Witchfire vs Beam

[Jabberwocky]

I've seen this argued both ways for assail and I can completely understand both sides of the argument.

Do you roll to hit the target point, or not?

I've been over and over it and just want to make some points why I now believe you don't.

Firstly, the precedent of advanced rules superceding basic rules. The rules for witchfire are basic. The rules for beam are advanced. Beam makes no mention of rolling to hit, only targetting a point then hitting models automatically. Surely it would say 'if the point is hit, all models are hit automatically' ?

Secondly, read maelstrom and nova. No one has suggested they roll to hit. Lets look at their wording and substitute in the rules for beam.

'automatically targets and hits all units'

'manually picks a target and hits all models'

See what I mean?

Thirdly if assail needed to roll to hit, then it could be snapfired in overwatch and at flyers, which I doubt was the intention. I also doubt it would come with the penalty of hitting your own models, if it were to need to hit as well. Otherwise a witchfire template, or even normal assault x would be vastly superior in most cases.

Obviously this needs FAQing but I just wanted to put my opinion out there to be blasted to pieces



I think a big part of the argument for rolling to hit is from Jaws. Jaws wasn't a beam though, it was a witchfire, as explained in the witchfire section on psychic shooting attacks.

[turndamage]

hmmm....sounds interesting Jabber. Seems like a logical argument.

[thereader]

The rules for a beam are in the Psyker section of the BRB, pg 69, left-hand column, bottom half. It states to draw a beam and all units along it are hit automatically. It says nothing about rolling to hit. Also keep in mind, the strength of a beam type power drops by one after every hit along the line, so after 3 hits, Assails Strength will be iffy unless your killing grots or guardsmen.

[coredump]

Not quite so simple.

Focused Witchfire also never mentions rolling to hit... but it pretty obviously does.
Also, it says that all witchfire powers need to roll to hit, unless blasts or templates.....
But does Nova? Maelstrom?

Beam 'targets' a point, and affects all models between psyker and that point. Do you need to 'hit' that target point?

[thereader]

It says to pick a point, but mentions only automatic hits after that. So unless they FaQ it, I'm going to say, no, you don't roll to hit the line.

Also, focussed witchfire says to follow all the standard rules of witchfire, hence a roll to hit, while there is no such mention in beam.

[Jabberwocky]

As thereader says, focused witchfire begins by saying it follows normal witchfire rules with a slight twist. None of the other types make this point.

Maelstrom and Nova both talk about targets, the same as beam. They both say they hit automatically.

I agree it's not simple, it took me a while to really feel confident in my conclusion. I was even considering swapping to Telepathy spam to avoid the potential arguments mid game! If only terrify worked on 'And they shall know no fear'....

[infornography]

As I said before, and nothing here has made me change my mind, RAW you have to roll to hit the point, but it really feels like RAI is that you don't. A strict interpretation of the rules has you rolling to hit that point. If you are playing against a rules lawyer you will not win this argument. There is no explicit exception, inferences won't matter as they are open to interpretation and opinion. The lack of an explicit exception makes it pretty clear.

If you were playing me, I'd say you don't have to roll to hit it. If you were playing with my usual opponent he would say you would. This is going to come down to an FAQ I'm afraid.

[greatescape13]

Okay, so I found one rule that may have some impact on this debate:

Pg. 13: "When rolling to hit there is no such thing as automatic hit and a roll of 1 always misses"

Thus, anything that automatically hits does not count as "rolling to hit". Thus, by RAW, it seems that Snap Shots (also page 13) cannot be taken by things that automatically hit--as they wouldn't be using Ballistic Skill due to being automatic hits. And thus fall under the cannot be snap-shotted umbrella along with the example of the Monolith's portal of exile that the rules cite.

So Beam doesn't have to roll to hit. But it cannot hit Flyers.

Imprecise, yes. But the phrasing of "there is no such thing as automatic hits when rolling to hit" seems to solve the conundrum. People who really want Beam to hit Flyers will probably protest, but I think it is solvable without a FAQ (tho I hope it is clarified in a FAQ anyhow).

Cheers.

[insanious]

Jul 14, 2012 10:28:57 GMT greatescape13 said:

Okay, so I found one rule that may have some impact on this debate:

Pg. 13: "When rolling to hit there is no such thing as automatic hit and a roll of 1 always misses"

Thus, anything that automatically hits does not count as "rolling to hit". Thus, by RAW, it seems that Snap Shots (also page 13) cannot be taken by things that automatically hit--as they wouldn't be using Ballistic Skill due to being automatic hits. And thus fall under the cannot be snap-shotted umbrella along with the example of the Monolith's portal of exile that the rules cite.

So Beam doesn't have to roll to hit. But it cannot hit Flyers.

