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.

 Goat wrote:
Ok so RAI vs. RAW. Don't people prefer to play a game by the rules rather then play how they feel like things should be played? I guess during a game you can just roll off if a debat happens over it. It is unclear and you can argue RAI vs RAW until people get blue in the face.

Its not the RAI, it is the RAW. The fact I have to discuss how English works to you is very sad indeed. The rule for Deny the Witch does in no way state that the exact word TARGET must be present for the rule to be used. Only that the unit affected is the target of the power. In the case of Cleansing Flame the psychic test is made and if its passed the power is applied to all enemy units in the same assault. Notice how there is nothing between passing the psychic test and applying the power to the affected unit/s. This means that the affected unit/s ARE THE TARGET.

Just to make sure its clear which part I am referencing in the text of the power.

"If the psychic test is passed, all enemy models that are part of the same assault suffer one wound on a roll of 4+."

You see how once the test is passed the power takes effect on the enemy with nothing between "If the psychic test is passed" and "all enemy models that are part of the same assault suffer one wound on a roll of 4+". This means they ARE THE TARGET.

And if they are the target of a psychic power then they CAN attempt to Deny the Witch.

For clarification in case you missed it, Heroic Sacrifice can not be Denied because the target of the power is the GK unit not the enemy unit. Yes?

 Bausk wrote:

 Goat wrote:
Ok so RAI vs. RAW. Don't people prefer to play a game by the rules rather then play how they feel like things should be played? I guess during a game you can just roll off if a debat happens over it. It is unclear and you can argue RAI vs RAW until people get blue in the face.

Its not the RAI, it is the RAW. The fact I have to discuss how English works to you is very sad indeed. The rule for Deny the Witch does in no way state that the exact word TARGET must be present for the rule to be used. Only that the unit affected is the target of the power. In the case of Cleansing Flame the psychic test is made and if its passed the power is applied to all enemy units in the same assault. Notice how there is nothing between passing the psychic test and applying the power to the affected unit/s. This means that the affected unit/s ARE THE TARGET.

Just to make sure its clear which part I am referencing in the text of the power.

"If the psychic test is passed, all enemy models that are part of the same assault suffer one wound on a roll of 4+."

You see how once the test is passed the power takes effect on the enemy with nothing between "If the psychic test is passed" and "all enemy models that are part of the same assault suffer one wound on a roll of 4+". This means they ARE THE TARGET.

And if they are the target of a psychic power then they CAN attempt to Deny the Witch.

For clarification in case you missed it, Heroic Sacrifice can not be Denied because the target of the power is the GK unit not the enemy unit. Yes?

Find me the word target in the rules or an FAQ saying who gets a deny the witch. RAI vs. RAW

 Bausk wrote:

 Goat wrote:

 Bausk wrote:
I said nova is the closest 6th ed power to it. It affects all units withing range (all enemy units in the assault, range does not need to be judged by inches), which in turn is much like but not exactly like a nova. There is no requirement for the word target to be used for a unit to deny, just that the unit is targeted directly by the power or rather is the target of the power. As the power is applied directly to the affected (target) unit the test is possible.

Actually the Deny rule says "Is the target of." So rules are posted for the requirement of getting a deny roll. Nova's have rules on how to apply the deny as does jaws of the world wolf. Cleansing flame does not have any stipulation that gives the model/unit a deny roll.

Again, as the unit is directly affected by the power it IS the target of the power. This is the base rule premise of Deny the Witch, interactions with different subtypes are expanded upon.

Cleansing flame affects, and there fore targets, all enemy units in the same assault. As they are the target, they get to deny.

So any unit hit by any effect (psychic or shooting) is considered a target?
JotWW FAQ would disagree with you. Also Blood Lance. Also Death Ray.

 Goat wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

 Goat wrote:

 Bausk wrote:
I said nova is the closest 6th ed power to it. It affects all units withing range (all enemy units in the assault, range does not need to be judged by inches), which in turn is much like but not exactly like a nova. There is no requirement for the word target to be used for a unit to deny, just that the unit is targeted directly by the power or rather is the target of the power. As the power is applied directly to the affected (target) unit the test is possible.

Actually the Deny rule says "Is the target of." So rules are posted for the requirement of getting a deny roll. Nova's have rules on how to apply the deny as does jaws of the world wolf. Cleansing flame does not have any stipulation that gives the model/unit a deny roll.

