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.

Ah i see. Personally i'd go with 'attack' in that context specifically representing attacks from weapons as defined in the question, rather than applying universally to any kind of attack. It's not from the Errata section and therefore 'should' not be introducing new rules though I have known GW to play fast and loose with rules updates presented as 'clarifications'. (for specific examples, see the writeup for the nightscythe)

i do believe that the Lightning is an 'attack' (in the english language-defined sense) but not necessarily such in the 40k-specific sense; which i believe are limited to 'close combat attacks', and 'shooting attacks'. (and anything that specifically references either of the above, such as PSAs)

PSAs (witchfire) even has a mention that it counts as firing an Assault weapon unless otherwise noted. (p69)

foolishmortal wrote:

 Neorealist wrote:
That said, have we moved on from determining wether or not LoTS can hit fliers to the definition of the word 'attack'? seems like a bit of a leap to me, perhaps someone can clarify why defining the word 'attack' within the context of 40k is relevent to the OPs question?

He is citing ...

Q: How do maelstroms, novas and beams – or indeed any weapon
that doesn’t need to roll To Hit or hits automatically – interact with
Zooming Flyers and Swooping Flying Monstrous Creatures? (p13)
A: Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Swooping
Flying Monstrous Creatures. Therefore, any attacks that use
blast markers, templates, create a line of/area of effect or
otherwise don’t roll to hit cannot target them. This includes
weapons such as the Necron Doom Scythe’s death ray or the
Deathstrike missile of the Imperial Guard, and psychic
powers that follow the rule for maelstroms, beams, and
novas.

So the short version of my stance is:
1) It's not a weapon.
2) It's not a shooting attack (if it were, it would be limited by range and line of sight, as no exemption to range or line of sight is given)
3) It doesn't auto hit, models are "struck" on a roll of 6.
4) All of the FAQ examples are ruling out effects that specifically work around the 1:6 chance vs flyers, either by auto-hitting or being a marker of some sort. Lightning does not bypass a roll to strike.

Since we don't have a rule for being Struck, does Struck = Hit?
I'd say yes.

Can Dark Eldar jet bikes Bladevanes a Flyer? Lacking a roll to hit, I'd say no, but I'd love to see GW respond to that as well (only because I'd bet on them waffling to confuse everyone).

-Matt

Good catch on the LoS issue.

As far as future updates, they already put out...

Q: Can a character on a Chariot that is also a Skimmer make a
Sweep Attack against a Zooming Flyer? (p82)
A: No.

So I'm guessing the trend is no.

Interestingly, GW also said ...

Q: Does a Necron Overlord on a Catacomb Command Barge benefit from Furious Charge on a Sweep Attack? In addition, are Sweep Attacks close combat attacks? (p52)
A: No to both questions.

So, we have an instance of a special rule generating attacks that are not close combat attacks. (and probably not shooting attacks either)

They are "sweep attacks"
Think of it this way, you need a roll of 6 to have the flyer be "struck". You need a 6 to "hit" a flyer based on hard to hit.. neither of these can be modified. Seems like if you call it a shooting attack, it needs a 6 to hit, and therefore is BS 1.

Other way of looking at it is...
N'Cons are OP, why not make them more OP? By Op i mean very under costed.

So we still have a general class called "attacks" then, using a common English defintion. We dont have a 40k one so the common English one is used.

In common English usage it most certainly IS an attack, and as such cannot hit fliers. Luckily this means it CAN actually damage other objects.

Fragile wrote:
Call it what you want, but you will find that it will fall under the same category that every other power/ability did that automatically hits..

"Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Swooping Flying Monstrous Creatures.."

LotS is not a snap shot and therefore cannot affect Flyers.. That simple sentence kills all the arguments that it can.

Stating that quote over and over again doesnt make it apply to non-shooting attacks. There are other things that can target flyers that doesnt fall under the Shooting rules either, like Vector Strikes etc, which means that you can't apply it to non-shooting attacks, or other special abilities.


