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.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Nothing suggests that the CP is returned or the stratagem isn't used. It's used, it just doesn't do very much.

It would be like saying if I use Bolter Drill stratagem on a unit with only Plasma Incinerators I should get the CP back because the stratagem didn't do anything.

The difference here though is the GK stratagem actually cannot be used.

It specifically requires 2 dice to be used for the psychic test. If the Psychic Test is taken using some other number of dice, than it's not like the stratagem simply doesn't do anything - it literally cannot even be used.

it can be used as you still meet the requirements, you just cannot apply the effects as you do not qualify for them, exactly as presented in BaconCatBug's example.

You are a grey knight unit using a psychic power, great, you can use this stratagem. You can roll 3 dice instead of 2 You do not have 2 dice to replace, so you are not eligible to benefit from this stratagem

Tristanleo wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Nothing suggests that the CP is returned or the stratagem isn't used. It's used, it just doesn't do very much.

It would be like saying if I use Bolter Drill stratagem on a unit with only Plasma Incinerators I should get the CP back because the stratagem didn't do anything.

The difference here though is the GK stratagem actually cannot be used.

It specifically requires 2 dice to be used for the psychic test. If the Psychic Test is taken using some other number of dice, than it's not like the stratagem simply doesn't do anything - it literally cannot even be used.

it can be used as you still meet the requirements, you just cannot apply the effects as you do not qualify for them, exactly as presented in BaconCatBug's example.

You are a grey knight unit using a psychic power, great, you can use this stratagem. You can roll 3 dice instead of 2 You do not have 2 dice to replace, so you are not eligible to benefit from this stratagem

I can see this interpretation as well - in which case, the CP is spent.

I had assumed that rolling 2 dice was a prerequisite to use the stratagem in the first place, based on what I read earlier in the thread. If, in fact, the stratagem can be used (even without benefit) when a number of dice other than 2 are being used on the test, then carry on.

Tristanleo wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

Tristanleo wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
The GK player declares he's going to cast a power
The Tyranid player says "haha Stratagem, now you only have one die to use!"
GK player makes the roll, grumbling.

They're not simultaneous. They're a sequence of events.

Yes, but we're contemplating the alternative sequence:

The GK player declares he's going to cast a power
Tyranid player says nothing
GK Player declares he is using Psychic Channeling
The Tyranid player says "haha Stratagem, now you only have one die to use!"

What does the GK player do?

Gotcha.

Um, GK player gets sad? There is no clear RAW answer as the interaction hasn't been through through, clearly. Work it out with yournopponent or dice off if you can't. Seems to me the Tyranid one ends up being a bit of a Top Trump in this situation, but that's HIWPI.

Yeah. That's the point we've got to, now we're just having a ponder about what happens when we apply the sequencing rules as to how to resolve effects that occur simultaneously if the GK player decides to resolve the Tyranid one first, thereby making his attempt to use his Stratagem illegal, would he be refunded the Command point for a Stratagem that can now legally not be used?

So far, I've disagreed but no-one else has pitched an opinion.

There is no mechanic for refunding command points so I'd say no, if that's how two peeps decide to play it.

There is no mechanic for game turn length ether. So as the GK player can just sit there waiting for you to cast the stratagem...

Are you going to cast the stratagem? I'm going to wait and see if you do...until you do. Okay...I think we have found the solution. There is no way GW intedend for this to be a trump card. Both abilities are effectively +1 or -1 to your dice number when you cast. They cost the same amount of CP - there is no reason 1 should trump the other. I will sit here waiting until you decide to use your stratagem. I will not roll until you declare if you are going to use it or not.

 Xenomancers wrote:
There is no mechanic for game turn length ether. So as the GK player can just sit there waiting for you to cast the stratagem...

Are you going to cast the stratagem? I'm going to wait and see if you do...until you do. Okay...I think we have found the solution. There is no way GW intedend for this to be a trump card. Both abilities are effectively +1 or -1 to your dice number when you cast. They cost the same amount of CP - there is no reason 1 should trump the other. I will sit here waiting until you decide to use your stratagem. I will not roll until you declare if you are going to use it or not.