Wouldn't the "target" be the unit being flamed?

Grey knight codex, Cleansing Flame, Pg 31, "This power can be used during the assault phase in either player's turn, after assault moves have been made but before blows have been struck. if the psychic test is passed, all enemy models that are part of the same assault suffer once wound on a roll of 4+. Armour saves may be taken as normal. Once the effects of cleansing flame have been resolved (and any casualties removed) blows are struck as normal. Unsaved wounds caused by Cleansing Flame are counted as having been caused in close combat for all purposes."

No. I can't find the word target anywhere. Not even in the FAQ. I find the rules to deny the witch for other special psyker attacks in their respective FAQs but not here.

Your issue is your confusing the word target with the meaning of the word. The word target does not specifically have to be present in the text of the power for the ability to deny the witch to be taken. Only that the meaning or intent of the word target is present. In other words if the unit in question is literally being targeted by the power. As in you roll the psychic test and apply the power to the unit.

Target in 40k has a specific meaning. This means that you cannot go with a generic definition - rather you must use it exactly as the brb defines.
Not every unit affected by a power/shooting attack is targeted.

Why can't GW do something as simple as label psychic powers offensive or defensive? Offensive you get to Deny, Defensive you don't?

You don't get a DtW roll for this one as it does not target the enemy unit.

This reminds me of a similar argument on whether or not you can Deny the Warlock power "Destructor" as there is no psychic test...

 Bausk wrote:

 Goat wrote:
Ok so RAI vs. RAW. Don't people prefer to play a game by the rules rather then play how they feel like things should be played? I guess during a game you can just roll off if a debat happens over it. It is unclear and you can argue RAI vs RAW until people get blue in the face.

Its not the RAI, it is the RAW. The fact I have to discuss how English works to you is very sad indeed. The rule for Deny the Witch does in no way state that the exact word TARGET must be present for the rule to be used. Only that the unit affected is the target of the power. In the case of Cleansing Flame the psychic test is made and if its passed the power is applied to all enemy units in the same assault. Notice how there is nothing between passing the psychic test and applying the power to the affected unit/s. This means that the affected unit/s ARE THE TARGET.

Just to make sure its clear which part I am referencing in the text of the power.

"If the psychic test is passed, all enemy models that are part of the same assault suffer one wound on a roll of 4+."

You see how once the test is passed the power takes effect on the enemy with nothing between "If the psychic test is passed" and "all enemy models that are part of the same assault suffer one wound on a roll of 4+". This means they ARE THE TARGET.

And if they are the target of a psychic power then they CAN attempt to Deny the Witch.

For clarification in case you missed it, Heroic Sacrifice can not be Denied because the target of the power is the GK unit not the enemy unit. Yes?

For clarification in case you missed it, you're right Bausk, it is RAW. But you're arguing RAI.
RAW states that a unit must be targeted in order to get a Deny the Witch.
RAW cleansing flame doesn't target.
And for you to sit there and tell me it does indeed target when there is NO RULE AT ALL DETAILING THAT CLEANSING FLAME TARGETS IN ANY RULE BOOK?
You can say that "well the english definition of the word target is..." but that doesn't actually mean GAK in 40k. You follow the rules. If the rules say a unit needs to be targeted, then it needs to be targeted. And Cleansing Flame, despite whatever kind of presumptive word twisting you try to use, does not target. It may hit one unit, or 4 units, or 16 units, but it doesn't target.
You are right in that it is rather unique though. Just like Jaw's of the World Wolf, and Blood Lance. But those powers were FAQ'd detailing exactly how they work. Cleansing Flame was not, which leads us to believe that the rule works RAW and and there is no need to faq it.

And as i have stated before, i can see this getting reversed in a FAQ. But right now, the rule is very clear, and any attempt to change the rules at all seems wrong to me. But if that's how you would rather play it, RAI, then go ahead. I'm not gonna tell you how to play your games.

Bausk wrote:Your issue is your confusing the word target with the meaning of the word. The word target does not specifically have to be present in the text of the power for the ability to deny the witch to be taken. Only that the meaning or intent of the word target is present. In other words if the unit in question is literally being targeted by the power. As in you roll the psychic test and apply the power to the unit.

