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.

Gravmyr wrote:
Doesn't look like a rule quote.

Cute.

“To determine whether a hit causes a telling amount of damage, compare the weapon’s Strength characteristic with the target’s Toughness characteristic using the To Wound chart below”

Excerpt From: Games Workshop Ltd. “Warhammer 40,000.” iBooks.
This material may be protected by copyright.

So for a missed weapon to be allowed to Roll to Wound, you'd need a rule allowing it.
Got one?

That's not what I asked for. I need a quote on what to do with the misses.

Gravmyr wrote:
That's not what I asked for. I need a quote on what to do with the misses.

Since there are no rules covering what to do with them, you don't do anything with them.

Just like we would with wounds allocated to a vehicle.

Gravmyr wrote:
Just like we would with wounds allocated to a vehicle.

Agreed?

Can we move on from this stage.

There has been posted at least three times, a link, that vets ad nauseam the fact that a to hit roll is irrelevant.

Even if every one decided to agree a roll to hit was required it wouldn't matter. The damaging effect of PS only requires a target, not successful hits anyway.

That is the current cruxt though, as soon as you say there is a To Hit roll it creates the required conditions allowing me to allocate to the chariot profile instead of the rider.

Gravmyr wrote:
Good then, I'll let it go that the intent is clear to most people about the roll to hit and move on. Since everyone, just about, agrees there should be a To Hit roll even though to some is doesn't do anything I can then use the chariot rule and allocate it, the resolution, and wounds to the the chariot not the rider.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I would also like a rule quote that tells me that a missed weapon does nothing. I've just read the section and nothing like that is mentioned. I have permission to fire and permission to resolve the shots but I do not have any rule as what to do with the misses. Continuing with your line of thinking I'll just resolve them as I have no other instructions on what to do with them.

You require permission or a method of carrying out an action to do something in 40k.

You create a pool of dice from hits and then roll wounds with them. The misses are irrelevant.

This is one of my biggest issues with the chariot itself. The rule states that the chariot unit takes the wounds from psychic screech. However, the chariot / vehicle section has no rules for allocating wounds to a chariot unit. Technically there are no restrictions or permissions present and the only saving grace is to try and argue that it's a characteristic modifier and be applied to the rider since the chariot states that they apply to both the chariot and the rider.

My contention, however, is that there's no method for the wounds to be assigned to the chariot model since there are no rules for allocating wounds in a chariot unit. The rules simply don't interact well and end up ignoring sections and failing others.

Page 34 first line tells you that you roll to wound for a hit. So you nerd to show permission to roll to wound for a miss. As DeathReaper has already pointed out we have permission to resolve PS and nothing in PS relates its effect to hits.

Good then, I'll let it go that the intent is clear to most people about the roll to hit and move on. Since everyone, just about, agrees there should be a To Hit roll even though to some is doesn't do anything I can then use the chariot rule and allocate it, the resolution, and wounds to the the chariot not the rider.

Yes I believe most people do understand the clear intent which in this case matches up with the RaW that there is no roll to hit for these types of power.

You still haven't posted any rule that negates the witchfire requirement of a To Hit roll.

About 15 minutes into to research and typing an argument, I found this. Wish I would have looked there first.

Witchfire [excerpt]
Similarly, a witchfire power must roll To Hit, unless it has the blast special rule, in which case it scatters as described in the Blast special rule, or it is a Template weapon, which hit automatically.

Roll To Hit
To determine if the firing model has hit its target, roll a D6 for each shot that is in range. Most models only get to fire one shot, however, some weapons are capable of firing more than once, as we'll explain in more detail later. [remainder omitted - unrelated to the issue]

Number of Shots
Some shooting weapons fire multiple shots. Where this is the case, the number of shots a weapon fires is noted after its type.

Emphasis is all mine.

The 'where this is the case' language implies pretty strongly that a weapon does not need to have a number of shots designated. The only thing that I don't have the energy to find right now is something that says 'witchfire is = weapon.' That would be the final nail for this issue, but the close relationship between weapons and witchfires as shooting attacks and the Witchfire section referring to a witchfire psychic power as a 'Template weapon' likely makes that exact language unnecessary.

The way to ignore the most rule holes is to say that witchfires are weapons. As such, they have one shot unless otherwise stated. Therefore, the wounds bounce off the chariot's hull.

Right? Wrong? I can't say that I though it would work out this way (particularly because of the shoddy rule support and morphing arguments in support of this conclusion - but who knows, maybe mine is just as bad).

The general Witchfire Rules might not outright state that it is a weapon, but it does constantly relate to Shooting Weapons for how the Rules function, comparing where they are identical and where they are not.

How about this line:
Indeed, they are often referred to as psychic shooting attacks, and many have profiles similar to ranged weapons.

You can make a very strong case that PS rolls 1 die to hit and RAW states you have to roll to hit.

The hole in the rules that they will focus on is that PS requires a hit to resolve since there is nothing that says misses do not also resolve PS.

Also even rolling 1 dice does not allow you resolve the to hit roll without a weapon type. And as Fragile has clearly pointed out PS resolves an effect on the targeted unit and that effect foes not care if you hit nor who in the unit you hit (if anyone), much like say Haemmorage which likewise cares not for a roll to hit.

We know we treat Witchfires with a profile like weapons. We do not know that we treat witchfires without a weapon profile like weapons and we do know that their effects only care who is targeted not who is hit.

I'd have to agree that the defender can allocate the wounds to the chariot right now, in which case they do nothing.

I also think it's an oversight which should be corrected in a FAQ as part of the unit can be affected. IMO, if you use the Overlord's LD to determine amount of wounds in the first place (and he's the only one whom they might concern) he should also take them.

Except if you can allocate the hit and witchfire to the chariot as opposed to the rider there is no LD. So you create 3d6 wounds which then are ignored, just like the S and T mods from enfeeble. In the end if there is a FAQ I beleive it will state that you need to roll to hit with Witchfire Powers and a miss will keep the power from being resolved. The entire rest of the rules for Witchfire fall into line if you put that line into place. Without a specific wording though we can take it at face value and simply roll off BS we only need to know restrictions of which there are none.

Sorry Gravmyr, but that statement is wrong. PS does not use the models leadership, but the units leadership. Which is normally the highest leadership contained within the unit.

Cheers

Andrew

I still disagree with the premise that you need hits in order to wound a target. There are weapons like certain barrage types that literally must scatter and therefore can never "hit" yet still can resolve damage upon the unit that was targeted.

PS only requires a target for the 3d6-ld=wounds effect. I am literally reading the card right now, no where does it say that it's contingent upon requiring hits. Select a target within range. targeted unit suffers X.

Think of it this way, even if it listed a profile. Upon a miss, the secondary effect still resolves. In fact Murderous Hurricane worked in this EXACT same way and was even FAQ'd. Even when it missed, the secondary effect still took place because it only required an initial target to resolve just like PS.

 Red Corsair wrote:
I still disagree with the premise that you need hits in order to wound a target. There are weapons like certain barrage types that literally must scatter and therefore can never "hit" yet still can resolve damage upon the unit that was targeted.

Blast weapons generate hits on units under their marker.

PS only requires a target for the 3d6-ld=wounds effect. I am literally reading the card right now, no where does it say that it's contingent upon requiring hits. Select a target within range. targeted unit suffers X.

Think of it this way, even if it listed a profile. Upon a miss, the secondary effect still resolves. In fact Murderous Hurricane worked in this EXACT same way and was even FAQ'd. Even when it missed, the secondary effect still took place because it only required an initial target to resolve just like PS.

Specific FAQ'd power does not equal a general rule.

I agree but it helps determine intent.

 AndrewC wrote:
Sorry Gravmyr, but that statement is wrong. PS does not use the models leadership, but the units leadership. Which is normally the highest leadership contained within the unit.

Cheers

Andrew

I thought you only use the highest Leadership for Leadership tests taken by the unit. Otherwise you would use the majority.

Take a look at the Chariot rules you can only use the rider leadership in case of characteristic tests. The rules presented there are for firing at a Chariot unit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Does that power exist in the same incarnation currently? Have we changed rule sets where the focus may have changed?

PS is not a focused witchfire, which means it hits the unit. Convention from earlier editions, for which I am forever getting mixed up with, was that a units leadership was the highest available.

Given that the majority value is the value of the riders LD, which would also be the highest LD it seems that I have little to disagree with you on should I be reminiscing on an earlier edition.

Cheers

Andrew

Also I can look at my units and they do not say their weapons are based off of getting hits in their profiles does that mean i can ignore the basic rule that tells me that i need to hit? The entire text of a spell can hardly be considered to be a secondary effect either, it would be the primary or solo effect.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Again please look at the rules for Chariots there are done differently from normal units.

Gravmyr wrote:
Also I can look at my units and they do not say their weapons are based off of getting hits in their profiles...

This is incorrect. a Heavy 1 weapon tells you that the weapon is based off getting hits to proceed to the To Wound roll.

does that mean i can ignore the basic rule that tells me that i need to hit? The entire text of a spell can hardly be considered to be a secondary effect either, it would be the primary or solo effect.

Incorrect premise leads to incorrect conclusions.

However you need to resolve the power according to the instructions in its entry.

If you do not resolve Psychic shriek (because you made up a number of dice to roll and missed with all of them) by rolling 3D6 - LD then you have not resolved the power according to the instructions in its entry.

 DeathReaper wrote:
This is incorrect. a Heavy 1 weapon tells you that the weapon is based off getting hits to proceed to the To Wound roll.

Much like the Witchfire tells us that you need to roll to hit.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Incorrect premise leads to incorrect conclusions.

However you need to resolve the power according to the instructions in its entry.

If you do not resolve Psychic shriek (because you made up a number of dice to roll and missed with all of them) by rolling 3D6 - LD then you have not resolved the power according to the instructions in its entry.

If you do not roll to hit you are not resolving the witcfire power per it's rules.

So you roll 1d6 to hit, and if you hit, the chariot owner assigns the wounds? If you miss, the generated wounds are assigned to the unit, ie. the rider gets wounded?

Huh?

If you miss we have no way allocate the wounds as chariots require you to allocate hits then the wounds that are caused by them.

Gravmyr wrote:
Much like the Witchfire tells us that you need to roll to hit.

Yes the general witchfire rules tell us to roll to hit.

None of that matters in the end as you still can not show an exception to the requirement.No weapon tells you how to resolve it fully, we know to look to the rules for weapons to solve this issue. Lack of clarity does not allow us to ignore requirements.

Edit: Beyond that how can you apply the wounds without a to hit roll on a chariot?