That first bit makes no sense, dude. Turns happen. Stratagems are played or they aren't. If they're countered there's nothing in the core rules granting CP refunds, outside of special effects on Relics.

The rest is your HIWPI and that's fine, but if you wait then the Tyranid player can say at any point. But if you've declared, payed your GK Stratagem and made the roll (thrown the dice) then they can't interrupt at that point. No backsides and all. If they get the Stratagem in before you make the roll, fine. If not it's too late.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
There is no mechanic for game turn length ether. So as the GK player can just sit there waiting for you to cast the stratagem...

Are you going to cast the stratagem? I'm going to wait and see if you do...until you do. Okay...I think we have found the solution. There is no way GW intedend for this to be a trump card. Both abilities are effectively +1 or -1 to your dice number when you cast. They cost the same amount of CP - there is no reason 1 should trump the other. I will sit here waiting until you decide to use your stratagem. I will not roll until you declare if you are going to use it or not.

That first bit makes no sense, dude. Turns happen. Stratagems are played or they aren't. If they're countered there's nothing in the core rules granting CP refunds, outside of special effects on Relics.

The rest is your HIWPI and that's fine, but if you wait then the Tyranid player can say at any point. But if you've declared, payed your GK Stratagem and made the roll (thrown the dice) then they can't interrupt at that point. No backsides and all. If they get the Stratagem in before you make the roll, fine. If not it's too late.

I'm trying to create the situation that the OP is talking about. If he really thinks its fair that he can effectively block me from ever using my 3 dice to cast strategem without being forced to lose a command point and still cast at 1 dice because of some trivial wording that you know has nothing to do with the intent of the wording because these interactions wern't even thought off - i will just sit there not playing until he quits or agrees that he will use his stratgem first so I don't have to waste command points for nothing. This isn't a game of magic the gathering - which actually has a system in place to deal with this kind of things AND is the way the game is expect to be played. Cards are supposed to counter cards in magic. Stratgems are supposed to give your army a slight advantage for a cost - they aren't supposed to be nullified.

The whole point of the tyranid stratagem IS to counter psychic power use. It even says so in the article it was previewed in.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
There is no mechanic for game turn length ether. So as the GK player can just sit there waiting for you to cast the stratagem...

Are you going to cast the stratagem? I'm going to wait and see if you do...until you do. Okay...I think we have found the solution. There is no way GW intedend for this to be a trump card. Both abilities are effectively +1 or -1 to your dice number when you cast. They cost the same amount of CP - there is no reason 1 should trump the other. I will sit here waiting until you decide to use your stratagem. I will not roll until you declare if you are going to use it or not.

That first bit makes no sense, dude. Turns happen. Stratagems are played or they aren't. If they're countered there's nothing in the core rules granting CP refunds, outside of special effects on Relics.

The rest is your HIWPI and that's fine, but if you wait then the Tyranid player can say at any point. But if you've declared, payed your GK Stratagem and made the roll (thrown the dice) then they can't interrupt at that point. No backsides and all. If they get the Stratagem in before you make the roll, fine. If not it's too late.

I'm trying to create the situation that the OP is talking about. If he really thinks its fair that he can effectively block me from ever using my 3 dice to cast strategem without being forced to lose a command point and still cast at 1 dice because of some trivial wording that you know has nothing to do with the intent of the wording because these interactions wern't even thought off - i will just sit there not playing until he quits or agrees that he will use his stratgem first so I don't have to waste command points for nothing. This isn't a game of magic the gathering - which actually has a system in place to deal with this kind of things AND is the way the game is expect to be played. Cards are supposed to counter cards in magic. Stratgems are supposed to give your army a slight advantage for a cost - they aren't supposed to be nullified.

None of that refutes what JohnnyHell said, however.

Your suggestion's a reasonable HIWPI, but understand that it isn't RAW and that this is a situation to talk about with your opponent beforehand. Otherwise, you're going to be stuck following RAW and it's heartbreak (and the game most likely ending at that poin) for both sides.

As for stratagems not supposed to being nullified - I'm sure we'll eventually see other stratgems that can be used to nullify someone else's stratagem. They have to pay a CP cost to use it, though. What we have here though is more than that- the HIWPI you suggest would be if it were only one stratagem negating another and not one strategem still being in play while negating the other. The feel of unfairness from that suggests they didn't think about how the stratagems were going to interact. I suspect that if GW gets questions on this they'll end up putting it in a FAQ fairly quickly.

alternatively, you roll 3 dice and pick the highest one.

Just saying. It's a good middle ground of both effects.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
The whole point of the tyranid stratagem IS to counter psychic power use. It even says so in the article it was previewed in.

The purpose of empiric channeling is to almost get a spell off automatically - there should be a middle ground here. Or in the very least - an order of operations that favors a player not wasting command points for a "countered" spell.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
The whole point of the tyranid stratagem IS to counter psychic power use. It even says so in the article it was previewed in.

The purpose of empiric channeling is to almost get a spell off automatically - there should be a middle ground here. Or in the very least - an order of operations that favors a player not wasting command points for a "countered" spell.

Well in that case, since this power was denied, I should not be penalized for it not going off due to being countered. Therefore I should be able to attempt it again.

 Happyjew wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
The whole point of the tyranid stratagem IS to counter psychic power use. It even says so in the article it was previewed in.

The purpose of empiric channeling is to almost get a spell off automatically - there should be a middle ground here. Or in the very least - an order of operations that favors a player not wasting command points for a "countered" spell.

Well in that case, since this power was denied, I should not be penalized for it not going off due to being denied (countered). Therefore I should be able to attempt it again.

I could settle with that. For sure. If they chose to hit you with the denial card - you get your CP back and can use it on a different spell. That is the way I will play it. Regardless of what side I am on - I have both these armies.

Easiest way to resolve it is to FAQ that the GK power lets you add one dice to your cast and remove the lowest.

Then the power can be used and possibly still help, even if the tyranid strat goes off.

No CP is wasted or refunded this way. Both players get to do something, and no hard feelings are had.

 Eihnlazer wrote:
Easiest way to resolve it is to FAQ that the GK power lets you add one dice to your cast and remove the lowest.

Then the power can be used and possibly still help, even if the tyranid strat goes off.

No CP is wasted or refunded this way. Both players get to do something, and no hard feelings are had.

That would be sensible and logical. Thus it will never happen.

 Eihnlazer wrote:
Easiest way to resolve it is to FAQ that the GK power lets you add one dice to your cast and remove the lowest.

Then the power can be used and possibly still help, even if the tyranid strat goes off.

No CP is wasted or refunded this way. Both players get to do something, and no hard feelings are had.

Probably the best of the temporary solutions I've seen.

 Eihnlazer wrote:
Easiest way to resolve it is to FAQ that the GK power lets you add one dice to your cast and remove the lowest.

Then the power can be used and possibly still help, even if the tyranid strat goes off.

No CP is wasted or refunded this way. Both players get to do something, and no hard feelings are had.

Yeah, this was brought up earlier in the topic that they should really just counter each other rather than one overwhelmingly winning out for the same cost, but GW can't decide on a straightforward rule consensus, they always have to leave ambiguity.

There is nothing ambiguous about it. The rule is clear, the Tyranid stratagem will win out either way. People are just upset it doesn't work the way they want, thus it clearly can't be "intended".

Simplest solution would be GK stratagem is +1 dice, tyranid stratagem is -1 dice. If both use their stratagem it remains 2 dice.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
There is nothing ambiguous about it. The rule is clear, the Tyranid stratagem will win out either way. People are just upset it doesn't work the way they want, thus it clearly can't be "intended".

I know, I spent most of my posts on this topic arguing that, what I mean by ambiguity in my last post is that they have 4 ways of writing the same rule for different factions where some have the most barebones descriptions on how to resolve it and others have detail each step out and people are left wondering whether the rules are effectively the same or different on purpose.

just remember it still wouldn't be a complete cancel each other out thing.

