Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

It does not. I had been going on everyone stating that it was similar in wording to Blood Lance. It turns out that it, unlike lance does not have the specific phrasing "automatically hits" that I thought was present.

You're entirely correct in thinking that the to hit roll is irrelevant. That will teach me to not look up the exact wording and just trusting people My bad :3

edit:
To explain more specifically, I thought it was phrased like Blood Lance which clearly states "any unit the lance passes through suffers a ... hit" That would constitute an automatic hit, which would in turn be in direct contradiction with how a PSA functions

Pretty much everyone that wants to side with Nos just mimics his contention that JotWW hits. People need to read the rule,

JAWS NEVER HITS A TARGET!!

All of you keep asking for the rule that tells you that you do not roll to hit. People keep asking what is the codex exception to rolling to hit. The very fact that the very wording of the rule tells you how a model is affected by JotWW is the codex exception!! The very fact that the rule tells you how to employ the psychic power is the codex exception!

Somebody please show me where JotWW HITS. It doesn't hit, it touches. Touching a model is how the psychic power is employed. Touched a model is the codex exception to rolling to hit.

Seriuosly, read the damn rule instead of just mimicking whatever Nos says because here is the real deal; Nos is NOT following all the RAW. He is picking and choosing to only present the FAQ saying PSA roll to hit WITHOUT including that exceptions to that general rule will be in the codexes. He is blatantly ignoring RAW and only presenting the BRB FAQ time and time again for you monkies to repeat it.

Tyr Grimtooth wrote:Pretty much everyone that wants to side with Nos just mimics his contention that JotWW hits. People need to read the rule,

JAWS NEVER HITS A TARGET!!

All of you keep asking for the rule that tells you that you do not roll to hit. People keep asking what is the codex exception to rolling to hit. The very fact that the very wording of the rule tells you how a model is affected by JotWW is the codex exception!! The very fact that the rule tells you how to employ the psychic power is the codex exception!

Somebody please show me where JotWW HITS. It doesn't hit, it touches. Touching a model is how the psychic power is employed. Touched a model is the codex exception to rolling to hit.

Seriuosly, read the damn rule instead of just mimicking whatever Nos says because here is the real deal; Nos is NOT following all the RAW. He is picking and choosing to only present the FAQ saying PSA roll to hit WITHOUT including that exceptions to that general rule will be in the codexes. He is blatantly ignoring RAW and only presenting the BRB FAQ time and time again for you monkies to repeat it.

Granted, I don't agree with Nosferatu in this debate, your post is pretty redundant and makes it look like you're very emotionally invested.

His bias has been pretty damn obvious since the first post, to be honest.

Tyr - so a number of posters have given very detailed explanations of why it must hit, yet you are unable to counter them.

I'd suggest bowing out.

nosferatu1001 wrote:His bias has been pretty damn obvious since the first post, to be honest.

Tyr - so a number of posters have given very detailed explanations of why it must hit, yet you are unable to counter them.

I'd suggest bowing out.

And yet again Nos, the psychi power is employed via touching a model, not hitting a model. That is the RAW per the rule. You have utterly failed to show at any time how the psychic power JotWW hits a model. I have asked you and your reply was to put the word "hits" in quotation marks.

The RAW of JotWW is that is employed when it touches a model. That is the codex exception to the general rule for a psychic shooting attack needing to hit a model to be employed.

Compare Living Lighning to JotWW:

Living Lightning as a psychic shooting attack affects its target with D6 Str 7 shots when it hits the model.

JotWW as a psychic shooting attack affects its target with a an initiative test when it touches the model.

The RAW that JotWW never hits a model and is employed via a different mechanic (touching) a model is the codex exception.

Your argument is solid when you don't include ALL the rules. Once they are included you stumble around trying to redefine touching to "hits" and "you are rolling to place the line".

Living Lightning doesn't say that, though. It just says that it is a psychic shooting attack with the following profile: Unlimited Range, S7 AP5 Assault D6. Nowhere does it say hits in that either. It doesn't have to. Hitting the target is implied by the use of "psychic shooting attack."

willydstyle wrote:

Tyr Grimtooth wrote:Pretty much everyone that wants to side with Nos just mimics his contention that JotWW hits. People need to read the rule,

JAWS NEVER HITS A TARGET!!

