We've been misreading the rules: Revisit the Maleceptor

[niloc]

The Maleceptor has brought to light a serious issue with the way we interpret focused witchfire, we don't roll to hit.

Refer to rulebook pages 24-26 for "Manifesting physic powers"

We first take the psychic test with (x) psychic dice.

Attempt to deny with (x) psychic dice.

Resolve the Psychic power.

"Assuming the Psychic test was passed and the enemy did not negate it with a successful deny the witch test, the power has been successfully manifested. Resolve its affects according to the instructions in its entry."

The line that is causing us trouble, is the line on page 27, under focused witch fire that reads "...They follow all the normal rules for witchfire, ..." which directs us to the real problem: the description for witchfire. the first paragraph in the description for witchfire, describes how witchfire powers, that have a shooting profile, are resolved. witchfire powers that don't have a shooting profile, break every rule in that paragraph.  its last line that states "Saves can be taken against wounds from witchfire in the same way as for any other shooting attack, and hits are allocated to the closest target models to the psyker." Every single focused witchfire description explicitly states that the target model either Suffers a hit or suffers a wound  directly and wether or not you can take armor or cover saves against it, seeming to supersede the general rules previously stated.

the description for witchfire, is confusing in that, in its introductory sentences it leaves ambiguity that some powers will NOT have shooting profiles, then seems to lay down blanket rules without describing what to do with those that don't have shooting profiles. this is because, under resolving the power on page 26, it tells you to use what the powers entry says to do. yes this does mean that psychic shriek does NOT roll to hit. (yes, its probably OP)

in light of that, the 2 warp charge cost for psychic overload, and the points cost for the maleceptor make a lot more sense.

Admittedly this is a bit obtuse, but I think a careful reading will clarify, that the problem text is in fact only applicable to powers with a shooting profile. But as evidenced by all this debate its clearly an issue crying out for a FAQ. 

[gigasnail]

i think you're really reaching on this one. witchfires tell us you have to roll to hit like a shooting attack. a focused witchfire just lets you target a particular model if you get enough successes. the wonky profile i can grant is wonky, but there are plenty of things you shoot with that don't have a proper profile.

[niloc]

got an example of one?

the wording is wormy and unclear. your gonna need to actually garb your physical copy of the rules.... that's what I did. this is a big issue, you need read it like a lawyer, because it dosent feel like a reach here, it really does read like the "resolving the power" step for a profiled and non profiled power apply differently. This is a good thing for us, and everyone else for that matter. especially the maleceptor.

[seethe]

Nah man p27 "...a witchfire power must roll To Hit.." and then under "Focussed Witchfire...they follow all the normal rules for witchfire..."

you still gotta put up with BS3, and if you manifest with more than 2 dice then you can choose the target in the unit you want to hit.

[niloc]

I know about that line, its the description of witchfire, that says, some powers may have shooting profiles. read the first bit, it leaves room for other powers that do not have profiles, then goes on to tell you how to resolve ones that do use profiles. it assumes, because of the earlier rule, under "resolving a power" which tells you to directly follow instructions under the power, which uses the text "suffers a wound" which is the wording used to skip the rolling to hit and to wound steps in every other case.

get your rulebook out and follow my case. I promise that the issue is the rule implies that all witchfires shoot like they have a profile, and they do not. look at all the focused witchfires in the main rulebook, (or any other book) its clear that "resolving a power" is the rule that actualy applies here.

I cast a power

I "resolve" it

a. it has a profile, roll to hit, wound, save, remove casualties.

b. it does not have a profile, follow its instructions.

it seems that the steps interfere here.

1. cast focused witchfire power (x)

2. resolve the power. -which uses all the rules for witchfire, which then describes how to use shooting profile powers.-

    2a. its not a shooting profile power so no need to resolve it like one,

    2b. resolve the power with the rules listed in its entry. which gives you rules for "wounds suffered" or  in some cases "Hits suffered" the rules for focused witch fire conflict with the rules for witchfire in wound allocation, and in saves.

its clear that the whole paragraph is releveant, not just the one liner.

please reread the section while thinking about this, the wording is wormy to say the least.

[gigasnail]

I did read my rulebook before I replied, and I'm pretty sure you're way out there on this one. Checked the FAQ as well just to be sure there wasn't something obvious I was overlooking.

Maybe I'm wrong and they meant for this to automatically hit, but they didn't bother to actually put that in the rules.

[WestRider]

That whole first paragraph applies to all Witchfires, unless specifically exempted. Yes, it says that "many" have a weapon profile, but then there's a full stop, and nothing to indicate that the rest of the paragraph only applies to the ones with weapon profiles. The only Witchfires that don't roll to hit are Beams, Novas, and those with Blasts or Templates, all of which are specifically exempted. Focused Witchfires are not specifically exempted from rolling to hit, so they still have to. Whether or not they have a weapon profile is irrelevant, that only affects how you determine whether or not it Wounded and what Saves are or are not allowed.

