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.
Its not unresolvable, it just has no effect as the models do not have a toughness value.
in regards to vehicles you can generate wound pools versus vehicles, which is totally legal, but as vehicles have no wounds characteristic that can be reduced the excess wounds would be discarded.
Its not unresolvable, it just has no effect as the models do not have a toughness value.
So you agree the roll to hit for PS has no effect as it has no weapon type? The -1T is not an optional instruction (just likr the roll to hit) if you are not applying it why due to lack of relevant profile, why are you inventing a profile to roll to hit with?
Why the difference in approach?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
What do you do in a game where you spot your opponent moving one unit twice? What does BRB tell you?
In answer to your question, Enfeeble against vehicles is as useful as Poison. Yet you can figure out how Poison works, yes?
Yes the BrB does not cover what to do when your opponent is breaking the rules. I don't see your point casting enfeeble on a vehicle is not breaking rules.
Poison has no effect on vehicles because you never make a to wound roll against vehicles because the rules tell you to replace that step with the armour pen roll. Enfeeble does have effects on vehicles for instance the -1S is useful at times against Walkers.
The issue you have is those claiming there is no roll to hit for PS are treating the -1T as doing nothing. Those that invent numbers to make the roll to hit work must also do the same for the -1T or they are being inconsistent and hypocritical. When we then highlight other similar situations (this thread has spilled over from a PS vs CCB thread) like the 3d6-ld roll for PS vs a CCB again they go with out method of no profile no effect.
Yet they refuse to tell us why they treat the roll to hit for PS differently to all other similar situations. The no roll to hit method is literally the only consistent way to play the rule otherwise if you cast PS against a vehicle these are the steps:
1. Roll to hit, but we have no profile to work out how many times so set to 1 roll.
2. Roll to pen, but we have no S & Ap, so set to S1 Ap1.
3. Roll 3d6-ld, but we have no Ld, so set to 1, therefore roll 3d6-1.
4. Apply 3d6-1 wounds to vehicle but it has no Wounds characteristic, so set to 1, Vehicle is automatically removed even if Super Heavy and does not explode as it was not reduced to 0 HPs...
Do you understand now why saying it is 1 roll to hit is ludicrous? Because if you're saying that then you're saying the above or you're being a hypocrite.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/20 09:36:45
nosferatu1001 wrote: Psychic Shriek causes wounds without a to wound roll. Perils causes wounds without a to wound roll. Crazy how different they are.
Your attempts at sarcasm are weak.
Deep Strike uses scatter dice. Blasts use scatter dice. Crazy how similar they are.
Attempt, singular.
When comparing the ability to cause wounds without rolling to wound, it is a very helpful comparison to make. Do you have anything actually constructive to add, maybe using something written in actual rules this time, not made up gak?
It's an incorrect comparison, because morgoth was referring to how wounds are applied for shooting attacks, and Flingitnow (whose name suddenly makes sense) tried to discredit his example by comparing a secondary effect of a peril test during the psychic phase to how shooting attacks work. Therefore, a terrible comparison.
Nope, a totally apt one. You have a situation where you are causing wounds without rolling to-wound, or even to-hit, exactly like Perils can. I suggest you retract your assertion, as you are demonstrably incorrect.
What do you do in a game where you spot your opponent moving one unit twice? What does BRB tell you?
In answer to your question, Enfeeble against vehicles is as useful as Poison. Yet you can figure out how Poison works, yes?
Yes the BrB does not cover what to do when your opponent is breaking the rules. I don't see your point casting enfeeble on a vehicle is not breaking rules.
So how do you handle such cases then, if there are no instructions? The whole problem with this topic is that the rules are lacking.
Poison has no effect on vehicles because you never make a to wound roll against vehicles because the rules tell you to replace that step with the armour pen roll. Enfeeble does have effects on vehicles for instance the -1S is useful at times against Walkers.
Agreed, bad example that came to my mind while driving so I just typed away. In any case I was pointing out that why must you try to resolve it when it obviously is not resolvable? You aren't stupid, you don't try to target something without Toughness with something that affects Toughness, right? The same way you don't try shooting AV13 with a bolter. There is no need to spell it out in the rules as nothing would happen even if you did try. See my first point on this.
The issue you have is those claiming there is no roll to hit for PS are treating the -1T as doing nothing.
Well, I am not in that camp then as I think the rules demand for these powers to roll for to hit and if they miss, the chain of events stops there.
Those that invent numbers to make the roll to hit work must also do the same for the -1T or they are being inconsistent and hypocritical.
