6th edition question

[Hear da Lamentation]

Fairly basic question, but Im not sure of answer.

 

So ... with the new 6+ save on psychic powers, does the WTT give you and additional +5 save, or does it replace the 6+.

[Iacton Qruze]

It's in addition to.

[Grey Mage]

So you could 4+ runic staff, 5+ WTT, 5+ deny the witch *rune priest in the unit* and then 5++ via runic armor if it was AP 2 and a psychic shooting attack.

 

Isnt that fun?

[Lord Ragnarok]

So you could 4+ runic staff, 5+ WTT, 5+ deny the witch *rune priest in the unit* and then 5++ via runic armor if it was AP 2 and a psychic shooting attack.

 

Isnt that fun?

 

Gawd, we are getting nerfed so hard in the next dex :P

[Brom MKIV]

Would you mind elaborating/give evidence on why you would get all those saves? Seems abusive but im new to wolves and I cant find anything for or against multiple saves like that.

 

Also since its relatively on topic (of multiple saves) and probably not worth a whole new thread, does eternal warrior allow lone wolves to use FNP against s8/ID causing wounds now?

[Khine]

Would you mind elaborating/give evidence on why you would get all those saves? Seems abusive but im new to wolves and I cant find anything for or against multiple saves like that.

 

Also since its relatively on topic (of multiple saves) and probably not worth a whole new thread, does eternal warrior allow lone wolves to use FNP against s8/ID causing wounds now?

 

Rune weapons ( 4+/ Njal's 3+ ) are done right after a psychic test is performed, regardless of target.

 

Deny the witch ( 6+ / 5+ or 4+ ) is done if a unit is targeted by an enemy psychic power.

 

@ OT aswell: Wolf tooth necklace (5+) is done when the targeted unit is affected by the enemy psychic power.

 

5++ against psychic wounds from the Runic armour is very situational and only really comes into play if the model doesn't have it's own invulnerable save. Though, i wonder if it triggers a save on perils.

 

As to your question on FNP for S8/ID wounds, no he wouldn't.

[Grey Mage]

Khine expanded the set- and thank you for correcting the order they go in, quite right- but basicly it boils down to the fact that only one of those is a "save". The others are dice rolls to negate the power, and operate at different times in different ways. Kind of like how FNP saves a models wound, but isnt a save.

 

So you could 4+ runic staff, 5+ WTT, 5+ deny the witch *rune priest in the unit* and then 5++ via runic armor if it was AP 2 and a psychic shooting attack.

 

Isnt that fun?

 

Gawd, we are getting nerfed so hard in the next dex ^_^

 

Maybe... or maybe theyll look at GKs and be like "whatever, just remake it with a couple new fiddly bits" like they did last time. We have what, another 8 years to wait and find out?

[dswanick]

5++ against psychic wounds from the Runic armour is very situational and only really comes into play if the model doesn't have it's own invulnerable save. Though, i wonder if it triggers a save on perils.

In 5th Ed it was argueable that the RA 5++ could be taken against PotW(hinging on a local groups definition PotW as a 'Wound from a Psychic Attack'), but 6th Ed threw out the ability to use Invuls against it. So, no longer.

[Khine]

So you could 4+ runic staff, 5+ WTT, 5+ deny the witch *rune priest in the unit* and then 5++ via runic armor if it was AP 2 and a psychic shooting attack.

 

Isnt that fun?

 

Gawd, we are getting nerfed so hard in the next dex ^_^

 

Maybe... or maybe theyll look at GKs and be like "whatever, just remake it with a couple new fiddly bits" like they did last time. We have what, another 8 years to wait and find out?

 

exactly, it's all about power creep. At some point .. a hundred years down the line, all marine codices will be movie marines.

[Grey Mage]

Oh, and the reason that FNP wont work, even with Eternal Warrior is that a model with EW is 'immune to the effects of instant death' but the attack still 'inflicts instant death' so FNP shorts out.

[Brom MKIV]

Thanks for the explanations, seems SW are now firmly established as the premier anti psykers. Too bad about fnp but at least mephiston and such can't benefit either. Man I wish my rulebook would show up.

[WG Vrox]

Maybe... or maybe theyll look at GKs and be like "whatever, just remake it with a couple new fiddly bits" like they did last time. We have what, another 8 years to wait and find out?

 

Space Wolves have become much more popular since our new codex, I don't think we will have to wait 8 years again to see a new one, maybe 3. Then again this is Game Workshop we are talking about so all logic goes out the window.

[Grey Mage]

Maybe... or maybe theyll look at GKs and be like "whatever, just remake it with a couple new fiddly bits" like they did last time. We have what, another 8 years to wait and find out?

 

Space Wolves have become much more popular since our new codex, I don't think we will have to wait 8 years again to see a new one, maybe 3. Then again this is Game Workshop we are talking about so all logic goes out the window.