Now, even if one rule says that Vector Strikes CAN hit Flyers it is still NOT a Snap Shot thus CAN NOT target flyers? Now i am not resolving the Vector Strike as a Snap Shot, but i can hit anyway?

Also, from the FAQ:

"Therefore, any attacks that use blast markers, templates, create a line of/area of effect or otherwise don’t roll to hit cannot target them."

Now, how and when do i "target" anything?

In the Shooting phase, where i nominate which models are firing, After doing that i have to target a model by checking range and los. Now, this isn't a shooting attack, so how do you expect to follow another set of shooting rules for a non-shooting attack?

I am NOT targetting them. I don't have to target them, the models are simply hit. Targetting is a part of the Shooting Phase where you check range and LoS. This is not shooting. I am simply resolving the hits.

Edit: Incredibly silly typos

Let's look at the structure of the faq.

Only snapshots can hit flyers (gives a very specific permission to what can hit flyers)
therefore (so based on this)
any attacks that use blast markers, templates, create a line of/area of effect or otherwise don’t roll to hit cannot target them. (the prohibition to what can't hit is very broad and covers any other kind of attack).

There is no need for a specific mention of "targeting" because the death ray doesn't target any unit but still doesn't affect flyers.

copper.talos wrote:
Let's look at the structure of the faq.

Only snapshots can hit flyers (gives a very specific permission to what can hit flyers)
therefore (so based on this)
any attacks that use blast markers, templates, create a line of/area of effect or otherwise don’t roll to hit cannot target them. (the prohibition to what can't hit is very broad and covers any other kind of attack).

There is no need for a specific mention of "targeting" because the death ray doesn't target any unit but still doesn't affect flyers.

Only snapshots can hit flyers (gives a very specific permission to what can hit flyers).

There are other things that can hit a flyer, like Vector Strike. By applying the "only snap shots can hit flyers" to everything, even things that aren't shooting you're actually saying that:

Vector Strike CAN hit a flyer because it says so in the rule. A Vector Strike cannot make Snap Shots which by your own logic is the only way to hit a flyer. So how can it hit if it can't fire Snap Shots?

The death ray IS a shooting weapon and must abide by the shooting rules which is clarified in the FAQ entry regarding shooting attacks that doesnt roll to hit.

You simply can't apply shooting rules and restrictions on non-shooting attacks.

Tjolle79 wrote:

copper.talos wrote:
Let's look at the structure of the faq.

Only snapshots can hit flyers (gives a very specific permission to what can hit flyers)
therefore (so based on this)
any attacks that use blast markers, templates, create a line of/area of effect or otherwise don’t roll to hit cannot target them. (the prohibition to what can't hit is very broad and covers any other kind of attack).

There is no need for a specific mention of "targeting" because the death ray doesn't target any unit but still doesn't affect flyers.

Only snapshots can hit flyers (gives a very specific permission to what can hit flyers).

There are other things that can hit a flyer, like Vector Strike. By applying the "only snap shots can hit flyers" to everything, even things that aren't shooting you're actually saying that:

Vector Strike CAN hit a flyer because it says so in the rule. A Vector Strike cannot make Snap Shots which by your own logic is the only way to hit a flyer. So how can it hit if it can't fire Snap Shots?

The death ray IS a shooting weapon and must abide by the shooting rules which is clarified in the FAQ entry regarding shooting attacks that doesnt roll to hit.

You simply can't apply shooting rules and restrictions on non-shooting attacks.

Citing a rule that gives specific permission to do something is a flawed argument in a permissive rule set. "Only snap shots can hit Flyers..." Vector strike gives permission to hit flyers by its rule. Where is the rule that lets LotS do it ?

Fragile wrote:

Tjolle79 wrote:

copper.talos wrote:
Let's look at the structure of the faq.

