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.

Interesting discussion. To me it comes down to the part in the FAQ that says that "a roll to hit is not required" and whether or bit that gives permission to technically make a roll. I think the evidence leans further in the "can't snap shot because auto hits" direction but it's fuzzy enough that we almost need clarification from GW. How did nobody catch this in the earlier version of the FAQ?

If it's ever settled by GW that Psychic Shriek does indeed hit Invisible targets automatically it makes Shriek an amazing power for bypassing two of the most common defensive crutches used today, Invisibility and Void Shield Generators.

I was surprised to see in the FAQ that Shriek is not intercepted by the Void Shield. It's a shooting attack that is targeting units within the shield which can't actually hurt the shield.

If it auto hits invisibility too does that make Psychic Shriek the best Primaris?

There is a chart for shooting to hit as well. It happens that the number on the chart equate to 7-BS but the chart does exist. Either way it doesn't change the fact that you don't make that comparison if you auto hit. Rules only tell you to make one determination of whether the attack hits. You want to determine both ways then choose the better option.

Trimming the quote tree!

The errata (thus new rule) says "not required" so you actually do have permission to do one if you want.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Even if you did use both options, if you compare using BS to determine hit then ignore that result because it auto hits then BS still wasn't used in game mechanics. You went through a mental exercise with BS to justify your position but it played no part whatsoever in the resolution of that attack.

Re-consult the dictionary definitions of 'use' I quoted. I actually repeated one just about verbatim. So yes, we 'used' the BS.

PsycicSpaceElf wrote:
Interesting discussion. To me it comes down to the part in the FAQ that says that "a roll to hit is not required" and whether or bit that gives permission to technically make a roll. I think the evidence leans further in the "can't snap shot because auto hits" direction but it's fuzzy enough that we almost need clarification from GW. How did nobody catch this in the earlier version of the FAQ?

If it's ever settled by GW that Psychic Shriek does indeed hit Invisible targets automatically it makes Shriek an amazing power for bypassing two of the most common defensive crutches used today, Invisibility and Void Shield Generators.

I was surprised to see in the FAQ that Shriek is not intercepted by the Void Shield. It's a shooting attack that is targeting units within the shield which can't actually hurt the shield.

If it auto hits invisibility too does that make Psychic Shriek the best Primaris?

I think it hands down absolutely would be. If this logic is true, then nothing would prevent Psychic Shriek from hitting flying monstrous creatures either. It'd be one of the most reliable shooting attacks in the game.

At this point, it looks like everyone is going in circles too so I'd agree it's ambiguous (though I come down a bit more on the other side of it than you). Thus, ask your TO, consult your gaming group and if you feel like it, pester GW for an additional clarification. I don't think we'll be able to reach a firm conclusion without a ruling from a higher authority.

Let's take a moment to recap your stance on this:

You decide to make a roll the rules expressly tell you is not needed because those rules don't tell you that you can't. Based on that roll and the BS of the model you determine if that attack would hit. Regardless of that result, you ignore everything up to this point because those aforementioned rules also dictate the result and the attack hits. Despite those actions having to other game impact, you have decided Psychic Shriek does use BS because you took then ignored an otherwise pointless action, so can not only make but also automatically hits Snap Shots.

What if you decided not to roll? It's been made clear the roll is not required so intuitively there would be no reason to do so. Now we don't have a roll to use so no way at all we can apply BS. Everything else about the attack is going to resolve the exact same way because it still auto hits, but now there is no way to claim we have used BS. It never came under consideration in this situation.

We now have two scenarios with the same rule that in almost all respects resolve exactly the same way, but in one we are claiming it uses BS because of an unnecessary roll made and the other is does not. Should we now reach the conclusion that Psychic Shriek sometimes uses BS and sometimes doesn't, based on whether the player decided/remembered to roll a die that otherwise doesn't matter at all?

Fhionnuisce wrote:
Let's take a moment to recap your stance on this:

You decide to make a roll the rules expressly tell you is not needed because those rules don't tell you that you can't. Based on that roll and the BS of the model you determine if that attack would hit. Regardless of that result, you ignore everything up to this point because those aforementioned rules also dictate the result and the attack hits. Despite those actions having to other game impact, you have decided Psychic Shriek does use BS because you took then ignored an otherwise pointless action, so can not only make but also automatically hits Snap Shots.