All of you keep asking for the rule that tells you that you do not roll to hit. People keep asking what is the codex exception to rolling to hit. The very fact that the very wording of the rule tells you how a model is affected by JotWW is the codex exception!! The very fact that the rule tells you how to employ the psychic power is the codex exception!

Somebody please show me where JotWW HITS. It doesn't hit, it touches. Touching a model is how the psychic power is employed. Touched a model is the codex exception to rolling to hit.

Seriuosly, read the damn rule instead of just mimicking whatever Nos says because here is the real deal; Nos is NOT following all the RAW. He is picking and choosing to only present the FAQ saying PSA roll to hit WITHOUT including that exceptions to that general rule will be in the codexes. He is blatantly ignoring RAW and only presenting the BRB FAQ time and time again for you monkies to repeat it.

Granted, I don't agree with Nosferatu in this debate, your post is pretty redundant and makes it look like you're very emotionally invested.

Actually it is pretty frustrating when one individual does not include ALL the rules in his argument ofr blatantly uses vernacular that is not the RAW. If Nos actually went back and replaced everytime he says that JotWW hits a target with the proper RAW vernacular, the entire basis of his argument falls apart.

What is then worse is that anyone who is not familiar with the actual RAW of rule comes in and not knowing that Nos is not using the proper RAW vernacular go right along with his reasoning. He perpetuates the problem by not being honest and blatantly changing the RAW vernacular to make his argument valid.

His argument is only valid if he continually changes the RAW vernacular of the rule from "anything the line touches" to "anything the line hits". So when he grandstands his argument saying that JotWW hits the target he is being disingenuous at the very least. Considering he is doing to force a change of gameplay, it becomes blatant cheating.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

lledwey wrote:Living Lightning doesn't say that, though. It just says that it is a psychic shooting attack with the following profile: Unlimited Range, S7 AP5 Assault D6. Nowhere does it say hits in that either. It doesn't have to. Hitting the target is implied by the use of "psychic shooting attack."

Rolling to hit is implied AND required because the rule as written gives you no codex exception to employ the psychic shooting attack other then the general rules, which even before the FAQ already included rolling to hit.

JotWW gives you a specific codex exception that the psychic shooting attack is employed by touching the models. The power affects the model not by hitting but by touching. That is your exception.

Psychic powers all state what occurs when the power entirely works.
A very few mention what happens when it does not.

JotWW does not mention what happens when it fails.

Failing to hit with a PSA does not allow hitting another target any more than failing to hit with a bolter does.

Template rules do not matter until template rules are relevant. Entirely.

Those quoting vibro cannons, they are a fundamentally different attack. They do not require LOS, can fire into combat, only one cannon in the unit has to hit, and regardless of how many in a unit hits only one line is drawn. But we know each of these points does not apply to JoTWW, so no parallels between the two can be made. It's kiwis and pineapples.

Just pointing out logical flaws. I don't care which way this argument goes, I just don't want to see bad arguments being used for either side.

The only reason I brought up Vibro Cannons is because people keep throwing the word 'template' around. That is what people try to compare Jaws to. Vibro Cannons are worth mentioning because they are, again, the only other shooting attack in the game that uses the draw a line method. I agree that they are two different things, but if you're going to compare the line to anything, it should be that and not a flame template.

Just because they have differences, doesn't mean you can't make parallels, thats silly. That's like saying you can't make parallels between Julius Caesar and Macbeth because they are set in different time periods and have different plots. You can make parallels between anything with any bit of similarity. The effects/restrictions of the attack aren't what we are looking at, we are just looking at the 'draw a line part'. Again, it sets an important precedent, in that here we have an attack that requires you to draw a line only after you see whether or not you hit.

