Morticon Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 Aanggrath (the gargantuanblood thirster) has a rule which reads: "An'ggrath passes any Deny the Witch test on a roll of 2+" I need to know if there's scope in that for a player to argue that this means all DtW rolls, or only vs. power's directed at him. I'm firmly in the camp of the latter example, but would like to be sure. Thanks. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/306607-aanggrath-and-deny-the-witch/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolemai Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 Well that sounds ominous. I imagine that this is the same argument as the Grey Knights' Aegis rule? As for me, I would say it's 2+ if directed at him but if it's directed anywhere else then it's 6+ (or whatever) as it's not "at him"? Aegis topic which is bizarrely unresolved. Merged double post, Dam13n. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/306607-aanggrath-and-deny-the-witch/#findComment-4018818 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dam13n Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 I would suggest that he only gets to deny the witch on a 2+ against psychic powers that target him, otherwise "he" isn't denying the witch (as he's not the target), however this is an RAI answer... The Aegis issue has been submitted to the GW FAQ team for consideration, I know that much. The wording of the section which details how psychic powers that don't target an enemy unit (blessings, conjurations) is poorly worded (as has been pointed out, by both sides of the argument, in the Aegis topic). As such it comes down to a RAI argument (RAW is actually unresolvable, for both sides). So, until GW fix the problem, it's one best resolved between the 2 (or more) players involved, or the TO if this were to come up in a tournament. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/306607-aanggrath-and-deny-the-witch/#findComment-4018959 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.