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:
Care to quote what in the witchfire powers tells you to continue with shooting rules and roll to wound after the roll to hit? The to hit is all that is referenced in the Witchfire rules.

Edit: As well as saves. So the question becomes in a power that just has a profile has no rules that are different from those such as Shriek, why would you treat them different. Unless a weapon tells you on a miss do x you stop after the missed to hit. Since witchfires are weapons why treat them different? There is nothing in any weapon that tells you this is what you do after a failed to hit roll without actually using the words do x even if / instead if you miss.

Every witchfire is bound to the shooting rules. Whether every rule can be applied is another matter entirely. Any hits resolved against a model with a Str characteristic require a hit in order to be able to wound. That is why witchfires with a profile require a hit in order to wound. But this is different for psychic powers that don't have a str characteristic.

I'll take Smite as an example:

Smite is a witchfire power with the following profile:
18" S4 AP2 Assault 4

So we've established that witchfires are a shooting attack. Smite gives you a profile to resolve the shooting attack as you would any other weapon.
You resolve the power (shooting attack) as per entry. The sequence for shooting is as follows:


Now the debate here is about step 4 & 5. The debate isn't about whether a roll to hit is required but whether it has effect on the outcome.

So on to the next step, which is "Roll to wound". The BRB has the following to say about this.


This paragraph specifies that only 'hits' are allowed to roll to wound because only 'hits' can be converted into wounds. This is possible with smite since it has a Str characteristic.
It also specifies that in order to 'Roll to wound' you need a Str characteristic.


Moving on to psychic shriek.
The rules quoted in my last quote cannot be applied to psychic shriek, because Psychic Shriek simply does not have a Str characteristic.
Because you cannot roll to wound, any ruling from the "Roll to wound" section in the BRB do not apply it. We do not have to convert hit's to wounds as described in the BRB page 34 because that simply is not possible.

Now what we do have is the "Manifesting psychic powers sequence", which you can find on P. 24 in the BRB. The last step here is "5. Resolve psychic power" in which we read the following:


Said entry:

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

So it is a shooting attack. We have to roll to hit. However, we cannot apply the 'to wound' rolls of shooting attacks because we are not given a Str value (which is required as per the 'To wound' rules found on P. 34 of the BRB). Because we cannot apply the rules, the rules have no effect on the power. This includes the restriction that you can only cause a wound for every hit you have made, meaning the number of hits is irrelevant to the outcome of the power.

The only rule that can be applied to generating wounds using Psychic Shriek is the ruling provided by the power itself which states that I Roll 3D6 and subtract the target's leadership. It does not tell me that it needs a 'hit' in order to cause the wound, whereasthe BRB tells me to do so for any weapon that includes a profile (or more specifically any weapon that has a Str characteristic).


TL;DR To generate wounds as per shooting attacks, you are converting 'hits' to 'wounds' using the Str and T characteristics of the weapon and the target. Using psychic shriek does not use this method of generating wounds and as such, any restrictions applying to the first method cannot be applied without being specifically stated in the power's entry. You roll 'to hit' but since you utilize another method of generating wounds, the number of hits is irrelevant to the process of generating wounds. RAW, Psychic Shriek does not require a hit in order to generate wounds.

rigeld2 wrote:

That does not mean that everything the power does is resolved as part of a shooting attack.

Then you need a specific statement in it that states this. You need something in the rule book that states it happens x instead of y otherwise you have no directions to skip or replace a step. Without that you are bound by the statement that it is a shooting attack to follow all the rules of a shooting attack.

DaPino wrote:
Every witchfire is bound to the shooting rules. Whether every rule can be applied is another matter entirely. Any hits resolved against a model with a Str characteristic require a hit in order to be able to wound. That is why witchfires with a profile require a hit in order to wound. But this is different for psychic powers that don't have a str characteristic.

I assume then you can provide the same quote I asked rigeld2 for, a line that states do x instead of y. You are attempting to apply one advanced rule instead of another when you are told specifically that you need to apply them both. There is nothing in any of the witchfires without a profile that state you get to treat it as anything other than a shooting attack. As such you in fact actually must meet all the requirements of being a witchfire, that includes a roll to hit. Whether or not you agree that it applies means 0 to the rules. Rigeld2 even went to great lengths to gather all of the rules that prove that all witchfire powers are weapons. Therefor you have rules telling you to follow the shooting rules using a weapon (witchfire power).

Gravmyr wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

That does not mean that everything the power does is resolved as part of a shooting attack.