Umm blood lance is a PSA that uses the 'draw a line' wording

The Blood Lance:
This power is a Psychic Shooting Attack. Extand a straight line ... yadda yadda

The problem with that is blood lance causes 'hits'

JotWW is uniquely worded as far as I know :3

Well I meant besides Blood Lance but I've typed it so many times I forgot that bit... my bad!

lledwey wrote:The only reason I brought up Vibro Cannons is because people keep throwing the word 'template' around. That is what people try to compare Jaws to. Vibro Cannons are worth mentioning because they are, again, the only other shooting attack in the game that uses the draw a line method. I agree that they are two different things, but if you're going to compare the line to anything, it should be that and not a flame template.

Just because they have differences, doesn't mean you can't make parallels, thats silly. That's like saying you can't make parallels between Julius Caesar and Macbeth because they are set in different time periods and have different plots. You can make parallels between anything with any bit of similarity. The effects/restrictions of the attack aren't what we are looking at, we are just looking at the 'draw a line part'. Again, it sets an important precedent, in that here we have an attack that requires you to draw a line only after you see whether or not you hit.

I like you Hed. Nice and consise points.

I too completely disagree with the template argument. It isn't supported in the RAW at all. It is a bunch argument that people cling to because of what the FAQ says about the thickness of the line.

I do not agree with you on the vibro-cannon comparison at all. While they both trace a line, that is absolutely all they share in common. The vibro-cannon is explicit in its instructions on rolling to hit and subsequently hitting the targets. JotWW is explicit in that models are affected by the power when the line tpuches them.

Vibro-cannon hits.

JotWW tpuches.

That is the difference that makes them completely different.

But that isn't how it is worded, and I apologize for not including that part. Vibro Cannons touch also. What it says is, after you hit, draw the line. Any unit touched by the line takes D6 hits. First check to hit, then see what the line touches. Again, PSAs often don't tell you they have to hit (see Living Lightning).

So here is how I break it down:

Vibro Cannon - tells you to roll to hit, then see what the line touches

Jaws - tells you it is a PSA (which implies you need to roll to hit as per the FAQ), then see what the line touches

That's what really gets me. If I was talking about a power in a different book not stating that you need a hit roll when you obviously do, that would be one thing. But they're on the same page. Living Lightning needs to hit, but it doesn't tell you that. There would be no reason for them to put a hit requirement in the Jaws text, as they assume you already know to hit due to it being a PSA.

Again I want to reiterate that I think this is completely stupid, should not work this way, and would not make someone else play this way, but going by the RAW, this is what I see.

Tyr - you do realise to be an exception, it has to be a specific set of wording to override the normal requirements?

The requirement of all PSA is: roll to hit

Until you can find a rule, actual wording, which you have utterly and completely failed to do despite REPEATED requests to do so and in complete disregard for the tenets of YMDC, which states it does not need to roll to hit - it does.

Also, please retract that I have altered the rules. I havent. I've asked you to substantiate your claim that you have a specific exception to the requirement to roll to hit. You have completely and utterly failed to provide one.

You do realise that, as you are claiming the exceptional, you need to actually prove it, right? That requires you to provide rules, not just repeated unsubstantiated claims.

lledwey wrote:The only reason I brought up Vibro Cannons is because people keep throwing the word 'template' around. That is what people try to compare Jaws to. Vibro Cannons are worth mentioning because they are, again, the only other shooting attack in the game that uses the draw a line method. I agree that they are two different things, but if you're going to compare the line to anything, it should be that and not a flame template.

Just because they have differences, doesn't mean you can't make parallels, thats silly. That's like saying you can't make parallels between Julius Caesar and Macbeth because they are set in different time periods and have different plots. You can make parallels between anything with any bit of similarity. The effects/restrictions of the attack aren't what we are looking at, we are just looking at the 'draw a line part'. Again, it sets an important precedent, in that here we have an attack that requires you to draw a line only after you see whether or not you hit.

Right. Except you are trying to use Vibro Cannons support for why JoTWW requires a roll to hit, suggesting the attacks are fundamentally similar. Or rather because they use the line mechanism, they share the same rules for using the attack. This is the fallicy, as if they were fundamentally similar, then they would have identical rules for placing the line as well, which is untrue. Otherwise I could use the same logic you are using to say JotWW doesn't require LoS - which we know is not true due to the FAQ.

At best, it's evidence that the text "draw a line" doesn't replace the roll to hit. But if you go down that route, people will chime in saying "since when did the rules in one codex affect another codex?" It's really a messy argument, and it's one that's been brought up before - by myself, at least in one thread.