So tell me why the word "TARGET" is present in almost EVERY OTHER PSYCHIC POWER THAT CAN BE DENIED?

Also Bausk, please take extra care to read rigeld2's post on the meaning of the word "target," as you have broken the sixth tenet of You Make Da Call.
6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.


I'm sorry if this post reads a little...venomous? But this is amazingly clear from a RAW standpoint. And that's the only point worth arguing from.

I play it that you do not get DTW against Heroic Sacrific, but you do get it against Cleansing Flame.

rigeld2 wrote:

So any unit hit by any effect (psychic or shooting) is considered a target?
JotWW FAQ would disagree with you. Also Blood Lance. Also Death Ray.

No JotWW and Blood lance have been FAQ'd to be treated like a beam for the purposes of DtW. If there is a direct application of the psychic power to the enemy unit then they are the target of the power.

rigeld2 wrote:

Target in 40k has a specific meaning. This means that you cannot go with a generic definition - rather you must use it exactly as the brb defines.
Not every unit affected by a power/shooting attack is targeted.

No, no it actually does not have a specific meaning. And if it did, which it doesn't, its not in any way outlined under Deny the witch on page 68. Just that if a power is targets an enemy unit they can attempt a nullification. No each power must have the word target in the text of the power, nothing like it. As I understand English I am able to easily draw the conclusion from the rules as they are written that if a power is directly applied to the unit then they may take a deny the witch roll.

Neronoxx wrote:

For clarification in case you missed it, you're right Bausk, it is RAW. But you're arguing RAI.
RAW states that a unit must be targeted in order to get a Deny the Witch.
RAW cleansing flame doesn't target.
And for you to sit there and tell me it does indeed target when there is NO RULE AT ALL DETAILING THAT CLEANSING FLAME TARGETS IN ANY RULE BOOK?
You can say that "well the english definition of the word target is..." but that doesn't actually mean GAK in 40k. You follow the rules. If the rules say a unit needs to be targeted, then it needs to be targeted. And Cleansing Flame, despite whatever kind of presumptive word twisting you try to use, does not target. It may hit one unit, or 4 units, or 16 units, but it doesn't target.
You are right in that it is rather unique though. Just like Jaw's of the World Wolf, and Blood Lance. But those powers were FAQ'd detailing exactly how they work. Cleansing Flame was not, which leads us to believe that the rule works RAW and and there is no need to faq it.

And as i have stated before, i can see this getting reversed in a FAQ. But right now, the rule is very clear, and any attempt to change the rules at all seems wrong to me. But if that's how you would rather play it, RAI, then go ahead. I'm not gonna tell you how to play your games.

Not the definition, the literal use of the word target. As I have said repeatedly there is absolutely no indication that the exact word TARGET must be in the text of the power. You need to support your standing that a power MUST have the word target in it to be denied. You show me where it states this explicitly and I will agree with you. Until then I live in a world where I don't draw ridiculous conclusions from nothing.

Neronoxx wrote:

So tell me why the word "TARGET" is present in almost EVERY OTHER PSYCHIC POWER THAT CAN BE DENIED?

Also Bausk, please take extra care to read rigeld2's post on the meaning of the word "target," as you have broken the sixth tenet of You Make Da Call.
6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.


I'm sorry if this post reads a little...venomous? But this is amazingly clear from a RAW standpoint. And that's the only point worth arguing from.

The sixth tenet was not broken as in this case it is a reliable source. The sixth tenet is around for moronic use of words like wielding, not when there is no other meaning to the word. Just because they use the word target in deny the witch does not mean the word must be present in the power. I fail to see how you are reading it that way as it does not say that or imply that the word target must be there.

As we know psychic shooting attacks (PSA) are able to be denied I will forgo mentioning them here. Also because some codices are ridiculously out of date I will stick to the most recent to be fair
.
Would you deny these powers or not?

C:SM: -Null zone, It has an area of effect and directly affects units but is not a PSA and does not have the word target in the text.
C:Nids: -Aura of despair, is exactly like Cleansing flame, pass the test apply the power to all enemy units with in range. Is not a PSA and no mention of target.
-Hypnotic gaze, only mentions target once after the test has ben passed and the model selected. Not a PSA.
C:SW: -Tempests Wrath, It has an area of effect and directly affects units but is not a PSA and does not have the word target in the text.