Then you need a specific statement in it that states this. You need something in the rule book that states it happens x instead of y otherwise you have no directions to skip or replace a step. Without that you are bound by the statement that it is a shooting attack to follow all the rules of a shooting attack.

I'm not skipping or replacing any steps - that's your intent.
The shooting attack is resolved. You still have instructions in the entry that must be resolved. You're saying they cannot be and haven't cited a rule saying so.

Then how many dice are you rolling to hit?

Gravmyr wrote:
Then how many dice are you rolling to hit?

An irrelevant number. HIWPI is that I skip that step because it literally doesn't matter.

rigeld2 wrote:
I'm not skipping or replacing any steps - that's your intent.
The shooting attack is resolved. You still have instructions in the entry that must be resolved. You're saying they cannot be and haven't cited a rule saying so.

rigeld2 wrote:
An irrelevant number. HIWPI is that I skip that step because it literally doesn't matter.

Umm huh....


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Skipping the to hit step does in fact matter as long as there is a single ability that functions on a successful hit. Is there a single ability in the game that triggers off being successfully hit?

Gravmyr wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
I'm not skipping or replacing any steps - that's your intent.
The shooting attack is resolved. You still have instructions in the entry that must be resolved. You're saying they cannot be and haven't cited a rule saying so.

rigeld2 wrote:
An irrelevant number. HIWPI is that I skip that step because it literally doesn't matter.

Umm huh....

Oh, I see where you're confused. You're conflating HIWPI with the RAW. I purposely noted it there to show it's not RAW.

Skipping the to hit step does in fact matter as long as there is a single ability that functions on a successful hit. Is there a single ability in the game that triggers off being successfully hit?

There's To Wound, but since there's no S value and no hits to generate To Wound rolls, HIWPI is that it can be safely skipped as well - because it's literally impossible to generate Wounds from it.

Actually I believe that is one of the first times you have marked anything as HIWPI so it's easy enough to do. So no other ability in the game that functions off a model being hit by a shooting attack?

I'd like to see a poll on this topic, to see how people are playing it.

 Jimsolo wrote:
I'd like to see a poll on this topic, to see how people are playing it.

Last time we did it is was pretty much even, and it matches my experiences in real life. This is really a frustrating issue, and all solutions either require making up rules or some really questionable interpretations that seem like easter-egging. And unlike often with YMDC debates, RAI is properly unclear as well; I just have no idea why they wrote it like they did. This problem has existed since the sixth edition, has never been addressed in a FAQ, and was not clarified with the seventh, so apparently GW somehow thinks it is clear, despite being the most hotly debated part of the 40K rules for two editions.

Please do so Jim, I do find your polls to be quite educational.

Crimson,
Agreed... it boggles my mind how such a massive error could be missed for so long.
I honestly start to wonder at times if these mistakes are deliberate....

DaPino wrote:

Gravmyr wrote:
Care to quote what in the witchfire powers tells you to continue with shooting rules and roll to wound after the roll to hit? The to hit is all that is referenced in the Witchfire rules.

Edit: As well as saves. So the question becomes in a power that just has a profile has no rules that are different from those such as Shriek, why would you treat them different. Unless a weapon tells you on a miss do x you stop after the missed to hit. Since witchfires are weapons why treat them different? There is nothing in any weapon that tells you this is what you do after a failed to hit roll without actually using the words do x even if / instead if you miss.

Every witchfire is bound to the shooting rules. Whether every rule can be applied is another matter entirely. Any hits resolved against a model with a Str characteristic require a hit in order to be able to wound. That is why witchfires with a profile require a hit in order to wound. But this is different for psychic powers that don't have a str characteristic.

I'll take Smite as an example:

Smite is a witchfire power with the following profile:
18" S4 AP2 Assault 4

So we've established that witchfires are a shooting attack. Smite gives you a profile to resolve the shooting attack as you would any other weapon.
You resolve the power (shooting attack) as per entry. The sequence for shooting is as follows:

Spoiler:

Nominate unit

Choose a target

Select a weapon

Roll to hit

Roll to wound

Allocate Wounds & remove casualties

Select another weapon

As per BRB page 30

Now the debate here is about step 4 & 5. The debate isn't about whether a roll to hit is required but whether it has effect on the outcome.

So on to the next step, which is "Roll to wound". The BRB has the following to say about this.

Spoiler:

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 on this page.
The number indicated on the chart is the minimum result on a D6 needed to convert the hit into a wound. A value of '-' indicates that the target cannout be wounded by the attack.

This paragraph specifies that only 'hits' are allowed to roll to wound because only 'hits' can be converted into wounds. This is possible with smite since it has a Str characteristic.
It also specifies that in order to 'Roll to wound' you need a Str characteristic.


