Quick question about how Runes of Warding and Runes of Witnessing work against each other. I searched and found extensive discussion referring back to the FAQ. However when looking at the new FAQ I find that it has been omitted. Is it safe to assume that is a mistake and thus go by the 5th ed FAQ (which i have printed), or is there a new way of handling them. I as because my Gaming club has a few Tau players who love to include Farseers now. Thanks.
Not seeing the problem?
The errata in h rules update is quite clear; both rules force you to roll an additional die when making psychic tests, and th Witnessing rule forces the discard of the highest. So you end up rolling 4D6, dropping the highest result and adding the remaining three together.
Originally Posted by Weird Al
the problem is that the errata that makes this ruling for 5th edition. when you read the new errata there is no mention of it. The question has been removed. So I guess the real question is would the ruling from the 5th edition errata still stand even though there is a new errata that makes no mention of it? I ask because in 5th it was never an issue for us because I was the only Eldar player, now in 6th I have other Eldar to compete against, their argument is that the 5th edition errata no longer applies, and so now the rules simply cancel each other until a new errata is created.
Last edited by Protocol; 11-08-2012 at 20:19. Reason: typo
The old question about them interacting has been removed because their rules changed, removing their conflicting nature; witnessing is no longer "roll 3D6 and discard highest", it's "roll an additional D6 and discard highest". Warding are similarly "... an additional D6 ... " and not a specific number. Mr Rose is correct with the way they now interact.
Perfect thank you. I missed that in the FAQ, and now can make a valid argument
That question is resolved by the change to "one additional d6" instead of a fixed number. The major question now is whether they really meant for 2 Farseers with Runes of Warding to be able to make another unit roll 2 extra dice for their psychic test. That's a completely different issue, though.
BRB page 32Seems good enough for me to stop the 2 extra dice.Unless specifically stated, a model cannot gain the benifit of a special rule more than once.
"Do you use the number on the bottom of the die to determine your rolls? Because the book doesn't discuss that the top is the correct side to read, either. Some things are just THAT obvious."
Except, this is two different special rules that do slightly different things. One forces your opponent to add an extra D6 to their psychic test rolls, while the other lets you roll an additional D6 when making psychic tests and discard the highest value. Should you have two Eldar players facing each other, both Runes of Warding and Runes of Witnessing could affect a Farseer trying to cast.
Psychic test: 2D6
Warding: +D6
Witnessing: +D6, discard highest
End result is 4D6, discard the highest.
Mr Rose has the right of it...there is no conflict in their errata-ed rules.
Before we veer off into the territory of whether RoW stack, the arguments against it are spurious at best. The quote regarding 'special rules' does not invalidate the use of a second power fist in the same army, why should it effect another wargear item's use? The very fact that the most recent errata changed the wording from '3D6' to an 'extra D6' also clearly points out the intent that they should stack...
M
Last edited by drmarco; 12-08-2012 at 02:28.
But who are ye, in rags and rotten shoes; you dirty-bearded, blocking up the way?...
Except Seattledv8 was responding to DoctorTom's comment about 2 farseers on the same side, both with runes of warding, adding 2 dice to the enemy psychic test, not to the original question about opposed warding/witnessing runes.
Once upon a midnight dreary...
It can be argued that rolling extra dice on your psychic tests is hardly a benefit. Also, if they had intended Warding to not stack, they needn't errata it at all. The errata on Witnessing would have been sufficient if there were to be no possibility of stacking, since you would either roll explicitly 3D6 (Warding), 3D6 discarding the highest (witnessing), or 3D6+D6 discarding the highest (both).
The extra dice would be a huge benefit to the Eldar player, which is the point.
The Rune of Warding does not mention stacking, therefore it doesn't get to stack with another Rune of Warding.
The Power Fist argument just shows how it does work, you get to double the St of the attack once, not doubling again .
They all work, but only once for each fist in the army.
The fists do not stack, neither does multiple Runes of Warding.
"Do you use the number on the bottom of the die to determine your rolls? Because the book doesn't discuss that the top is the correct side to read, either. Some things are just THAT obvious."
My bad.
The errata to make them +D6 was so they played nice with other things such as Shadow In The Warp, which has a similar (identical?) effect as Runes of Warding.
Here we go again. I don't know why this becomes so confusing to so many, or whether you're just deliberately misinterpreting the stack of RoW because you fear it's op, SeattleDV8.