[swarm492]

[seethe]

Nov 9, 2014 1:42:43 GMT swarm492 said:

[niloc]

the weapon profile determines the rules used to "resolve the power"

under the "casting Psychic Powers" section it is clear that the "resolving a power" rule, is used when doing its namesake. the "Resolving a power" rule is how a power is manifest. not the Witchfire rule, which points to the rules for the subsection. the rules for the focused witchfire point back to witchfire, which state that some but not all (paraphrasing) powers have profiles, and "Similarly, ..." which is the operative word, that makes everything unclear, that is referring to the previous sentence. so although it is a full stop, they made unclear semantic choices, in attempt to carry their meaning into the next sentence, which is a summation of the shooting rules. (I believe a misguided attempt to remove confusion...)

my reading of this IS plausible. I've gone over it repeatedly. but it is wormy, and badly needs FAQ.

I urge you to look at all the focused witchfires in the book. which one is OP if it does not roll to hit?

Psychic Shriek, the power that caused the controversy isn't even a focused witchfire. its just witchfire. but its the only witchfire without a shooting profile.

its clear to me that this is not a case of RAW  conflicting with RAI

this seems to be a case where the wording is correct, but confusing to an insane degree, and needs to be addressed by GW.... as in, I'm going to e-mail them.

[Davor]

Well I guess Focused Witchfire= Witchfire just like how Gargantuan Creatures=Monstrous Creatures. So we roll for the Maleceptors power and our GC can be dropped.

[cyaneye]

This is starting to remind me of the Mawloc rules conundrum where it wasn't clear how to resolve it, how it used a blast but wasnt a shooting attack.

Is there any example of a weapon used in the shooting phase that doesn't have the standard weapon profile?

[seethe]

Nov 9, 2014 1:56:03 GMT Davor said:

Well I guess Focused Witchfire= Witchfire just like how Gargantuan Creatures=Monstrous Creatures. So we roll for the Maleceptors power and our GC can be dropped.

ill take that tradeoff. IAv4 is in the mail, I should have snuck a hierodule or something in, but they move 12" anyways...and shoot a million str10...yeah nm.

Fix Maleceptor

[niloc]

Nov 9, 2014 1:58:36 GMT cyaneye said:

This is starting to remind me of the Mawloc rules conundrum where it wasn't clear how to resolve it, how it used a blast but wasnt a shooting attack.

Is there any example of a weapon used in the shooting phase that doesn't have the standard weapon profile?

as far as I know, there is no shooting attack without a profile.

if you accept that the wording for witchfire powers is unclear, and read the rest of the chapter.... and every single psychic power in every single book... it all comes together. then when you reread the paragraph understanding that it is unclear, all the context points to the fact that they are only talking about how to resolve powers with profiles. every other power  tells you exactly how the powers are solved except powers with profiles. so to be clear, they had to tell you how to solve powers with profiles.... but they put the sentence in the wrong place, breaking the context, and making things unclear.

if you follow the rule "Resolve the Psychic power."

"Assuming the Psychic test was passed and the enemy did not negate it with a successful deny the witch test, the power has been successfully manifested. Resolve its affects according to the instructions in its entry."

the ones with profiles are the only ones we don't have explicit instructions on how to solve them. its why beam and nova, and blast need a distinction, they are the only ones WITH profiles that don't roll to hit. but ALL of those WITHOUT profiles don't roll to hit unless the power specificly states that they do.

however, the rule that precedes witchfire, is "resolving a power" hence, it takes precedence, and it says to do what the power says. explaining why all focused witchfire powers have conditional success rolls, and save conditions built into their effect, overriding the later sentences of the same witchfire paragraph detailing how saves are applied and wounds are allocated.  

as for mc=gc, yes...but not hierophant or harridin.  Heirodule only...model must be wholly inside 6" of drop pod.

[hiveminded]

I think what we can all agree on is that, with respect to whether a to-hit roll is required, psychic overload should be treated the same way as psychic shriek.

The question on whether psychic shriek requires a to-hit roll is one that has been asked many times before and is unclear from the rules. About half the people will argue it needs a to-hit roll because it's a witchfire and the the rules say witchfire powers must roll to hit. The other half will argue that the first argument is moot because the power skips the to-hit roll since the power's wounds aren't generated from hits being converted into wounds (in other words, the to-hit roll is irrelevant and can be skipped). Bottom line is that both arguments have merit and the rule needs an FAQ,

Until one is issued (which will be some time between next week and never), you need to check with your opponent or TO prior to the game to agree on a house ruling. Thanks to the OP for raising this question. I don't know why I hadn't made the connection sooner, but in our local games we don't require to-hit rolls with psychic shriek.

I'm starting to appreciate the Maleceptor more and more as the days go by =).