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.

P. 13 should suffice.

 Crimson wrote:
P. 13 should suffice.

What Graph, because I can not find anything on Page 13 telling me how many dice to roll for Psychic Shriek's to hit roll.

I see this " roll a D6 for each shot that is in range" (13)

So how many shots does Psychic Shriek have?

I can not find this information in the rules.

"Most models only get to fire one shot, however some weapons are capable..." This should be sufficient information for you to conclude, that unless otherwise told, a shooting attack has one shot.

Are you firing a shot?

Or any weapon at all?

 Crimson wrote:
"Most models only get to fire one shot, however some weapons are capable..." This should be sufficient information for you to conclude, that unless otherwise told, a shooting attack has one shot.

1) that says most, so it may or may not apply to Psychic Shriek.

2) Unfortunately that does not address Psychic Shriek.

How do we know how many shots Psychic Shriek gets, there is nothing to tell us, we can not just assume it is one.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
"Most models only get to fire one shot, however some weapons are capable..." This should be sufficient information for you to conclude, that unless otherwise told, a shooting attack has one shot.

1) that says most, so it may or may not apply to Psychic Shriek.

2) Unfortunately that does not address Psychic Shriek.

How do we know how many shots Psychic Shriek gets, there is nothing to tell us, we can not just assume it is one.

It is obviously 3d6-the target units LD in shots; but then they all auto hit because that is what the rule says(to apply that many wounds)

Pg 69 "a witchfire power must roll to hit unless its a blast, large blast, ..."

Shriek doesn't match any of the exceptions and has no exemption from rolling to hit. Therefore it must roll to hit. 1d6 as it (the witchfire power) is treated as an assault weapon.

There's literally nothing in the BRB exempting it from this roll. There is nothing in the BRB even hinting that a miss would still apply the effect, only a single power specific FAQ to an old codex. You cannot apply a FAQ to an old codex as a precedent to create a situation in how the whole witchfire system in the BRB functions.

1) Assault weapons all have a number after the word assault telling you how many shots are made from that assault weapon(and the weapon profile powers all have this number too).

2) There is nothing in the BRB that states you have to hit to have the effects of the power go off; instead we are given a power and then given an effect for when that power is successfully cast.

So the question arises: did you pass a Psychic test? if the answer is yes then the effects of the power occur. Many witchfire powers have weapon profiles, these absolutely then need to hit for their effects to occur

 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.

If you just now noticed this, I'm not sure how you missed my post 4 minutes prior to that.

rigeld2 wrote:

p69 wrote:If the witchfire does not list a subtype,or simply describes itself as a psychic shooting attack, use the rules given above to resolve it. If it has one of the following subtypes, use the rules for that subtype.

Focused Witchfires don't even roll to hit in the first place, since the FW subtype never lists that as a requirement. (it is a requirement in the "rules given above")
Which also means they can't precision shot.

But thank you pointing out a sentence I missed. How about instead of getting all uppity you politely correct me on something like that?
Have I offended you recently? Is there a reason you're being so hostile?

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.

Except for JotWW - that doesn't have to roll at all. And Murderous Hurricane can cause damage on a miss. Yeah, except for where your statement doesn't apply, it does.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 hyv3mynd wrote:
Pg 69 "a witchfire power must roll to hit unless its a blast, large blast, ..."

Shriek doesn't match any of the exceptions and has no exemption from rolling to hit. Therefore it must roll to hit. 1d6 as it (the witchfire power) is treated as an assault weapon.

There's literally nothing in the BRB exempting it from this roll. There is nothing in the BRB even hinting that a miss would still apply the effect, only a single power specific FAQ to an old codex. You cannot apply a FAQ to an old codex as a precedent to create a situation in how the whole witchfire system in the BRB functions.

Please explain how many dice I must roll to hit with. Please also include a page citation.
Please note that page 51 requires you to fire the number of times indicated in the Assault weapon's profile. Have you found a profile for Psychic Shriek yet? A page number for that would be great.

rigeld2 wrote:

 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.