That was an extremely well reasoned response.

Neronoxx wrote:
You can say that "well the english definition of the word target is..." but that doesn't actually mean GAK in 40k. You follow the rules. If the rules say a unit needs to be targeted, then it needs to be targeted. And Cleansing Flame, despite whatever kind of presumptive word twisting you try to use, does not target.

And "destroyed" must mean "destroyed". So now then, Purge the Alien and First Blood just got really...... complicated. While in general RAW is strictly as written, however GW has a nasty habit of generalizing terms they use. Which complicates most any discussion.

Of the 4 you listed, only Hypnotic Gaze can be DtWed.

Ad you're wrong - target does have a specific 40k meaning. Pretending it doesn't wont help your argument.

rigeld2 wrote:
Of the 4 you listed, only Hypnotic Gaze can be DtWed.

Ad you're wrong - target does have a specific 40k meaning. Pretending it doesn't wont help your argument.

I'd say Hypnotic gaze and Aura of despair as they have instant effects that apply directly to the affected enemy units rather than bubble like effects that can be passed though with movement. Pretty much its one AoE vs another, Cleansing Flame and Aura of Despair are like explosions that directly apply the effect to the enemy unit. Null zone and Tempests Wrath are like summoned bubbles that apply the effect to the area around the psyker and then if an enemy unit is in the area they are affected.

Please direct me to where it is outlined and quote the passage that supports your claim that the word target is oh so very specific 40k meaning. Just saying I'm wrong does not prove you are right.

 Bausk wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Of the 4 you listed, only Hypnotic Gaze can be DtWed.

Ad you're wrong - target does have a specific 40k meaning. Pretending it doesn't wont help your argument.

I'd say Hypnotic gaze and Aura of despair as they have instant effects that apply directly to the affected enemy units rather than bubble like effects that can be passed though with movement. Pretty much its one AoE vs another, Cleansing Flame and Aura of Despair are like explosions that directly apply the effect to the enemy unit. Null zone and Tempests Wrath are like summoned bubbles that apply the effect to the area around the psyker and then if an enemy unit is in the area they are affected.

Please direct me to where it is outlined and quote the passage that supports your claim that the word target is oh so very specific 40k meaning. Just saying I'm wrong does not prove you are right.

There is no direct definition of "Target" in the rules. Only rules for choosing target's in the shooting phase, and the psychic power phase.

bausk wrote:Just because they use the word target in deny the witch does not mean the word must be present in the power. I fail to see how you are reading it that way as it does not say that or imply that the word target must be there.

bausk wrote:Just that if a power is targets an enemy unit they can attempt a nullification. No each power must have the word target in the text of the power, nothing like it. As I understand English I am able to easily draw the conclusion from the rules as they are written that if a power is directly applied to the unit then they may take a deny the witch roll.

"If a psychic power is targeted on an enemy unit, and the psychic test is passed, the target can attempt to deny the witch before the psychic power is resolved. -PG 68"
If a psychic power is targeted on an enemy unit....
That sir, is a requirement. If a psychic power did not target an enemy unit, would you get a Deny the Witch? You are arguing that if it affects a unit, it is targeting a unit. You can not assume this, because you are indeed assuming this, for there is no rule in the book to support this claim, other than your mysterious word-twisting magical "ENGLISH". If you could indeed find a page, please post the page number.

These are the Dictionary Definitions for "Target"

tar·get
noun
1.an object, usually marked with concentric circles, to be aimed at in shooting practice or contests.
2.any object used for this purpose.
3.anything fired at.
4.a goal to be reached.
5.an object of abuse, scorn, derision, etc.; butt.
6.Fencing. the portion of a fencer's body where a touch can be scored.
7.a disk-shaped signal, as at a railroad switch, indicating the position of a switch.
8.Surveying .
a.the sliding sight on a leveling rod.
b.any marker on which sights are taken.
9.a small shield, usually round, carried by a foot soldier; buckler.

Could you please point out and explain which of these definitions you are using to fuel your argument? Because i don't see it here.

Neronoxx wrote:


There is no direct definition of "Target" in the rules. Only rules for choosing target's in the shooting phase, and the psychic power phase.

Good t know that at least you get that. I'm to assume your stand point is reliant on the enemy unit being selected before the test is made then?