I don't get this. The power requires a roll to hit. A profile is not given. Unless specified I deduce that I must roll once to hit. I think I am happy with this solution.
When we then highlight other similar situations (this thread has spilled over from a PS vs CCB thread) like the 3d6-ld roll for PS vs a CCB again they go with out method of no profile no effect.
Yet they refuse to tell us why they treat the roll to hit for PS differently to all other similar situations. The no roll to hit method is literally the only consistent way to play the rule otherwise if you cast PS against a vehicle these are the steps:
1. Roll to hit, but we have no profile to work out how many times so set to 1 roll.
2. Roll to pen, but we have no S & Ap, so set to S1 Ap1.
3. Roll 3d6-ld, but we have no Ld, so set to 1, therefore roll 3d6-1.
4. Apply 3d6-1 wounds to vehicle but it has no Wounds characteristic, so set to 1, Vehicle is automatically removed even if Super Heavy and does not explode as it was not reduced to 0 HPs...
Maybe I missed something here, but does not Psychic Shriek cause only Wounds? Why do you attempt to utilize it against Vehicles? Would it make any difference if you did not roll for To Hit? Would the above suddenly make more sense and you could roll to pen, roll for Ld and apply the Wound??
Do you understand now why saying it is 1 roll to hit is ludicrous? Because if you're saying that then you're saying the above or you're being a hypocrite.
I am sorry, but I do not get what you are saying
The only thing obvious here is that the rules are not complete, they are lacking some key elements. No matter how you explain it, you are not playing it RAW.
Edit: Sorry, it looked fine when previewed with a mobile device, maybe now?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/20 13:55:52
What do you do in a game where you spot your opponent moving one unit twice? What does BRB tell you? In answer to your question, Enfeeble against vehicles is as useful as Poison. Yet you can figure out how Poison works, yes?
Yes the BrB does not cover what to do when your opponent is breaking the rules. I don't see your point casting enfeeble on a vehicle is not breaking rules.
So how do you handle such cases then, if there are no instructions? The whole problem with this topic is that the rules are lacking.
Poison has no effect on vehicles because you never make a to wound roll against vehicles because the rules tell you to replace that step with the armour pen roll. Enfeeble does have effects on vehicles for instance the -1S is useful at times against Walkers.
Agreed, bad example that came to my mind while driving so I just typed away. In any case I was pointing out that why must you try to resolve it when it obviously is not resolvable? You aren't stupid, you don't try to target something without Toughness with something that affects Toughness, right? The same way you don't try shooting AV13 with a bolter. There is no need to spell it out in the rules as nothing would happen even if you did try. See my first point on this.
The issue you have is those claiming there is no roll to hit for PS are treating the -1T as doing nothing.
Well, I am not in that camp then as I think the rules demand for these powers to roll for to hit and if they miss, the chain of events stops there.
Those that invent numbers to make the roll to hit work must also do the same for the -1T or they are being inconsistent and hypocritical.
I don't get this. The power requires a roll to hit. A profile is not given. Unless specified I deduce that I must roll once to hit. I think I am happy with this solution.
When we then highlight other similar situations (this thread has spilled over from a PS vs CCB thread) like the 3d6-ld roll for PS vs a CCB again they go with out method of no profile no effect.
Yet they refuse to tell us why they treat the roll to hit for PS differently to all other similar situations. The no roll to hit method is literally the only consistent way to play the rule otherwise if you cast PS against a vehicle these are the steps:
1. Roll to hit, but we have no profile to work out how many times so set to 1 roll. 2. Roll to pen, but we have no S & Ap, so set to S1 Ap1. 3. Roll 3d6-ld, but we have no Ld, so set to 1, therefore roll 3d6-1. 4. Apply 3d6-1 wounds to vehicle but it has no Wounds characteristic, so set to 1, Vehicle is automatically removed even if Super Heavy and does not explode as it was not reduced to 0 HPs...
Maybe I missed something here, but does not Psychic Shriek cause only Wounds? Why do you attempt to utilize it against Vehicles? Would it make any difference if you did not roll for To Hit? Would the above suddenly make more sense and you could roll to pen, roll for Ld and apply the Wound??
Do you understand now why saying it is 1 roll to hit is ludicrous? Because if you're saying that then you're saying the above or you're being a hypocrite.
I am sorry, but I do not get what you are saying
The only thing obvious here is that the rules are not complete, they are lacking some key elements. No matter how you explain it, you are not playing it RAW.