In the end, just ask your TO. After all, it doesn't matter what your opinion is, the TO sets the rules you have to play by. Plus, this is such a polarizing issue that those from each camp are likely to never give in, for whatever reason. Which is fine, if you like running around in circles and seeing these threads pop up every few weeks or so.

Which, the template thing was from a TO at GW's US headquarters in Memphis. He justified Jaws not requiring it to need a roll to hit by saying it worked as a pseudo template. That's likely the origins of that argument, as it was brought up in the last thread. And as my FLGS is the Memphis Battle Bunker - or was before I moved, I'm content to use those rulings. Really, just ask your TO and go with their rules.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Tyr - you do realise to be an exception, it has to be a specific set of wording to override the normal requirements?

The requirement of all PSA is: roll to hit

Until you can find a rule, actual wording, which you have utterly and completely failed to do despite REPEATED requests to do so and in complete disregard for the tenets of YMDC, which states it does not need to roll to hit - it does.
...
You do realise that, as you are claiming the exceptional, you need to actually prove it, right? That requires you to provide rules, not just repeated unsubstantiated claims.

Nos1001, I've got back into the thread because you're beating up (friendly idiom) the other posters by committing a fallacy. Asking someone to provide rules for something, and when they fail to do so, for you to claim that their argument holds no water, well *that* is a fallacy in of itself (man! that is worded badly, sorry).

Just because it wasn't prove does *not necessarily* invalidate their position.

I had not seen a response to my last post. I was wondering if ya missed it or ignored it.

Anyway, is my claim that the text in JoWW, "trace a line" a fallacy? Nope. Or simply evidence that you (and most others0 won't accept ? May I request that you dispute the "trace a line" text itself? I know PSAs require rolls to hit, but this is an exception. "Trace a line."

Whaddya think?


As for my argument (syllogism and such)?

a. JoWW is a PSA.
b. PSAs require a roll to hit.
c. 40k is fulla exceptions (meltas get x2 to Pen at half distance, but not against Living Metal, SRGs or Wave Serpents)
d. JoWW has an exception in its text, " ... trace a line."

Okay, blast away!

I have always read that line as defining range and area of the (successful) use of the power. Even before the FAQ.

I do not understand how it can equate to a die roll that is not mentioned.

lledwey wrote:You can make parallels between anything with any bit of similarity. The effects/restrictions of the attack aren't what we are looking at, we are just looking at the 'draw a line part'. Again, it sets an important precedent, in that here we have an attack that requires you to draw a line only after you see whether or not you hit.

You can absolutely compare anything with any bit of similarity. What weight that comparison has on the argument, however, depends on the degree of similarity. In the case of Jaws and Vibrocannons, the degree of similarity is low enough that the comparison has little value, for the reasons I and others have mentioned.

nosferatu1001 wrote:You do realise[sic] that, as you are claiming the exceptional, you need to actually prove it, right? That requires you to provide rules, not just repeated unsubstantiated claims.

Actually, it's the ones who are arguing that "failing to hit means you don't draw the line" who are claiming the exceptional. 40k is a permissive ruleset. We can only do what the rules tell us to do. Jaws says "may trace a straight line". It does NOT make that permission conditional on a successful roll to hit (unlike, say, vibrocannons). Yes we have to obey the PSA's roll to hit rule and roll the die, but its outcome is irrelevant. Nowhere do the rules give us permission NOT TO draw the line, even if the hit roll fails. Rolling to hit, as I discussed in the article I linked previously (yeah, I'm citing myself, take that!) only has relevance in the context of determining whether an attack ultimately causes wounds. Nowhere in the rule for Jaws, the rules for psychic shooting attacks, or the rules for rolling to hit, does it say, "if you fail to hit, you don't draw the line". Without such language, we must do what Jaws tells us to do, regardless of the outcome of the roll to hit - draw the line and apply the effects. The FAQ for Murderous Hurricane says basically the same thing - even if you fail to hit, the effect happens anyway.