Only snapshots can hit flyers (gives a very specific permission to what can hit flyers)
therefore (so based on this)
any attacks that use blast markers, templates, create a line of/area of effect or otherwise don’t roll to hit cannot target them. (the prohibition to what can't hit is very broad and covers any other kind of attack).

There is no need for a specific mention of "targeting" because the death ray doesn't target any unit but still doesn't affect flyers.

Only snapshots can hit flyers (gives a very specific permission to what can hit flyers).

There are other things that can hit a flyer, like Vector Strike. By applying the "only snap shots can hit flyers" to everything, even things that aren't shooting you're actually saying that:

Vector Strike CAN hit a flyer because it says so in the rule. A Vector Strike cannot make Snap Shots which by your own logic is the only way to hit a flyer. So how can it hit if it can't fire Snap Shots?

The death ray IS a shooting weapon and must abide by the shooting rules which is clarified in the FAQ entry regarding shooting attacks that doesnt roll to hit.

You simply can't apply shooting rules and restrictions on non-shooting attacks.

Citing a rule that gives specific permission to do something is a flawed argument in a permissive rule set. "Only snap shots can hit Flyers..." Vector strike gives permission to hit flyers by its rule. Where is the rule that lets LotS do it ?

It's right in the rule for LotS: "Roll a d6 for EACH unengaged enemy unit on the battlefield".

Each unit, no exceptions is listed or FAQ'd, hence each unit on the battlefield is hit.

So the permission is given that i hit a flyer because each unit is hit, without listing exceptions.
If i were to assume that the rulebook FAQ answer about shooting applies (which i don't since both Snap Shot and the rules for targetting is for shooting attacks, which this isnt). I now have clashing rules. Now what does the rulebook say about conflicting rules? That the rule in the codex always takes precedence.

Vector Strike has a specific permission, LotS does not. If LotS had such a permission we wouldn't have this discussion (at least I hope we wouldn't)...

In the specific > general point: LotS has permission to hit all units. Those that have the hard to hit rule are an exception.

Flyers can only be hit by snap shot. Vector strike is an exception to this.

copper.talos wrote:
Vector Strike has a specific permission, LotS does not. If LotS had such a permission we wouldn't have this discussion (at least I hope we wouldn't)...

In the specific > general point: LotS has permission to hit all units. Those that have the hard to hit rule are an exception.

Flyers can only be hit by snap shot. Vector strike is an exception to this.

Why are they an exception? What does the Hard to Hit rule say?

"Shots resolved at a zooming flyer can only be resolved as Snap Shots"

This isn't a shot.

The HtH was clarified by the faq as: Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Swooping Flying Monstrous Creatures.

So any unit in general can be hit by LotS. Hard to Hit provides an exception to flyers.

If i were to assume that the rulebook FAQ answer about shooting applies (which i don't since both Snap Shot and the rules for targetting is for shooting attacks, which this isnt). I now have clashing rules.

My codex says that all units are hit.
The Rulebook says that the flyers aren't hit because it has to be a Snap Shot.

Now what does the rulebook say about conflicting rules? That the rule in the codex always takes precedence.

Faq > codex & rulebook.

And it never was codex>rulebook. Only specific>general. And as it is HtH provides a specific exception to LotS.

copper.talos wrote:
Faq > codex & rulebook.

And it never was codex>rulebook. Only specific>general. And as I have proven HtH provides a specific exception to LotS.

Page 7 of 6th edition rulebook:

"On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between rules in this rulebook, and one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex always takes precedent".

So, the Rulebook FAQ overrules the Rulebook. It's still the rulebook, just updated by the FAQ.
So still its Codex>Rulebook.

Now if it were to be put into the Necron FAQ they would most likely put a reply directly to LotS like they have for similar special abilites, such as Bomb Squigs and Mawloc's Terror from the Deep.

This isn't a case of conflicting rules. It's a case of specific vs general.

Of course its conflicting rules.

Codex lets me hit ALL targets.
Rulebook FAQ says i can't hit Flyers, thus i can't hit all targets anymore.