The rules just as expressly provide that you may if you so choose, but your spin aside, this is mostly right. We have made a roll to hit and then noted the attack scored a hit (which would be automatic).

What if you decided not to roll? It's been made clear the roll is not required so intuitively there would be no reason to do so. Now we don't have a roll to use so no way at all we can apply BS. Everything else about the attack is going to resolve the exact same way because it still auto hits, but now there is no way to claim we have used BS. It never came under consideration in this situation.

This would be incorrect. BS was still part of the calculation even if it was inconsequential. Consult the dictionary definition again.

We now have two scenarios with the same rule that in almost all respects resolve exactly the same way, but in one we are claiming it uses BS because of an unnecessary roll made and the other is does not. Should we now reach the conclusion that Psychic Shriek sometimes uses BS and sometimes doesn't, based on whether the player decided/remembered to roll a die that otherwise doesn't matter at all?

Of course not. We have two scenarios but the same rules being employed in both. Remember, the rules say "does not use BS", which is mandatory and global; BS cannot touch it anywhere in any way. Since Psychic Shriek can use BS, permissively, it is not something that does not use BS, mandatory, ever.

Just because we chose not to use the roll that time does not change the fact that Psychic Shriek, as a whole, uses BS. Thus, we have no contradiction. You're just hung-up on a very narrow definition and application of 'use'.

Seriously?

If you don't use BS to meaningfully impact the result of the rule, then BS has not nor cannot be used.
Ergo, Shriek is a rule that does not use BS and is considered to auto-hit. Thereby meaning it cannot be resolved against an invisible unit.
The only BS here is what anyone who really thinks otherwise is full of.

No, I am "hung-up" on the idea that a stat that does nothing except determine if an attack hits has no bearing on an attack that can never miss. And as I pointed out before, you only make a determination about whether an attack hits once. Since in this case that is dictated by the ability, whether or not you feel you have permission to make the roll you don't get to make a second determination on hitting just to be able to say it used BS.

Audustum wrote:

This would be incorrect. BS was still part of the calculation even if it was inconsequential. Consult the dictionary definition again.

Actually, you're wrong. BS isn't used because BS determines what it takes to hit, and when BS is used a roll of 1 always fails. If you automatically hit, you aren't having the 1 in 6 chance of missing even if your ballistic skill is a 6 (or the 1 in 36 chance by rolling 2 1's if your ballistic skill is 10). Using ballistic skill = having a chance of failure. Automatically hitting = no chance of failure = ballistic score is not being used.

 doctortom wrote:
Automatically hitting = no chance of failure = ballistic score is not being used.

Bingo!

PsycicSpaceElf wrote:
Interesting discussion. To me it comes down to the part in the FAQ that says that "a roll to hit is not required" and whether or bit that gives permission to technically make a roll. I think the evidence leans further in the "can't snap shot because auto hits" direction but it's fuzzy enough that we almost need clarification from GW. How did nobody catch this in the earlier version of the FAQ?

It's only fuzzy because one person is trying their hardest to make it fuzzy and you've fallen for it. In fact, what happened with the FAQ was people realized the consequences of it being an automatic hit. Such as can't be snap fired and can't target invisible units.

The evidence leans further in the "can't snap shot because auto hits" direction because it can't snap shot because it auto hits.

Jacksmiles wrote:

PsycicSpaceElf wrote:
Interesting discussion. To me it comes down to the part in the FAQ that says that "a roll to hit is not required" and whether or bit that gives permission to technically make a roll. I think the evidence leans further in the "can't snap shot because auto hits" direction but it's fuzzy enough that we almost need clarification from GW. How did nobody catch this in the earlier version of the FAQ?

It's only fuzzy because one person is trying their hardest to make it fuzzy and you've fallen for it. In fact, what happened with the FAQ was people realized the consequences of it being an automatic hit. Such as can't be snap fired and can't target invisible units.

The evidence leans further in the "can't snap shot because auto hits" direction because it can't snap shot because it auto hits.

Haha well the post above which made the point about the lack of miss chance defuzzed it more for me.