I dunno, I kinda liked the mini-updates of being an add-on codex, and the long winters we had together.

[Max_Dammit]

God I hope not, I hope this dex will get to see the 2 digits, and all the real wolves are still here, not complaining about the age of the dex :P

 

I really hope we get to keep this dex for a long time though

[Grimtooth]

New FAQ just spit on RAW and you only get one chance at stopping psychic powers. Rune priests have absolutely no reason to ever take a WTT now.

[Brom MKIV]

Where did you find the new faqs Ramses? US still shows the old ones.

[Hannibal.Lictor]

New ones are up in the good ole US now.

[Loki-LaughingDeath]

To point out one small flaw in his initial question.... What exactly is a wolf TOOTH talisman? Does this mean it's an all inclusive hits anything with a WS on a 3 and provides the psychic defense?

[Valerian]

Although we answered truly, indeed today's new FAQ just completely changed it. Here is the text for your convenience:

 

"Q: Can I attempt to use a Rune Priest’s runic weapon, a Wolf Tail

Talisman and make a Deny the Witch roll to nullify an enemy psychic

power?

A: No. You can only make a single attempt to prevent an

enemy psychic power, so choose your method carefully."

 

Valerian

[Nrthstar]

Aw hell, time to save some points at least...

[Grimtooth]

I have been thinking about this since I posted up the change and it only seems to piss me off the more I think about it.

 

The damn RAW, the exact reading of each of those things supports multiple use. This isn't like our rune weapons where theyput in an errata, this is just GW blatantly disregarding the wording for the WTT, the runic weapon, and Deny the Witch.

[Wulfebane]

I have been thinking about this since I posted up the change and it only seems to piss me off the more I think about it.

 

The damn RAW, the exact reading of each of those things supports multiple use. This isn't like our rune weapons where theyput in an errata, this is just GW blatantly disregarding the wording for the WTT, the runic weapon, and Deny the Witch.

 

Join us...

 

Abandon your signature's crusade and support the Lords of GW, and all their grammatically inaccurate splendor.

[dswanick]

I have been thinking about this since I posted up the change and it only seems to piss me off the more I think about it.

 

The damn RAW, the exact reading of each of those things supports multiple use. This isn't like our rune weapons where theyput in an errata, this is just GW blatantly disregarding the wording for the WTT, the runic weapon, and Deny the Witch.

I don't think it's something to get that worked up about.

- Our Psykers are the same basic cost as any other SM Psyker. Yet they get to negate any enemy Psychic power, not just the ones directed at a friendly unit. They negate the power on a 4+, even if they aren't a higher level than the caster. And they do so to 24", instead of 12".

- Our WTT is now a 5pt "Psyker-in-a-can". Any IC can now be upgraded to a "Psyker" for the purposes of giving their attached unit a 5+ DTW.

- Yes, the WTT option on a Rune Priest is now redundant-dundant. But it's not quite so over the top now.

I'll miss the multiple attempts to negate. But I don't think this alteration is anything other than "ignore the RAW, and play it as it should be so both players have fun".

 

I'm more annoyed that Njal still only gets two BRB powers for his six Codex powers and is only PML2.

[Grimtooth]

I have been thinking about this since I posted up the change and it only seems to piss me off the more I think about it.

 

The damn RAW, the exact reading of each of those things supports multiple use. This isn't like our rune weapons where theyput in an errata, this is just GW blatantly disregarding the wording for the WTT, the runic weapon, and Deny the Witch.

I don't think it's something to get that worked up about.

- Our Psykers are the same basic cost as any other SM Psyker. Yet they get to negate any enemy Psychic power, not just the ones directed at a friendly unit. They negate the power on a 4+, even if they aren't a higher level than the caster. And they do so to 24", instead of 12".

- Our WTT is now a 5pt "Psyker-in-a-can". Any IC can now be upgraded to a "Psyker" for the purposes of giving their attached unit a 5+ DTW.

- Yes, the WTT option on a Rune Priest is now redundant-dundant. But it's not quite so over the top now.

I'll miss the multiple attempts to negate. But I don't think this alteration is anything other than "ignore the RAW, and play it as it should be so both players have fun".

 

I'm more annoyed that Njal still only gets two BRB powers for his six Codex powers and is only PML2.

 

I am more pissed that in the wording of the FAQ.

 

They have made the WTT absolutely redundant not only on a rune priest, but on any IC with a WTT within that 24" bubble of the rune priest.

[Wulfebane]

I am more pissed that in the wording of the FAQ.

 

They have made the WTT absolutely redundant not only on a rune priest, but on any IC with a WTT within that 24" bubble of the rune priest.

 

I know loads of SW players that don't use RPs, so it'll still have its uses.