Please fix your post. Something got screwed up when quoting, and it makes it harder to figure out your responses.
Psychic Shriek requires a To Hit roll. Everyone agrees on that. The problem is the pick an arbitrary number group, do not want to pick an arbitrary number when other things require us to do something with a non-existent value. If your claim is that you only roll 1 To Hit die, but do not have to assign a Toughness Value to a Walkere who has been enfeebled, you are being hypocritical.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/20 10:18:51
Greebo had spent an irritating two minutes in that box. Technically, a cat locked in a box may be alive or it may be dead. You never know until you look. In fact, the mere act of opening the box will determine the state of the cat, although in this case there were three determinate states the cat could be in: these being Alive, Dead, and Bloody Furious.
Orks always ride in single file to hide their strength and numbers.
Gozer the Gozerian, Gozer the Destructor, Volguus Zildrohar, Gozer the Traveler, and Lord of the Sebouillia
Automatically Appended Next Post: What do you do in a game where you spot your opponent moving one unit twice? What does BRB tell you?
In answer to your question, Enfeeble against vehicles is as useful as Poison. Yet you can figure out how Poison works, yes?
Yes the BrB does not cover what to do when your opponent is breaking the rules. I don't see your point casting enfeeble on a vehicle is not breaking rules.
So how do you handle such cases then, if there are no instructions? The whole problem with this topic is that the rules are lacking.
Well if your opponent is breaking the rules you tell him. Why do you think the rules require explanation of what you do if your opponemt breaks the rules?
Poison has no effect on vehicles because you never make a to wound roll against vehicles because the rules tell you to replace that step with the armour pen roll. Enfeeble does have effects on vehicles for instance the -1S is useful at times against Walkers.
Agreed, bad example that came to my mind while driving so I just typed away. In any case I was pointing out that why must you try to resolve it when it obviously is not resolvable? You aren't stupid, you don't try to target something without Toughness with something that affects Toughness, right? The same way you don't try shooting AV13 with a bolter. There is no need to spell it out in the rules as nothing would happen even if you did try. See my first point on this.
Actually the rules do cover what to do when you fire a bolter at AV13. The rules only don't need to spell out that the -1T has no effect if they also don't need to spell out that you don't roll to hit with PS (and focussed witchfires).
The issue you have is those claiming there is no roll to hit for PS are treating the -1T as doing nothing.
Well, I am not in that camp then as I think the rules demand for these powers to roll for to hit and if they miss, the chain of events stops there.
Then you are also in the camp that the rules demand you apply a -1T modifier to a vehicle when you enfeeble it. So how do you apply it?
Those that invent numbers to make the roll to hit work must also do the same for the -1T or they are being inconsistent and hypocritical.
I don't get this. The power requires a roll to hit. A profile is not given. Unless specified I deduce that I must roll once to hit. I think I am happy with this solution.
The power requires that I reduce toughness by 1, a profile is jot given so I assume it is T1... This is your claim?
When we then highlight other similar situations (this thread has spilled over from a PS vs CCB thread) like the 3d6-ld roll for PS vs a CCB again they go with out method of no profile no effect.
Yet they refuse to tell us why they treat the roll to hit for PS differently to all other similar situations. The no roll to hit method is literally the only consistent way to play the rule otherwise if you cast PS against a vehicle these are the steps:
1. Roll to hit, but we have no profile to work out how many times so set to 1 roll.
2. Roll to pen, but we have no S & Ap, so set to S1 Ap1.
3. Roll 3d6-ld, but we have no Ld, so set to 1, therefore roll 3d6-1.
4. Apply 3d6-1 wounds to vehicle but it has no Wounds characteristic, so set to 1, Vehicle is automatically removed even if Super Heavy and does not explode as it was not reduced to 0 HPs...
Maybe I missed something here, but does not Psychic Shriek cause only Wounds? Why do you attempt to utilize it against Vehicles? Would it make any difference if you did not roll for To Hit? Would the above suddenly make more sense and you could roll to pen, roll for Ld and apply the Wound??
Do you understand now why saying it is 1 roll to hit is ludicrous? Because if you're saying that then you're saying the above or you're being a hypocrite.
I am sorry, but I do not get what you are saying
The only thing obvious here is that the rules are not complete, they are lacking some key elements. No matter how you explain it, you are not playing it RAW.
What I'm saying is if you believe that when the rules require you to perform an action but do not provide the profile to do so that you set the profile to 1 then the above sequence holds for PS and it is the best antitank in the game.
