Focussed Witchfire & Rolling To Hit [Re-Hash for new rules]

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.

**rigeld2**

col_impact wrote:
Yup, this requires a house rule to continue. And my house rule is better than yours.

...
Right, so your opinion is worthless to me. The actual rules allow you to roll 0 dice to continue, and you're asserting otherwise. Have a great day.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gravmyr wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:

There is no rule that says the entirety of the power must be resolved as a single shooting attack and nothing outside of it.
Indeed, as we have no rule stating that we tie the 3d6 to any step of the shooting attack process, doing so is inventing rules.

We are told to resolve a shooting attack. Doing so leaves rules unresolved - we must resolve them.

There is actually. Witchfire powers are shooting attacks. It doesn't say they are mostly shooting attacks or there are parts of them that are shooting attacks. That is a flat blanket statement that the entire power is a shooting attack. You must prove that you have permission to resolve it outside of that framework. The lack of a rule telling you how to resolve it makes anything as all a house rule. Since the whole power is a shooting attack why are you taking it out of the shooting framework. You would need instructions giving you permission to do so. You are told to resolve it. You are told it is a shooting attack which tells you what rules you must follow. You are not told how to fit the power into said framework. Resolving a shooting attack then resolving part of said shooting attack separate, without direct rules telling you to is inventing rules.

So Psychic Shriek (and any witchfire without a profile), according to you, does nothing?

**col_impact**

rigeld2 wrote:
col_impact wrote:
Yup, this requires a house rule to continue. And my house rule is better than yours.

...
Right, so your opinion is worthless to me. The actual rules allow you to roll 0 dice to continue, and you're asserting otherwise. Have a great day.

All of what you have advanced is HYWPI. You have not proven otherwise. You are house ruling to treat Psychic Shriek as a zero shot shooting attack. The onus is on you to delineate a full-fledged strict RAW argument. I am having a great day, thank you.

**Gravmyr**

We have no way to resolve it RAW. The only way to resolve it is to incorporate the wording of the power into a shooting attack. In this case simply exchange the wording in the power for the to wound roll in the shooting sequence. Which by default is HIWPI.

**FlingitNow**

Col_impact

What do you do if someone casts Enfeeble on a Dreadnaught? We can apply the DT effect we can apply the -1S, so what do you do with the -1T?

**col_impact**

FlingitNow wrote:
Col_impact

What do you do if someone casts Enfeeble on a Dreadnaught? We can apply the DT effect we can apply the -1S, so what do you do with the -1T?

This is a tangent. Feel free to open up a separate YMDC thread to see if this question has anything at all to do with the present discussion. I eagerly await your findings.

**FlingitNow**

It does I'm checking for consistency. So answer the question. How do you deal with it?

Do you believe the game breaks and requires house rules to resolve? If not why are you treating this differently to the PS roll to hit?

Do you assign the number 1 to any missing profile value and then resolve using that number? If not why are you treating this differently to the PS roll to hit?

**col_impact**

FlingitNow wrote:
It does I'm checking for consistency. So answer the question. How do you deal with it?

Do you believe the game breaks and requires house rules to resolve? If not why are you treating this differently to the PS roll to hit?

Do you assign the number 1 to any missing profile value and then resolve using that number? If not why are you treating this differently to the PS roll to hit?

You need to do your homework first. Feel free open up a separate YMDC thread and see how Enfeeble plays out.

**DeathReaper**

Gravmyr wrote:
DR where in the shooting rules are you resolving the 3d6 roll?

They are not in the shooting rules, they are in the psychic power entry.

**FlingitNow**

Your concession is accepted thank you for finally conceding.

**Gravmyr**

Now that you have found them where in the rules for resolving a shooting attack are you resolving them?

**col_impact**

FlingitNow wrote:
Your concession is accepted thank you for finally conceding.

This kind of lame argument tactic has no place in a YMDC thread. Refrain from posting this kind of stuff.

**Gravmyr**

@flingitnow I believe people have already been asked not to post things like post or concede.

**DeathReaper**

Gravmyr wrote:
Now that you have found them where in the rules for resolving a shooting attack are you resolving them?

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

Rolling the 3D6- LD to cause wounds is a part of resolving the power.

**Gravmyr**

That's how not where. Where in the rules for resolving shooting attacks are you resolving them?

**FlingitNow**

col_impact wrote:
FlingitNow wrote:
Your concession is accepted thank you for finally conceding.

This kind of lame argument tactic has no place in a YMDC thread. Refrain from posting this kind of stuff.

It wasn't a tactic. We both know you've conceded I was just being polite and thanking you for it.