Neronoxx wrote:

"If a psychic power is targeted on an enemy unit, and the psychic test is passed, the target can attempt to deny the witch before the psychic power is resolved. -PG 68"
If a psychic power is targeted on an enemy unit....
That sir, is a requirement. If a psychic power did not target an enemy unit, would you get a Deny the Witch? You are arguing that if it affects a unit, it is targeting a unit. You can not assume this, because you are indeed assuming this, for there is no rule in the book to support this claim, other than your mysterious word-twisting magical "ENGLISH". If you could indeed find a page, please post the page number.

These are the Dictionary Definitions for "Target"

tar·get
noun
1.an object, usually marked with concentric circles, to be aimed at in shooting practice or contests.
2.any object used for this purpose.
3.anything fired at.
4.a goal to be reached.
5.an object of abuse, scorn, derision, etc.; butt.
6.Fencing. the portion of a fencer's body where a touch can be scored.
7.a disk-shaped signal, as at a railroad switch, indicating the position of a switch.
8.Surveying .
a.the sliding sight on a leveling rod.
b.any marker on which sights are taken.
9.a small shield, usually round, carried by a foot soldier; buckler.

Could you please point out and explain which of these definitions you are using to fuel your argument? Because i don't see it here.

None because it says targeted, not target (the verb not the noun). As the power directs itself at the enemy unit without interruption between cause and effect it is targeted by the power.

And coming full circle this is where I state that Cleansing Flame and Aura of Despair are both much like Novas without actually being novas. A nova affects all enemy units with in range, none are preselected before a test is made. A nova can be denied but on a unit by unit basis, which I agree with for Cleansing Flame and Aura of despair.

 Bausk wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

So any unit hit by any effect (psychic or shooting) is considered a target?
JotWW FAQ would disagree with you. Also Blood Lance. Also Death Ray.

No JotWW and Blood lance have been FAQ'd to be treated like a beam for the purposes of DtW. If there is a direct application of the psychic power to the enemy unit then they are the target of the power.

This is kinda wrong especially about JOTWW.
The target is the 1st unit effected, while a large number of units can be effected, only one is the target. JOTWW is not a beam, nor is it treated like a beam, it is resolved as it is ruled to be resolved.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I think you need to draw the destinction between "these ones are small, those ones are far away". If it looks like a nova but isn't a nova then you cannot apply the rules for a nova.

As above. You need to actually "target", which is something that Cleansing Flame does NOT do.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Nova say that it targets every unit?

It does - which is why you get DtW for each unit to stop it affecting them.

Cleansing flame? Not so much

 liturgies of blood wrote:

 Bausk wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

So any unit hit by any effect (psychic or shooting) is considered a target?
JotWW FAQ would disagree with you. Also Blood Lance. Also Death Ray.

No JotWW and Blood lance have been FAQ'd to be treated like a beam for the purposes of DtW. If there is a direct application of the psychic power to the enemy unit then they are the target of the power.

This is kinda wrong especially about JOTWW.
The target is the 1st unit effected, while a large number of units can be effected, only one is the target. JOTWW is not a beam, nor is it treated like a beam, it is resolved as it is ruled to be resolved.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I think you need to draw the destinction between "these ones are small, those ones are far away". If it looks like a nova but isn't a nova then you cannot apply the rules for a nova.

One: It is treated like a Beam for the purposes of Deny the Witch as I said previously. As in only the first unit affected may attempt to deny it then it functions like a beam, so we reference the rules for beams and deny the witch. That said it behaves like a beam in many respects but as it is a 5th ed power is not and never can be a a beam.

Two: Cleansing flame and aura of despair they behave much like a nova, but can never be a nova. As the base rules for denying are on a psyker to unit basis a novas operation of denying is a great reference of operation for these powers, but it is not saying that they are novas.

How about the previous version of Nurgle's Rot. The power had a defined range, was not a psychic shooting attack, affected enemy units after the test was passed and made no mention of the word target but applied the effect directly to enemy units within range. And how did we treat it for deny the witch purposes?