So do you believe that if the rules require you to perform an action but do not give you the relevant profile you then treat it as if that profile was a 1? Yes or No (remembering that a No means there is no roll to hit for Psychic Shriek).
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also to sum up the no roll to hit interpretation leads to this when you resolve PS against a vehicle:
1. Roll to hit, can't resolve as there is no profile, so does nothing.
2. Roll 3d6-ld, can't resolve as there is no profile, so does nothing.
The end. Now which makes more sense?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/20 10:50:15
Please fix your post. Something got screwed up when quoting, and it makes it harder to figure out your responses.
Psychic Shriek requires a To Hit roll. Everyone agrees on that. The problem is the pick an arbitrary number group, do not want to pick an arbitrary number when other things require us to do something with a non-existent value. If your claim is that you only roll 1 To Hit die, but do not have to assign a Toughness Value to a Walkere who has been enfeebled, you are being hypocritical.
Nope, you're just being obnoxious.
It's a shooting attack, meaning it does between one and infinite number of shots.
Without any clarification, it's just one shot, because one shot is enough to resolve the power and more shots are not necessary.
That has nothing to do with missing profile stats.
Please fix your post. Something got screwed up when quoting, and it makes it harder to figure out your responses.
Psychic Shriek requires a To Hit roll. Everyone agrees on that. The problem is the pick an arbitrary number group, do not want to pick an arbitrary number when other things require us to do something with a non-existent value. If your claim is that you only roll 1 To Hit die, but do not have to assign a Toughness Value to a Walkere who has been enfeebled, you are being hypocritical.
Nope, you're just being obnoxious.
It's a shooting attack, meaning it does between one and infinite number of shots.
Without any clarification, it's just one shot, because one shot is enough to resolve the power and more shots are not necessary.
That has nothing to do with missing profile stats.
given that psychic shriek causes a target to suffer 3d6-LD of target units LD in wounds, and as a witchfire it requires a to hit roll.
per rolling to hit under shooting, you can never automatically hit if you are required to roll to hit.
That a to hit roll is required means you need to hit for the effect to happen, otherwise normal witchfires with a normal profile would still work if you missed as well if the effect is not tied to a to hit roll.
Default rolling to hit is 1 die unless we are told more.
We are not told how many dice to roll to hit specifically in the case of PS, so it is safe to assume you would roll 1 dice - HYWPI/RAW (not told how many to roll, but are required to roll to hit)
Given that we could roll more than one die in some peoples thoughts what would happen if we scored more than 1 hit? Would it be 3d6-ld of target unit per hit? Obviously the rules for PS do not state this is the case so RAI it is 1 hit on a target unit, and as a witchfire being required to roll to hit it is most likely 1 shot. RAI arguement.
anyone claiming it goes off despite the hit roll is ignore the RAW for witchfires and treating it as a malediction, anyone rolling only 1 die has no clear RAW support to say that is the rule, however there is more RAI support that this is how it should be played.
overall its broken and poorly written.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/20 14:04:48
That a to hit roll is required means you need to hit for the effect to happen, otherwise normal witchfires with a normal profile would still work if you missed as well if the effect is not tied to a to hit roll.
Supposition. Not supported by actual rules. Actual rules only tie to-wound to succesfully rolling to-hit
blaktoof wrote:
Default rolling to hit is 1 die unless we are told more.
Supposition, the actual rules do not state that. they state "most", but then point out that a weapon profile will tell you how many shots are fired. We dont have a profile, so the default HERE is "unknown"
blaktoof wrote:We are not told how many dice to roll to hit specifically in the case of PS, so it is safe to assume you would roll 1 dice - HYWPI/RAW (not told how many to roll, but are required to roll to hit)
Agreed that RAW we must roll ot hit, however there is no rule telling you how many dice you must roll. You cannot roll any, as doing so has literally no rules support.
blaktoof wrote:Given that we could roll more than one die in some peoples thoughts what would happen if we scored more than 1 hit? Would it be 3d6-ld of target unit per hit? Obviously the rules for PS do not state this is the case so RAI it is 1 hit on a target unit, and as a witchfire being required to roll to hit it is most likely 1 shot. RAI arguement.
I wouldnt argue it was RAI, given we have had powers in the past that could auto=miss(out of range) but still resolve non-to-wound effects. There simply isnt enough support to come up with "RAI It is one dice and if that misses then non-to-wound effects are ignored, despite the rules for psychic powers stating you must resolve the power"
blaktoof wrote:anyone claiming it goes off despite the hit roll is ignore the RAW for witchfires and treating it as a malediction, anyone rolling only 1 die has no clear RAW support to say that is the rule, however there is more RAI support that this is how it should be played.
overall its broken and poorly written.