Moving on to psychic shriek.
The rules quoted in my last quote cannot be applied to psychic shriek, because Psychic Shriek simply does not have a Str characteristic.
Because you cannot roll to wound, any ruling from the "Roll to wound" section in the BRB do not apply it. We do not have to convert hit's to wounds as described in the BRB page 34 because that simply is not possible.

Now what we do have is the "Manifesting psychic powers sequence", which you can find on P. 24 in the BRB. The last step here is "5. Resolve psychic power" in which we read the following:

Spoiler:

Assuming the Psychic test was passed and the enemy did not negate it with a succesful 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.

Said entry:

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

So it is a shooting attack. We have to roll to hit. However, we cannot apply the 'to wound' rolls of shooting attacks because we are not given a Str value (which is required as per the 'To wound' rules found on P. 34 of the BRB). Because we cannot apply the rules, the rules have no effect on the power. This includes the restriction that you can only cause a wound for every hit you have made, meaning the number of hits is irrelevant to the outcome of the power.

The only rule that can be applied to generating wounds using Psychic Shriek is the ruling provided by the power itself which states that I Roll 3D6 and subtract the target's leadership. It does not tell me that it needs a 'hit' in order to cause the wound, whereasthe BRB tells me to do so for any weapon that includes a profile (or more specifically any weapon that has a Str characteristic).


TL;DR To generate wounds as per shooting attacks, you are converting 'hits' to 'wounds' using the Str and T characteristics of the weapon and the target. Using psychic shriek does not use this method of generating wounds and as such, any restrictions applying to the first method cannot be applied without being specifically stated in the power's entry. You roll 'to hit' but since you utilize another method of generating wounds, the number of hits is irrelevant to the process of generating wounds. RAW, Psychic Shriek does not require a hit in order to generate wounds.

Please mark your post HYWPI. The point at which your solution becomes HYWPI is where you decide that the missing profile and the broken rules allow you to skip paying witchfire's requisite costs. You are required to roll to wound. Skipping that requisite step is HYWPI. The end result of your HYWPI is a witchfire that has been seriously buffed to effectively autohit and autowound. The problem with your approach is that you are admitting to broken rules and then leveraging those broken rules to buff powers, which is easter-egging.

A better, more elegant HYWPI is to follow the other examples of weapons that affect Target leadership and simply add a clause "Instead of a To Wound Roll . . . " to the power which enables the power to resolve fully as witchfire with a To Hit Roll and a To Wound Roll. This approach is better than your approach since I am fully acknowledging that there is a missing profile and a broken ruleset and I am treating the situation appropriately and openly as HYWPI and not taking advantage of broken rules to generate buffs under the disguise of a HYWPI argument masquerading as a RAW argument. Moreover, my approach has a solid RAI argument. GW clearly intends Psychic Shriek to resolve as witchfire so lets treat it that way instead of bending rules, going down the path of loopholes, and inventing fictions to transform a witchfire power into an uber-witchfire.

col_impact wrote:
The point at which your solution becomes HYWPI is where you decide that the missing profile and the broken rules allow you to skip paying witchfire's requisite costs.

This is, of course, not true.

There are a few things we skip because we can not resolve, like casting enfeeble on a vehicle...

 DeathReaper wrote:

col_impact wrote:
The point at which your solution becomes HYWPI is where you decide that the missing profile and the broken rules allow you to skip paying witchfire's requisite costs.

This is, of course, not true.

There are a few things we skip because we can not resolve, like casting enfeeble on a vehicle...

That's not skipped at all. It's a perfectly reasonable RAW interpretation that modifiying characteristics on models that don't have those characteristics has no effect. Similarly, I cannot assign wounds to vehicles. Wounds have no effect on vehicles.

col_impact wrote:
Please mark your post HYWPI. The point at which your solution becomes HYWPI is where you decide that the missing profile and the broken rules allow you to skip paying witchfire's requisite costs. You are required to roll to wound. Skipping that requisite step is HYWPI. The end result of your HYWPI is a witchfire that has been seriously buffed to effectively autohit and autowound. The problem with your approach is that you are admitting to broken rules and then leveraging those broken rules to buff powers, which is easter-egging.