If you just now noticed this, I'm not sure how you missed my post 4 minutes prior to that.

rigeld2 wrote:

p69 wrote:If the witchfire does not list a subtype,or simply describes itself as a psychic shooting attack, use the rules given above to resolve it. If it has one of the following subtypes, use the rules for that subtype.

Focused Witchfires don't even roll to hit in the first place, since the FW subtype never lists that as a requirement. (it is a requirement in the "rules given above")
Which also means they can't precision shot.

But thank you pointing out a sentence I missed. How about instead of getting all uppity you politely correct me on something like that?
Have I offended you recently? Is there a reason you're being so hostile?

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.

Except for JotWW - that doesn't have to roll at all. And Murderous Hurricane can cause damage on a miss. Yeah, except for where your statement doesn't apply, it does.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 hyv3mynd wrote:
Pg 69 "a witchfire power must roll to hit unless its a blast, large blast, ..."

Shriek doesn't match any of the exceptions and has no exemption from rolling to hit. Therefore it must roll to hit. 1d6 as it (the witchfire power) is treated as an assault weapon.

There's literally nothing in the BRB exempting it from this roll. There is nothing in the BRB even hinting that a miss would still apply the effect, only a single power specific FAQ to an old codex. You cannot apply a FAQ to an old codex as a precedent to create a situation in how the whole witchfire system in the BRB functions.

Please explain how many dice I must roll to hit with. Please also include a page citation.
Please note that page 51 requires you to fire the number of times indicated in the Assault weapon's profile. Have you found a profile for Psychic Shriek yet? A page number for that would be great.

Have you found a rules quote that exempts shriek from following the requirement of all witchfire powers rolling to hit?

You're dodging by asking pointless questions. Poorly written rules do not equate to an exemption.

Since the rules state witchfire powers must roll to hit, it's fairly obvious that shriek should be read as "(if this power hits) target unit rolls 3d6..." Since a witchfire power must roll to hit, and all references to the power are singular, it's fairly obvious that a power must roll a d6 to hit.

It's not written in RAW, but the weight of intent in the gaps of the rule are obvious enough that every person I've played with shriek has rolled a single d6 to hit. Without any question or debate.

If you did not roll to hit, you didn't meet the requirements of witchfire. Stop there and don't apply the effects.

I'm with Nos and rigeld2 in this one.

My personal RAW opinion. Psychic Shriek does not work at all per RAW. It requires you to roll to hit and gives you no dice to roll with. Either the game suddenly ends in a stalemate as you are not allowed to proceed at that point without making a To-hit roll or the power just fails entirely as you cannot meet the requirements. Either way is entirely broken but per RAW, that's it. The effects would be applied to the target either way as it does not stipulate a requirement to Hit, wound, etc for those effects to go off unless you can find some thing saying otherwise. You'll never get that far though for the aforementioned reason.

The closest related-though-not-exactly-RAW point of view on this would be that since the roll to hit does not do anything we can just gloss over that particular oversight of theirs and and proceed with the rest of the power which only requires targeting.

Edit: Added note: This power does require a roll To-Hit and therefore can effect flyers and Swooping FMCs.

 hyv3mynd wrote:

Have you found a rules quote that exempts shriek from following the requirement of all witchfire powers rolling to hit?

You're dodging by asking pointless questions. Poorly written rules do not equate to an exemption.

Since the rules state witchfire powers must roll to hit, it's fairly obvious that shriek should be read as "(if this power hits) target unit rolls 3d6..." Since a witchfire power must roll to hit, and all references to the power are singular, it's fairly obvious that a power must roll a d6 to hit.

It's not written in RAW, but the weight of intent in the gaps of the rule are obvious enough that every person I've played with shriek has rolled a single d6 to hit. Without any question or debate.

Thank you. This pretty much sums it up.

Hvy - fine, once you can tell me how many shots my Assault Weapon fires, I will roll that many dice to-hit.