No, by stating it goes off despite not rolling to-hit, you ignore that you cannot roll any dice, and that the resolution of the power is not tied to successfully hitting, meaning the to-hit roll has literally no purpose. Absolutely none.
So you feel that marker lights hit regardless of to hit rolls as their effect is not to wound based, and they also require a to hit roll as per the RAW just like psychic shriek does?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/20 14:46:02
Well if your opponent is breaking the rules you tell him. Why do you think the rules require explanation of what you do if your opponemt breaks the rules?
But I do not need specific rules here, as I explained already. It seems that there are those who do. This thread should be another proof for that.
Then you are also in the camp that the rules demand you apply a -1T modifier to a vehicle when you enfeeble it. So how do you apply it?
The power requires that I reduce toughness by 1, a profile is jot given so I assume it is T1... This is your claim?
These are not my claims nor would I try to play them that way. I have no problem requiring Psychic Shriek that 1 roll to hit and based on its results resolve the power if needed. I also do not need to try to apply -1T to a target that does not have a toughness value, that would simply not work.
What I'm saying is if you believe that when the rules require you to perform an action but do not provide the profile to do so that you set the profile to 1 then the above sequence holds for PS and it is the best antitank in the game.
It is the best because you decided that for this to work the vehicle must have a toughness value of 1? Does not compute.
So do you believe that if the rules require you to perform an action but do not give you the relevant profile you then treat it as if that profile was a 1? Yes or No (remembering that a No means there is no roll to hit for Psychic Shriek).
As said, I'd require Psychic Shriek a roll to hit with 1 die.
1. Roll to hit, can't resolve as there is no profile, so does nothing.
2. Roll 3d6-ld, can't resolve as there is no profile, so does nothing.
The end. Now which makes more sense?
As those are the only options you see available we are at a dead end. I've already pointed out how I would read and use the rules.
Edit: Is quoting somehow broken? Can't spot the error. Bah, there it was. Small font..
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/10/20 14:51:55
No, stop creating a strawman. The two situaitons are not remotely similar
1) Markerlightys create a requirement that the to-hit is succesful. No such requirement is written ANYWHERE in the PS or witchfire rules. If it is, find it or concede
2) Requiring a to-hit roll is NOT THE SAME THING as requiring the to-hit roll to be a certain value. I really do not understand why posters cannot understand the difference between a to-hit roll (in general) and a to-hit (must be X value otherwise you canonot proceed)
The witchfire rule require a roll to hit. They do NOT, in any way shape or form require that the roll is a to=hit of a specific value, i.e. a successful one. They just dont. If they did, and you could find it, this argument would have been finished long ago
So go on, find a link. Find a written, actual link between to-hit of a specific value and resolving non-to-wound parts of a psychic power. Page and graph. Fialure to do so means you concede there is no such link.
blaktoof wrote: given that psychic shriek causes a target to suffer 3d6-LD of target units LD in wounds, and as a witchfire it requires a to hit roll.
Correct.
per rolling to hit under shooting, you can never automatically hit if you are required to roll to hit.
That's not entirely true there are several abilities that automatically hit. Psychic Shriek is not such an ability.
That a to hit roll is required means you need to hit for the effect to happen, otherwise normal witchfires with a normal profile would still work if you missed as well if the effect is not tied to a to hit roll.
This is entirely incorrect. Normal witchfires that have effects other than a to wound roll would absolutely have those effects apply even if all shots hit, unless those effects were tied to the to hit roll. The to wound roll is the only effect directly tied to a successful to hit roll by default. So please don't make these assertions that have absolutely no rules support at all.
Default rolling to hit is 1 die unless we are told more.
Again with the baseless assertions.
We are not told how many dice to roll to hit specifically in the case of PS, so it is safe to assume you would roll 1 dice - HYWPI/RAW (not told how many to roll, but are required to roll to hit)
Given that we could roll more than one die in some peoples thoughts what would happen if we scored more than 1 hit? Would it be 3d6-ld of target unit per hit? Obviously the rules for PS do not state this is the case so RAI it is 1 hit on a target unit, and as a witchfire being required to roll to hit it is most likely 1 shot. RAI arguement.
