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.

It depends on how you read it. Is targeting (RAW) enough for the effect to occur in terms of witchfires? It depends on whether or not rolling to hit refer to its shooting ability or further requirements for its effects. This part is purely RAI

 Unforgiven656 wrote:


With regards to the first point, I'm not sure we can separate the shooting ability from the effect can we?

Well we can, the power requires we only have a valid target in order for the 3D6-LD to happen. Which is why I and others have stated it is irrelevant even if we decide how to determine a hit (which would require too many assumptions). Murderous hurricane, JoTWW and blood lance all set a precedent in their FAQ's which I believe helps determine RAI to not require a to hit roll for the secondary effect to happen. This really comes down to a RAI HYWP scenario.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 chillis wrote:
It depends on how you read it. Is targeting (RAW) enough for the effect to occur in terms of witchfires? It depends on whether or not rolling to hit refer to its shooting ability or further requirements for its effects. This part is purely RAI

This^

But we do have other FAQ rulings on similar powers. Specifically MH.

Although lets not be biased in terms of RAI, there is plenty of RAI going with the side that it is further requirements.

Well we can, the power requires we only have a valid target in order for the 3D6-LD to happen. Which is why I and others have stated it is irrelevant even if we decide how to determine a hit (which would require too many assumptions). Murderous hurricane, JoTWW and blood lance all set a precedent in their FAQ's which I believe helps determine RAI to not require a to hit roll for the secondary effect to happen. This really comes down to a RAI HYWP scenario.

False.

Nowhere does it state you simply target the power then the effect happens.

But we do have other FAQ rulings on similar powers. Specifically MH.

MH is not a similar power, and has a specific FAQ just for it. The fact it is faqed means that without the faq the effect would not occur without rolling to hit. as there is no faq for psychic shriek there is nothing RAW or RAI supporting the hit roll not mattering, as it is plainly RAW require to roll to hit.

The blast, template, beam, and nova subtypes are given their own rules. Psychic shriek is not one of those. These rules are all contained within the same book, and if psychic shriek was intended to be one of those subtypes it would have been listed so. it is not one of those subtypes, it is a standard witchfire power. It is required to roll to hit.

blaktoof wrote:
as there is no faq for psychic shriek there is nothing RAW or RAI supporting the hit roll not mattering, as it is plainly RAW require to roll to hit.

Except for what we have proven in this very thread!

 DeathReaper wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
as there is no faq for psychic shriek there is nothing RAW or RAI supporting the hit roll not mattering, as it is plainly RAW require to roll to hit.

Except for what we have proven in this very thread!

that was never proven, simply stated in its own void by certain people without any support.

[quote=DeathReaper 555787 6149088 4c88678b47c696ff320c311a3a04b86c.jpg
yes, profile included which will tell you how many shots you get.

Like Lifeleach page 419, or Inferno P.421, or Vortex of doom P. 422...

P.S. why do they list Assault 1, if one shot is the default? (Hint: it is because 1 shot is not the default and the profile contains the information for how many shots any given weapon will fire).

blaktoof wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
as there is no faq for psychic shriek there is nothing RAW or RAI supporting the hit roll not mattering, as it is plainly RAW require to roll to hit.

Except for what we have proven in this very thread!

that was never proven, simply stated in its own void by certain people without any support.

It has been proven, with quotes, however some people are ignoring it, so there can be no further discussion.

 DeathReaper wrote:

blaktoof wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
as there is no faq for psychic shriek there is nothing RAW or RAI supporting the hit roll not mattering, as it is plainly RAW require to roll to hit.

Except for what we have proven in this very thread!

that was never proven, simply stated in its own void by certain people without any support.

It has been proven, with quotes, however some people are ignoring it, so there can be no further discussion.

Sorry I missed this also.

Where's the quote that a witchfire power can be resolved after it missed its roll to hit?

 hyv3mynd wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

blaktoof wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
as there is no faq for psychic shriek there is nothing RAW or RAI supporting the hit roll not mattering, as it is plainly RAW require to roll to hit.

Except for what we have proven in this very thread!

that was never proven, simply stated in its own void by certain people without any support.

It has been proven, with quotes, however some people are ignoring it, so there can be no further discussion.

Sorry I missed this also.

Where's the quote that a witchfire power can be resolved after it missed its roll to hit?

Page 67 Declare a target. -This is basic ruleset though and is over-ridden by the more specific witchfire rules
Page 69- roll to hit, does it say that a hit is required for an effect to happen? This is up to RAI and is not RAW because it can be referring to the powers shooting ability.

These interpretations can be debated (don't argue) on which has a stronger foundation and why.

So this seems to be no clearer, and I really don't want to wade through 16 pages of back and forth tosh...

Could Markerlights be something to refer to? They aren't weapons either.

 Bloodhorror wrote:
So this seems to be no clearer, and I really don't want to wade through 16 pages of back and forth tosh...

Could Markerlights be something to refer to? They aren't weapons either.

Markerlights are weapons, Pg. 68 "Markerlights are ranged weapons"


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But I see where you are coming from where the special rule is a result of getting a hit

 hyv3mynd wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

blaktoof wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
as there is no faq for psychic shriek there is nothing RAW or RAI supporting the hit roll not mattering, as it is plainly RAW require to roll to hit.

Except for what we have proven in this very thread!

that was never proven, simply stated in its own void by certain people without any support.

It has been proven, with quotes, however some people are ignoring it, so there can be no further discussion.

Sorry I missed this also.

Where's the quote that a witchfire power can be resolved after it missed its roll to hit?

Psychic Shriek, re-read it and not that rolling to hit does not matter, as the #d6 effect has nothing to do with a to hit roll.

It is as chillis said above.

^as based on justified interpretation

 DeathReaper wrote:

 hyv3mynd wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

blaktoof wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
as there is no faq for psychic shriek there is nothing RAW or RAI supporting the hit roll not mattering, as it is plainly RAW require to roll to hit.

Except for what we have proven in this very thread!

that was never proven, simply stated in its own void by certain people without any support.

It has been proven, with quotes, however some people are ignoring it, so there can be no further discussion.

Sorry I missed this also.

Where's the quote that a witchfire power can be resolved after it missed its roll to hit?

Psychic Shriek, re-read it and not that rolling to hit does not matter, as the #d6 effect has nothing to do with a to hit roll.

It is as chillis said above.

Read any PSA's entry and it doesn't talk about rolling to hit unless it breaks from the norm. This is a false burden you've inserted here.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Read any PSA's entry and it doesn't talk about rolling to hit unless it breaks from the norm. This is a false burden you've inserted here.

Like Smite, wait, that is Assault 4. Lifeleech, wait, that is Assault 2. Inferno, wait that is Assault 1. Flame Breath wait, that is Assault 1. Assail, wait, that is Assault 1. Vortex of Doom, wait, that is Heavy 1.

Literally all of the other Witchfire powers have a profile so they do actually talke about rolling to hit by virtue of Assault X or Heavy X is the respective power. Something that Psychic Shriek lacks.

And for all of the focussed witchfire powers? All of the unusual and odd powers in the codices?
I didn't know that the number was all that mattered when it came to rolls to hit, does that mean that I have to just look at the profile for a pistol when I go to roll to hit? Or do I look at more than one place in the rule book? Cos if you look at the pistol rules then you're argument here is also false, as you can look at the witchfire powers to see that you need to roll to hit.

The number explicitly tells you how many shots you get with an assault weapon, something that Whichfires are equated to in the BRB...

Blaktoof - sigh, again you misrepresent the argument

I will I imagine shock you now: I agree that you have to roll to-hit with witchfires, in general

Shock!

However, what you missed is that there is nothing in the rules that requires a successful hit for you to proceed with non to-wound effects

We know this to be true, despite liturgies claims otherwise, because the written rules only require a successful to hit when rolling to-wound

If you are NOT rolling to wound, there is nothing requiring a successful roll to-hit before you can resolve the power

Now, plenty of people have assumedt there is such a thing - Liturgies, yourself, etc. However no actual written rule states any such thing - if there was, someone would surely have found it by now.

