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.

foolishmortal wrote:
Hard to Hit applies the Snap Shot restriction to shooting attacks. LotS is not a shooting attack.

And if it is not a shooting attack/weapon, it can not add its Str to the D6 roll to pen. (and this line of thinking breaks rules, so it must be an attack or a weapon).

Or we treat it as a weapon/attack, and the FAQ about Snap shots kicks in as the lightning is a weapon, that does not need to roll to hit, or it is an attack that creates an area of effect. (and no rules are broken).

"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. "

foolishmortal wrote:

undertow wrote:I'm not reading it as a new rule. I'm reading it as a clarification of the Hard to Hit rule. Hard to hit in the BRB says 'Shots fired at such a Zooming Flyer can only be resolved as Snap Shots'. The FAQ is a clarification of that poorly worded rule.

I'm not even sure you realize you are doing it. Here it is again.

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.

This is a faq entry on Snap Shot (p13) not Hard to Hit (p81).

As you said, HtH restricts what sort of shooting attacks may hit flyers (snap shots)

As you said, Snap Shot is poorly written, thus the faq entry.

What I'm saying is that LotS is not a shooting attack, nor is it anything else prohibited from affecting flyers under the Zooming rule or HtH rule.
Since it is not a shooting attack, I'm asking why are you imposing restrictions on it as if it were?

I think I see where our disconnect is. It sounds like you're saying that all things are allowed to hit flyers unless prohibited under the HtH rule. I'm saying that all hits are prohibited unless allowed by HtH or specific permission. Also, I'm not saying that HtH restricts what short of shooting attacks my hit flyers, I'm saying it restricts what can hit flyers to snap shots.

May I ask why you feel that this is a FAQ for Snap Shot? I am of the opinion that it is a FAQ for Hard to Hit, as it clarifies that rule. The Snap Shot rules on page 13 do not mention fliers in any way, it really only lays out which weapons can be fired as Snap Shots. The BRB entry for HtH on page 81 mentions (poorly) how Snap Shots interact with flyers, which is exactly the subject of this FAQ entry.

 undertow wrote:
Also, is there a definition of 'attack' anywhere in the BRB or FAQs? Why is it wrong to apply the label 'attack' to an ability of a character that is used only offensively to damage the other player's units?

I'm actually geting much more comfortable with calling the lightning from LotS an attack now that I have re-read the Mawloc faq entries and considered some other non-shooting/cc/psykic attacks (such as Sweep Attack)

I didn't say you were wrong or that I disagreed with you when you said "For the record, I see hits from any source to be attacks." I just said it was an opinion. It looked like you were leading up to some sort of deductive argument, and those need to be based on true premises if you want them to be persuasive.

I'm open to the idea of LotS's lightning being a 'generic attack' and/or a 'non-wargear weapon'. But I'm not going to say it is or is not so because I want it to be or not to be. I was just trying to keep opinion separate from RAW.

That's fair enough. My point was, if we're going to argue about what exactly is a 'weapon' or 'attack', it would be nice to have a solid definition of what that is. I don't see any such definition for 'attack' in the BRB, and the weapons section has no definition either. Just a bunch of examples, which with a little bit of looking around, can be demonstrated to be far from comprehensive.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

foolishmortal wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Does LoTS have specific rules that over ride the snap shot requirement?

If not then it can not hit a zooming flyer.

Why? The faq entry on Snap Shots?

Hard to Hit applies the Snap Shot restriction to shooting attacks. LotS is not a shooting attack.

Seeing this exchange over and over again reminds me of "who's on first?".

Whoever said that there is no problem with LotS hitting Zooming Flyers was right.

There is no RAW in the BRB or the FAQ that prevents a game effect or ability from hitting a Zooming Flyer, or a Swooping FMC for that matter. The only RAW hiccup arrives when determining armor penetration or to wound rolls as neither of those mechanics make allowance to resolve hits not classified as weapons. However as has also been said, that is a debate for another weapons and has no bearing on this one.

 Brother Ramses wrote:
There is no RAW in the BRB or the FAQ that prevents a game effect or ability from hitting a Zooming Flyer, or a Swooping FMC for that matter.

Yeah, there's no RAW, unless you read the section for Hard to Hit and its FAQ entry. But if you want to ignore that, go ahead.