A better, more elegant HYWPI is to follow the other examples of weapons that affect Target leadership and simply add a clause "Instead of a To Wound Roll . . . " to the power which enables the power to resolve fully as witchfire with a To Hit Roll and a To Wound Roll. This approach is better than your approach since I am fully acknowledging that there is a missing profile and a broken ruleset and I am treating the situation appropriately and openly as HYWPI and not taking advantage of broken rules to generate buffs under the disguise of a HYWPI argument masquerading as a RAW argument. Moreover, my approach has a solid RAI argument. GW clearly intends Psychic Shriek to resolve as witchfire so lets treat it that way instead of bending rules, going down the path of loopholes, and inventing fictions to transform a witchfire power into an uber-witchfire.

Except that it is not HYWPI. He asked me for a ruling on why the to hit role does not matter and I gave it to him.

You are referring to something as 'requisite' while there is no way of applying the ruling behind it (Roll to wound). In order to apply the restriction based on the requisite of to wound rolls, you need to have a to wound roll in the first place. If you don't then you are bending the rules. You take a requisite from one rule (which can't be used) and you paste it into to the rule that does apply. In this case, you are taking the restriction from the 'Roll to wound' section in the BRB and apply it to the power description of Psychic Shriek while there is not even so much as a hint that you should do so.

Your solution might be a more balanced. But my solution goes by the book (even if it's broken) and does not require me to add/remove words from the BRB. I do not bend rules, I simply don't apply rules that cannot be applied. This includes any requisites for these rules. The result is that any restriction because of the lack of the requisite is nullified.

DaPino wrote:

col_impact wrote:
Please mark your post HYWPI. The point at which your solution becomes HYWPI is where you decide that the missing profile and the broken rules allow you to skip paying witchfire's requisite costs. You are required to roll to wound. Skipping that requisite step is HYWPI. The end result of your HYWPI is a witchfire that has been seriously buffed to effectively autohit and autowound. The problem with your approach is that you are admitting to broken rules and then leveraging those broken rules to buff powers, which is easter-egging.

A better, more elegant HYWPI is to follow the other examples of weapons that affect Target leadership and simply add a clause "Instead of a To Wound Roll . . . " to the power which enables the power to resolve fully as witchfire with a To Hit Roll and a To Wound Roll. This approach is better than your approach since I am fully acknowledging that there is a missing profile and a broken ruleset and I am treating the situation appropriately and openly as HYWPI and not taking advantage of broken rules to generate buffs under the disguise of a HYWPI argument masquerading as a RAW argument. Moreover, my approach has a solid RAI argument. GW clearly intends Psychic Shriek to resolve as witchfire so lets treat it that way instead of bending rules, going down the path of loopholes, and inventing fictions to transform a witchfire power into an uber-witchfire.

Except that it is not HYWPI. He asked me for a ruling on why the to hit role does not matter and I gave it to him.

You are referring to something as 'requisite' while there is no way of applying the ruling behind it (Roll to wound). In order to apply the restriction based on the requisite of to wound rolls, you need to have a to wound roll in the first place. If you don't then you are bending the rules. You take a requisite from one rule (which can't be used) and you paste it into to the rule that does apply. In this case, you are taking the restriction from the 'Roll to wound' section in the BRB and apply it to the power description of Psychic Shriek while there is not even so much as a hint that you should do so.

Your solution might be a more balanced. But my solution goes by the book (even if it's broken) and does not require me to add/remove words from the BRB. I do not bend rules, I simply don't apply rules that cannot be applied. This includes any requisites for these rules. The result is that any restriction because of the lack of the requisite is nullified.

The result is an easter-egg. You are taking broken rules and missing information as justification for skipping requisite steps and buffing witchfire into uber-witchfire. Moreover, it is HYWPI. You are not permitted to skip requisite steps. Psychic shriek cannot be resolved per strict RAW. There is missing critical information and everyone acknowledges that. Everyone is in the land of HYWPI.

col_impact wrote:
The result is an easter-egg. You are taking broken rules and missing information as justification for skipping requisite steps and buffing witchfire into uber-witchfire. Moreover, it is HYWPI. You are not permitted to skip requisite steps. Psychic shriek cannot be resolved per strict RAW. There is missing critical information and everyone acknowledges that. Everyone is in the land of HYWPI.

I do not skip requisites, the requisite does not exist because the rule that requires the requisite is not in effect (because it cannot be applied).
Wether this is intentional or not does not matter, the fact is that the ruling is there.

It would be like saying that a model with Str 8 Poisond(2+) attacks cannot harm vehicles because 'Poisoned' cannot affect vehicles. However, Str 8 poisoned(2+) attacks can affect vehicles because Str 8 stands apart from Poisoned(2+) and restrictions from 1 can't be hauled over to another. Like that, Psychic Shriek stands apart from rolling to wound and restrictions from rolling to wound cannot be applied to Psychic Shriek, including the requisite of having scored a hit.

Easter egg or not, it is according to the rules. I am not wrongly using rules, I am using the rules I am given to resolve the power in the only way possible without adding/removing/changing rules. It might be overpowered or broken (although I hardly think it is), but it is still within the boundaries set up by the rules. Whether it is something the writers intended or not is of little consequence, it is the only way to resolve the power until changes are made.
'Because it's too strong' is not a decent argument to this because there are a lot of things that are 'too strong' according to a lot of people.

Calling it a loophole is an assumption on your side because we do not know what the RAI is and we can't be sure until the rule is FAQ'ed or otherwise changed.

Can you provide me with a paragraph of anything else that RAW proves me that 'a hit' is a requisite to resolve the power. If no, We will have to agree to disagree because I don't feel like having an arguement if people claim that my arguments are HYWPI, even though they are all supported by the BRB's literal writing.

@DaPino Are witchfire powers required to roll to hit?

Gravmyr wrote:
@DaPino Are witchfire powers required to roll to hit?

Yes, and as I already explain very lengthily why the result of the roll is irrelevant to the outcome when no weapon profile is given.
Briefly, it comes down to this:
Witchfires are shooting attacks, shooting attacks require a roll to hit. Causing wounds as per shooting attacks requires you to convert hits to wounds using Str and T characteristics. You cannot apply 'rolling to wound' rules because there is a total lack of said characteristics. The only rule that you can apply says to resolve the power as per power entry.
The power tells us to generate wounds in totally different way than described in the 'rolling to wound' section of the shooting attack sequence, and as such you cannot apply restrictions and requisites from the 'rolling to wound' section to this method of generating wounds because there is not one ounce of evidence that we should do so.

For a more detailed explanation I point you to one of my previous posts.

DaPino wrote:

Gravmyr wrote:
@DaPino Are witchfire powers required to roll to hit?

Yes, and as I already explain very lengthily why the result of the roll is irrelevant to the outcome when no weapon profile is given.
Briefly, it comes down to this:
Witchfires are shooting attacks, shooting attacks require a roll to hit. Causing wounds as per shooting attacks requires you to convert hits to wounds using Str and T characteristics. You cannot apply 'rolling to wound' rules because there is a total lack of said characteristics. The only rule that you can apply says to resolve the power as per power entry.
The power tells us to generate wounds in totally different way than described in the 'rolling to wound' section of the shooting attack sequence, and as such you cannot apply restrictions and requisites from the 'rolling to wound' section to this method of generating wounds because there is not one ounce of evidence that we should do so.

For a more detailed explanation I point you to one of my previous posts.

Your reasoning is as nonsensical as stating that general shooting rolls to wound after rolling to hit, so since you can't roll to wound vehicles they are auto penetrated.

a step after the required step that cannot be performed for a specific profile does not mean the previous step that is required is invalid.

terrible reasoning.

if the hit roll were irrelevant it would have to be stated in the power.

You are completely and utterly wrong with no RAW support.

@dapino Is there even a single ability that exists in the game that is triggered off of being hit by a shooting attack?

blaktoof wrote:

DaPino wrote:

Gravmyr wrote:
@DaPino Are witchfire powers required to roll to hit?

Yes, and as I already explain very lengthily why the result of the roll is irrelevant to the outcome when no weapon profile is given.
Briefly, it comes down to this:
Witchfires are shooting attacks, shooting attacks require a roll to hit. Causing wounds as per shooting attacks requires you to convert hits to wounds using Str and T characteristics. You cannot apply 'rolling to wound' rules because there is a total lack of said characteristics. The only rule that you can apply says to resolve the power as per power entry.
The power tells us to generate wounds in totally different way than described in the 'rolling to wound' section of the shooting attack sequence, and as such you cannot apply restrictions and requisites from the 'rolling to wound' section to this method of generating wounds because there is not one ounce of evidence that we should do so.

For a more detailed explanation I point you to one of my previous posts.

Your reasoning is as nonsensical as stating that general shooting rolls to wound after rolling to hit, so since you can't roll to wound vehicles they are auto penetrated.

a step after the required step that cannot be performed for a specific profile does not mean the previous step that is required is invalid.

terrible reasoning.

if the hit roll were irrelevant it would have to be stated in the power.

You are completely and utterly wrong with no RAW support.

