Talon Kaine Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 Greetings, Please note, I'm not trying to fudge rules here, just want rule clarification. The 5th Edition FAQ says.. Q: What psychic powers count as psychic shooting attacks? (p50) A: Any psychic power with a profile like that of a ranged weapon (i.e. has a range, strength and AP value) and any psychic power that specifically states that it is a psychic shooting attack. So this means that powers such as Lash of Submission is not a Psychic Shooting Attack. It’s just a psychic power that is used instead of shooting...right? Since Lash states a psyker may use this power in the Shooting Phase, instead of using another ranged weapon. It means that if he uses this power then he must give up the opportunity to fire one of his weapons. I have a few questions about this... 1: Does this mean Lash can be used before resolving shots (such as if a Sorcerer is attached to a squad, you can use Lash to move the enemy, and then have the attached unit fire on them). 2: Could the Psyker now assault a different unit then he targeted Lash with? 3: Also can the Psyker's attached unit fire on a different target then he used Lash on? 4: Can this ability now be used while the Psyker is locked in combat? Or does it specifically have to state "Can be used while in combat"? 5: (This one is unlikely.) If a model is in a vehicle does the vehicle have to have fire points for the transported model to have line of sight to a target? Or can you measure from the hull, if it's not a shooting attack?. Example: Can Lash be used from within a Land Raider? Please provide some reference of where the rulebook would conflict with these questions... Thank you to everyone to replies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hiro_Protagonist Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 As far as I know, with the new FAQ up the answers to your questions are as follows: 1. Yes. Lash can now be used to bring a unit into firing range before the squad the Sorcerer is in shoots. 2. Yes. Unless the Sorcerer is in a squad who fired upon the Lashed squad. 3. Yes. Less sure of this one but a it is no longer a shooting attack it probably avoids the targeting restrictions of shooting. 4. No. Lash still requires line of sight, as it is a requirement of using the power (Chaos Codex pg 88). Models in combat aren't considered to have line to anything as combat is considered to be a "whirling melee". For the same reason I'm pretty sure it can't be used "into" a combat. 5. As it requires line of sight the model using the power must have a usable fire point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Excessus Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 I don't know how the new FAQ changed lash much... 1: All models in a squad shoot at the same time. The range of lash is measured at the same time as the other ranges, thus before it has resolved. 2: No, lash is a shooting power, a unit/model can only assault a unit/model it shot at in the shooting phase. 3: No, if a sorcerer is attached to a unit, they all have to shoot at the same target. 4: No, it is a shooting power and is used instead of firing another weapon. You cannot fire a weapon in cc and so cannot use lash. 5: Lash requires line of sight to the target. References are the parts in the BRB about the shooting phase and the psykers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talon Kaine Posted June 26, 2011 Author Share Posted June 26, 2011 Excessus, it seems to me your answering all those questions as if Lash is a Psychic Shooting attack, which it is not. Therefore it has to be treated as a regular non-shooting psychic power in my opinion, unless you know something I don't. Still open for discussion, as I would like to hear more peoples thoughts on this. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Excessus Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 It's not a shooting psychic power, and thus do not have to roll to hit. But "instead of using another ranged weapon" indicates that he(or she, or both, since it's slaanesh after all...) is still limited to what he would have been able to do with an ordinary weapon... He can only use the power instead of shooting his pistol. When can he shoot his pistol? When the rest of the squad is firing. He can only use the power instead of shooting his pistol. What could he have targeted with his pistol? The same target as the rest of the squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hiro_Protagonist Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 The can of worms that GW opened up here is in the wording. As per their FAQ to be a Psychic Shooting Attack the power must either have a profile like a gun (Range, Strength, AP, Type/Rules) or specifically state that it is a Psychic Shooting Attack. Lash, Nurgle's Rot and even Wind of Chaos do not have these distinctions. They state that they are used instead of firing another weapon. Is it grey and ambiguous? Kind of. Personally I always treated them as shooting attacks. Now, according to GW's FAQ, they aren't. It would have been better if they had of defined a Psychic Shooting Attack as "any power that targets an enemy model/unit in the shooting phase" but that's not what they went with now is it? It's not like it's going to make Chaos OMG unstoppable anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techmarine Azuris Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 Flamer Template for WOC wont scatter tho? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Excessus Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 flamer templates don't scatter...unless specifically said that they do... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the jeske Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 It would have been better if they had of defined a Psychic Shooting Attack as "any power that targets an enemy model/unit in the shooting phase" but that's not what they went with now is it? it would mean that psychic powers that are plain debuffs like for example eldar doom power would have to roll to hit . Also as some auras target [nid ones for example] it would mean they would have to roll to hit too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hiro_Protagonist Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 It would have been better if they had of defined a Psychic Shooting Attack as "any power that targets an enemy model/unit in the shooting phase" but that's not what they went with now is it? it would mean that psychic powers that are plain debuffs like for example eldar doom power would have to roll to hit . Also as some auras target [nid ones for example] it would mean they would have to roll to hit too. Yes, but at least it wouldn't have been open for debate. As it is people are still unsure about things because not all codexes have the same wording. I'm not saying it would have been "fair", just "clearer". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the jeske Posted June 27, 2011 Share Posted June 27, 2011 and why should they have the same wording for a rule to work . Does the lash or any other psychic power chaos can use out of the Gav dex has psychic shooting attacks ? nope. so next step is check FAQ and FAQ says that in case when something like that happens you look for str/ap/number of shots. lash doesnt have it , rot doesnt have it , gift doesnt have it[but that doesnt matter much as it is impossible to use] ergo it aint a psychic shooting attacks. Did the BA or BT ss had the same rules like the SS from other meq dex? not before the FAQ. Is the sob rhino still different from all the other meq rhinos ? yes it is . Are chaos dozerblades impossible to use [unlike loyalist ones] ? yes they are. There is nothing unclear about the rules . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hiro_Protagonist Posted June 27, 2011 Share Posted June 27, 2011 I'm pretty sure we're on the same side here so maybe it's just my point that's unclear. All that I'm saying is that because our wording is different (cause our dex is older) it can cause confusion. People could argue that "instead of firing another weapon" implies that the power in question is therefore a weapon and should be held against the rules for shooting attacks. Perhaps I should have used "inconsistent" instead of "unclear" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristoff Posted June 27, 2011 Share Posted June 27, 2011 I'm pretty sure we're on the same side here so maybe it's just my point that's unclear. All that I'm saying is that because our wording is different (cause our dex is older) it can cause confusion. People could argue that "instead of firing another weapon" implies that the power in question is therefore a weapon and should be held against the rules for shooting attacks. Perhaps I should have used "inconsistent" instead of "unclear" Not going by RAW and RAFAQ. "nstead of firing another weapon" just means that instead of being able to use the Sorcerer power and his pistol/TL/Combi-Bolter, it's either or. Since it is not technically a shooting attack, the rules for shooting hold no sway. So using Lash, Nurgle's Rot, or Wind of Chaos on one target and the squad shooting at another, is technically legal and viable. The only "Psychic Shooting Attacks" in C:CSM are Doombolt and Bolt of Change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drudge Dreadnought Posted June 27, 2011 Share Posted June 27, 2011 Psychic shooting attack used to be loosely defined, so saying instead of using another ranged weapon was enough for us to assume that lash was a psa. But with the new definition, it certainly isn't because it does not specifically state that it does. Interpreting it being used instead of another ranged weapon is not specific. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Excessus Posted June 27, 2011 Share Posted June 27, 2011 Not going by RAW and RAFAQ. "nstead of firing another weapon" just means that instead of being able to use the Sorcerer power and his pistol/TL/Combi-Bolter, it's either or. Since it is not technically a shooting attack, the rules for shooting hold no sway. So using Lash, Nurgle's Rot, or Wind of Chaos on one target and the squad shooting at another, is technically legal and viable. The only "Psychic Shooting Attacks" in C:CSM are Doombolt and Bolt of Change. Yes, the only shooting attacks are just as you say the two bolts, which means that any other power doesn't need to roll to hit! But it doesn't change the fact that the sorcerer exchanges his boltpistol shot for the use of a psychic power. And since the only legal target his boltpistol can shoot at is the same target the rest of the squad is firing at, he must use lash on that target as well. Otherwise it wouldn't be legal to use his boltpistol on it, and thus he wouldn't be able to exchange it for the lash... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristoff Posted June 27, 2011 Share Posted June 27, 2011 Not going by RAW and RAFAQ. "nstead of firing another weapon" just means that instead of being able to use the Sorcerer power and his pistol/TL/Combi-Bolter, it's either or. Since it is not technically a shooting attack, the rules for shooting hold no sway. So using Lash, Nurgle's Rot, or Wind of Chaos on one target and the squad shooting at another, is technically legal and viable. The only "Psychic Shooting Attacks" in C:CSM are Doombolt and Bolt of Change. Yes, the only shooting attacks are just as you say the two bolts, which means that any other power doesn't need to roll to hit! But it doesn't change the fact that the sorcerer exchanges his boltpistol shot for the use of a psychic power. And since the only legal target his boltpistol can shoot at is the same target the rest of the squad is firing at, he must use lash on that target as well. Otherwise it wouldn't be legal to use his boltpistol on it, and thus he wouldn't be able to exchange it for the lash... That's looking at RAI, not RAW. Movement precludes the use of Heavy Weapons and long range Rapid-Fire use, but that doesn't mean you have to move towards a target to use RF or Assault weapons on them at close range. I agree in spirit, but I have to disagree with how the written word specifically puts it. All the rules say is that they are used in the Shooting Phase and preclude the use of any other firearm the Sorcerer in question may be carrying. Targeting is never mentioned. Of course, this was in an edition that allowed a unit to split their fire after taking a Leadership test, if I'm not mistaken, so that particular portion has not been included. Depending on the expected release of the next Chaos Marine codex, we may see a Chaos Marine FAQ that addresses this specifically, somewhat soon. Of course, it's just as likely they will completely ignore the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Excessus Posted June 27, 2011 Share Posted June 27, 2011 EXCHANGES is what I am basing my views on. Even if where he can shoot would be as you describe, you can't argue away from the when he can shoot. After all, he does exchange his shot with casting lash, and there is only one time during the shooting phase when he can shoot, and that is at the same time as his friends... ...and then I just argue that there is only one target he could have shot his pistol at, and since you exchange the shot, there is only one viable target for the lash as well... I do not consider this RAI, I consider it RAW since what is written in the codex is "exchange", and that is the thing I'm using in my argument... [Edit]: Btw, damn it took some time to find this topic again, lol! I'm not a regular poster in the forum and I can't really find my way around. Was a bit surprised since the topic was just gone, with no indication of where it went, most forum software have some sort of indication of it, hehe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chengar Qordath Posted June 27, 2011 Share Posted June 27, 2011 RAW, it's not a shooting attack. As indicated by things like running, not every action one takes in the shooting phase instead of shooting must be a shooting attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Excessus Posted June 27, 2011 Share Posted June 27, 2011 I know it's not a shooting attack, but you exchange a shooting attack for it. Thus there would be some restrictions on it. But you don't have to roll and hit, as you would have to with a shooting attack... [Edit]: To clarify my thinking: The shooting sequence: (since it's only within this sequence lash can be used) 1) Check LoS & pick a target. (have nothing to do with the actual weapons a model is carrying) 2) Check range. (this is the first place in the shooting sequence where the weapon's rules are actually used and thus the first place where it logically can be exchanged for lash) 3) Roll to hit. (lash hits automatically) 4-6) Roll to wound, save and remove casualties. (this is the only logical place to resolve the lash effect) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timmytool Posted June 27, 2011 Share Posted June 27, 2011 I know it's not a shooting attack, but you exchange a shooting attack for it. Thus there would be some restrictions on it. But you don't have to roll and hit, as you would have to with a shooting attack... in this instance it is like running - instead of firing/using another range weapon do this.... It replaces all rules for firing so all the firing rules are no longer relevant. The model still cant shoot as the time/concentration was used for the power, just like running. example if your told not to COOK a omelet instead make a sandwich do you still break the eggs because you were only told to replace the COOKING of the omelet... edit:added example Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Excessus Posted June 27, 2011 Share Posted June 27, 2011 Fair enough, I'll give in on the target part. Though I still maintain my stance that he lashes at the same time as his unit shoots, not before or after... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.