So my opponent declares he's casting Jaws and passes the psychic test. The Jaws rule gives him permission to draw the line and apply its effects. It does not make that permission conditional on a successful roll to hit. The only thing failing a roll to hit gives permission to do is not cause wounds. He rolls to hit and fails. Fine, I take no wounds from my opponent's Jaws. I wouldn't anyway, so the outcome of that roll is irrelevant. In a permissive rule set, once a permission has been granted you must be able to point to something that takes away or nullifies that permission granted in order to stop it from happening. I've got no such rule to stop him from drawing the line and applying the effects of the power anyway. Failing his roll to hit has exactly the same relevance as to whether or not the line gets drawn as whether or not my opponent breaks wind while leaning over to measure the 24". (Yep. That's happened.)

Hope this helps!
-GiantKiller

GiantKiller wrote:Yes we have to obey the PSA's roll to hit rule and roll the die, but its outcome is irrelevant.

I read this often in folk's assertion but never yet in the rules. Did I miss it? It makes as much sense as saying the psychic roll is irrelevent.

GiantKiller wrote:Nowhere do the rules give us permission NOT TO draw the line

Check the section on Psykers, especially the use of powers.
PSAs function as ranged weapons.
Next check using ranged weapons. Especially on what happens when they fail to hit rolls.

There is your permission NOT TO draw the line.

Let's just get rid of JotWW, it's the only sensible answer.

gpfunk wrote:Let's just get rid of JotWW, it's the only sensible answer.

Honestly I do not see it that often, it really is not all that. (Note: I am a Tyranid player)

Once the novelty wore off most SW players I know realized there are better ways to use their army.

CiaranAnnrach wrote:At best, it's evidence that the text "draw a line" doesn't replace the roll to hit.

Just wanted to point out that this was the ONLY thing I was using it as evidence for in the first place. So you agree with me!

kirsanth wrote:I read this often in folk's assertion but never yet in the rules. Did I miss it? It makes as much sense as saying the psychic roll is irrelevent.

Take another look at your rule book. Rolling to hit is only relevant as part of the process to determine whether or not ranged and physical attacks ultimately cause wounds. The psychic test is specifically applicable to all psychic powers, regardless of whether or not they cause wounds. (BGB p. 50)

kirsanth wrote:Next check using ranged weapons. Especially on what happens when they fail to hit rolls. There is your permission NOT TO draw the line.

I have checked. Many times. When ranged weapons fail to hit rolls, they don't cause wounds. That is certainly not enough to take away my opponent's permission to draw a line which:
a. does not cause wounds; and
b. is not made conditional upon a successful roll to hit

Hope this helps!
-GiantKiller

GiantKiller wrote:When ranged weapons fail to hit rolls, they don't cause wounds.

You skipped a step or two there.

Editing to add to what is apparently a confusing point:
When a (psychic) shooting attack misses its target it is rather contradictory to say it touches the target it misses.

When a (psychic) shooting attack misses its target, where is your text allowing it to affect ANYTHING in the game?
removing redundancy

kirsanth wrote:When a (psychic) shooting attack misses its target it is rather contradictory to say it touches the target it misses.
When a (psychic) shooting attack misses its target, where is your text allowing it to affect ANYTHING in the game?

"Q. Does Murderous Hurricane require the power to hit or wound its target to affect them? (p37)
A. No, a targeted unit is affected by Murderous Hurricane even if the power fails to hit or wound." Codex: Space Wolves FAQ v1.1 (July 2011)

.


Hope this helps!
-GiantKiller

So let me ask you this, GiantKiller. Do you believe that markerlights don't work? You must, because they require a hit roll and do not cause wounds. What happens when you miss with a markerlight? Does the game end because the rules just broke?

I know you'll say "well markerlights aren't psychic powers and are different, etc. etc." just like with the vibro cannons. Seriously though, you're trying to say that only things that cause wounds depend on the hit roll. It isn't true. Next time I play a Tau player, I'll let him know though that even if he misses with his markerlight, he still gets the bonus. I'm sure he'll be happy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And as I said earlier, that FAQ bit you quoted about Murderous Hurricane allows the SECONDARY effect of the power, the slowing of units, to still happen even if the damage part misses. Jaws only has one part to it.