1 hit, 0 hits, 1,000,000 hits the unit suffers 3d6-ld wounds because nothing in the rules ties it to hits so they are independent of each other. Stop trying to claim an RaI when you absolutely know your interpretation is not the intention of the rules and is entirely hypocritical as proven above.
anyone claiming it goes off despite the hit roll is ignore the RAW for witchfires and treating it as a malediction, anyone rolling only 1 die has no clear RAW support to say that is the rule, however there is more RAI support that this is how it should be played.
Absolutely false. As you are well aware the roll to hit has absolutely nothing to do with the PS effect. So please stop posting stuff you know is untrue it does not help the discussion.
Overall its broken and poorly written.
Only as broken as manifesting Enfeeble, Ironarm or say Haemmorage on a vehicle is broken. Just because people want to interpret the rules in bizarre and advantageous ways doesn't necessarily mean they are poorly written.
blaktoof wrote: That a to hit roll is required means you need to hit for the effect to happen, otherwise normal witchfires with a normal profile would still work if you missed as well if the effect is not tied to a to hit roll.
Untrue. Witchfires with a profile don't do anything different from a gun.
Default rolling to hit is 1 die unless we are told more.
Literally invented from whole cloth. There isn't a rule anywhere telling us this.
Given that we could roll more than one die in some peoples thoughts what would happen if we scored more than 1 hit? Would it be 3d6-ld of target unit per hit? Obviously the rules for PS do not state this is the case so RAI it is 1 hit on a target unit, and as a witchfire being required to roll to hit it is most likely 1 shot. RAI arguement.
No, the hit is irrelevant - but it'd satisfy your "side" that requires a hit to resolve the power.
anyone claiming it goes off despite the hit roll is ignore the RAW for witchfires and treating it as a malediction, anyone rolling only 1 die has no clear RAW support to say that is the rule, however there is more RAI support that this is how it should be played.
Quote the rule that requires a hit to resolve a non-profile power. Nothing in the actual rules is broken.
My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
Why do you require that the to hit roll to be set to a 1 with a missing profile but not the T value of a vehicle? Why are you treating them differently?
Do you believe that if an action is unresolvable due to lack of relevant profile we set the profile to 1? Yes or No?
Big Blind Bill wrote: There is no right answer. Anyone claiming the answer to be simple or obvious is writing out of arrogance or ignorance.
As it stands the rulebook does not clarify the issue, therefore houserule it to your own liking.
These two statements are completely false.
There is a RAW answer for this one, people are just not accepting it.
As it stands the rule-book could do a better job of clarifying the issue, but it does clarify the issue if you do a little reading and comprehension of all relevant rules.
"Did you notice a sign out in front of my chapel that said "Land Raider Storage"?" -High Chaplain Astorath the Grim Redeemer of the Lost.
I sold my soul to the devil and now the bastard is demanding a refund!
We do not have an attorney-client relationship. I am not your lawyer. The statements I make do not constitute legal advice. Any statements made by me are based upon the limited facts you have presented, and under the premise that you will consult with a local attorney. This is not an attempt to solicit business. This disclaimer is in addition to any disclaimers that this website has made.
Big Blind Bill wrote: There is no right answer. Anyone claiming the answer to be simple or obvious is writing out of arrogance or ignorance.
As it stands the rulebook does not clarify the issue, therefore houserule it to your own liking.
These two statements are completely false.
There is a RAW answer for this one, people are just not accepting it.
As it stands the rule-book could do a better job of clarifying the issue, but it does clarify the issue if you do a little reading and comprehension of all relevant rules.
RAW says witchfires roll to hit. RAW says psychic shriek rolls 3D6-LD for determining number of wounds, but nothing about determining how many shots.
I personally play the power as you are saying, however there is still no clear RAW answer to this question. Nowhere does it say "instead of rolling to hit", therefore the issue of the power still being a witchfire remains.
3.) If it passes, you then roll 3D6, you add the total and subtract the targets leadership.
The remainder is the number of Wounds taken, which MUST BE Invulnerable saves. This is what it says in the telepathy description in the Rule Book.
Kill this thread =/
No the generic way it played is the same as a focussed witchfire with no roll to hit made. Some people make up their own hypocritical and inconsistent rules and play by them instead.
Big Blind Bill wrote: There is no right answer. Anyone claiming the answer to be simple or obvious is writing out of arrogance or ignorance.
As it stands the rulebook does not clarify the issue, therefore houserule it to your own liking.
These two statements are completely false.
There is a RAW answer for this one, people are just not accepting it.