More than one person feels that Psychic Shriek should auto hit Invisible units. I've posed the question elsewhere and there was no consensus there either.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I just thought the language was vague. If it said "Do not roll to hit, the attack hits automatically" it would be obvious. The "not required" wording is what made it less than crystal clear to me.

Fhionnuisce wrote:
No, I am "hung-up" on the idea that a stat that does nothing except determine if an attack hits has no bearing on an attack that can never miss. And as I pointed out before, you only make a determination about whether an attack hits once. Since in this case that is dictated by the ability, whether or not you feel you have permission to make the roll you don't get to make a second determination on hitting just to be able to say it used BS.

That's where you'd be wrong. Again, look at the plain language of the rules. It's rather notable that I'm quoting them and you're not. You're trying to invoke a rule that only applies to attacks that do not use BS. I listed the dictionary definition of 'use' and walked you through two different ways it applies to Psychic Shriek. Just throwing up your arms and saying 'na-uh' isn't going to waive that. The caveat for weapons that "do not use BS" goes to the entirety of a weapons usage and not to one particular kind of usage, unless you can show some RAW otherwise.

 doctortom wrote:

Audustum wrote:

This would be incorrect. BS was still part of the calculation even if it was inconsequential. Consult the dictionary definition again.

Actually, you're wrong. BS isn't used because BS determines what it takes to hit, and when BS is used a roll of 1 always fails. If you automatically hit, you aren't having the 1 in 6 chance of missing even if your ballistic skill is a 6 (or the 1 in 36 chance by rolling 2 1's if your ballistic skill is 10). Using ballistic skill = having a chance of failure. Automatically hitting = no chance of failure = ballistic score is not being used.

This is one of those things that sounds right, but is actually incorrect. As mchammadad laid out previously in this very thread, regardless of what you roll, it turns into a '6' in order to secure the automatic hit. Thus, you still roll, but you can't roll a 1 once the result is finalized. You're entire example breaks down after that. That's the only way to reconcile this with Novas being able to hit invisible units and also 'automatically hitting'.

Alternatively, I could see GW saying it works like Harlequin attacks (see below) on immobile vehicles and buildings, but I'm trying to add as little as possible to each interpretation.

Jacksmiles wrote:

PsycicSpaceElf wrote:
Interesting discussion. To me it comes down to the part in the FAQ that says that "a roll to hit is not required" and whether or bit that gives permission to technically make a roll. I think the evidence leans further in the "can't snap shot because auto hits" direction but it's fuzzy enough that we almost need clarification from GW. How did nobody catch this in the earlier version of the FAQ?

It's only fuzzy because one person is trying their hardest to make it fuzzy and you've fallen for it. In fact, what happened with the FAQ was people realized the consequences of it being an automatic hit. Such as can't be snap fired and can't target invisible units.

The evidence leans further in the "can't snap shot because auto hits" direction because it can't snap shot because it auto hits.

Actually, I'm a late comer to this but kudos to reading the thread. mchammadad was the original proponent and I thought his arguments were right (and had some free time today).

PsycicSpaceElf wrote:

Jacksmiles wrote:

PsycicSpaceElf wrote:
Interesting discussion. To me it comes down to the part in the FAQ that says that "a roll to hit is not required" and whether or bit that gives permission to technically make a roll. I think the evidence leans further in the "can't snap shot because auto hits" direction but it's fuzzy enough that we almost need clarification from GW. How did nobody catch this in the earlier version of the FAQ?

It's only fuzzy because one person is trying their hardest to make it fuzzy and you've fallen for it. In fact, what happened with the FAQ was people realized the consequences of it being an automatic hit. Such as can't be snap fired and can't target invisible units.

The evidence leans further in the "can't snap shot because auto hits" direction because it can't snap shot because it auto hits.

Haha well the post above which made the point about the lack of miss chance defuzzed it more for me.

More than one person feels that Psychic Shriek should auto hit Invisible units. I've posed the question elsewhere and there was no consensus there either.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I just thought the language was vague. If it said "Do not roll to hit, the attack hits automatically" it would be obvious. The "not required" wording is what made it less than crystal clear to me.

It's not just that which should make it confusing, it's also the fact that identical wording is used for Novas as for Psychic Shriek. Novas are also said to "target" and "hit automatically". As I explained, this is not an errata: GW is saying the RAW allows for this, which means any contrary interpretation is violating GW's own interpretation of RAW. Obviously, we have to stick with GW's otherwise no opinion is valid and we have no bedrock basis.

Anyway, I'm not saying the GW solution is elegant, but the problem I'm seeing in other conclusions here is that people are adding their own additions without any basis, like saying that Novas received a special rule. They didn't; GW is saying RAW allows 'automatic hitting' to hit invisibility. We can't just declare that to be an errata when it's a FAQ.

Moreover, rolling for an automatic hit isn't even unprecedented. GW has melee weapons roll To Hit on vehicles if their special ability procs on To Hit rolls of 6 even though hitting a vehicle is automatic.

From the Harlequin FAQ:

Q: What does a Harlequin Troupe armed with Harlequin's caresses do to a building or immobile vehicle? As you automatically hit does this count as a roll of 6 or is the roll totally ignored?
A: In this situation, roll all of your attacks. None of the attacks will miss, and any rolls of 6 benefit from the Caress of Death rule.

Assault To-Hit rolls are also supposed to always fail on a 1 and yet, here we are.

Audustum wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

Audustum wrote:

This would be incorrect. BS was still part of the calculation even if it was inconsequential. Consult the dictionary definition again.

Actually, you're wrong. BS isn't used because BS determines what it takes to hit, and when BS is used a roll of 1 always fails. If you automatically hit, you aren't having the 1 in 6 chance of missing even if your ballistic skill is a 6 (or the 1 in 36 chance by rolling 2 1's if your ballistic skill is 10). Using ballistic skill = having a chance of failure. Automatically hitting = no chance of failure = ballistic score is not being used.

This is one of those things that sounds right, but is actually incorrect. As mchammadad laid out previously in this very thread, regardless of what you roll, it turns into a '6' in order to secure the automatic hit. Thus, you still roll, but you can't roll a 1 once the result is finalized. You're entire example breaks down after that. That's the only way to reconcile this with Novas being able to hit invisible units and also 'automatically hitting'.

Please quote from the rulebook that you roll and it turns into a 6. Automatically hitting means you don't roll, which means you aren't rolling and turning it into something else - it means you aren't rolling. Period. You might enjoy your theory there, there's no basis in the rules for that to apply.

Audustum wrote:
Alternatively, I could see GW saying it works like Harlequin attacks (see below) on immobile vehicles and buildings, but I'm trying to add as little as possible to each interpretation.

Well, you're certainly adding to the interpretation, changing "automatically hitting" from not rolling to rolling but changing the roll to a 6, which is not stated anywhere in the rules.


Also, claiming that an automatic hit still counts as using ballistic skill means that there literally would be no situation that would not use ballistic skill for a ranged attack if that were true, which would mean that there would not be any need to say that attacks not using BS automatically miss since (by your definition) all attack use it.

 doctortom wrote:

Audustum wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

Audustum wrote:

This would be incorrect. BS was still part of the calculation even if it was inconsequential. Consult the dictionary definition again.

Actually, you're wrong. BS isn't used because BS determines what it takes to hit, and when BS is used a roll of 1 always fails. If you automatically hit, you aren't having the 1 in 6 chance of missing even if your ballistic skill is a 6 (or the 1 in 36 chance by rolling 2 1's if your ballistic skill is 10). Using ballistic skill = having a chance of failure. Automatically hitting = no chance of failure = ballistic score is not being used.

This is one of those things that sounds right, but is actually incorrect. As mchammadad laid out previously in this very thread, regardless of what you roll, it turns into a '6' in order to secure the automatic hit. Thus, you still roll, but you can't roll a 1 once the result is finalized. You're entire example breaks down after that. That's the only way to reconcile this with Novas being able to hit invisible units and also 'automatically hitting'.

Please quote from the rulebook that you roll and it turns into a 6. Automatically hitting means you don't roll, which means you aren't rolling and turning it into something else - it means you aren't rolling. Period. You might enjoy your theory there, there's no basis in the rules for that to apply.

Audustum wrote:
Please quote a rule where it says an "automatic hit" cannot roll.

You obviously don't understand how a permissive rules set works. If it doesn't say that you can do something, then you can not. Working with your position, I could place all of my models back on the board again after you've killed them because the rules don't say I cannot do so.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/How_to_Have_an_Intelligent_Rules_Debate

 Ghaz wrote:

Audustum wrote:
Please quote a rule where it says an "automatic hit" cannot roll.

You obviously don't understand how a permissive rules set works. If it doesn't say that you can do something, then you can not. Working with your position, I could place all of my models back on the board again after you've killed them because the rules don't say I cannot do so.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/How_to_Have_an_Intelligent_Rules_Debate

I think it's quite the opposite and you should read your own link. We have a ruling saying rolling is permissive, it's under Psychic Shriek's entry in the FAQ (and that actually is Errata). Thus, you have permission to roll or not roll. He's arguing you cannot choose to roll, thus he needs to show a rule supporting that.

Let's recap the situation here. That might help your understanding:

1. Originally, people said Psychic Shriek could not hit invisible if it did not roll. Under this interpretation, novas also cannot hit invisible as they do not roll to hit.
2. GW released an errata for Psychic Shriek saying it "hits automatically".
3. In the original rules, novas also say "hits automatically".
4. GW released a FAQ that says novas, based upon RAW, can hit invisible.
5. Someone now asks: can Psychic Shriek hit invisible?
6. Psychic Shriek has no provisions specifically referring to invisibility or snap shots.
7. Thus, we're left only with "hits automatically".
8. Since novas also "hit automatically" after targeting a unit, there is no reason to believe GW meant two different things by the exact same wording.

The onus is now on the naysayers to explain how "hits automatically" means two different things despite the literally same language or how GW failed to interpret its own rules (and thus we should abrogate them).

Psychic Shriek and nova are two different types of attack. You can't just decide they work the she, you need rules that tell you they work the same. That's how the game rules work. You can't do things unless you are given express permission to do then.

In the same line, the only rules I have seen for using BS is to determine if an attack hits. If to hit has already been determined those don't apply so you would need rules giving you permission to use BS when it isn't needed. Note that even if we accept that not required to roll still allows you to roll, rolling is not using BS and it does not give permission to do so.

Fhionnuisce wrote:
Psychic Shriek and nova are two different types of attack. You can't just decide they work the she, you need rules that tell you they work the same. That's how the game rules work. You can't do things unless you are given express permission to do then.

In the same line, the only rules I have seen for using BS is to determine if an attack hits. If to hit has already been determined those don't apply so you would need rules giving you permission to use BS when it isn't needed. Note that even if we accept that not required to roll still allows you to roll, rolling is not using BS and it does not give permission to do so.

The rules DO tells us they work the same. They say both attacks "hit automatically" you're choosing to create two different definitions for the exact same language, that's the issue.

Audustum wrote:

Fhionnuisce wrote:
Psychic Shriek and nova are two different types of attack. You can't just decide they work the she, you need rules that tell you they work the same. That's how the game rules work. You can't do things unless you are given express permission to do then.

In the same line, the only rules I have seen for using BS is to determine if an attack hits. If to hit has already been determined those don't apply so you would need rules giving you permission to use BS when it isn't needed. Note that even if we accept that not required to roll still allows you to roll, rolling is not using BS and it does not give permission to do so.

The rules DO tells us they work the same. They say both attacks "hit automatically" you're choosing to create two different definitions for the exact same language, that's the issue.

That is an unsupported assumption on your part. You only know with certainty that nova powers are intended to hit invisible units because of the FAQ. That FAQ doesn't mention Psychic Shriek. They share a line of rules text but that doesn't mean they are intended to work in all ways the same. In the absence of errata or FAQ answered that say otherwise you don't assume it works the same as a different FAQ answer, you assume it works the way the rules state. Which brings us back to you need rules that tell you to use BS when to hit has already been decided.

Fhionnuisce wrote:

Audustum wrote:

Fhionnuisce wrote:
Psychic Shriek and nova are two different types of attack. You can't just decide they work the she, you need rules that tell you they work the same. That's how the game rules work. You can't do things unless you are given express permission to do then.

