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.

 Brometheus wrote:
Having a profile or not doesn't matter- it's a Witchfire. If you miss, you don't apply anything. If you hit, the "wounds" are determined by what your opponent rolls.

How many dice do you roll to hit, and where did you get that number from?

Banbaji wrote:

 Brometheus wrote:
Having a profile or not doesn't matter- it's a Witchfire. If you miss, you don't apply anything. If you hit, the "wounds" are determined by what your opponent rolls.

How many dice do you roll to hit, and where did you get that number from?

Also there are clear cut cases of witchfires that don't roll to hit...

example: Any template psi power.

With the blanket statement of witchfire MUST roll to hit then you would be changing the rules for a lot of powers.

 Crimson wrote:
This sounds like another case of intent blind rules-lawyering by Rigeld and Nos.

No - actually the intent on this could go either way for Psychic Shriek specifically. Making it reliant on BS makes it a very sub-par power.

Which wouldn't surprise us at all in the case of GW, would it? That we can agree upon, at least.

It was errata'ed under the last Codex, but the Lash of Submission might be suitable for precedence?

It was listed as a psychic shooting attack, and was later addressed in a FAQ to state that it did in fact need a roll to hit. Of course this might be because it was notoriously overpowered but there is perhaps a precedent in that.

Mozzamanx wrote:
It was errata'ed under the last Codex, but the Lash of Submission might be suitable for precedence?

It was listed as a psychic shooting attack, and was later addressed in a FAQ to state that it did in fact need a roll to hit. Of course this might be because it was notoriously overpowered but there is perhaps a precedent in that.

And then there's JotWW (a PSA that does not need to roll to hit) and Murderous Hurricane (that needs to roll to hit to do damage, but the secondary effect of difficult/dangerous terrain happens regardless of the hit)

So if it doesn't "need" to roll to hit, must you (or may you) roll to hit to determine whether or not Precision Shots occurs?

 Brometheus wrote:
So if it doesn't "need" to roll to hit, must you (or may you) roll to hit to determine whether or not Precision Shots occurs?

If you do not need to roll to hit, Precision Shot cannot occur. Precision Shot is part of the risk/reward of the "to hit" roll. Powers that do not require "to hit" rolls cannot benefit from rules dependant on a "to hit" roll occuring.

 Brometheus wrote:
So if it doesn't "need" to roll to hit, must you (or may you) roll to hit to determine whether or not Precision Shots occurs?

No, because the act of hitting never occurs. Example: Psi Shriek never causes grounding tests because the act of hitting never happens

But where does it say you ignore the requirement to roll to hit per the Witchfire rule?

 Brometheus wrote:
But where does it say you ignore the requirement to roll to hit per the Witchfire rule?

How can you implement that requirement without a weapons profile telling you the number of shots (which equals the number of "to hit" dice) to roll for?

The same way a Warpsmith can Curse vehicles by rolling to Hit . "If the curse hits, all that vehicles.." blah blah..

Psychic Shriek is an effect that happens after you roll to hit, much like the Curse. The number of "shots" doesn't matter, because the effect is applied if it hits (in this case: 3d6 vs. Leadership is the effect and there is only one effect)

I am not implementing the requirement to hit. The Witchfire rule is.

SaganGree wrote:

 Brometheus wrote:
So if it doesn't "need" to roll to hit, must you (or may you) roll to hit to determine whether or not Precision Shots occurs?

No, because the act of hitting never occurs. Example: Psi Shriek never causes grounding tests because the act of hitting never happens

Well, sure, it never causes grounding checks....you can't target Swooping FMCs with it in the first place if it doesn't roll to hit.

I think the most convincing argument I've seen so far in favour of skipping the "To Hit" rolls is this: how many dice does one roll when seeing if it hits? It's Assault X (since it's PSA)...but what is that X? The rules for PSA don't tell us, nor do the rules for Shriek. There is no default value (such as 1) to choose, which means the caster could choose any number he desires. But without rules support any number he chooses, be it 1 or 100, is illegal.
The simplest way to solve this, then, is to skip the roll to hit. No Precision Shots, no missing. Target unit takes a 3D6 Ld, and that's that.

 Brometheus wrote:
The same way a Warpsmith can Curse vehicles by rolling to Hit . "If the curse hits, all that vehicles.." blah blah..

But that's not what Shriek says.

I am not implementing the requirement to hit. The Witchfire rule is.

I don't disagree that you're required to roll.
I just don't see evidence that you must hit to successfully resolve the power.

SaganGree wrote:

 Brometheus wrote:
So if it doesn't "need" to roll to hit, must you (or may you) roll to hit to determine whether or not Precision Shots occurs?

No, because the act of hitting never occurs. Example: Psi Shriek never causes grounding tests because the act of hitting never happens

Incorrect. Psi Shriek requires a to hit roll. It is a plain witchfire spell. Now in order to hit a FMC you would have to snapfire it.

Psi Shriek requires a roll to hit.

On a 6 "to hit" a precision shot occurs so any wounds from that shot would be precision.

rigeld2 wrote:

I don't disagree that you're required to roll.
I just don't see evidence that you must hit to successfully resolve the power.

If you honestly believe that a correct way to interpret the rules is to make a to-hit roll that affects nothing, I really don't know what to tell you.

 Crimson wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

I don't disagree that you're required to roll.
I just don't see evidence that you must hit to successfully resolve the power.

If you honestly believe that a correct way to interpret the rules is to make a to-hit roll that affects nothing, I really don't know what to tell you.

It could be intended that you don't roll and it just works.
It could be intended that you do roll and it works regardless of the roll.
It could be intended that you do roll and if you miss it doesn't work.

As far as I can tell, it's written to be the second option. I'm open to actual rules proving otherwise but I'd rather not be insulted like you're doing.

When you shoot, you roll the number of dice indicated in the weapons profile. Here, you are never told how many dice to roll. Well, actually, this would have to be an assault 0 weapon. It is treated as firing an assault weapon (can move and charge), but you are not given permission to roll any dice (which requires a statement like "assault 0" in a weapons profile). You cannot roll to hit with this attack. You are given no dice to roll. Instead, the attack takes effect simply by targeting a unit.

 Crimson wrote:
This sounds like another case of intent blind rules-lawyering by Rigeld and Nos.

Stick to arguing rules and not making personal attacks please.

 Crimson wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

I don't disagree that you're required to roll.
I just don't see evidence that you must hit to successfully resolve the power.

If you honestly believe that a correct way to interpret the rules is to make a to-hit roll that affects nothing, I really don't know what to tell you.

OK, as it is an assault weapon, I will call it an Assault Infinity weapon, and therefore I automatically hit.

Done.

Seriously, MH. If you miss, the effect on the unit takes place. Take your "intent rules lawyering" insults and see that FAQ first before posting again

You can roll to hit, miss, and the effect still happens, because those are the rules for the psychic power.

As I recall (do not have the book on me for direct quotes), the section detailing "assault weapons" simply lists what models are allowed to do when these weapons are fired (can have moved, and allowed to assault). The only time rolling to hit is talked about is, as far as I remember, directly tied to a weapons profile, which psychic shriek does not have. No profile, no number of dice given, no roll. Only an effect.

rigeld2 wrote:

It could be intended that you do roll and it works regardless of the roll.

No it couldn't.

As far as I can tell, it's written to be the second option. I'm open to actual rules proving otherwise but I'd rather not be insulted like you're doing.

Would you actually play it like this?

 Crimson wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

It could be intended that you do roll and it works regardless of the roll.

No it couldn't.

Citation required - you cannot know that without some form of FAQ.

As far as I can tell, it's written to be the second option. I'm open to actual rules proving otherwise but I'd rather not be insulted like you're doing.

Would you actually play it like this?

I'd ask the TO for his ruling but not argue it. In a friendly game I wouldn't care.

rigeld2 wrote:

Citation required - you cannot know that without some form of FAQ.

I know it same way I know Wraithguard are intended to be able to shoot. GW doesn't make rules that are that stupid.

 Crimson wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Citation required - you cannot know that without some form of FAQ.

I know it same way I know Wraithguard are intended to be able to shoot. GW doesn't make rules that are that stupid.

One of those examples leads to an unplayable game. The other is an oddity due to funky wording that really has no effect on anything. Comparing the two isn't smart.

Regardless - have any actual rules to add to the discussion yet? Or just trying to get someone angry?

 Crimson wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Citation required - you cannot know that without some form of FAQ.

I know it same way I know Wraithguard are intended to be able to shoot. GW doesn't make rules that are that stupid.

We know where the eyes of the model should be(art students know exactly where they should be but also baulk at every model in the 40K range).

We do not know the intent of a power that requires a to hit roll, and then has an effect against units/targeted or random models as a whole.

Requiring a Psychic test and then a successful To-hit roll on some of the non-weapon witchfires is a bit much compared to the auto hitting maledictions with limited effects

rigeld2 wrote:

Page 69 disagrees - Focused Witchfires don't roll to hit.

I only now noticed this. Which part that may be? It sure as hell isn't the part where they follow all the rules of normal witchfires.

As for Shriek, I just don't believe GW writes rules so that you have to decrypt the secret meanings. When they say that a power must roll to hit, they obviously mean it has to hit for its damaging effect to apply. They don't mean roll for hit just for LOLs.

 Crimson wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Page 69 disagrees - Focused Witchfires don't roll to hit.

I only now noticed this. Which part that may be? It sure as hell isn't the part where they follow all the rules of normal witchfires.

As for Shriek, I just don't believe GW writes rules so that you have to decrypt the secret meanings. When they say that a power must roll to hit, they obviously mean it has to hit for its damaging effect to apply. They don't mean roll for hit just for LOLs.

Murderous. Hurricane.

Will you ever address the ONE FAQ that I have mentioned every damn time, or will you just pretend we have no prior ruling on this?

Fact: secondary effects CAN apply even if you miss.

ALso: if you insist on rolling to hit, tell me how many dice I can use, using some written rules as per the tenets of this forum.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Murderous. Hurricane.

Will you ever address the ONE FAQ that I have mentioned every damn time, or will you just pretend we have no prior ruling on this?

Fact: secondary effects CAN apply even if you miss.

I can now, as you actually typed the name of the power instead of two letter acronym; I don't remember initials of every power in every book by heart.

It's an old power from old codex, and it's an odd combination of witchfire and malediction, and that's why it works like it does.

ALso: if you insist on rolling to hit, tell me how many dice I can use, using some written rules as per the tenets of this forum.

It's a single attack, so one die. Why would it be anything else?

 Crimson wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
ALso: if you insist on rolling to hit, tell me how many dice I can use, using some written rules as per the tenets of this forum.

It's a single attack, so one die. Why would it be anything else?

And what rule told you to roll one die?

Page and Graph will suffice.