zoanthrope and death or glory

[Archangelion]

First of all, nice double post!

like other conversations, counts as does not always equals is.

Counting as a shooting attack when used is stated so that a psyker can't shoot lightning AND fire a weapon unless it is a monsterous creature.

Sure, 'counts as' doesn't always equil 'is', but by that same logic sometimes it does and that's the issue. What you have stated above is how you view what you feel the RAI are. That may very well be the intent, however, you do not know that the writer wasn't considering rules that trigger on an enemy model fireing a ranged weapon for example. Such a rule would still trigger from the PSA, despite you feeling that the sole purpose of said rule was simply to disalow the psyker from fireing more ranged weapons than it is allowed.

[Vipoid]

Counting as a shooting attack when used is stated so that a psyker can't shoot lightning AND fire a weapon unless it is a monsterous creature.

Please don't confuse your own opinion with fact.

Your own idea as to the reason why certain psychic powers are classified as shooting attacks shouldn't come into a rules discussion, unless you can actually back them up.

Saying that PSA basically only exist to make psychic powers worse is not a valid argument for a model not being able to make a PSA during 'death or glory', unless you can actually back it up with evidence.

[DoctorTom]

like other conversations, counts as does not always equals is.

Counting as a shooting attack when used is stated so that a psyker can't shoot lightning AND fire a weapon unless it is a monsterous creature.

while counts as doesn't always equal is, for the situations that define what it counts as, you do treat it as equaling in those situation. So, if using a PSA counts as firing a weapon, you get to use it when you are in a situation where you can fire a weapon.

EDIT: and, to address the earlier comments about whether the psychic test is needed, I would say that you do still need to take the psychic test. If he fails, he doesn't have the power to use to count as firing a weapon.

[red_drake]

Isnt there an FAQ that says for all intents and purposes, 'counts as' is the same as 'is'?

[orlando davion]

Where are the psychic shooting attacks listed, in wargear where weapons carried are, or in a "other" section... not there? gee can't use it.

If I was tanking shocking, I'd allow it in most games, but at a tourney I'd go raw and say no for the sake of winning. In a league? I'd let it be do a death or glory as well.

-Not because I think it's legal, but because it's fun-

I would urge you to think about "If I was tanking shocking, I'd allow it in most games, but at a tourney I'd go raw and say no for the sake of winning." Honest and I think you are not alone but really?

I can see a point of view based on rule as written; rule as intended or rule as played but to flip flop for a tourney?

[ThatGuy]

I guess you could always nullify it with a hood.lol

[Kevlar]

Are there really people out there who would try to argue RAW that a psychic shooting attack is not a shooting attack? Really?

I'd guess they would argue a chaos sorcerer would have to use his bolt pistol instead of his bolt of change?

[severed001]

I feel like how this would work is, you opt to use the PSA. If you pass the leadership test, then you auto-hit, and roll to pen. If you fail the leadership, you fail, can't use it, and splat.

Now, I'm sure there is some wording that someone could find that'd contradict me, but that's how these discussions work ^^

[TheGreatDalmuti]

Techincaly since psikic shooting attacks replace a weapon shooting, you could nominate a model and then instead of firing it's weapon do the psikic attack. But by RAW the model still should have the shooty weapon. So Zoanthroaps which I think don't have a ranged weapon would not be eligable. A librarian that has a pistol could opt to use lightning instead. Does anyone play it that way though? I hope not.
So Raw it can be argued you can't but I sure hope no one argues in tournaments or otherwise

[lantzkev]

Are there really people out there who would try to argue RAW that a psychic shooting attack is not a shooting attack? Really?

I'd guess they would argue a chaos sorcerer would have to use his bolt pistol instead of his bolt of change?

I'm not arguing that the psychic attack isn't a shooting attack, I'm saying it's not a weapon. And that's what's needed for a death or glory. That counting as shooting a weapon is merely there so you can't get a psychic "shot" and then fire a "real shot"

Counts as shooting a weapon is pretty clearly written to the way it is, so that the above doesn't happen, this is a RAI and RAW interpretation, the best kind...

[Archangelion]

Specifically, it counts as firing a ranged assault weapon unless stated otherwise. Fireing a weapon is firing a weapon, whether it is a psykic weapon or a physical one, it is still firing a weapon.

[TheGreatDalmuti]

Yes but it has to carry a weapon in order to DoG..

[Archangelion]

So I can't DoG with a Kroot Hound? It isn't 'carrying' a weapon. It uses its fangs to attack. Wow, that really sucks!

[severed001]

Yes but it has to carry a weapon in order to DoG..

see the last post of the first page for the definition of "carry," seems from that, the zoanthrope is clearly 'acting as a conductor' for the PSA then

[Vipoid]

So I can't DoG with a Kroot Hound? It isn't 'carrying' a weapon. It uses its fangs to attack. Wow, that really sucks!

Wouldn't it also mean that no tyranid would be able to attack?

After all, you can't 'carry' your own arms.

[lantzkev]

Wouldn't it also mean that no tyranid would be able to attack?

After all, you can't 'carry' your own arms.

alot of tryannids are already "equipped" with a "weapon" of some sort, sything talons, rending claws, etc.
Melee attacks were always considered to have a weapon, even if it was the butt of a rifle (see prior explanation)

[Vipoid]

alot of tryannids are already "equipped" with a "weapon" of some sort, sything talons, rending claws, etc.
Melee attacks were always considered to have a weapon, even if it was the butt of a rifle (see prior explanation)

I'm not sure being 'equipped' with a weapon is the same as 'carrying' it.

[lantzkev]

I could see a argument against being able to death or glory if you have no weapon in your wargear listing... as few as those guys are in the game. I'd allow it because there's a vague enough interpretation. Equiped IS = Carrying. Counts as a shooting a weapon =/= carrying a weapon.

[severed001]

The final sentence of the first paragraph for DoG seals the deal for me, here's what it says:

p 69 BRB

"Whatever form it takes, the attack hits automatically, so resolve the hit against the vehicles's front armour..." etc etc

This previous sentence also says,

"The attack can be either a shot from a weapon carried by the model, or a single close combat attack using any weapon carried, including grenades."

This wording is meant to describe the various items a model can utilize for a DoG attack, but in the end, Whatever form it takes, the attack can be melee or a shooting attack.

Next, going to p. 50 of the BRB, for PSA:

"... he (the psyker) can replace the firing of any of the weapons he is allowed to fire with a psychic shooting attack (but still cannot use the same power twice in a turn)."

Therefore, the zoanthrope can replace his allowance of one attack on the vehicle, with the PSA of the Warp Lance.

cheers ^^

[Vipoid]

I could see a argument against being able to death or glory if you have no weapon in your wargear listing... as few as those guys are in the game. I'd allow it because there's a vague enough interpretation. Equiped IS = Carrying. Counts as a shooting a weapon =/= carrying a weapon.

Out of interest, if a tank attempted to tank-shock a GK Grand Master, and he attempted Death or Glory, would he be able to use an Orbital Strike against it?