In the same line, the only rules I have seen for using BS is to determine if an attack hits. If to hit has already been determined those don't apply so you would need rules giving you permission to use BS when it isn't needed. Note that even if we accept that not required to roll still allows you to roll, rolling is not using BS and it does not give permission to do so.

The rules DO tells us they work the same. They say both attacks "hit automatically" you're choosing to create two different definitions for the exact same language, that's the issue.

That is an unsupported assumption on your part. You only know with certainty that nova powers are intended to hit invisible units because of the FAQ. That FAQ doesn't mention Psychic Shriek. They share a line of rules text but that doesn't mean they are intended to work in all ways the same. In the absence of errata or FAQ answered that say otherwise you don't assume it works the same as a different FAQ answer, you assume it works the way the rules state. Which brings us back to you need rules that tell you to use BS when to hit has already been decided.

So your argument is that GW meant two different things by the exact same language? If that's true we can't trust anything in the book!

Look at the errata again. Remember, this is the errata for Witchfires (of which novas are a sub-category) so it applies to all Witchfires (vanilla, focussed, beam, nova):

‘However, some witchfire powers do not have a weapon
profile (such as the Telepathy power, Psychic Shriek);
where this is the case, no To Hit roll is required – the
attack hits automatically.’

Now for invisibility and novas:

Q: How does the Invisibility psychic power work in relation to
nova and beam powers, and Template and Blast weapons not
initially targeting the invisible unit?
A: You cannot choose to target an invisible unit with
such attacks, but should models from the unit end up
beneath the template, marker or line of fire, then they
can be hit using the normal rules. The invisible unit
would be hit if it was on the line of a beam, if it was
in the range of a nova, or if a blast ended up being
scattered onto it. For Template weapons, as long as you
follow the rules – ensuring that the template ‘covers
as many models in the target unit as possible, without
touching any other friendly units’ – then if the invisible
unit was also fully or partially under the template, it
would be hit.

The only way for your interpretation to work, is to disregard this and say "Psychic Shriek doesn't roll to hit thus it can't Snap Fire", but you skipped a step to get there. The rules did not give you permission to go there. The rules said "psychic shriek hits automatically". Thus, the question is 'what does hit automatically mean?'.

The nova answer tells you. "Hits automatically" can hit invisible. Otherwise, you have to explain, with RAW, why novas can circumvent that rule and psychic shriek can't when they use identical language.

The reason Novas and Beams work on invisible untis is because THEY DON"T TARGET UNITS.

Shriek does target a unit for its shooting attack

 CrownAxe wrote:
The reason Novas and Beams work on invisible untis is because THEY DON"T TARGET UNITS.

Shriek does target a unit for its shooting attack

And that is where you would be wrong. Straight RAW from the book (and previously quoted in this thread):

A nova power automatically targets and hits all enemy units...

A shooting attack can only hit automatically if it can be fired in the first place. An attack that doesn't use BS can't be fired as a snap shot. You have not shown where you have permission to use BS in Psychic Shriek when the to hit has already been determined.

The thing that you keep missing or ignoring with nova and beam powers in that FAQ is that it's not dealing with them being snap shot. Like Psychic Shriek, those powers can't be fired as snap shots. The FAQ is saying nova and beam powers WHEN FIRED NORMALLY can hit invisible units. Those powers don't have to declare a target unit to fire so don't trigger the snap shot requirement for shooting at invisible units. That is not the same as Psychic Shriek which does require a declared target before firing.

Fhionnuisce wrote:
A shooting attack can only hit automatically if it can be fired in the first place. An attack that doesn't use BS can't be fired as a snap shot. You have not shown where you have permission to use BS in Psychic Shriek when the to hit has already been determined.

The thing that you keep missing or ignoring with nova and beam powers in that FAQ is that it's not dealing with them being snap shot. Like Psychic Shriek, those powers can't be fired as snap shots. The FAQ is saying nova and beam powers WHEN FIRED NORMALLY can hit invisible units. Those powers don't have to declare a target unit to fire so don't trigger the snap shot requirement for shooting at invisible units. That is not the same as Psychic Shriek which does require a declared target before firing.