My comparison with power fists was that 2 models can have power fists, and both can individually use the effect a power fist has. This is not a special rule. Neither is the effect of a farseer's Runes of warding. If one Farseer carries a set then all enemy players Psykers test on an extra d6. If 2 farseers opt to carry them all enemy Psykers test on 4d6. This is not stacking the effects of a 'special rule', this is simply the collective effect of the rules of these items of wargear. What makes me think so?
The rule you quote to refute the RoW's effect description, regarding special rules stacking on page 32, pertains to the special rules found in the section of the rulebook in which your quoted rule is found (page 32-44) entitled...wait for it!...'Special rules'.
Are the effects of RoW found therein?
My second piece of support comes from the very fact that the most recent rules update for Eldar 6th edition specifically says to replace the last sentence to 'all enemy Psykers must roll an extra dice when taking psychic tests, suffering perils of the warp on any roll of 12 or above.'
This errata REPLACES the existing rule which stated all enemy Psykers test on 3d6.
Why errata this if they don't stack?
Both in terms of RAW and, I feel, RAI this makes sense, as facing the Eldar with a strong Psyker led force should be a challenge to the Psyker component of enemy forces, and ties to the fluff very well...
Cheers,
M
Last edited by drmarco; 12-08-2012 at 08:58.
But who are ye, in rags and rotten shoes; you dirty-bearded, blocking up the way?...
Again, part of the reason for the amendment to the rules was to make it work with Shadows, and to also clear up what happens if a psyker with Runes of Witnessing casts a power while being hindered by an enemy's Runes of Warding.
But they did not need to errata Warding if it were to just clarify the runes' interaction, only Witnessing. The errata to mingle RoW and Shadows was kind of important, yes, but that only possibly ever comes into play in 3+ player games, which you already can't do running strictly RAW, unless I'm mistaken.
Also, the argument against stacking for "it doesn't say it stacks, so it can't" is irrelevant. The errata says nothing about multiple Autarch's reserves ability stacking as per RAW, but the FAQ section of the errata clarifies that they do. Just because the errata does not address the Runes question, it addresses a very similar case of a rule not implicitly stacking by RAW being allowed to do so.
Also, the double-power fist for 4x str argument is irrelevent as it is addressed in the BRB, since you can only benefit from the effects of the weapon you're attacking with. As per current, there are no models that simultaneously attack with two different CCW.
Last edited by Grentain; 12-08-2012 at 16:48.
Not really. Wargear and special rules are two different things, unless the wargear tells you it gives you a special rule. Runes of Warding are listed in a completely different section from Special Rules. Unfortunately that ruling wouldn't apply, even though it looks to be GW's intention for it to work that way. Still, it's probably better to have this as a sticking point where we know what their intention has been, while having Runes of Witnessing vs Runes of Witnessing or Shadow of the Warp cleared up.
p.32 of the BRB explains that special rules can be granted by the BRB, a codex entry, wargear, a weapon, terrain, psychic powers, etc. It goes on to say the special rules in the BRB is not an exhaustive list. This would imply that both runes are indeed special rules and should be treated as such.
Now, does it make sense to stack runes of warding? Can you stack Night Fight Rules or Feel No Pain? Of course not! So I don't get why people think a game affecting rule stacks. There are exceptions, but they are expressly stated such as stealth and shrouded. The Autarchs reserves roll (pointless if you ask me though). But an Astropaths reserve rolls do not stack (I don't get the inconsistenty but this is RAW).
So for those of you trying to rules lawyer stacking runes of warding just stop until you can say right here on page X "Runes of Warding effects are cumulative."
As for how Warding and Witnessing interact, I concur on 4D6 and discard the highest. I learned something new today, thanks!
It was just a FAQ that changed the wording, cleared an issue and raised another. P 32 of BRB says a "model" cant benefit from the same Special Rule more then once, the benefit of rules of warding is giving a penalty to other psykers, if a farseer had the option to take RoW twice, then that reasoning would apply and they wouldn't stack, the problem is that you have two different models (Farseers) using RoW, so it isn't clear and you can make an argument that they do stack, or that they don't stack. For me i think it was the intention of faq to clear up the issues regarding RoW and other abilities and not to allow RoW to stack, so on that principle i wont use Stacking RoW, making enemy psykers test on 3d6 is already very good, 4d6 just shuts down the oppositon which is a little bit over the top.
There are no perfect people in this world, just perfect intentions...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote