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.

 Dracos wrote:
Alright haha I guess you just can't admit it. No worries!

Well since there isn't anything to admit...

 FlingitNow wrote:
Mortetvie your position is "I assume I'm right because it's obvious". You concession accepted.

Another classic deflection, good job.

FYI. my position that Psychic Shriek needs a successful to-hit roll to resolve damage is more likely to be correct because that is how everything else in 40k works. Unless there is a specific rule that says a shooting attack that misses can still do damage, you are wrong by default. The rule that says "resolve the power according to its entry" does not get around the to-hit requirement imposed by the Witch Fire rules.

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Hit or miss you "Resolve its effects according to the instructions in its entry." (The Psychic Phase Chapter Resolve Psychic power sub-section, 1st sentence in bold).

Therefore a roll to hit is not needed RAW.

It's not needed, but you have no permission to skip the step RAW. Agreed?

Permission to skip is in the rule is actually in the rule right here (Though not explicitly).

"Assuming the Psychic test was passed and the enemy did not negate it with a successful Deny the Witch test, the power has been successfully manifested. Resolve its effects according to the instructions in its entry." (The Psychic Phase section Resolve Psychic power sub-section, 1st sentence in bold).

If you "Resolve its effects according to the instructions in its entry." that does not include a to hit roll since we are not given instruction on how many dice to roll, so we just do not roll any and resolve the effects anyway.

False. It's a witchfire so the rules require - absolutely, without question - a roll to hit. Nothing in the rule you quoted says otherwise. Yes, you resolve the power according to its effects, but you're still required to make the roll. Please cite the rule you've asserted exists.

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Hit or miss you "Resolve its effects according to the instructions in its entry." (The Psychic Phase Chapter Resolve Psychic power sub-section, 1st sentence in bold).

Therefore a roll to hit is not needed RAW.

It's not needed, but you have no permission to skip the step RAW. Agreed?

Permission to skip is in the rule is actually in the rule right here (Though not explicitly).

"Assuming the Psychic test was passed and the enemy did not negate it with a successful Deny the Witch test, the power has been successfully manifested. Resolve its effects according to the instructions in its entry." (The Psychic Phase section Resolve Psychic power sub-section, 1st sentence in bold).

If you "Resolve its effects according to the instructions in its entry." that does not include a to hit roll since we are not given instruction on how many dice to roll, so we just do not roll any and resolve the effects anyway.

False. It's a witchfire so the rules require - absolutely, without question - a roll to hit. Nothing in the rule you quoted says otherwise. Yes, you resolve the power according to its effects, but you're still required to make the roll. Please cite the rule you've asserted exists.

As a witchfire, the power requires a to hit roll.

As there is no number of dice or a profile to go off of this particular witchfire does not require a to hit roll. Basic Vs Advanced.

So what I said before is actually True.

 DeathReaper wrote:

As there is no number of dice or a profile to go off of this particular witchfire does not require a to hit roll. Basic Vs Advanced.

Lacking a weapon profile or a number of shots is not equivalent to "This power does not need to roll To-Hit".

FYI. my position that Psychic Shriek needs a successful to-hit roll to resolve damage is more likely to be correct because that is how everything else in 40k works. 

Simply not true. Rules that require a to hit roll to function say they do. Nem even posted a list of examples earlier and we have Njal's no defunked power that had a secondary effect that happened whether you hit or not.

Unless there is a specific rule that says a shooting attack that misses can still do damage, you are wrong by default. 

You mean like Psychic Shriek which says the target unit takes the 3d6-ld wounds?

The rule that says "resolve the power according to its entry" does not get around the to-hit requirement imposed by the Witch Fire rules.

No it doesn't. The to hit roll is however unresolvable and has no impact on the target unit taking 3d6-ld wounds. If the to hit roll generates 0 hits, 1 hits, 20 hits you make that many to wound rolls (also unresolvable) and the target unit takes 3d6-LD wounds. We have a non-functional non-resolvable part of the rule. We can either ignore it as we do in every other similar situation or we can make a raft of houserules to try make it functional resolvable and relevant.

Stick with the clear intent, GW does not expect you to create your own processes. They word things in a hamfisted way at times true. But stick to doing what they actually tell you to do and you're going to be much nearer the actual rules than making a raft of houserules and then trying to pass them off as RaW and RaI when we both know they are not.

As has previously been demonstrated, weapons are presumed to have 1 shot unless stated otherwise...Also, the 3d6-ld bit is preceded by the categorization of being a witch fire so it logically and naturally follows that the 3d6-ld doesn't happen if the attack misses.

Rule A says you must roll to-hit, Rule B of the power makes no mention of number of shots. Elsewhere in the rulebook, there is the general principle that shooting attacks are normally one shot unless stated otherwise in their profile. It is a very safe assumption that Psychic Shriek requires a single to-hit roll.

The fact remains, Witch Fire powers are a special type of shooting attack with unique effects-the fact that the way they deal damage is unique or different from the majority of other shooting attacks does not mean that you can resolve them without a successful to-hit roll; yet you are arguing exactly that without ANY actual proof-only a rule statement taken out of context.

As has previously been demonstrated, weapons are presumed to have 1 shot unless stated otherwise...Also, the 3d6-ld bit is preceded by the categorization of being a witch fire so it logically and naturally follows that the 3d6-ld doesn't happen if the attack misses. 

You know PS is not a weapon so the 1 shot unless stated otherwise rule doesn't apply. The logically and naturally follows part is you assuming it is true with no support what so ever. Given that every other roll that is dependent on a successful hit tells you it is, why you'd assume other results that make no mention of hits are suddenly dependent on a hit is baffling. Do you believe that the bearer of a Shield Eternal is only an Eternal Warrior against wounds which the shield saved? Because that is the same argument you are presenting here.

Rule A says you must roll to-hit, Rule B of the power makes no mention of number of shots. Elsewhere in the rulebook, there is the general principle that shooting attacks are normally one shot unless stated otherwise in their profile. It is a very safe assumption that Psychic Shriek requires a single to-hit roll. 

Lets try that again:

Rule A says you must roll to-hit, Rule B of the power makes no mention of number of shots and causes an effect on the target unit making no mention of hits. Elsewhere in the rulebook, there is the general principle that weapons are normally one shot unless stated otherwise in their profile and we know this is not relevant as this shooting attack is not made by a weapon. It is a completely unfounded assumption that Psychic Shriek requires a single to-hit roll. 

You see how your argument falls apart when you remove the lies and unsupported assumptions?

The fact remains, Witch Fire powers are a special type of shooting attack some function just like weapons others have unique effects. That you think that these effects have to be houseruled to be more in line with shooting rather than just following what the rules tell us to do is again baffling.

Edited by RiTides

Cute post, however, ultimately all you are saying is "rulebook requires me to roll to hit but I don't get how to make that work so I'll just ignore it!" Rather than try to work out the rules interactions you simply brush them away by ignoring them and do whatever you want...At least my position is relying on the existing rules in the BRB to make it work which is the preferred way of resolving rules issues.

Like I said, good luck playing Psychic Shriek your way at any major event (because it won't happen).

 DeathReaper wrote:

As a witchfire, the power requires a to hit roll.

As there is no number of dice or a profile to go off of this particular witchfire does not require a to hit roll. Basic Vs Advanced.

So what I said before is actually True.

I'm sure you can cite a rule stating the underlined - otherwise it's plainly your assumption and HYWPI.
The statement, originally, was that RAW the power can't resolve. You've asserted that this is incorrect and that RAW it does.
Cite rules support please. Right now all you've shown is some related rules linked by an assumption "to make things work".

So we can all rehash the same old "how do you resolve a witch fire having to roll to hit RAW, when it doesn't have a weapon profile to tell us how many dice to roll because then I want to roll 100, and you have to roll 0 to make it auto hit, but you should roll 1" argument...

However its been done a lot, with no clear agreement from either side because both sides are right and wrong, the power RAW doesn't work.

yes its a witchfire, yes it requires a to hit roll, no it doesn't tell us how many dice to roll to hit, and no it doesn't tell us it auto hits. There is no way to resolve the power without agreeing with your opponent/self/tournament/vassal person that something somewhere unwritten is how it will proceed.

that said, the topic of the post is in regards to psychic shriek hitting a chariot and what affect it would have.

Perhaps we can change our arguments so that we can approach that question from an "if psychic shriek auto hits because x is fubared then chariot does y" or "if psychic shriek has to roll to hit because x is fubared then chariot does z"

Psychic shrieks uses the wording other maledictions used 'suffers" for charcteristic modifers, wounds is a characteristic.

if a chariot suffers a characteristic modifer it applies to both the rider and chariot.

Does anyone disagree that wounds is a characteristic, or suffers is a negative modifer, or have anything else to say about why chariots should be invulnernable scything death machines, or along the lines of hey you got hit by something you can't just ignore here is why.

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

As a witchfire, the power requires a to hit roll.

As there is no number of dice or a profile to go off of this particular witchfire does not require a to hit roll. Basic Vs Advanced.

So what I said before is actually True.

I'm sure you can cite a rule stating the underlined - otherwise it's plainly your assumption and HYWPI.
The statement, originally, was that RAW the power can't resolve. You've asserted that this is incorrect and that RAW it does.
Cite rules support please. Right now all you've shown is some related rules linked by an assumption "to make things work".

I have, nowhere in PS's rules does it state the roll to hit is needed to apply the effects. Therefore no roll to hit needed.

Nowhere in the Psychic Shriek entry does it say that it doesn't either-so how do you get around the requirement for a to-hit roll in the, you know, witch fire section of the resolving psychic powers? Yeah....

 DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

As a witchfire, the power requires a to hit roll.

As there is no number of dice or a profile to go off of this particular witchfire does not require a to hit roll. Basic Vs Advanced.

So what I said before is actually True.

I'm sure you can cite a rule stating the underlined - otherwise it's plainly your assumption and HYWPI.
The statement, originally, was that RAW the power can't resolve. You've asserted that this is incorrect and that RAW it does.
Cite rules support please. Right now all you've shown is some related rules linked by an assumption "to make things work".

I have, nowhere in PS's rules does it state the roll to hit is needed to apply the effects. Therefore no roll to hit needed.

There's a difference between "not needed to apply the effects" and "not needed". The former is true. The latter is demonstrably false as all Witchfires require (as in, not optional - so you need a rule saying otherwise) a to hit roll. Please, cite a rule that says there's no to hit roll required. So far, all you've got is inference and assumptions. You haven't cited a rule that says "No to hit roll is required." To prove your point, you have to.

I think everyone generally agrees one way or another that a to-hit roll is required for the power as the rules expressly say so.

However, the point Death and friends are making is that since there is no rule that spells out verbatim "a shooting attack or its effects can't be resolved if it misses" that you can go ahead and apply the effects of Psychic Shriek regardless of the to-hit roll result. That begs the question of what is the point of the to-hit roll at all, then? Saying that it's just sloppy rules writing doesn't solve the dilemma of what to do with the to-hit roll. It only makes sense to have a to-hit roll if the power can miss and therefore not do any damage and this should be as obvious as the statement "water is wet" but alas, to some people it isn't and they are asking for someone to demonstrate why water isn't wet which is impossible...The burden of proof in applying Psychic Shriek's effects when the to-hit roll fails should be on those proposing such an application of the rules as there is a strong presumption in the 40k rules that when an attack misses...it fails and is not resolved.

Indeed, the problem with playing Psychic Shriek as doing damage even if it misses is that you have an absurd result where you are required to have a to-hit roll that ultimately doesn't do anything...Therefore it only makes sense to say that if the to-hit roll required by Psychic Shriek fails that the power fails to affect the target. I mean, think about it...You are basically creating a "Psychic Shriek" and then launching it at someone via a shooting attack; chance are you might miss and fail to do any damage at all and that is what GW likely intended.

However, the point Death and friends are making is that since there is no rule that spells out verbatim "a shooting attack or its effects can't be resolved if it misses" that you can go ahead and apply the effects of Psychic Shriek regardless of the to-hit roll result. That begs the question of what is the point of the to-hit roll at all, then? 

Exactly there is no point of rolling to hit for PS and we have a rule that can't be resolve and is irrelevant. So the only way to proceed is to do what we can actually do.

Saying that it's just sloppy rules writing doesn't solve the dilemma of what to do with the to-hit roll. It only makes sense to have a to-hit roll if the power can miss and therefore not do any damage and this should be as obvious as the statement "water is wet" but alas, to some people it isn't and they are asking for someone to demonstrate why water isn't wet which is impossible...The burden of proof in applying Psychic Shriek's effects when the to-hit roll fails should be on those proposing such an application of the rules as there is a strong presumption in the 40k rules that when an attack misses...it fails and is not resolved. 

Underlined is utterly false. You have this baseless assumption the rules do not. The rules are actually very clear on what is dependent on a successful to hit roll.

Why do witchfires require a roll to hit? Because they are shooting attacks and many have weapon profiles, heck they go on to tell you that blast weapons don't need a to hit roll and neither do templates which is redundant as the shooting rules already cover that. PS and most Focussed Witchfires have effects that are not dependant on a successful rolls to hit. In the case of PS its only effect is not dependant on a successful roll to hit.

Indeed, the problem with playing Psychic Shriek as doing damage even if it misses is that you have an absurd result where you are required to have a to-hit roll that ultimately doesn't do anything...

Yes we have that situation the required roll to hit is irrelevant to the resolution of the power. This irrelevant part of the rule is also unresolvable. Hence why ignoring it is the only way to proceed without inventing Houserules.

Therefore it only makes sense to say that if the to-hit roll required by Psychic Shriek fails that the power fails to affect the target. I mean, think about it...

No that is your assumption based nothing. You see the roll to hit and you want it to be relevant you want to tie it to the effect so you can make it not work against a Chariot. I've asked this before but lets assume you do roll to hit and that the to hit roll determines if there is damage and who is effected. I have 3 questions for you once you assign this to the Chariot:

1) What strength do you use for the required roll to penetrate the vehicle?
2) What leadership do you use to resolve the 3d6-ld
3) How do you apply the wounds to the vehicle

@DeathReaper/FlingitNow: Do I get to ignore to hit roll for these powers also and simply resolve the attack?

- Haemorrhage
- Purge Soul
- Spontaneous Combustion
- Crush

How is it?

Also, am I just allowed to apply the effects of let's say Terrify upon the enemy, as we are going to be ignoring the general rules for manifesting (and hitting, in case of witchfires) powers successfully?

Now that we are past that, can we move back to the topic at hand? As I wrote earlier, I changed my position to that of the chariot being basically invulnerable to Psychic Shriek. I see no way of applying those wounds to the model that doesn't call for a house rule.

Naw yes all those powers resolve regardless of a to hit roll. Why on earth do you think they would need one for the effect to resolve? None of those powers have an effect tied to a successful to hit roll. As for terrify it must be manifested to resolve just like the Witchfires, yes the Witchfires also require a to hit roll but that roll does not need to hit to resolve all the effects. The rules tell you which effects are dependant on a successful it.

I like the idea of wounds being a modifier. There is no duration and since they are from a instant attack once it is resolves, and we aren't told how long they last, if the model is still there the modifier disappears. The same would apply to shooting attacks and close combat attacks.

On a serious note though how do you allocate to a chariot without following the rules for shooting at a chariot?

I like the idea of wounds being a modifier. There is no duration and since they are from a instant attack once it is resolves, and we aren't told how long they last, if the model is still there the modifier disappears. The same would apply to shooting attacks and close combat attacks. 