You just proved it's a specific vs general case.

foolishmortal wrote:Interestingly, GW also said ...
Q: Does a Necron Overlord on a Catacomb Command Barge benefit from Furious Charge on a Sweep Attack? In addition, are Sweep Attacks close combat attacks? (p52)
A: No to both questions.
So, we have an instance of a special rule generating attacks that are not close combat attacks. (and probably not shooting attacks either)

nosferatu1001 wrote:So we still have a general class called "attacks" then, using a common English defintion. We dont have a 40k one so the common English one is used.

In retrospect, "Sweep Attacks" is the name of the special rule for Chariot Skimmers on p82. It could have been "Floating Pokes" or "Royal Privileged", etc. No where in the Sweep Attack text does it refer to "attacks" separately or capitalized as part of "Sweep Attacks" .

copper.talos wrote:Let's look at the structure of the faq.

Only snapshots can hit flyers (gives a very specific permission to what can hit flyers)
therefore (so based on this)
any attacks that use blast markers, templates, create a line of/area of effect or otherwise don’t roll to hit cannot target them. (the prohibition to what can't hit is very broad and covers any other kind of attack).

There is no need for a specific mention of "targeting" because the death ray doesn't target any unit but still doesn't affect flyers.

Let's look at the structure of the whole faq, not just the part that supports a particular argument.

Q: How do maelstroms, novas and beams – or indeed any weapon
that doesn’t need to roll To Hit or hits automatically – interact with
Zooming Flyers and Swooping Flying Monstrous Creatures? (p13)
A: Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Swooping
Flying Monstrous Creatures. Therefore, any attacks that use
blast markers, templates, create a line of/area of effect or
otherwise don’t roll to hit cannot target them. This includes
weapons such as the Necron Doom Scythe’s death ray or the
Deathstrike missile of the Imperial Guard, and psychic
powers that follow the rule for maelstroms, beams, and
novas.

1) Is Lord of the Storm (or the lightning from LotS) a weapon?
2) Does Lord of the Storm (or the lightning from LotS) need to roll To Hit or hits automatically?

Please check to see if the faq entry applies before citing parts it. (for a RAW discussion. If you want to argue, RAI or HIWPI, feel free, but try to keep it clear)

On #1, I have posted above that LotS has no easily determined type - can anyone help this line of thought?

I was waiting for #1 to resolve before I went to #2, but I will say for now, if Lord of the Storm (or the lightning from LotS) is weapon, and the traits of that weapon are only knowable by reading the LotS rules text, I am leaning towards Yes, it does need a roll to hit (based also on its rules text)

1) The lightning is comparable to a weapon. it has a Str and AP value. and if we look at the standard definition of a weapon then the lightning qualifies.

2) On a 6 the LotS automatically generates hits on a unit. That tells me it hits automatically as no roll to hit is needed, just that the unit takes D6 hits on the roll of a 6.


As for the LoS, the rule does not originate from a model so LoS does not enter into the equation.

 DeathReaper wrote:
1) The lightning is comparable to a weapon. it has a Str and AP value. and if we look at the standard definition of a weapon then the lightning qualifies.

This looks like a very reasonable HYWPI argument. RAW. I would refer to page 50 and ask what is the weapon's type?

 DeathReaper wrote:
2) On a 6 the LotS automatically generates hits on a unit. That tells me it hits automatically as no roll to hit is needed, just that the unit takes D6 hits on the roll of a 6.

You don't see any odd about this sentence?

 DeathReaper wrote:
As for the LoS, the rule does not originate from a model so LoS does not enter into the equation.

let me see if I understand your position here. You believe it is a weapon, but not a shooting attack, and therefore does not require LoS?

Not all attacks require LOS. Some examples listed:
Barrage weapons
Impaler Cannons
Astral Aim
Eldar Vibro Cannon
Seeker Missiles (unless it got FAQ'd can't remember)
It is also arguable that the Farseer psa "Eldritich Strm" does not need LOS due to the wording of Farseer powers.