This is the FAQ rigeld is talking about I believe:

Q: If the Blood Lance or Jaws of the World Wolf psychic power (or any beam power for that matter) passes through more than one enemy unit, does my opponent get to make a Deny the Witch roll foreach unit affected? (p69)
A: No. The first unit affected by the psychic power can
attempt to Deny the Witch, but if that test is failed, every
enemy unit is affected as normal

Although Cleansing Flame is not a beam, it does provide precedent that being affected by a psychic power is not enough to be considered its target.

oh boy, this thing is getting more complicated now than I origionally thought. Incidentially we never played heroic sacrifice as targeting the other guy such as when I first used the power in a game vs Kharn who was immune to psy powers but upon reading the rules, we decided that he could still be affected.

I thought that origionally you can Deny the cleansing flame but now after all these other power faq's that I really never paid attention to, I'm not sure anymore.

jms40k wrote:
This is the FAQ rigeld is talking about I believe:

Q: If the Blood Lance or Jaws of the World Wolf psychic power (or any beam power for that matter) passes through more than one enemy unit, does my opponent get to make a Deny the Witch roll foreach unit affected? (p69)
A: No. The first unit affected by the psychic power can
attempt to Deny the Witch, but if that test is failed, every
enemy unit is affected as normal

Although Cleansing Flame is not a beam, it does provide precedent that being affected by a psychic power is not enough to be considered its target.

This and the FAQ that says Jaws only targets the first unit it hits. Which means that the other units are explicitly not targeted.
It's funny like that - almost like target is a specific 40k concept...

rigeld2 wrote:
Which means that the other units are explicitly not targeted.
It's funny like that - almost like target is a specific 40k concept...

I agree with you on this rigeld, that 40k's definition of target doesn't run quite parallel with english, and has it's own specific context to the rules. A lot of the words in this game are like that...army, move, etc.
The problem is that nowhere in the book is the word or action of targeting clearly defined, so we have to work through examples.
When you have multiple psychic powers with different workings, and some clearly say target, and others do not say target, one can only conclude that target has a specific meaning in 40k, and that there is a difference.
To assume anything else is playing Rules as Intended. I have no problem with this, and it is how i would play the game. I let my friend charge his aegis defense line with typhus all the time.
But in a tournament, where for the most part you have to play Rules as Written, its easier to run into problem's like this.

Was Games workshop's intent to allow players to deny the witch on any power affecting their unit? Probably.
But was it Games Workshop's intent to deny player's from moving through their own units? Definitely, but there is no rule to prevent a player from doing this, only references to such a rule.

With the second issue, the intent is clearer. We have multiple references to players not being able to move through their own models.
But with the first, it becomes a lot murkier because we have this word dispute. Just what does "Target" mean in 40k?

We can't use english definitions, because they don't always apply well to 40k (see the Tervigon+gate of infinity dispute, and the use of the word "Army" when determining the composition of units players take into the game.)
So we have to use the precedents set for us by the game itself, which again, is not always clear or perfect. But that, as i have said already, is the only way to play a competitive game of 40k; taking the rules at face value and not assuming, implying, twisting any of the rules or words therein.

rigeld2 wrote:

jms40k wrote:
This is the FAQ rigeld is talking about I believe:

Q: If the Blood Lance or Jaws of the World Wolf psychic power (or any beam power for that matter) passes through more than one enemy unit, does my opponent get to make a Deny the Witch roll foreach unit affected? (p69)
A: No. The first unit affected by the psychic power can
attempt to Deny the Witch, but if that test is failed, every
enemy unit is affected as normal

Although Cleansing Flame is not a beam, it does provide precedent that being affected by a psychic power is not enough to be considered its target.

This and the FAQ that says Jaws only targets the first unit it hits. Which means that the other units are explicitly not targeted.
It's funny like that - almost like target is a specific 40k concept...

And the FAQ quoted only says affected, not targeted. So are we ignoring the FAQ because nothing in it says target?

Neronoxx wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Which means that the other units are explicitly not targeted.
It's funny like that - almost like target is a specific 40k concept...

I agree with you on this rigeld, that 40k's definition of target doesn't run quite parallel with english, and has it's own specific context to the rules. A lot of the words in this game are like that...army, move, etc.
The problem is that nowhere in the book is the word or action of targeting clearly defined, so we have to work through examples.
When you have multiple psychic powers with different workings, and some clearly say target, and others do not say target, one can only conclude that target has a specific meaning in 40k, and that there is a difference.
To assume anything else is playing Rules as Intended. I have no problem with this, and it is how i would play the game. I let my friend charge his aegis defense line with typhus all the time.
But in a tournament, where for the most part you have to play Rules as Written, its easier to run into problem's like this.