Although would it really have killed them to just add in another line about Jaws? Maybe someday.

imweasel wrote:

Mahtamori wrote:Rolling to hit and rolling to wound has no relationship beyond that rolling to wound sometimes require you to first roll to hit. Eschewing one does not eschew the other.

DarknessEternal: That's me belief as well. It sort of goes hand-in-hand with the GW rule design methodology (or lack thereof).

But does it matter in JotWW case?

It explicitly states that if you are 'under/in' the line, you take an init test. Period. Whether you actually 'hit' or not with the PSA doesn't seem to matter?

I'm staying well away from this debate.

I mean, come on. "The power may miss, but it still hits" is essentially the current argument.

lledwey wrote:So let me ask you this, GiantKiller. Do you believe that markerlights don't work? You must, because they require a hit roll and do not cause wounds. What happens when you miss with a markerlight? Does the game end because the rules just broke?

So you ask me a question, answer it yourself, attribute the answer to me, and then attempt to discredit the answer you've attributed to me with a poorly constructed reductio ad absurdem? Do I even need to point out the toxic levels of fallacy in your argument?

lledwey wrote:I know you'll say "well markerlights aren't psychic powers and are different, etc. etc." just like with the vibro cannons. Seriously though, you're trying to say that only things that cause wounds depend on the hit roll. It isn't true. Next time I play a Tau player, I'll let him know though that even if he misses with his markerlight, he still gets the bonus. I'm sure he'll be happy.

Here's why your reductio ad absurdem fails. We have permission not to apply the markerlight effect if they miss because the effect is conditioned upon a successful to hit roll. In other words, we only have permission to apply the effect if it hits. Tau markerlights tell us "each time you hit a target with a markerlight, put a counter by that unit." (Codex: Tau p.29, emphasis added). It is expressly conditional upon a successful hit. Note the complete lack of any such language in the Jaws rule. Jaws doesn't say if you hit, draw the line; it says draw the line.

lledwey wrote:And as I said earlier, that FAQ bit you quoted about Murderous Hurricane allows the SECONDARY effect of the power, the slowing of units, to still happen even if the damage part misses. Jaws only has one part to it.

The rules and FAQs, as best I can tell, make no distinction between "primary" and "secondary" effects of a power. Murderous Hurricane does not say "as a secondary effect, that unit treats all terrain as difficult and dangerous." But the FAQ does draw a distinction between those effects that cause wounds and those that do not.

Right, but you contended that the only time you ever have to make a hit roll is if something is going to wound. That IS what you said. I showed you how that is false.

As for the hurricane thing, I know there is no such defined thing as primary and secondary effects. I'm just saying that was the intent of that FAQ. You are twisting the answer, specific to that one power, to mean that all PSAs can 'miss' and still have their effect. That just isn't true. In the specific case of murderous hurricane, the power can miss, and some of the effects of the power still go through. You take it to mean "any effects that don't cause wounds (weirder effects) disregard whether or not the PSA hits." It does not say that though, or anything like it. You applying it to Jaws is just not valid.

Here's what I have shown in the points I've argued:

Within the rules, there is an example of a shooting attack that requires the player to draw a line. They must roll to hit, and if they miss, they don't draw the line. That is a fact, I'm not arguing any other similarity between vibrocannons and Jaws. Hit roll followed by drawing a line. It exists in the rules.

Within the rules, there is also an example of a shooting attack that does not cause wounds, that is still dependant on a hit roll. Jaws not causing wounds therefore does not automatically disqualify it from depending on the hit roll.

Then, the points that Nos and everyone else have argued: nowhere does it say that you are exempt from the roll. You yourself even agree that you do have to roll, just that it doesn't matter.

So we have a power that does need to roll to hit (you agree), nowhere in the text does it specifically give you permission to ignore the hit roll, and other examples in the rules of shooting attacks working in the way I am describing.

We have no solid proof that the power does not require a hit roll. We also have no solid proof that the power does require a hit roll. By solid proof of course I mean a direct answer from GW. I have tried to show, however, that it is POSSIBLE within the rules for a hit roll to apply in this case.

I think I'll take a break from this for a while, especially seeing as how little it actually matters.