The novas are targeting invisible units, by definition, they are snap shoting. The FAQ also establishes that they can hit flying units, by definition snap shoting again. A nova is also declaring targets: it's automatically declaring every unit in range a target. Read the RAW I just posted. The player has no control over what is being declared, but it is still being targeted and thus declared.

Beam powers also have to declare a target, though the target can be a piece of ground and not a unit so that is different.

You're problem is that you're taking "hits automatically" from Psychic Shriek and saying this means it doesn't use ballistic skill and thus can't snap shot, but novas also say "hits automatically" after targeting and GW has explicitly said those do hit snap shot targets (invisible and flying). You have to explain why "hits automatically" means two different things with no change in language.

Let's put this even more simply: an attack that hits automatically can be fired as a snap shot (see novas). Novas target units just like psychic shriek. What rule justification is there for treating identical language differently?

I didn't say nova powers don't target. They target all units in range as part of the resolution of the ability. However, no target must be declared before firing. That is very different from most shooting attacks including Psychic Shriek that require you declare a target before you fire.

Order of operations:
Nova powers-fire, then all units in range are targetted and hit automatically, then roll and resolve wounds
Beams-lay down the line, then anything under it is automatically hit, then roll and resolve wounds
Psychic Shriek-target a unit, fire, then the unit is hit automatically, roll and wound per the Psychic Shriek rules

If something prevents Psychic Shriek from firing the auto hit never comes into play. Being prevented from firing snap shots does this.

Nova powers CAN NOT be snap shot because they also do not use BS. If you jink you would not be allowed to fire it. Because it targets after firing it works around the invisible and flying rules that would dictate a snap shot when targeting them.

Fhionnuisce wrote:
I didn't say nova powers don't target. They target all units in range as part of the resolution of the ability. However, no target must be declared before firing. That is very different from most shooting attacks including Psychic Shriek that require you declare a target before you fire.

Order of operations:
Nova powers-fire, then all units in range are targetted and hit automatically, then roll and resolve wounds
Beams-lay down the line, then anything under it is automatically hit, then roll and resolve wounds
Psychic Shriek-target a unit, fire, then the unit is hit automatically, roll and wound per the Psychic Shriek rules

If something prevents Psychic Shriek from firing the auto hit never confess into play. Being prevented from firing snap shots Sirs this.

Nova powers CAN NOT be snap shot because they also do not use BS. If you jink you would not be allowed to fire it. Because it targets after firing it works around the invisible and flying rules that would dictate a snap shot when targeting them.

There's a couple things wrong with this. First, there's no RAW whatsoever to indicate a snap shot is determined at the 'declaring' step. The rule for snap shots just says "cannot be 'fired' as a snap shot". As outlined in the rules (and quoted previously), there are 7 steps in the shooting sequence. "Choose a target" is 2 and just says "The unit can shoot at an enemy unit that it can see". Rolling to hit is 4. Inbetween them is 'select a weapon'. Where is this saying we determine if we're snap shooting or not at 2?

Conversely and second, you can just as easily argue that novas 'automatically targeting' all units occurs at 2: choose a target. Then there is literally no place for what you're arguing to supersede in the sequence as 1 is just "Nominate a unit to shoot".

So what is 'fire', where are you pulling its definition from the rules and how are we justifying inserting it before step 2 or step 4?

Under the plain language of the Shooting Sequence, we nominate a unit (the psyker), select a weapon (after manifesting it) then roll to hit, roll to wound, allocate wounds & remove casualties and finally select another weapon (if applicable). In Psychic Shriek's case, we target an invisible squad, we're asked to make a snap shot and we automatically hit. In a nova's case we target an invisible squad, we're asked to make a snap shot and we automatically hit. There's no plain language reason for a distinction.

Audustum wrote:

Fhionnuisce wrote:
I didn't say nova powers don't target. They target all units in range as part of the resolution of the ability. However, no target must be declared before firing. That is very different from most shooting attacks including Psychic Shriek that require you declare a target before you fire.

Order of operations:
Nova powers-fire, then all units in range are targetted and hit automatically, then roll and resolve wounds
Beams-lay down the line, then anything under it is automatically hit, then roll and resolve wounds
Psychic Shriek-target a unit, fire, then the unit is hit automatically, roll and wound per the Psychic Shriek rules

If something prevents Psychic Shriek from firing the auto hit never confess into play. Being prevented from firing snap shots Sirs this.