Was Games workshop's intent to allow players to deny the witch on any power affecting their unit? Probably.
But was it Games Workshop's intent to deny player's from moving through their own units? Definitely, but there is no rule to prevent a player from doing this, only references to such a rule.

With the second issue, the intent is clearer. We have multiple references to players not being able to move through their own models.
But with the first, it becomes a lot murkier because we have this word dispute. Just what does "Target" mean in 40k?

We can't use english definitions, because they don't always apply well to 40k (see the Tervigon+gate of infinity dispute, and the use of the word "Army" when determining the composition of units players take into the game.)
So we have to use the precedents set for us by the game itself, which again, is not always clear or perfect. But that, as i have said already, is the only way to play a competitive game of 40k; taking the rules at face value and not assuming, implying, twisting any of the rules or words therein.

Army: An organized military force equipped for fighting on land
Move: Verb; Go in a specified direction or manner; change position.
Noun; A change of place or position.

Yeah cause those are clearly inaccurate for describing these "very specific game terms". And before you go all "Breaking the sixth" on me its only breaking if the word has no clear meaning that is applicable or has multiple conflicting meanings to the game. As everything defined has been accurate in describing of "game terms" it is not breaking the sixth tenet.

Wait wait wait, first you say that it has a different meaning but then go on to say its in no way defined in the rules. So you have to go off of 'examples', wich to me means your making assumptions based on other factors. You go on to state that some powers have it and some don't. And then arbitrarily decide that 'one can only conclude that target has a specific meaning in 40k, and that there is a difference.'....Sorry what?

The first is not a word dispute, well to you it is I suppose, and if it was there is no solid basis for your stand point. Deny the Witch describes its base interaction with all Psychic powers and the subtypes listed explain their unique application. Two different things. What it comes to is how a power interacts with the units; that the affect is applied directly to the enemy unit. Not to the caster, not to the area and not to a weapon but the enemy unit. If so they are the target of the attack.

The second is just GW skipping over a rule that it should have in the book, simple one line fix. They are unrelated.

Since everything I've said applied without conflict to the game thus far it isn't an issue. But since you referenced the Gate+Tervigon, any chance you could you link it?

Speaking of precedents I see no one answer my Nurgles rot question....But hey that's cool, I'll just give you more food for thought if your adamant about the word target being specific to 40k without evidence. Cleansing Flame is a close combat attack, do we not choose a target unit to direct our attacks or do they just land on enemy units because we say so?

 Bausk wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

jms40k wrote:
This is the FAQ rigeld is talking about I believe:

Q: If the Blood Lance or Jaws of the World Wolf psychic power (or any beam power for that matter) passes through more than one enemy unit, does my opponent get to make a Deny the Witch roll foreach unit affected? (p69)
A: No. The first unit affected by the psychic power can
attempt to Deny the Witch, but if that test is failed, every
enemy unit is affected as normal

Although Cleansing Flame is not a beam, it does provide precedent that being affected by a psychic power is not enough to be considered its target.

This and the FAQ that says Jaws only targets the first unit it hits. Which means that the other units are explicitly not targeted.
It's funny like that - almost like target is a specific 40k concept...

And the FAQ quoted only says affected, not targeted. So are we ignoring the FAQ because nothing in it says target?

You must have missed the part I bolded.
Between the two of them, they clarify that only a targeted unit (not just any affected unit) can DtW.

The first is not a word dispute, well to you it is I suppose, and if it was there is no solid basis for your stand point. Deny the Witch describes its base interaction with all Psychic powers and the subtypes listed explain their unique application. Two different things. What it comes to is how a power interacts with the units; that the affect is applied directly to the enemy unit. Not to the caster, not to the area and not to a weapon but the enemy unit. If so they are the target of the attack.

Citation required.
If I fire a large blast from my Harpy, and it scatters from the unit of Scouts over onto the unit of Space Marines, am I allowed to assault the Scouts?

If a SM Terminator Swuad fires storm bolters and a frag missile at a unit of Hormagaunts, and the missile scatters over to hit some Tyranid Warriors, can the Terminators assault the Warriors?

Cleansing Flame is a close combat attack, do we not choose a target unit to direct our attacks or do they just land on enemy units because we say so?