**col_impact**

FlingitNow wrote:
col_impact wrote:
FlingitNow wrote:
Your concession is accepted thank you for finally conceding.

This kind of lame argument tactic has no place in a YMDC thread. Refrain from posting this kind of stuff.

It wasn't a tactic. We both know you've conceded I was just being polite and thanking you for it.

I have made no such concession. Again please refrain from lame argument tactics that have no place in a YMDC thread.

**DeathReaper**

Gravmyr wrote:
That's how not where. Where in the rules for resolving shooting attacks are you resolving them?

I dont understand the question

What does this mean "Where in the rules for resolving shooting attacks are you resolving them?"

Where in the rules for resolving shooting attacks are we resolving what?

Them meaning the 3d6 - LD?

That is found in the psychic powers entry not the shooting rules.

**Gravmyr**

Shriek is a shooting attack. You are told what the rules are for resolving shooting attacks. At what step are you resolving them?

**FlingitNow**

col_impact wrote:
FlingitNow wrote:
col_impact wrote:
FlingitNow wrote:
Your concession is accepted thank you for finally conceding.

This kind of lame argument tactic has no place in a YMDC thread. Refrain from posting this kind of stuff.

It wasn't a tactic. We both know you've conceded I was just being polite and thanking you for it.

I have made no such concession. Again please refrain from lame argument tactics that have no place in a YMDC thread.

No need to get upset I was just trying to be polite. You've conveded your argument can't hold up to scrutiny live with it. Or change yoyr argument. I don't really care which you choose.

**col_impact**

FlingitNow wrote:
col_impact wrote:
FlingitNow wrote:
col_impact wrote:
FlingitNow wrote:
Your concession is accepted thank you for finally conceding.

This kind of lame argument tactic has no place in a YMDC thread. Refrain from posting this kind of stuff.

It wasn't a tactic. We both know you've conceded I was just being polite and thanking you for it.

I have made no such concession. Again please refrain from lame argument tactics that have no place in a YMDC thread.

No need to get upset I was just trying to be polite. You've conveded your argument can't hold up to scrutiny live with it. Or change yoyr argument. I don't really care which you choose.

Yet more lameness from you. Refrain from posting this drivel in a YMDC thread.

**FlingitNow**

col_impact wrote:
FlingitNow wrote:
col_impact wrote:
FlingitNow wrote:
col_impact wrote:
FlingitNow wrote:
Your concession is accepted thank you for finally conceding.

This kind of lame argument tactic has no place in a YMDC thread. Refrain from posting this kind of stuff.

It wasn't a tactic. We both know you've conceded I was just being polite and thanking you for it.

I have made no such concession. Again please refrain from lame argument tactics that have no place in a YMDC thread.

No need to get upset I was just trying to be polite. You've conveded your argument can't hold up to scrutiny live with it. Or change yoyr argument. I don't really care which you choose.

Yet more lameness from you. Refrain from posting this drivel in a YMDC thread.

So personal attacks are your recourse after concefing your argument and you don't think I should post here? Priceless.

**col_impact**

FlingitNow wrote:
col_impact wrote:
FlingitNow wrote:
col_impact wrote:
FlingitNow wrote:
col_impact wrote:
FlingitNow wrote:
Your concession is accepted thank you for finally conceding.

This kind of lame argument tactic has no place in a YMDC thread. Refrain from posting this kind of stuff.

It wasn't a tactic. We both know you've conceded I was just being polite and thanking you for it.

I have made no such concession. Again please refrain from lame argument tactics that have no place in a YMDC thread.

No need to get upset I was just trying to be polite. You've conveded your argument can't hold up to scrutiny live with it. Or change yoyr argument. I don't really care which you choose.

Yet more lameness from you. Refrain from posting this drivel in a YMDC thread.

So personal attacks are your recourse after concefing your argument and you don't think I should post here? Priceless.

Anyone who is following this thread can see your posts are out of line.

**FlingitNow**

Anyone who is following this thread can see your posts are out of line

Nothing I've said is out of line. You're the one that conceded your argument could not be defended. I was polite and presumably due to being upset after realising your interpretation was incorrect decided to turn to personal attacks.

Good day.

**col_impact**

FlingitNow wrote:

Anyone who is following this thread can see your posts are out of line

Nothing I've said is out of line. You're the one that conceded your argument could not be defended. I was polite and presumably due to being upset after realising your interpretation was incorrect decided to turn to personal attacks.

Good day.

I made no such concession. You attempted to put words into my mouth. Lame argument tactics like that have no place in YMDC. Refrain from putting words into other peoples mouth. Those kind of posts are out of line here.