Seriously, could you go out and buy the rulebook before making bold claims?
Your argument is nonsensical because the BRB contains rules on how to resolve shooting at vehicles, as described in the 'shooting at vehicles' section (what a surprise).
What the rulebook does not contain, is any statement that allows you to apply the rules from 'Rolling to wound' on the Psychic shriek power. The ruling IS invalid because there is no way of applying it, because there is no Str characteristic. It is not 'an example way of wounding' as some have stated, it is THE way of wounding as per 'Rolling to wound'. If it was an example, the rulebook would have said so.

I don't even find a single written word that tells me I have to finish step 5 before I can move on to step 6. It only tells me that if I want to allocate wounds as per step 6, I need a wound pool.
Step 5 only tells me that if I want to produce wounds as per step 5, I need a hit. However, I need to produce wounds as per Psychic Shriek entry. This entry does not tell me that 'a hit' is a requirement in order to generate wounds.

The closest thing I can find that supports your claims is P.30 which says:

Once you have completed steps 1 to 7 for each unit in your army that you wish to make a shooting attack, carry on to the Assault phase.

Now how would you complete step 5 you wonder? I'll tell you how. I apply every rule and written word from step 5 that is applicable, which is 0 because there is not a single thing in the 'Roll to wound' paragraph that can be applied to the situation.
Step 5 is now resolved because logic dictates that when everything that is applicable is applied, the entry is resolved. I do not ignore it, I go through it while applying every rule that is applicable.

If you shoot at someone with a weapon that has 'ignore cover' he does not get to make a cover save before being removed as a casualty. The entry 'cover saves' is ignored because the 'Ignore cover' rule says you cannot apply them.
Here it's similar (meaning they can be compared, not that it is the same). We cannot take 'a hit' as a requisite because the rule that requires the requisite cannot be applied, in this case because of a lack of a Str characteristic. So we ignore the rule while going through step 5.


I (nor the book) do not have to prove the irrelevance of 'a hit' you have to prove its relevance.
YOU are taking requisites from a method of wounding that is not applied ( wounding as described in step 5) and are applying them to another method of wounding.
You have to prove to me that a requisite from method A (Roll to wound) should apply to method B (Psychic Shriek) when method A is not applied (because it is not applicable). You make that claim so you have to give me proof.

Even if you were to replace the step 'Rolling to wound', that does not give you the right to only replace half the step. You have to replace the entire 'roll to wound' method with the one provided by Psychic Shriek, which does impose the requisite of 'a hit'.

Gravmyr wrote:
@dapino Is there even a single ability that exists in the game that is triggered off of being hit by a shooting attack?

Strictly speaking, yes. The preferred enemy USR triggers without hitting with a shooting attack, but I understand that this is not similar to this situation.
The stomp ability, at no point in its entry, refers to 'hitting a unit' you roll a 2-5. However, if you roll a 6 the book doesn't talk about 'hits'. Again this is not a shooting attack but whatever, you asked for an ability that triggers without 'hits' so I gave you one.

One final point I'd like to make is that everyone is treating Psychic powers the same as 'shooting with a weapon' in order to try and impose restrictions applying to weapons. Psychic powers are not the same as 'weapons' and the rulebook is very clear on this.

Witchfire powers are shooting attacks. Indeed, they are often refered to as psychic shooting attacks, and many have profiles similar to ranged weapons. Just like shooting a weapon, a Psyker must be able to see the target unit and cannot be locked in combat if he wishes to manifest a witchfire power.
Similarly, a witchfire power must roll To Hit, unless it is has the Blast special rule, in which case it scatters as descrbied on page 158 or it is a templeta weapon, which hit automatically.

We learn 2 things here. 1) Not all witchfires are required to have profiles, because 'many' =/= 'all'. However, this is irrelevant because there is still a lack of Str characteristic which is the real issue. So I don't understand why everyone is so determined to (dis)prove the existence of one. 2) The only restrictions from 'shooting with a weapon' we can apply literally to witchfires are 'Line of sight' and 'not locked in combat', blindly applying anything else literally is not supported by the rulebook.

For example:
The BRB specifically states that saves can be taken against Witchfires and THAT requires you to have an overriding rule to be written in its entry.
However, there is no rule that allows you to apply requisites from the 'Roll to wound' section (which 100% is inapplicable) to the Psychic Shriek entry.

Then you do in fact know that there are abilities in the game that trigger directly off being hit by a shooting attack. With that knowledge can you still claim that rolling to hit is irrelevant? Unless you know every codex and every rule in every codex there is no way to make the claim the to hit is irrelevant in any situation due to the nature of a shooting attack affecting another unit.

By the way Stomp does not trigger off being hit it triggers off being under a blast template then can create hits and preferred enemy triggers on a miss.