I didn't say LotS is not an attack. (in my recent post you quoted. I may have 10 pages ago, but as I say below, new evidence and arguments have been presented. I am reasonable )
I didn't say LotS is not a weapon. (I am willing to consider these positions, but given examples and rules based arguments cited in this thread, it seems reasonable to call the lightning from LotS a generic attack. I could also see it as a generic weapon, but I still have some concerns about it's type)

I said LotS is not a shooting attack.
I said HtH applies the Snap Shot restriction to shooting attacks

 DeathReaper wrote:
Or we treat it as a weapon/attack, and the FAQ about Snap shots kicks in as the lightning is a weapon, that does not need to roll to hit, or it is an attack that creates an area of effect. (and no rules are broken).

Why do you say the Snap Shot faq entry kicks in if it is a weapon/attack? Please read HtH again.

HtH kicks in if is is a shooting attack, because Hard to Hit restricts shots against zooming flyers to Snap Shots.
If LotS is a shooting attack, then it must be a snap shot to hit a zooming flyer.
If LotS is not a shooting attack, why are you saying it must be a snap shot to hit a zooming flyer?

You might try and make a case based on the word "shots" in the HtH rule. I have taken this to mean shooting attacks because I have never (iirc) seen the word 'shots' used in any other way or context in 40k. Please let me know if you can think of any.

 undertow wrote:

 Brother Ramses wrote:
There is no RAW in the BRB or the FAQ that prevents a game effect or ability from hitting a Zooming Flyer, or a Swooping FMC for that matter.

Yeah, there's no RAW, unless you read the section for Hard to Hit and its FAQ entry. But if you want to ignore that, go ahead.

Sections read and I see nothing dictating a restriction on what is clearly not a weapon or a shooting attack. Care to actually cite where a non-weapon/non-shooting attack is mentioned in either? You wont, which is why I said there is no RAW that prevents LotS from hitting Zooming Flyers.

foolishmortal wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Or we treat it as a weapon/attack, and the FAQ about Snap shots kicks in as the lightning is a weapon, that does not need to roll to hit, or it is an attack that creates an area of effect. (and no rules are broken).

Why do you say the Snap Shot faq entry kicks in if it is a weapon/attack? Please read HtH again.

If it is a weapon then the Snap shot FAQ kicks in because it says

"Q: How do[es] 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."

And LoTS "doesn’t need to roll To Hit", and if it is a weapon it must use a Snap Shot to be able to hit a Zooming Flyer.

foolishmortal wrote:
If LotS is not a shooting attack, why are you saying it must be a snap shot to hit a zooming flyer?.

If it is an attack then the Snap shot FAQ kicks in because it says
"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 LoTS rule is an attack that "otherwise [doesn't] roll to hit" so LoTS can not target a Flyer.

You keep saying the Snap Shot faq entry kicks in for mentioning 'weapon' or 'attack'.... Please show me where the Snap Shot rule kicks in.

HtH says "shots resolved at a zooming flyer can only be resolved as Snap Shots"
LotS is not a shooting attack.
Why are you requiring LotS to be a Snap Shot?

It kicks in because "Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers"

If it is hitting a flyer then it has to be a snap shot (Barring a specific allowance like the Skyfire rule).

If the rules say you must eat only bread for breakfast, and a faq entry tells you what bread means, including the phrase "tofu may not be made into bread", can you eat tofu for lunch?

Why don't you make a poll about that?

Oh and by the way, there is no "trick question" in the faq. It's clear, only snapshots can hit a flyer (and anything else with a specific permission).

If the Hard to Hit rule says shots must be snap shots to hit zooming flyers, and a faq entry clarifies what can and cannot make snap shot, why are you insisting that a special ability that is not a shot be a snap shot in order to hit a zooming flyer?

foolishmortal wrote:
If the Hard to Hit rule says shots must be snap shots to hit zooming flyers, and a faq entry clarifies what can and cannot make snap shot, why are you insisting that a special ability that is not a shot be a snap shot in order to hit a zooming flyer?

From their responses in this thread it appears to be because they believe that it should be considered a weapon and thus is shooting despite nothing to back up that claim.

foolishmortal wrote:
If the Hard to Hit rule says shots must be snap shots to hit zooming flyers, and a faq entry clarifies what can and cannot make snap shot, why are you insisting that a special ability that is not a shot be a snap shot in order to hit a zooming flyer?

Wrong 100%. Faq says the only attacks that can hit a flyer are snap shots.

foolishmortal wrote:
If the Hard to Hit rule says shots must be snap shots to hit zooming flyers, and a faq entry clarifies what can and cannot make snap shot, why are you insisting that a special ability that is not a shot be a snap shot in order to hit a zooming flyer?