Note the rules for assault weapons state how many shots they fire. An assault 1 weapn fires one shot. How many shots does an assault (undefined) weapon fire?

Find me the number of dice I am required to roll, then you may have a point. A page and paragraph will be sufficient

Failure or refusal to prrovide is concession that the roll is undefined.

Nos, you approach this from RAW-debate-society point of view, we approach this from we-actually-want-to-play-the-bloody-game point of view. Considering that vast majority of people are actually rolling to hit for Psychic Shriek, they somehow manage to figure out how many dice to roll.

What Hyv3mynd sais.

Yes, in a forum dedicated to determining rules, when I am explicitly discussing the written rules - and showing you explanations of how GW have previously ruled in similar situations, to clarify that your "intention" argument fails, and fails hard - and showing the gaps in peoples assumptions

You are assuming that the roll to-hit has any effect on the use of the secondary power. This is belied by a minimum of 2 other witchhfire powers just mentioned in this thread. So not only do you have no written evidence, you lack any intent argument. Point the first

Even if I accepted your contention that you must have a successful roll to hit, I was asking you to determine - using rules, not your made up version of the game - how many dice I roll. This you have also been unable to do.

So, in order to how I want to play the rule - given how generally lacklustre witchfires, and focused witchfires are in particular - playing it how precedent has ruled makes most sense to me. Thus, you have no need to roll to hit, as your secondary effect always takes place.

Also, who is "we"? So far "we" consists of "not many people in this thread"

Finally, define "vast majority". Any citations for that? Anything?

I think that there is a need to roll to hit because nothing says you don't have to make the roll.

I also think that the roll needs to hit and I'm not taking MH as precedence due to the age difference in the codex and the brb I see it just as a rebalancing. Also there is a clear primary attack and secondary effect there so the powers aren't analogous .

There is nothing to say that the actual effect of shriek is an effect in the same way MH's secondary effect is. It is an attack as it causes wounds, while I can see the idea that the roll to hit isn't said to be necessary in the power, the witchfire rules does say that it must roll to hit. Must is a very direct order to take the roll. If it doesn't roll to hit, like all other witchfire powers it cannot cause wounds, that MH gets to put on secondary effects is irrelevant to this discussion IMHO.

As to how many dice are rolled, just 1. The same as any ambiguous stuff in 40k, you assume it's the simplest iteration of the rules unless there is something to say otherwise and it's one attack that has a very odd mechanic to figure out how many wounds are inflicted so just 1 dice.

These all all the threads on Dakka I could find that deal with the subject:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/461761.page
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/485633.page
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/513701.page
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/497392.page
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/481298.page
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/470546.page

In all of these the consensus is, or it is just flat out taken as given, that you need to roll to hit. The problem of how many dice to roll has not ever been brought up before this thread, it's a made up problem.

"I don't know how many dice to roll, so my power just automatically hits!" or "Yes, I have roll to hit, but it doesn't say I actually have to hit for to work!" are not arguments I could see going well in any real gaming table.

And FAQs on old 5E powers should have no bearing on how 5E powers work.

How is it made up?
Find some rules. Please. The actual rules state it is an Assault weapon, and the rules for assault weapons define them as stating the number of shots. This does not define the number of shots, so it is undefined.

As per the tenets can you please mark your posts as "HIWPI", so people dont mistakenly think you are arguing from a rules position?

Edit: following the first link that you posted, Yak had this to say (I have edited to get to the summary)

So the questions (that have no RAW answers) are:

1) Does Focused Witchfire really have to roll 'to hit' as the basic Witchfire rules seem to indicate?
2) If so, and the psyker is a character and he rolls a '6' to hit, are any and all wounds caused by the focused witchfire precision shots?
3) If so, how does this interact with the focused witchfire rule about the psyker getting to choose the target only if he passes his Psychic Test on a '5' or less?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Actually reading the 4th paragraph of the Witchfire rules on page 69 have led me to conclude that all the specialty types of Witchfire (Beam, focused witchfire, maelstrom, nova) are probably not supposed to have to roll to hit, although if that's the case it really is quite unclear which if any of the targeting restrictions for general witchfire (such as LOS) apply.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
How is it made up?
Find some rules. Please. The actual rules state it is an Assault weapon, and the rules for assault weapons define them as stating the number of shots. This does not define the number of shots, so it is undefined.