My point stands as this, as long as you are interacting with other models there are going to be other things that are triggered so even if in your opinion the to hit is irrelevant to the power the hit may allow / cause other things to happen. Beyond that post a rule that states rules can be ignored that you don't see a link to what you are doing or is irrelevant. Without it you are playing HIWPI not RAW.

col_impact wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

col_impact wrote:
The point at which your solution becomes HYWPI is where you decide that the missing profile and the broken rules allow you to skip paying witchfire's requisite costs.

This is, of course, not true.

There are a few things we skip because we can not resolve, like casting enfeeble on a vehicle...

That's not skipped at all. It's a perfectly reasonable RAW interpretation that modifiying characteristics on models that don't have those characteristics has no effect. Similarly, I cannot assign wounds to vehicles. Wounds have no effect on vehicles.

And the roll to hit for PS and Focused Witchfire powers also has no affect on the resolution of those powers.

Can it have an affect on other powers or abilities that trigger off a hit for a shooting attack?

Gravmyr wrote:
Then you do in fact know that there are abilities in the game that trigger directly off being hit by a shooting attack. With that knowledge can you still claim that rolling to hit is irrelevant? Unless you know every codex and every rule in every codex there is no way to make the claim the to hit is irrelevant in any situation due to the nature of a shooting attack affecting another unit.

By the way Stomp does not trigger off being hit it triggers off being under a blast template then can create hits and preferred enemy triggers on a miss.

My point stands as this, as long as you are interacting with other models there are going to be other things that are triggered so even if in your opinion the to hit is irrelevant to the power the hit may allow / cause other things to happen. Beyond that post a rule that states rules can be ignored that you don't see a link to what you are doing or is irrelevant. Without it you are playing HIWPI not RAW.

You have to prove a link between the rules that does exist. And there is not a single line written in the book that allows you to connect the two and it is up to you to prove the contrary. I can type out the entire rulebook here just to prove nothing is in it but in the end you'd have to read it and tell me what part does connect the requisite 'a hit' with the profile of psychic shriek in a way.
YOU have to prove that 'A hit' is a requisite for psychic shriek to resolve. It is a requisite for rolling to wound but the BRB is very clear on what a to wound roll is and Psychic Shriek is not in any way shape or form a to wound roll as describe in the section 'roll to wound'.

Quite honestly I am fething sick of having to disprove relationships that others claim to exist with 0 wording to back them up.
I have typed over and over and over again why I think that RAW there is no relationship between 'roll to wound' P34 (with its requisite 'a hit') and psychic shriek's entry. All I ever get as an answer is: "But you have to prove there is a no relationship because I think there is a relationship".
I've also typed over and over and over again that a rule that cannot be applied cannot put restrictions on something. all you have to say to that is: "I have to prove it". NO! that is not how burden of proof works, YOU claim something exists so it is up to YOU to provide evidence for the existence of whatever it is you claim exists.

If you do something that is not in the rules, you are breaking the rules that is the basic concept of what rules are.
There is no ruling on how to apply the 'roll to wound' section (including it's requisites and restrictions) to Psychic Shriek. If you want to do so anyway you need rules that allow you to do so. If "Instead of a to wound roll..." or "except that you..." was in Psychic shriek's entry for instance (and oh yeah there's rules that do exactly this), you'd have a solid connection . But you do not, because there is no connection as per the rulebook but still you insist that there is a connection.

Again, you claim that I am 'ignoring and skipping rules'. No I am not, I am simply not trying to apply the inapplicable. Prove that I am ignoring a rule that is perfectly applicable in this situation? Everyone here has failed to provide so much as a single line of texts from the rulebook that says that I have to meet requirements put in place by a rule that cannot be applied.

It doesn't matter in the least if it applicable. There is a requirement in Witchfire that states you have to roll to hit. You have even acknowledged that the book has stated you have to do it. You then follow it up with but it doesn't matter so I'm not doing it. Post a rule that states you can skip it if it doesn't matter. You have yet to do so. Secondly I already pointed out there are abilities on models that trigger on successful hits from shooting attacks. As such it does in fact matter.

Did you even read what i posted?

I did not post about resolution I asked for the rule that states you ignore can skip any step that you don't see a link to. There isn't one, you are still required to do so. I also note you didn't address my post. You addressed what you assume I am talking about. So again is a to hit roll irrelevant if there are abilities in the game that trigger off being hit by a shooting attack? To spell it out better for you, if a model/unit has a rule that states "if model/unit is hit by a successful shooting attack do x." Doesn't that make the to hit roll relevant?