GK says roll 3, keep the best.

Nid says roll 1.


If you change it in the way I suggested then nids still is stronger, but GK's still does something.

So you would roll +1 dice to your one dice and take the highest of the two.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
There is nothing ambiguous about it. The rule is clear, the Tyranid stratagem will win out either way. People are just upset it doesn't work the way they want, thus it clearly can't be "intended".

To be fair, I don't think there were any intentions one way or another because I don't think that GW had thought about it, so wouldn't have come up with an intention before now.

This is obviously an oversight which requires a FAQ entry. You can't reason through it because the wording for the powers is fundamentally different.

Kronos: Power is attempted
GK: When taking a psychic test

"I am attempting this power. Would you like to interrupt?"
"No."
"Ok, I am going to move on to taking the psychic test. I will now use my stratagem."

That seems wholly fair but it relies on intended rules not clear ones.

Which doesn't surprise me. If i was GW, i would have forgotten about the GK codex as well. It's garbage.

Until a proper FAQ is out, both sides spend the Command Point, and the Grey Knight player rolls 1 die to resolve that Psychic power. It seems pretty clear cut.

SYKOJAK wrote:
Until a proper FAQ is out, both sides spend the Command Point, and the Grey Knight player rolls 1 die to resolve that Psychic power. It seems pretty clear cut.

I don't think so. The people arguing that the GK loses CP are trying to apply MtG's stack logic, but 40k has no stack. Moreover, they're adding steps to phases we don't have.

RAW, 40k doesn't say when CP is spent. Some here are saying it's when you play a Stratagem, some say it's when you resolve a Stratagem, but the rules don't say. In that case, I'd say Stratagems are paid for and resolved simultaneously and thus fall under the sequencing rule.

So the GK player has to structure 6 events that occur simultaneously here:

1. He declares a Stratagem.
2. He pays for a Stratagem.
3. He resolves a Stratagem.
4. Tyranid declares a Stratagem.
5. Tyranid pays for a Stratagem.
6. Tyranid resolves a Stratagem.

People are right that the Tyranid Stratagem always wins in effect, but what about GK's CP? Well, if he structures resolution:

4-->5-->6-->1-->2-->3

Then he should get the CP back. When it comes time for sequencing to hit his Stratagem it can't because he doesn't have 2 dice. It'd be like trying to upgrade a to a Chapter Master after deployment: I can declare it all I want but it doesn't do anything and doesn't remove points because it's an illegal move.

People are splitting a lot of hairs over scenarios where the GK plays his first or the Tyranid plays one first, but that's irrelevant. We don't have subphases of alternating opportunity like this, unlike in MtG. Thus, regardless of what order the players ACTUALLY declared the cards in the real world, the GK player gets to determine who declared first for purposes of resolution due to sequencing. It's not about refunding CP, it's about never spending it in the first place.

Thus, the GK is forced to roll only 1 die, but he also keeps his CP

Audustum wrote:

SYKOJAK wrote:
Until a proper FAQ is out, both sides spend the Command Point, and the Grey Knight player rolls 1 die to resolve that Psychic power. It seems pretty clear cut.

I don't think so. The people arguing that the GK loses CP are trying to apply MtG's stack logic, but 40k has no stack. Moreover, they're adding steps to phases we don't have.

RAW, 40k doesn't say when CP is spent. Some here are saying it's when you play a Stratagem, some say it's when you resolve a Stratagem, but the rules don't say. In that case, I'd say Stratagems are paid for and resolved simultaneously and thus fall under the sequencing rule.

So the GK player has to structure 6 events that occur simultaneously here:

1. He declares a Stratagem.
2. He pays for a Stratagem.
3. He resolves a Stratagem.
4. Tyranid declares a Stratagem.
5. Tyranid pays for a Stratagem.
6. Tyranid resolves a Stratagem.