The enemy unit takes wounds because Cleansing Flame said so. Not because they were targeted, but because that's how the power works.
Have you read it?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And as for your Nurgles Rot question - no DtW as it doesn't target (assuming your statement of how it works is correct).

rigeld2 wrote:

You must have missed the part I bolded.
Between the two of them, they clarify that only a targeted unit (not just any affected unit) can DtW.

Firstly, not the question I asked. I asked is the FAQ quoted to be ignored as it doesn't specifically say target anywhere. Secondly it only clarified how Jaws, blood lance and beams work in relation to the base Deny the Witch rules. Last I checked exceptions are not the rule.

rigeld2 wrote:

Citation required.

English. As there is no citation being brought against understanding the context is the only recourse.

rigeld2 wrote:

If I fire a large blast from my Harpy, and it scatters from the unit of Scouts over onto the unit of Space Marines, am I allowed to assault the Scouts?

If a SM Terminator Swuad fires storm bolters and a frag missile at a unit of Hormagaunts, and the missile scatters over to hit some Tyranid Warriors, can the Terminators assault the Warriors?

No as scattering is its own mechanic that is, again, an exception and not the rule.

Without launching a disordered charge? No.

My counter to that is warp blast, if it scatters onto a unit that was not your original target do they get to Deny the Witch or are they not allowed as they are not the 'Target' of the attack?

rigeld2 wrote:
The enemy unit takes wounds because Cleansing Flame said so. Not because they were targeted, but because that's how the power works.
Have you read it?

Yes, I have. Did you read this per chance?

GK:FAQ
"Q: Is Cleansing Flame a shooting attack or a close combat attack?
A: A close combat attack"

rigeld2 wrote:

And as for your Nurgles Rot question - no DtW as it doesn't target (assuming your statement of how it works is correct).

The statement is correct, its used in the shooting phase instead of firing a weapon but is not a shooting attack. But you didn't answer my question, how did we treat for to Deny the Witch? Not "Based on your opinion how would you treat it?"

 BoomWolf wrote:
Question is then, is it a buff to your model, or a debuff to his?

It's a buff to your own model: if you pass it, you get to make an attack. It's like adding +D3 attacks for the Blood Angel psychic power, it affects the caster. Not sure how this can be an issue. I'm all for taking away abilities from Grey Knights, but in this case, Grey Knights clearly get to use this without being hit by DtW.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Bah, true neck-beards eat their rule book, and as such gain whatever knowledge is stored within.

Only if you're mon-keigh scum.
I just look at it and know what's in it.

 Bausk wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

If I fire a large blast from my Harpy, and it scatters from the unit of Scouts over onto the unit of Space Marines, am I allowed to assault the Scouts?

If a SM Terminator Swuad fires storm bolters and a frag missile at a unit of Hormagaunts, and the missile scatters over to hit some Tyranid Warriors, can the Terminators assault the Warriors?

No as scattering is its own mechanic that is, again, an exception and not the rule.

Does scattering change the target?

Without launching a disordered charge? No.

But... I have permission to assault anything I target.
You've asserted that anything affected is (by definition) targeted.
If the Terms affected a unit (they did) why are they not allowed to assault them?

My counter to that is warp blast, if it scatters onto a unit that was not your original target do they get to Deny the Witch or are they not allowed as they are not the 'Target' of the attack?

The target unit would get a DtW as you resolve DtW before resolving the power (which would include resolving scatter). Page 67 defines this.

Yes, I have. Did you read this per chance?

GK:FAQ
"Q: Is Cleansing Flame a shooting attack or a close combat attack?
A: A close combat attack"

I'm failing to see the relevancy of that statement.

rigeld2 wrote:

And as for your Nurgles Rot question - no DtW as it doesn't target (assuming your statement of how it works is correct).

The statement is correct, its used in the shooting phase instead of firing a weapon but is not a shooting attack. But you didn't answer my question, how did we treat for to Deny the Witch? Not "Based on your opinion how would you treat it?"

I never ran into it, so I can't say how I did treat it - I can only say how I would have treated it.
I'm not sure what you're fishing for here, but throwing a situation out there that doesn't exist currently and then trying to base an argument on it - and not accepting opinions of people who never ran into that situation - isn't a solid argument.