Because thousands of people have managed to play with rolling to hit just fine. It obviously cannot be a game stopping problem. I can conclude from from p. 13 just fine that unless told otherwise, you shoot once. But I'm clever like that.

As per the tenets can you please mark your posts as "HIWPI", so people dont mistakenly think you are arguing from a rules position?

Strict RAW position is that game breaks down and you cannot play as rules are not clear enough. And if you want actually play the game (as I assume the OP does) you must move beyond that.

Although page 13 doesnt say that. And the rule for Assault weapons doesn't actually say that. So when you say "clever", what you mean is "capable of blindly assuming", and we all know how clever making assumptions is.

Strict RAW for this power doesnt result in the game breaking - the roll to-hit is not tied to the success, or otherwise, of the 3D6 effect. Because its like rules matter or something.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
How is it made up?
Find some rules. Please. The actual rules state it is an Assault weapon, and the rules for assault weapons define them as stating the number of shots. This does not define the number of shots, so it is undefined.

As per the tenets can you please mark your posts as "HIWPI", so people dont mistakenly think you are arguing from a rules position?

Edit: following the first link that you posted, Yak had this to say (I have edited to get to the summary)

So the questions (that have no RAW answers) are:

1) Does Focused Witchfire really have to roll 'to hit' as the basic Witchfire rules seem to indicate?
2) If so, and the psyker is a character and he rolls a '6' to hit, are any and all wounds caused by the focused witchfire precision shots?
3) If so, how does this interact with the focused witchfire rule about the psyker getting to choose the target only if he passes his Psychic Test on a '5' or less?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Actually reading the 4th paragraph of the Witchfire rules on page 69 have led me to conclude that all the specialty types of Witchfire (Beam, focused witchfire, maelstrom, nova) are probably not supposed to have to roll to hit, although if that's the case it really is quite unclear which if any of the targeting restrictions for general witchfire (such as LOS) apply.

"Must roll to hit" still applies to focused witchfire as there is nothing saying it doesn't. Unlike beams, maelstroms and novas there is no automatic hitting RAW. Unless you have a specific permission you've got to apply all the restrictions of psychic powers and shooting to these attacks.

The issue of focussed witchfire has nothing to to with shriek as it's just a witchfire and the 4th paragraph is about targeting restrictions not about creating a false dichotomy of witchfire and every other witchfire.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Although page 13 doesnt say that. And the rule for Assault weapons doesn't actually say that. So when you say "clever", what you mean is "capable of blindly assuming", and we all know how clever making assumptions is.

Strict RAW for this power doesnt result in the game breaking - the roll to-hit is not tied to the success, or otherwise, of the 3D6 effect. Because its like rules matter or something.

If the roll is not tied to the success, where is the page quote? Rigeld proposed that it may not be tied due to precedent not hard facts from RAW, which is fine but I don't think it's a strong or winning argument.

The 3D6 effect is an attack, it is not analogous to "counts all terrain as difficult and dangerous" which is an effect secondary to MH's attack.
If the rules matter or something, why are you ignoring them? Glib answers are great and I do love to give them but there is a rule you've not shown exemption from that you are handwaving away.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Although page 13 doesnt say that. And the rule for Assault weapons doesn't actually say that. So when you say "clever", what you mean is "capable of blindly assuming", and we all know how clever making assumptions is.

Believe or not, GW rules are written with assumption that people can make such assumptions.

Strict RAW for this power doesnt result in the game breaking - the roll to-hit is not tied to the success, or otherwise, of the 3D6 effect. Because its like rules matter or something.

No, you have to roll to hit, even though it would not be tied to the success. You cannot skip the step as rules require it. And then you are standing there, staring at the dice as you cannot know how many to roll (possibly without pants, as they didn't come with instructions for which way to put them on.)