The FAQ entry says nothing at all about 'shooting attacks', nor does it clarify what can and cannot make a snap shot. It clarifies what can hit fliers. It uses language like 'only snap shots may target' and 'any attacks that ... cannot target'.

At the risk of sounding redundant, the FAQ also says: "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?"

Is the lightning from Imotekh's ability any one of the above? (specifically is it a maelstrom, nova, beam, or any weapon that doesn't need to roll to hit or hits automatically?)

If the answer to the above question is 'No' (and i believe it is, as a special ability not included in the above), then why are you applying the 'answer' to that question to something that isn't 'in' the question itself?

 Neorealist wrote:
At the risk of sounding redundant, the FAQ also says: "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?"

Is the lightning from Imotekh's ability any one of the above? (specifically is it a maelstrom, nova, beam, or any weapon that doesn't need to roll to hit or hits automatically?)

If the answer to the above question is 'No' (and i believe it is), then why are you applying the 'answer' to that question for something that isn't 'in' the question itself?

It would be one of them though, as it doesn't need to roll to hit. on a roll of a 6 it automatically hits the unit eh?

Well for one: it isn't a weapon, it is a special ability.

The question is specific to weapons, not everything that doesn't need to roll to hit or hits automatically.

 Neorealist wrote:
At the risk of sounding redundant, the FAQ also says: "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?"

Is the lightning from Imotekh's ability any one of the above? (specifically is it a maelstrom, nova, beam, or any weapon that doesn't need to roll to hit or hits automatically?)

If the answer to the above question is 'No' (and i believe it is, as a special ability not included in the above), then why are you applying the 'answer' to that question to something that isn't 'in' the question itself?

This has already been brought up. This is a broad answer to a specific question.

It would be as if someone said:

Q: Can I eat wheat bread for breakfast?
A: You may not eat any thing that has flour listed as an ingredient.

Then, people on the www.breadlovers.com forums were trying to justify eating cookies for breakfast, because the specific question was about eating wheat bread.

 undertow wrote:

 Neorealist wrote:
At the risk of sounding redundant, the FAQ also says: "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?"

Is the lightning from Imotekh's ability any one of the above? (specifically is it a maelstrom, nova, beam, or any weapon that doesn't need to roll to hit or hits automatically?)

If the answer to the above question is 'No' (and i believe it is, as a special ability not included in the above), then why are you applying the 'answer' to that question to something that isn't 'in' the question itself?

This has already been brought up. This is a broad answer to a specific question.

It would be as if someone said:

Q: Can I eat wheat bread for breakfast?
A: You may not eat any thing that has flour listed as an ingredient.

Then, people on the www.breadlovers.com forums were trying to justify eating cookies for breakfast, because the specific question was about eating wheat bread.

Holy cow, you even nitpick and paraphrase your own analogies! How about being more realistic?

Q: Can I eat wheat bread, white bread, rye bread, or any other type of baked good that uses yeast to rise?
A. You may not eat any thing that uses yeast to rise. This includes wheat, white, and rye bread - as well as baguettes or croutons.

Awesome, I can eat cookies.

 Neorealist wrote:
Well for one: it isn't a weapon, it is a special ability.

The question is specific to weapons, not everything that doesn't need to roll to hit or hits automatically.

and to take the stance that it is not a weapon means that you can not add the strength of the attack to the D6 roll to pen. So right there you have an instance of the rules not working correctly, so that interpretation can not be correct.

If it is considered a weapon, then you can add the Strength to the armor pen roll. Of course that also means that you can not hit a zooming flyer with that ability.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Neorealist wrote:
Well for one: it isn't a weapon, it is a special ability.

The question is specific to weapons, not everything that doesn't need to roll to hit or hits automatically.

and to take the stance that it is not a weapon means that you can not add the strength of the attack to the D6 roll to pen. So right there you have an instance of the rules not working correctly, so that interpretation can not be correct.

If it is considered a weapon, then you can add the Strength to the armor pen roll. Of course that also means that you can not hit a zooming flyer with that ability.

DUDE! That has nothing to do with this topic so stop bringing it up!! A RAW discrepency with armor penetration and to wound rolls. And how the interact with non-weapon hits has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not LotS can hit Zooming Flyers.

I can see it now. The FAQ is released to tell us that LotS can indeed hit Zooming Flyers and you are then going to insist it wont do anything because didn't address the wording for armor pen.