Imprecise, yes. But the phrasing of "there is no such thing as automatic hits when rolling to hit" seems to solve the conundrum. People who really want Beam to hit Flyers will probably protest, but I think it is solvable without a FAQ (tho I hope it is clarified in a FAQ anyhow).

Cheers.

But the beam isn't being snap shotted AT the flyer, the beam is being shot AT a point. Then the rules say that anything under the beam is automatically hit.

So you shoot at a point, the line crosses say a Vendetta, the vendetta is automatically hit due to being under the line. The beam was never shot AT the vendetta, but THROUGH the vendetta and AT a point on the board.

[Tempests Wrath]

Id give you that someone could force you to roll a hit with a beam without a fight if the paragraph at the very bottom of witchfire talking about subtypes didnt exist.

Where it says to use the rules for the subtype if it has one.

Focused witchfire specifically says to use the normal rules of witchfire (much to my annoyance), which means rolling to hit.

Beam, Maelstrom and Nova do not specify that. They fall under the "If it has one of the following subtypes..." part. Not the "if it does not list a subtype, or.. etc"

Id rather not just quote the book straight up. So look it up if you want.

But it flat out tells us what rules to use and when to use them right there. It tells us to use the subtypes rules if its a subtype (Most of these auto hit, and dont require a roll). and it tells us to use standard witchfire (the requiring a roll to hit) if its just psychic shooting attack or non typed power.

EDIT::

Jul 14, 2012 12:32:53 GMT insanious said:

But the beam isn't being snap shotted AT the flyer, the beam is being shot AT a point. Then the rules say that anything under the beam is automatically hit.

So you shoot at a point, the line crosses say a Vendetta, the vendetta is automatically hit due to being under the line. The beam was never shot AT the vendetta, but THROUGH the vendetta and AT a point on the board.

It wasnt shot at the vendetta, but the flyer rules state that any shots resolved at a zooming flyer can only be resolved as a snap shot. Not any ones that target the flier (as you wouldn't be targeting the flyer). But because it says resolved against not targeted at I doubt the arguments for "it work on a vehicle because im not targeting it, I am passing through it" will pass simply because of that word.


For the to hit..
Me: "show me where it says I have to roll to hit."
Other Dude: "Right here under standard witchfire."
Me: "Except that the subtype overrides that restriction as stated in the last section of witchfire and in the first paragraph of beam, in a case where a more specific rule over-rides a general one ala 'basic vs advanced'."

[greatescape13]

Jul 15, 2012 3:00:21 GMT Tempests Wrath said:

For the to hit..
Me: "show me where it says I have to roll to hit.";
Other Dude: "Right here under standard witchfire.";
Me: "Except that the subtype overrides that restriction as stated in the last section of witchfire and in the first paragraph of beam, in a case where a more specific rule over-rides a general one ala 'basic vs advanced'.";

I think that's only part of the problem, Tempest. But I agree on that point entirely--the Beam rules supersede the normal Witchfire rules, and that should be the starting consensus on arguments about what Beams can hit and cannot hit.

Cheers.

[coredump]

Except there is no evidence that it overrides anything except what it explicitly overrides. And it does not explicitly state it does not need to roll to hit.

For example, Witchfire is used instead of shooting... does a beam still follow that? Why follow that rule and not need the rest?

[angeleania]

The answer is actualy there in the book, i did the same, skim read and you miss the last paragraph about witchfire. Read it its just above the start of the Beam sub rules.

It says that if the power does not mention any sub type then treat as a witch-fire using the rules above. however if the power mentions a sub type (nova, beam) then use those spacific rules instead.

OK, that sorted then in the entry for beam it says center from the model draw a line 18" hitting every model friend or foe, until the str drops to 0. It even hits ruins and buildings, these also drop the str. No roll to hit. You donr roll to hit yourself as the start point of the beam.

Focused however says Use all the normal rules for witch-fire (meaning we roll to hit) and also follow the following special rules, (role the perils test if 5 or less Hit the object of our displeasure, if higher hit a random).

Sadly there is no way to ignore one part of the rules. I was just as guilty, you have to read the full entry, not stopping when you think you have the bit you want.

Slightly off track its the same as one of my friends, tried to argue that a vector strike was a Close combat attack, but as the rule states you cant assault a flier, then you cant vector a flier. Nice try its not going to wash , as it does say we hit the flyer on the side armour. Read it all.

[coredump]

Yes, we know about the last paragraph, yes we read it too.
We all agree that Beam uses its own rules when they differ from the rest of the Witchfire rules.

The problem is knowing when, exactly, they differ.

Beam says to target a point... do you have to roll to hit when you target that point? It just isn't clear...

[angeleania]

why would you roll to hit your self? Thats the start point of the beam. Why the confusion? For me all of the entries are pretty clear cut. Its says you need to roll to hit, you roll, if you follow the rules that say you need to hit, you roll. If it does not say then you dont. Whats the problem? I am sorry but it sounds some times that people try to create confusion when there is no need.