If you're not told to end the modifier why are you ending it? Wounds suffered are a permenent modifier to your wounds characteristic. Unless you think they don't modify your wounds characteristic and all models with wounds never due?

On a serious note though how do you allocate to a chariot without following the rules for shooting at a chariot?

Who said we aren't using the shooting at chariot rules? The effect of PS though is a number of wounds applied to the target unit.

I think you guys are miss understand what me and DeathReaper are stating (which is also the RaW and most likely RaI).

You manifest Psychic Shriek. You then roll to hit, you then apply the effect to the target unit.

For the roll to hit you don't know how many dice to roll and whether or not it is a snapshot and regardless of the result the unit still suffers from the effect. So we pick up a handful of dice roll them say one or more of those dice where the roll to hit, we don't care which or the results now the target unit must take 3d6-ld wounds.

So we are not really ignoring the roll to hit just acknowledging it is irrelevant and we have no way to determine the result so we carry on with what we can do.

Which still doesn't cover how you are allocating them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Please go through those steps using the rules for allocation to a chariot.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also since the modifier is created by a power it only lasts as long as the power lasts as it does not say it is permanent.

Cool the unit takes 3d6-LD test right?

So what ld values do we have in the unit? Oh only 1 so we use that. We literally have no choice.

Cool so we then apply the wounds modifier to the Chariot which again we have rules for. Again being consistent since we can resolve the wound modifier vs the vehicle profile we essentially ignore that effect (much like we do with the initial roll to wound).

So how does your process work?

How do you deal with these situations once you've assigned the hit?

1) What strength do you use for the required roll to penetrate the vehicle? 
2) What leadership do you use to resolve the 3d6-ld 
3) How do you apply the wounds to the vehicle 

I know you're not going to ignore them and say they do nothing as they can't resolve because that makes you a massive hypocrite. So what are you going to do that is consistent with your approach to the unresolvable to hit roll?

Now please go back through and use the chariot rules to apply the wounds per it's specific way of resolving shooting attacks.

Gravmyr wrote:
Now please go back through and use the chariot rules to apply the wounds per it's specific way of resolving shooting attacks.

What part of the Chariot rules do you think I've broken?

(Hint the correct answer is no part).

Can you answer my questions?

You need permission to allocate to a profile. You gain this by allocating a hit, something you have said is not needed despite the witchfire and chariot allocation requiring it. Secondly, the owner of the chariot gets to choose the allocation location which you have stated must be allocated to the rider, not backed by any rule.

I'll spell out how I see it when I go on lunch.

Well, you can choose to allocate hits to the chariot or the rider and then roll wound / pen based on those hits..... Which still doesn't work with this power. As the hit doesn't roll to wound or pen it is still resolved against the model... Which is both profiles.

Gravmyr wrote:
You need permission to allocate to a profile. You gain this by allocating a hit, something you have said is not needed despite the witchfire and chariot allocation requiring it. Secondly, the owner of the chariot gets to choose the allocation location which you have stated must be allocated to the rider, not backed by any rule.

The owner only gets to assign hits nothing else. The 3d6-ld is assigned to the unit (not a model or profile) so you use majority Ld just as you would for any other unit there is only 1 Ld value so that is easy. We then apply wounds to models and the Chariot rules tell us how to do this.

As the hits have nothing to do with the PS effect assigning them has no effect on the resolution of the PS effect.

Without it you have no permission to continue allocating.

 FlingitNow wrote:
Naw yes all those powers resolve regardless of a to hit roll..

Please cite your rule, page and graph that allows you to do this. Considering you are required to roll a to hit roll, quote something that says these powers do not need that to hit roll.

Please cite your rule, page and graph that allows you to do this. Considering you are required to roll a to hit roll, quote something that says these powers do not need that to hit roll.

Please read the thread this has been explained in detail. Argue against the points made or don't argue at all but reposting questions that have been answered in detail does not help move the discussion forward it is what creates a circular discussion.