Before someone says it I'm going to say it.
Ram.

Already been said.

 Tyr Grimtooth wrote:
DUDE! That has nothing to do with this topic so stop bringing it up!! A RAW discrepency with armor penetration and to wound rolls. And how the interact with non-weapon hits has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not LotS can hit Zooming Flyers.

I can see it now. The FAQ is released to tell us that LotS can indeed hit Zooming Flyers and you are then going to insist it wont do anything because didn't address the wording for armor pen.

It illustrates why the view that the LoTS is not a weapon is incorrect, as it does not gel with all of the rules and thus it is an important point.

How you do not see this puzzles me.

 Tyr Grimtooth wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Neorealist wrote:
Well for one: it isn't a weapon, it is a special ability.

The question is specific to weapons, not everything that doesn't need to roll to hit or hits automatically.

and to take the stance that it is not a weapon means that you can not add the strength of the attack to the D6 roll to pen. So right there you have an instance of the rules not working correctly, so that interpretation can not be correct.

If it is considered a weapon, then you can add the Strength to the armor pen roll. Of course that also means that you can not hit a zooming flyer with that ability.

DUDE! That has nothing to do with this topic so stop bringing it up!! A RAW discrepency with armor penetration and to wound rolls. And how the interact with non-weapon hits has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not LotS can hit Zooming Flyers.

I can see it now. The FAQ is released to tell us that LotS can indeed hit Zooming Flyers and you are then going to insist it wont do anything because didn't address the wording for armor pen.

He's pointing out that if reading the rules one way results in broken rules, hats probably not the right way to read rules.

Damn those ninjas are getting fast......

foolishmortal wrote:

Kevin949 wrote:Well first off, sorry I don't have every facet of the rules memorized like you

I don't think we need to have all rules and updates memorized. But if we are posting somethinng as fact, try to double check. Also, I don't think we should come down on each other quite so hard when make a mistake. Somewhere in the middle is a nice balanced approach with phrases like 'iirc' and 'sorry, pXYZ disagrees.'

The idea that a weapon may or may not require a model is is interesting. The p50-62 weapons seem to all be wargear carried by models. Witchfire (PSA) "counts as firing an Assault weapon."
(p69)

Let me be the first to say, if I make a mistake or am pointed out to be obviously wrong, I'll own up to it. I have NO problems admitting a mistake or when I'm wrong. It's how you learn and grow. And yes, I do double check many things before I post about them, those that I don't [double check on] I'm sure (in my head) that I'm remembering it correctly.

So tell me then, what did I post up that wasn't fact? I mean, recently in this thread. I'm trying my hardest to not take sides on this debate anymore as the actual discussion has become ludicrously juvenile and circular.

The idea of a weapon in this game to me is anything that can be used as an advantage over the opposing player at the cost of casualties. So, take for instance that terrain that was mentioned earlier. I consider that a weapon as it is something that could potentially be utilized by either side and is both beneficial and detrimental to both sides. Taking advantage of terrain or weather or whatever is absolutely considered a "weapon".

 Neorealist wrote:
Well for one: it isn't a weapon, it is a special ability.
The question is specific to weapons, not everything that doesn't need to roll to hit or hits automatically.

Question was specific to certain types of PSA's and some specific sorts of weapons. It definitely was not specific to weapons generally. The answer on other hand, wasn't specific to those things at all.

FAQ v1.1a regarding Flyers wrote:"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."

Note the underlined portion. It obviously doesn't refer to either weapons or shooting attacks.
For example, if you had special ability that allowed you to place Blast Marker on the table during Movement phase, with models under the markers taking hits, you still wouldn't be able to hit Flyer with that attack.

There are other FAQs where answer given is goes far beyond what was asked. Good examples are: IG FAQ entry about priests and enginseers, SW FAQ entry about Leaders of the Pack and Tyranid FAQ entry about Mawloc.

Luide wrote: There are other FAQs where answer given is goes far beyond what was asked. Good examples are: IG FAQ entry about priests and enginseers, SW FAQ entry about Leaders of the Pack and Tyranid FAQ entry about Mawloc.

I'm sorry, you seem to be saying that the FAQ should be extrapolated from in addition to being a set of answers to specific questions. I'd like you to provide a reason for that: Do any of those examples you've listed above indicate that they extend beyond the explicit scope of their own questions to provide specific rules interpretation to non-specifically addressed related ones?