Gravmyr wrote:
It doesn't matter in the least if it applicable. There is a requirement in Witchfire that states you have to roll to hit. You have even acknowledged that the book has stated you have to do it. You then follow it up with but it doesn't matter so I'm not doing it. Post a rule that states you can skip it if it doesn't matter. You have yet to do so. Secondly I already pointed out there are abilities on models that trigger on successful hits from shooting attacks. As such it does in fact matter.

Did you even read what i posted?

I did not post about resolution I asked for the rule that states you ignore can skip any step that you don't see a link to. There isn't one, you are still required to do so. I also note you didn't address my post. You addressed what you assume I am talking about. So again is a to hit roll irrelevant if there are abilities in the game that trigger off being hit by a shooting attack? To spell it out better for you, if a model/unit has a rule that states "if model/unit is hit by a successful shooting attack do x." Doesn't that make the to hit roll relevant?

I'm not saying I shouldn't roll to hit, I am saying that the result of this roll is irrelevant to resolve the power because I don't need a hit in order to resolve the rest of the power.
Fine I'll throw a dice... but whether it's a 1 or a 6, I am still rolling that 3D6 and you are still going to take wounds if it's higher than your leadership.

I already explained this multiple times aswell why I think this and I am not going over it again because you are too lazy to read all arguments made.
There are powers that trigger on succesful hits or trigger when no succesful hit is scored, so I will make a to hit roll if you really want me to.
It's just that Psychic Shriek is not one of those powers and requires neither a succesful or unsuccesful to hit roll in order to be resolved.

Also, not once did I claim you don't make a to hit roll. I said that a succesful to hit roll is not a requirement for resolving Psychic Shriek, which is completely different.

So I decide to cast Psychic Shriek.

After successfully casting the power, I then proceed to resolve the power.

Since it is a witchfire, I must roll To Hit. I roll an undefined number of dice. I count up the undefined number of successful Hits and roll them again comparing an undefined Strength with Toughness to determine an undefined number of Wounds.

I then finish resolving the power in accordance with its entry.


Did I do this correctly?

If you follow Psychic Shriek strictly according to RAW, everything comes to a screeching halt when you are asked to roll to wound.

It is in the Roll To Wound where the missing profile makes for a situation where you cannot proceed any further. The missing profile means you have no Str characteristic to enable you to Roll To Wound.

At this point some people are advocating that you skip this step that is mired in broken rules and missing information.

HOWEVER -- SKIPPING THIS STEP IS HYWPI. Nowhere in the rules are you allowed to skip over sections of the rules where you cannot proceed (because you have a broken situation).

Per strict RAW the games comes to a screeching halt at the To Wound Roll because of the missing profile.

At this point in the rules per strict RAW you can shake hands since now you have a draw!

However no one wants that so you need to come up with a house rule that avoids that stupidity.

If you implement a HYWPI that skips the To Wound Roll, the end result is an easter egg and a witchfire power that autohits and autowounds. By skipping over rules with your HYWPI you have effectively cast witchfire without paying costs.

Quit pretending that you have a RAW argument when you have skipped over rules to do so. That is absurd. You are deceiving yourself minimally and at worse you are actively trying to pull the wool over other peoples eyes and rules lawyer to advantage.

Come on people. Psychic Shriek is broken rules. There is obviously a missing profile and we are missing critical information. You cannot resolve witchfire wihout some measure of HYWPI. You absolutely do not have permission to skip over rules because you are missing information.

Psychic Shriek absolutely puts us in a position of being forced to HYWPI in order to get along with the game.

Quit trying to hide your HYWPI as a RAW argument. Strict RAW brings the game to a screeching halt.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Happyjew wrote:
So I decide to cast Psychic Shriek.

After successfully casting the power, I then proceed to resolve the power.

Since it is a witchfire, I must roll To Hit. I roll an undefined number of dice. I count up the undefined number of successful Hits and roll them again comparing an undefined Strength with Toughness to determine an undefined number of Wounds.

I then finish resolving the power in accordance with its entry.


Did I do this correctly?

If all you are claiming is HYWPI then that's fine. Feel free to implement a house rule that lets you roll undefined number of dice. Strict RAW does not allow for that. So you are obviously not doing strict RAW if you are "rolling an undefined number of dice".

However, I have a much better HYWPI than yours. My HYWPI does not resort to fictions like "rolling an undefined number of dice" and it leads to a result that does not produce an Easter Egg and it leads to a result that actually resolves Psychic Shriek as witchfire (which is RAI!)