As it stands the rule-book could do a better job of clarifying the issue, but it does clarify the issue if you do a little reading and comprehension of all relevant rules.
RAW says witchfires roll to hit. RAW says psychic shriek rolls 3D6-LD for determining number of wounds, but nothing about determining how many shots.
I personally play the power as you are saying, however there is still no clear RAW answer to this question. Nowhere does it say "instead of rolling to hit", therefore the issue of the power still being a witchfire remains.
I actually roll the 3D6-LD first, then fire that many shots. It makes more sense with the shooting rules of 1 shot = 1 hit.
despite the fact I think there is no RAW way to resolve the power.
it is always amazing how much the strawman arguements put forth that it goes off despite not hitting come out, they never are backed up with any RAW statements and never refute the central point of needing to roll to hit and are always laced with insults and the lowest form of debate.
Big Blind Bill wrote: There is no right answer. Anyone claiming the answer to be simple or obvious is writing out of arrogance or ignorance.
As it stands the rulebook does not clarify the issue, therefore houserule it to your own liking.
These two statements are completely false.
There is a RAW answer for this one, people are just not accepting it.
As it stands the rule-book could do a better job of clarifying the issue, but it does clarify the issue if you do a little reading and comprehension of all relevant rules.
RAW says witchfires roll to hit. RAW says psychic shriek rolls 3D6-LD for determining number of wounds, but nothing about determining how many shots.
I personally play the power as you are saying, however there is still no clear RAW answer to this question. Nowhere does it say "instead of rolling to hit", therefore the issue of the power still being a witchfire remains.
Yes you must roll to hit and have no profile to resolve that. Thus skipping the roll to hit is just as RaW as not applying the -1T from enfeeble on a vehicle or the +3T from iron arm or saying that casting Haemmorage or Psychic Shriek on a vehicle has no effect. If the people claiming you have to roll to hit were also claiming that the had to invent the relevant profile to resolve all the above too then and only then would you be able to claim that there isn't a clear answer. Yet everyone claiming you must roll to hit is also claiming that in those situations you don't try to resolve the unresolvable action. That those situations obviously do nothing, yet drop that reasoning for the roll to hit and only for the roll to hit. This is the Hypocrisy and inconsistency of their approach.
The rules are clear regardless that many people want them not to be.
blaktoof wrote: despite the fact I think there is no RAW way to resolve the power.
it is always amazing how much the strawman arguements put forth that it goes off despite not hitting come out, they never are backed up with any RAW statements and never refute the central point of needing to roll to hit and are always laced with insults and the lowest form of debate.
Always laced with insults? Cite them. It should be easy since they're always there.
And I think you don't understand what "strawman" arguments are.
Spoiler:
Manifesting Psychic Powers Sequence
1. Select Psyker and Psychic Power. Unless you have 0 Warp Charge points remaining, select one of your Psyker units, then nominate a psychic power known to that unit that you wish to manifest.
2. Declare Target. If the power requires a target, choose it at this point.
3. Take Psychic Test. The Psyker must now expend Warp Charge points and attempt to harness them by taking a Psychic test. If the test is failed, the psychic power fails and nothing further happens. If two or more 6s are rolled, the Psyker suffers Perils of the Warp, which is resolved immediately.
4. Deny the Witch. If the Psychic test was passed, one of the enemy targets gets a chance to expend Warp Charge points to nullify the power by taking a Deny the Witch test. If the psychic power does not target an enemy unit, your opponent can still attempt to Deny the Witch, but will not be able to use any bonuses. In either case, if the Deny the Witch test is passed, the psychic power does not manifest and nothing further happens.
5. Resolve Psychic Power. Assuming the Psychic test was passed and the power was not negated by a successful Deny the Witch test, it is now resolved.
What's step 5 again?
Spoiler:
Resolve Psychic Power
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. Unless otherwise stated, the effects of multiple different psychic powers are cumulative.
Okay - we have to resolve its effects according to the instructions in its entry. That's easy! Let's go look at Shriek's entry!
Spoiler:
PSYCHIC SHRIEK - Warp Charge 1
The psyker breathes in deeply the power of the Warp before emitting a banshee howl of psychic energy that shreds the minds of his enemies.
Psychic Shriek is a witchfire power with a range of 18". Roll 3D6 and subtract the target’s Leadership – the target unit suffers a number of Wounds equal to the result. Armour and cover saves cannot be taken against Wounds caused by Psychic Shriek.
Does it say to roll if you hit? Oh - it doesn't. It just says to roll. So not rolling would mean you're not resolving the power according to the instructions in its entry. Where's your permission (actual rules quote please) to skip the resolution?