**blaktoof**

Witchfires require you to roll to hit to resolve the power, and follow the rules for shooting.

if you fail to hit, you have missed.

if you miss you do not proceed past the hit roll step as the attack has ended, and the rest of the entries rules no longer matter unless it specifies it has an affect on a miss.

if people are asserting that the attack gets to continue because the psychic power rules say to resolve the psychic power, and you have to resolve the entire profile.

then if you miss with warp blast (lance)
18" range strength 10 assault 1 ap 2, do you still resolve the strength 10 hit?

It has all the same rules to resolve as a normal witchfire power just like psychic shriek, and neither entry states you may not resolve the effect on a miss.

**DeathReaper**

Gravmyr wrote:
Shriek is a shooting attack. You are told what the rules are for resolving shooting attacks. At what step are you resolving them?

You use all of the steps that you can. and you resolve the power according to the instructions in its entry.

Rolling to hit is required, but we have no profile to tell us how many shots we have, so either the game breaks or we skip this step and move on to the next one.

That is rolling To Wound on a successful To Hit roll, can't do that either, there was no To Hit roll.

**FlingitNow**

I made no such concession. You attempted to put words into my mouth. Lame argument tactics like that have no place in YMDC. Refrain from putting words into other peoples mouth. Those kind of posts are out of line here.

I did not put words in your mouth. But thanks for keeping up with the personal attacks. If you don't wish to discuss rules but instead just want to throw insults do it elsewhere.

**col_impact**

DeathReaper wrote:
Gravmyr wrote:
Shriek is a shooting attack. You are told what the rules are for resolving shooting attacks. At what step are you resolving them?

You use all of the steps that you can. and you resolve the power according to the instructions in its entry.

Rolling to hit is required, but we have no profile to tell us how many shots we have, so either the game breaks or we skip this step and move on to the next one.

That is rolling To Wound on a successful To Hit roll, can't do that either, there was no To Hit roll.

Technically the game breaks as you say. If you skip the step you are technically house ruling as you have made very clear in your own words.

And by the way, my house rule is better than yours. It doe not Easter Egg (by turning Psychic Shriek into a power that autohits and autowounds) and resolves the power as witchfire (which is RAI)

**FlingitNow**

blaktoof wrote:
Witchfires require you to roll to hit to resolve the power, and follow the rules for shooting.

if you fail to hit, you have missed.

Correct

if you miss you do not proceed past the hit roll step as the attack has ended, and the rest of the entries rules no longer matter unless it specifies it has an affect on a miss.

Repeating this over and over won't make it more true. If you don't hit you don't do a to wound roll. Anything else that needs to be resolved as part of that attack that is not a to wound roll or not dependent on a to wound roll continues as you have no denial of the permission to resolve those rules.

if people are asserting that the attack gets to continue because the psychic power rules say to resolve the psychic power, and you have to resolve the entire profile.

then if you miss with warp blast (lance)
18" range strength 10 assault 1 ap 2, do you still resolve the strength 10 hit?

What S10 hit? You just stated there was no hit. As covered in depth you would not make a to wound roll for that attack as that is dependent on a successful to hit roll (an armour pen roll is made instead of a to wound roll so is also covered by this). This has all been explained to you several times so why are you deliberately posting untrue statements?

It has all the same rules to resolve as a normal witchfire power just like psychic shriek, and neither entry states you may not resolve the effect on a miss.

Cool we resolve Warp Blast too. What effect does it have? We have covered no to wound (or armour pen) roll is made so what are you expecting Warp Blast to do?

**DeathReaper**

col_impact wrote:
DeathReaper wrote:
Gravmyr wrote:
Shriek is a shooting attack. You are told what the rules are for resolving shooting attacks. At what step are you resolving them?

You use all of the steps that you can. and you resolve the power according to the instructions in its entry.

Rolling to hit is required, but we have no profile to tell us how many shots we have, so either the game breaks or we skip this step and move on to the next one.

That is rolling To Wound on a successful To Hit roll, can't do that either, there was no To Hit roll.

Technically the game breaks as you say. If you skip the step you are technically house ruling as you have made very clear in your own words.

And by the way, my house rule is better than yours. It doe not Easter Egg (by turning Psychic Shriek into a power that autohits and autowounds) and resolves the power as witchfire (which is RAI)

No, skipping the step is not a house rule.

It is needed to move the game along.

Since you have two choices. 1) Stop the game altogether because you are not given any instructions to continue with a witchfire without a profile.

Or 2) Skip the irrelevant to hit roll because you skip the To Wound roll as the power does not roll To Wound and resolve the power according to the instructions in its entry as the rules tell us to do.

Ill pick #2 because that is what the rules tell us to do.