People are right that the Tyranid Stratagem always wins in effect, but what about GK's CP? Well, if he structures resolution:

4-->5-->6-->1-->2-->3

Then he should get the CP back. When it comes time for sequencing to hit his Stratagem it can't because he doesn't have 2 dice. It'd be like trying to upgrade a to a Chapter Master after deployment: I can declare it all I want but it doesn't do anything and doesn't remove points because it's an illegal move.

People are splitting a lot of hairs over scenarios where the GK plays his first or the Tyranid plays one first, but that's irrelevant. We don't have subphases of alternating opportunity like this, unlike in MtG. Thus, regardless of what order the players ACTUALLY declared the cards in the real world, the GK player gets to determine who declared first for purposes of resolution due to sequencing. It's not about refunding CP, it's about never spending it in the first place.

Thus, the GK is forced to roll only 1 die, but he also keeps his CP

This is nonsense. There is no sequencing for spending cp and stratagems. Declaring your using it is the same as spening. The moment you declare its done. Nothing in the rules gives you permission to treat it any other way. You cant pick targets for, or even select a stratgem until you reach its trigger condition and declare it. The moment you do the cp is spent and you move on to resolution. If your opponent then also declares s/he also spends and its locked in.

 Lance845 wrote:

Audustum wrote:

SYKOJAK wrote:
Until a proper FAQ is out, both sides spend the Command Point, and the Grey Knight player rolls 1 die to resolve that Psychic power. It seems pretty clear cut.

I don't think so. The people arguing that the GK loses CP are trying to apply MtG's stack logic, but 40k has no stack. Moreover, they're adding steps to phases we don't have.

RAW, 40k doesn't say when CP is spent. Some here are saying it's when you play a Stratagem, some say it's when you resolve a Stratagem, but the rules don't say. In that case, I'd say Stratagems are paid for and resolved simultaneously and thus fall under the sequencing rule.

So the GK player has to structure 6 events that occur simultaneously here:

1. He declares a Stratagem.
2. He pays for a Stratagem.
3. He resolves a Stratagem.
4. Tyranid declares a Stratagem.
5. Tyranid pays for a Stratagem.
6. Tyranid resolves a Stratagem.

People are right that the Tyranid Stratagem always wins in effect, but what about GK's CP? Well, if he structures resolution:

4-->5-->6-->1-->2-->3

Then he should get the CP back. When it comes time for sequencing to hit his Stratagem it can't because he doesn't have 2 dice. It'd be like trying to upgrade a to a Chapter Master after deployment: I can declare it all I want but it doesn't do anything and doesn't remove points because it's an illegal move.

People are splitting a lot of hairs over scenarios where the GK plays his first or the Tyranid plays one first, but that's irrelevant. We don't have subphases of alternating opportunity like this, unlike in MtG. Thus, regardless of what order the players ACTUALLY declared the cards in the real world, the GK player gets to determine who declared first for purposes of resolution due to sequencing. It's not about refunding CP, it's about never spending it in the first place.

Thus, the GK is forced to roll only 1 die, but he also keeps his CP

This is nonsense. There is no sequencing for spending cp and stratagems. Declaring your using it is the same as spening. The moment you declare its done. Nothing in the rules gives you permission to treat it any other way. You cant pick targets for, or even select a stratgem until you reach its trigger condition and declare it. The moment you do the cp is spent and you move on to resolution. If your opponent then also declares s/he also spends and its locked in.

You apparently missed the point because you just agreed with me for the most part.

Anyway, RAW, these are all things that happen when you use a Stratagem. They are, thus, simultaneous, as you and I both agree. Since they're simultaneous, active player chooses order of resolution.

That minutiae aside, you should note that the critical part of what I wrote is not how the GK sequences the minutiae (declare, spend, resolve) but the more macro element (who declares first; Tyranid or GK). There's no provision in RAW for playing 'in response' or 'like interrupts' for MtG. The GK can thus always elect to have the two simultaneous Stratagems resolve Tyranid first, thus making his own attempt at a declaration illegal and not spending the CP.