My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
blaktoof wrote: despite the fact I think there is no RAW way to resolve the power.
it is always amazing how much the strawman arguements put forth that it goes off despite not hitting come out, they never are backed up with any RAW statements and never refute the central point of needing to roll to hit and are always laced with insults and the lowest form of debate.
Always laced with insults? Cite them. It should be easy since they're always there.
And I think you don't understand what "strawman" arguments are.
Spoiler:
Manifesting Psychic Powers Sequence
1. Select Psyker and Psychic Power. Unless you have 0 Warp Charge points remaining, select one of your Psyker units, then nominate a psychic power known to that unit that you wish to manifest.
2. Declare Target. If the power requires a target, choose it at this point.
3. Take Psychic Test. The Psyker must now expend Warp Charge points and attempt to harness them by taking a Psychic test. If the test is failed, the psychic power fails and nothing further happens. If two or more 6s are rolled, the Psyker suffers Perils of the Warp, which is resolved immediately.
4. Deny the Witch. If the Psychic test was passed, one of the enemy targets gets a chance to expend Warp Charge points to nullify the power by taking a Deny the Witch test. If the psychic power does not target an enemy unit, your opponent can still attempt to Deny the Witch, but will not be able to use any bonuses. In either case, if the Deny the Witch test is passed, the psychic power does not manifest and nothing further happens.
5. Resolve Psychic Power. Assuming the Psychic test was passed and the power was not negated by a successful Deny the Witch test, it is now resolved.
What's step 5 again?
Spoiler:
Resolve Psychic Power
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. Unless otherwise stated, the effects of multiple different psychic powers are cumulative.
Okay - we have to resolve its effects according to the instructions in its entry. That's easy! Let's go look at Shriek's entry!
Spoiler:
PSYCHIC SHRIEK - Warp Charge 1
The psyker breathes in deeply the power of the Warp before emitting a banshee howl of psychic energy that shreds the minds of his enemies.
Psychic Shriek is a witchfire power with a range of 18". Roll 3D6 and subtract the target’s Leadership – the target unit suffers a number of Wounds equal to the result. Armour and cover saves cannot be taken against Wounds caused by Psychic Shriek.
Does it say to roll if you hit? Oh - it doesn't. It just says to roll. So not rolling would mean you're not resolving the power according to the instructions in its entry. Where's your permission (actual rules quote please) to skip the resolution?
following that line all witch fires hit without a successful to hit roll is the problem that is not refuted by people who resolve the power without rolling to hit, or by rolling to hit and discarding the to hit roll.
the list of steps does not require a to hit roll for any witchfire, so yes it is a strawman argument to throw that list up and state it resolves because list, and ignore that required to hit roll.
1) Is the -1T from enfeeble optional or a requirement once manifested?
2) Is it possible to resolve that against units that lack a T characteristic on their profile?
3) How do you resolve the -1T from enfeeble against a vehicle.
4) If different from assigning a T value of 1 and then resolving against that why are you treating this situation differently to the roll to hit for PS?
Particularly number 4 because it is something no one on your side of the argument has ever answered despite repeatedly being asked.
1) Is the -1T from enfeeble optional or a requirement once manifested?
2) Is it possible to resolve that against units that lack a T characteristic on their profile?
3) How do you resolve the -1T from enfeeble against a vehicle.
4) If different from assigning a T value of 1 and then resolving against that why are you treating this situation differently to the roll to hit for PS?
Particularly number 4 because it is something no one on your side of the argument has ever answered despite repeatedly being asked.
your argument is pretty invalid.
1- required, but this is a malediction which has no to hit roll so your whole argument failed at this point and there is no point in continuing.
2-Yes, it applies a -1 to a charcteristic present, if none is present there is no effect this does not mean the power did not resolve.
3- above
4- because it requires a to hit roll before resolution of the power, otherwise all witchfires always resolve as the order of resolution posted by rigeld2 from the book does not state to roll to hit for any power.
comparing a malediction to a witchfire is not a good analogy as they are not similar in how they resolve, one has a step that is required by the RAW that the other does not have, and ignoring that step does not refute that it is required, and stating it is not required is a strawmen argument as witchfire requires it outside of the normal resolution of psychic power sequence, otherwise all withcfires would resolve without rolling to hit as that is not part of the normal resolution of psychic powers.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/20 17:57:16
Grey Knights 4600
Orks 4000 
3000
4000 