Liturgies - because the 3D6 roll has nothing to do with a to-wound roll. There is no link between an assault weapon to-hit and this test. Yes, it is an attack - just not a shooting attack. You can tell, as it has no shootign profile. Not even a glimmer of one.

It isnt being handwaved away - I am pointing out that you have no rule tying the two together. I dont have to prove a negative, you have to prove that to0hit has ANYTHING to do with rolling 3D6, comparing to Ld, and taking that many wounds. Where is the to-wound step, the next part of the shooting process? There isnt one? Then why are you stating this remains part of the shootnig process?

It is a nonsensical position to take.

Crimson - maybe this isnt the forum for you, as you dont seem to agree with the tenets. Ignored your post as it remains irrelevant to the discussion, and lacked any actual content - it didnt even respond to the points raised by Yak, ina thread you cited, which points out a flaw in your argument

So is ecstatic seizures is not an attack as it doesn't roll to wound as normal? If it's not a shooting attack why is it witchfire, if it's not a shooting attack how do I allocate those wounds, if it's not a witchfire why does it say it's a witchfire power and why does witchfire rules call them shooting attacks? I think you might be mistaken.

What process? It's a shooting attack that doesn't use the standard to hit, to wound and take saves procedure. It doesn't have to follow that exactly to be a witchfire attack. Ecstatic seizures doesn't and the examples of different powers are from the SW codex which is ham fisted into 6th ed rather than being 6th ed powers.

The power is witchfire, it is resolved as a witchfire is resolved.
Does a witchfire have to roll to hit?
Does this hit allow you to continue the resolution of the power?
What happens when you fail to roll to hit with a witchfire power in the absence of any exceptions?

You are told witchfires are Assault weapons unless stated otherwise. Does this state otherwise?

No. It doesn't... and?
It also doesn't state any exceptions to the rules of a witchfire.

You're entire argument is based on the assumption that because something doesn't have the profile of an assault weapon it isn't one. However the convention that "counts as = is" in 40k means that stance is irrelevant as the attack "is" an assault weapon as per the witchfire rules.

Many shooting attacks do not follow the range x S y AP Z profile, it doesn't stop them being shooting attacks nor does it remove the need to roll to hit, unless there is an exception in the attack's wording.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Crimson - maybe this isnt the forum for you, as you dont seem to agree with the tenets. Ignored your post as it remains irrelevant to the discussion, and lacked any actual content - it didnt even respond to the points raised by Yak, ina thread you cited, which points out a flaw in your argument

Cite the rule that allows you to skip the clear requirement to roll to hit, please. This is important, you haven't been able to do so.



As for Yak's points (though I don't see why they're relevant):

1) Yes
2) Yes
3) They both apply. You just have two different ways being able to choose the target.

Crimson - Cite the rules that allow you to roll only 1 dice to hit. You havent been able to. Page 13 doesnt work, as you are well aware. Once you can do that, you may have a point. Or are you back to arguing HYWPI, without stating so explicitly?

Liturgies - because otherwise it is an assault weapon, but has no profile given. Meaning you cannot operate it. You are claiming that the 3D6 is part of the assault weapon, with no actual rules stating so. It is simply an effect that is not tied to the "weapon" status at all - as there is no such link stated. Permissive ruleset - you have no permission to alter the assault weapon stat line (that doesnt exist, in totality) so you may not do so.

Prove it. Prove it is partr of the stat line, with page and para.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Crimson - Cite the rules that allow you to roll only 1 dice to hit. You havent been able to. Page 13 doesnt work, as you are well aware. Once you can do that, you may have a point. Or are you back to arguing HYWPI, without stating so explicitly?

And what if I can't? You can't cite the rule that allows you to skip rolling to hit part either. That you cannot figure out how many dice you have to roll doesn't let you skip that part. Maybe it means that the power cannot be resolved at all; tough luck. That's what you get with strict RAW.