Audustum wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:


This is nonsense. There is no sequencing for spending cp and stratagems. Declaring your using it is the same as spening. The moment you declare its done. Nothing in the rules gives you permission to treat it any other way. You cant pick targets for, or even select a stratgem until you reach its trigger condition and declare it. The moment you do the cp is spent and you move on to resolution. If your opponent then also declares s/he also spends and its locked in.

You apparently missed the point because you just agreed with me for the most part.

Anyway, RAW, these are all things that happen when you use a Stratagem. They are, thus, simultaneous, as you and I both agree. Since they're simultaneous, active player chooses order of resolution.

That minutiae aside, you should note that the critical part of what I wrote is not how the GK sequences the minutiae (declare, spend, resolve) but the more macro element (who declares first; Tyranid or GK). There's no provision in RAW for playing 'in response' or 'like interrupts' for MtG. The GK can thus always elect to have the two simultaneous Stratagems resolve Tyranid first, thus making his own attempt at a declaration illegal and not spending the CP.

Apparently you missed my point.

The only thing that is sequenced is whether the GK players stratagem gets resolved first or the Nids. All the stuff you posted about points, resolution and declare. That doesn't exist. At all. The moment the player declares the points are already spent and the action is going to be resolved. No take-backsies. If the nid players stratagem is chosen to resolve first, it doesn't make the GK players stratagem illegal and thus not playable thus saving him the point/s. The sequencing rules don't allow for that. Both stratagems are taking place SIMULTANEOUSLY in game time. The one is incapable of canceling out the other by making it illegal. Again, the points have already been spent, the action is already taking place. It is possible for the one to make it so the other takes place to no effect. THAT can happen. And in this case that is exactly what happens. The GK players stratagem ends up having no effect. But it still happens.

Again, the sequencing rules allow you to choose the order in which effects are RESOLVED. They already were declared, their costs have already been paid, it's only the resolution that is sequenced.

Initially I was convinced that the deepest shadow won out on RAW. However I remembered that there are things in this game that you are allowed to do "instead of" things that you aren't allowed to do. Ie: you can trigger smoke launchers instead of shooting even if you fell back and couldn't shoot that phase.

"Your opponent can only roll a single dice for the Psychic test."
vs
"Roll three dice rather than two and pick the two highest"

Just like smoke launchers that can trigger even when you can't shoot, can you chose to roll 3 dice even when you denied from rolling 2?

JakeSiren wrote:
Initially I was convinced that the deepest shadow won out on RAW. However I remembered that there are things in this game that you are allowed to do "instead of" things that you aren't allowed to do. Ie: you can trigger smoke launchers instead of shooting even if you fell back and couldn't shoot that phase.

"Your opponent can only roll a single dice for the Psychic test."
vs
"Roll three dice rather than two and pick the two highest"

Just like smoke launchers that can trigger even when you can't shoot, can you chose to roll 3 dice even when you denied from rolling 2?

No. currently the GK strat fissles out because of the wording. Since you only have 1 dice to cast with, you can no longer roll "3 instead of 2".

I personally believe this is a bit too harsh, but it is the RAW.

My suggestion was to change it so that the GK strat just adds one dice and drop the lowest, meaning you would still get some use out of it even if hit with the tyranid strat.

JakeSiren wrote:
Initially I was convinced that the deepest shadow won out on RAW. However I remembered that there are things in this game that you are allowed to do "instead of" things that you aren't allowed to do. Ie: you can trigger smoke launchers instead of shooting even if you fell back and couldn't shoot that phase.

"Your opponent can only roll a single dice for the Psychic test."
vs
"Roll three dice rather than two and pick the two highest"

Just like smoke launchers that can trigger even when you can't shoot, can you chose to roll 3 dice even when you denied from rolling 2?

If it had said "your opponent can only roll a single dice instead of two" then he would have been able to roll three since that would have bypassed rolling 2. However, this isn't a case where they say 'instead of two'; with them saying that you can only roll a single dice, you are stuck with getting to roll only one dice.