So, RAW, you have to roll to hit. You cannot roll ANY dice, as you have no written profile as required by page 51, but you are still compelled to do so. Assume, for a minute, that you actually make up this number, and arbitrarily decide on one D6 as the number - pretendingit is assault 1. Now, without a rule equating successful to-hit with resolving non to-wound effects - and remember, we know there is no such rule in the rulebook - the result of this to-hit - pass or fail - is irrelevant - the rest of the power WILL resolve regardless, because you have NO RULE stating it does not, and a rule stating it does resolve

Can you now see the issue? to repeat - I freely admit I am not following RAW when I state I do not require people to roll to hit with those powers, but that is because RAW is broken - instead I skip the roll to hit because the roll to hit is irrelevant to resolving the actual powers efffects

Now, hopefully the bolding will mean you cannot any longer misrepresent my argument through misunderstanding it, as I have explicitly stated - for about the 5th time - the exact problems with it.

Liturgies - given you still cannot find a link between non-towound resolution and to-hit being successful, your concession is accepted that no such requirement in the rules exists.

Nos - what do you mean by non to-wound effects. PS's effect is a to wound effect. Or am I mis-understanding?

I guess my question is, is the roll of 3D6 - leadership an effect or a just a mechanic to determine number of wounds.

I have to say I'm being swayed by chilli's argument regarding templates. Also is it possible that PS was intended to be a focussed witchfire? The wording of the power certainly matches the wording for other focussed witchfires such as Spontaneous Combustion.

When you're firing a gun you roll to hit and then in accordance to those hits you roll to wound. These to wound rolls are a result, whereas PS has an effect (in some instances the effect follows the result)and doesn't have the 1:1 traditional to roll for wound ritual (3D6 effect is not dependent on to hit roll then even though it allocates wounds) and is only completely known to require targeting. That is my interpretation though of what nos was saying

RAW targeting is required to manifest a power
RAW to hit roll is required for a witchfire power
RAI does to hit roll refer to the manifestation (effect) or the shooting ability (result) of said power?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Cos if you look at the pistol rules then you're argument here is also false, as you can look at the witchfire powers to see that you need to roll to hit.

All pistols are effectively Assault 1, I feel like you probably had a good argument but I was probably too slow to comprehend.

 Unforgiven656 wrote:
Nos - what do you mean by non to-wound effects. PS's effect is a to wound effect. Or am I mis-understanding?

I guess my question is, is the roll of 3D6 - leadership an effect or a just a mechanic to determine number of wounds.

I have to say I'm being swayed by chilli's argument regarding templates. Also is it possible that PS was intended to be a focussed witchfire? The wording of the power certainly matches the wording for other focussed witchfires such as Spontaneous Combustion.

to-wound is a defined mechanic within 40k - you compare S vs T, check chart, etc. This has a specific link to how many hits you managed to get, as per page 14.

These other effects - which CAN generate wounds, but dont have to - are NOT to-wound; they do not follow this process

As such there is no RULES lnk to say that you can only perform these effects - such as the 3D6 - if you first manage to "hit" successfully. There just isnt anything stating this - hence me saying it is irrelevant whether you hit or not, and why those saying you have to hit BEFORE you can roll these effects, are making a rule up that does not exist.

It is a good assumption, sort of, but there is no consistency on this from GW - PSAs have sometimes rolled to hit and sometimes havent, seemingly art random. Hell, Lash of Despair both didnt roll to hit, rolled to hit, then didnt roll to hit all during 5th edition!

Food for thought
Using the nos and unforgiven's last statements, but keeping PS as a normal witchfire as it is labeled, would PS have the ability to get precision shots since it is not following the normal mechanic?

 chillis wrote:
Food for thought
Using the nos and unforgiven's last statements, but keeping PS as a normal witchfire as it is labeled, would PS have the ability to get precision shots since it is not following the normal mechanic?

No precision shots. Would be tought to get a 6 when we do not know how many dice to roll to hit for Psychic Shriek. Not that the roll to hit matters with PS anyway.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 chillis wrote:
Food for thought
Using the nos and unforgiven's last statements, but keeping PS as a normal witchfire as it is labeled, would PS have the ability to get precision shots since it is not following the normal mechanic?

No precision shots. Would be tought to get a 6 when we do not know how many dice to roll to hit for Psychic Shriek. Not that the roll to hit matters with PS anyway.

I was using the scenario ignoring the whole missing profile sense situation. But yea, that would keep PS different from a focused witchfire in the case stated

You would get precision shots on any wounds you allocate, that come from the roll to hit of a 6. Except no wounds result from the hit - there is no link between the two parts.