Nova powers CAN NOT be snap shot because they also do not use BS. If you jink you would not be allowed to fire it. Because it targets after firing it works around the invisible and flying rules that would dictate a snap shot when targeting them.

There's a couple things wrong with this. First, there's no RAW whatsoever to indicate a snap shot is determined at the 'declaring' step. The rule for snap shots just says "cannot be 'fired' as a snap shot". As outlined in the rules (and quoted previously), there are 7 steps in the shooting sequence. "Choose a target" is 2 and just says "The unit can shoot at an enemy unit that it can see". Rolling to hit is 4. Inbetween them is 'select a weapon'. Where is this saying we determine if we're snap shooting or not at 2?

Conversely and second, you can just as easily argue that novas 'automatically targeting' all units occurs at 2: choose a target. Then there is literally no place for what you're arguing to supersede in the sequence as 1 is just "Nominate a unit to shoot".

So what is 'fire', where are you pulling its definition from the rules and how are we justifying inserting it before step 2 or step 4?

Under the plain language of the Shooting Sequence, we nominate a unit (the psyker), select a weapon (after manifesting it) then roll to hit, roll to wound, allocate wounds & remove casualties and finally select another weapon (if applicable). In Psychic Shriek's case, we target an invisible squad, we're asked to make a snap shot and we automatically hit. In a nova's case we target an invisible squad, we're asked to make a snap shot and we automatically hit. There's no plain language reason for a distinction.

I will concede that may have been my brain filling and and not be completely accurate. However that makes my presentation wrong not the conclusion. Nova powers still do not use BS so cannot fire snap shots. This is supported in the FAQ, which states "you cannot choose to target an invisible unit with such attacks". If an invisible unit were the only available target it would be forced to snap shot which it can't do, however if another unit is targeted the nova will automatically target and hit all other units in range.

Essentially a nova can target a unit that does not require snap shots and will hit invisible units also in range. Psychic Shriek only targets one unit with no text about targeting and hitting other units. If the unit targeted is invisible it is forced to snap shoot, wich it is prevented to do because it doesn't use BS. If it can't fire then it doesn't matter that it auto hits.

To expand on this, you're able to target a non-invisible unit with a template, and as long as you're hitting as many models in the target unit as possible, if the template covers any models in an invisible that unit is hit as well. You can't primarily target the invisible unit with the template, however.

Psychic shriek. You declare a target. You do not roll to hit, You hit automtically. You do not use BS, you cannot snap shot.

The rules are unambiguous. Everything else that's been said is completely unrelated. (Novas and beams follow unique targeting methods, and have been clarified by faqs, no comparison to psychic shriek is valid.)

The idea that a to hit roll is made philosophically is interesting but has no place in a rules discussion.

If there were an actual choice to roll to hit or not, then perhaps a snap shot could be made, which would obviously not hit automatically. However the rules do not indicate this is the case (falling back into the age old discussion of how you roll to hit for something with no weapon profile- you can't). Fortunately the faq has cleared this up.

The attempted argument that you can BOTH snap shot AND hit automatically is clearly for the purpose of gaining a game advantage, and has no rules justification.

There reaches a point, where this is arguing for arguments sake. A lot of wookies on endor going on here.

^^^

What he said.

Also, if you're claiming that Nova powers and Psychic Shriek work the same then the first sentence of the FAQ answer you quoted is relevant:

"You cannot choose to target an invisible unit with
such attacks, but should models from the unit end up
beneath the template, marker or line of fire, then they
can be hit using the normal rules."

First part of that sentence prohibits you from targeting an invisible unit with "such attacks". According to you this means not only Novas and Beams but Psychic Shriek too. We are then given special permission for Nova and Beam powers to affect an invisible unit because of the way they determine who is affected.

In my opinion the only reason why the FAQ even mentions "no roll is required" is that people previously insisted on a to-hit roll for Shriek. To avoid any further insisting, they spelled it out. This elaboration isn't a starting point for flipping the entire situation on it's head though.

This thread makes me very grateful that neither death-stars nor invisible death-stars are common in my meta.