I believe it is comparable to a weapon. (Not that it is a weapon, just comparable to one).

I also believe it is not a shooting attack that originates from any specific model.

as for 2) there is nothing odd about what I wrote. roll a die to see if the unit is affected by the lightning. on the roll of a 6 the unit takes D6 hits. The power does not state that it rolls to hit, so it does not. It is not a roll to hit, because rolls to hit use a BS. the Lightning does not use a BS to hit, just a 1 in 6 chance.

 DeathReaper wrote:
I believe it is comparable to a weapon. (Not that it is a weapon, just comparable to one).

I also believe it is not a shooting attack that originates from any specific model.

as for 2) there is nothing odd about what I wrote. roll a die to see if the unit is affected by the lightning. on the roll of a 6 the unit takes D6 hits. The power does not state that it rolls to hit, so it does not. It is not a roll to hit, because rolls to hit use a BS. the Lightning does not use a BS to hit, just a 1 in 6 chance.

This seems reasonable from a RAI point of view. I do have some problems with this line of thinking when applied to a Zooming Ork Blitza-Bommer's uses the Skreamin' Descent rule.

When I see an apparent contradiction like that between the application of a line of thinking to one rule invalidating another rule when applied in the same maner, I question where the problem might be - the line of thought, a poorly written other rule, or some failure on my part of comparing them.

Again, I never questioned the validity of the NO position from a RAI view. I might agree with it, or not agree with it, but I would not say it's silly or inconsistent with other flyer related rulings.

RAW, my main objection is that I'm not sure the oft quoted faq entry applies.

(p12) "During the Shooting Phase, a unit containing models armed with ranged weapons can be nominated to make shooting attacks." Since LotS is not a shooting attack, I do not believe the Hard to Hit rule applies here. I believe the LotS special rule is simply that - a special rule from a Unique HQ that instructs you to do something at certain times, under certain conditions.

The application Mawloc faq entry clarifies of whether or not my argument would be RAW or RAI.

RAI, it seems that GW wishes flyers to be nearly sacrosanct while zooming, vulnerable to a very narrow list of threats (Snap Shots, Skyfire, and Vector Strike)

RAW, the Mawloc faq entry tells me what to do with a Mawloc. No more, no less.

It is actually really simple, and I did not notice until just now.

Question for you guys.

Does LotS hit zooming flyers?

 DeathReaper wrote:
Does LotS hit zooming flyers?

Isn't that what the past 7 pages have been trying to answer?
Or do you have a cunning revelation to reveal?

The effected units suffer hits if that's what you're asking. The rule does say hits.

The Lots generates hits. Is that equivalent to LotS hitting zooming flyers?

If Yes:
Then Lots can not hit as it does not make snap shots.

If No:
Then the rules are too vague to determine and we should take the least advantageous position which has the same result as the Yes answer.

 DeathReaper wrote:
The Lots generates hits. Is that equivalent to LotS hitting zooming flyers?

As far as LotS "generating" hits, I would say the LotS rule sometimes causes hits to be suffered. Personally, I am ok with calling that generating hits, yes. It's just that most things that "generate hits" do so with other rules. Space marines generate hits in the shooting phase by using the rules for shooting and making shooting attacks.

LotS does not use the shooting rules. It is a rule in and of itself that generates hits, more like an exploding transport generates hits on the embarked unit.

 DeathReaper wrote:
If Yes:
Then Lots can not hit as it does not make snap shots.

To this, I would ask why? I think we have both made our arguments as to the applicability of the faq entry on weapons hitting flyers without rolling to hit.

At this time, I don't have any new points to bring up on the faq entry applicability issue.

I would mention that whatever readers here choose to decide, please also consider if your answer also would apply to...

Njal
Ether Crystal
Ork Blitz Bommer
Tesla, Arc
Tesla (additional hits from 6s)