Ironclad Melta

[Bannus]

Just keep the seismic hammer.

 

Problem solved. :)

[eyescrossed]

What bannus said.

The Chainfist isn't really worth it anyway.

[Thantoes]

What bannus said.

The Chainfist isn't really worth it anyway.

 

How so? Sure it adds 1 to your damage roll but you would still need a 4+ on 1d6 to hurt a LR. Chainfist gives you a potential Strength 22 (not that you need it) and you get 2d6 for penetration.. Also its free which is a bonus. Whats not to like?

[eyescrossed]

You don't get an extra attack, while you do with the hammer.

[nighthawks]

so it depends on the applciation. the chainfist is a valid option for anti-armour applications, and the extra attack will not be missed there given the strenght. if you are up against multi-wound MCs, you would likely prefer the hammer. givent he prevelence of CC in 5th, I'd likely advise keeping the hammer. but this isn't the tactics forum.

 

on topic:

personally, I think that the "built-in" weapon is lost with the arm - including hammer to fist. just not enough evidence to the contrary and a lot of supporting precident (DCCW).

[Isiah]

In terms of upgrading / changing weapons the words tell us exactly what we must do. On the Ironclad's hammer/chainfist/melta issue instructions are clear enough. In that weapon change operation the words "built-in" have no bearing.

[Thantoes]

You don't get an extra attack, while you do with the hammer.

 

I have to say that I dont agree with that.

 

While it is true that it says a powerfist (which a chainfist essentially is) has to be paired with another fist to get the attack it also explicitly states (BRB p73, in the box dealing with DCCW) "If a walker is armed with two or more close combat weapons, it gains one bonus attack for each additional weapon over the first"

 

Since this is the section dealing with walkers (all walkers, not just marine dreads) and a chainfist is indeed a CCW then I believe that it trumps the earlier section dealing with infantry CCW's and you get the full amount of attacks.

[eyescrossed]

You need to be armed with 2 DCCW to get a bonus attack, but the Ironclad Chainfist says it follows the rules of the Chainfist, not a DCCW with 2D6 penetration, so by RAW, you don't get an extra attack.

[rat of vengence]

And the chainfist is a close combat weapon. A Dread with two of them gets +1 attack. It doesn't specify what type in any way.

 

RoV

[Steelmage99]

The box on page 73 can be read to mean that any close combat weapon mounted on a dreadnought is a Dreadnought lose Combat Weapon.

[eyescrossed]

Okay, I bfghbgfshfg'ed it (basically :lol: ed it).

[Grey Mage]

You lose the siesmic hammer. Precident- When you lose the DCCW of a dreadnaught in exchange for a ML you also lose the (built in) stormbolter.

[Steelmage99]

Did you mean "you lose the melta"?

[Thantoes]

You lose the siesmic hammer. Precident- When you lose the DCCW of a dreadnaught in exchange for a ML you also lose the (built in) stormbolter.

 

By RAW this isnt true. C:SM pg137 Entry for Dreadnought and venerable dreadnought: "Replace Dreadnought close combat weapon with - twin-linked autocannon or missile launcher"

 

No mention is made of the storm bolter. The entry for the Ironclad dreadnought specifically mentions that you loose the storm bolter "Replace Dreadnough close combat weapon and storm bolter with a hurricane bolter"

 

I think people just assume that you loose the SB as its generally modelled onto the arm.

 

*edit: spelling*

[Isiah]

Yep I agree. The wording is inconsistant with regards the SB as Thantoes points out. But it is perfectly clear what gets swapped when you change a weapon.

 

Cheers

I

[Legatus]

By RAW this isnt true. C:SM pg137 Entry for Dreadnought and venerable dreadnought: "Replace Dreadnought close combat weapon with - twin-linked autocannon or missile launcher"

Also from the entry for Dreadnought and Venerable Dreadnought, page 137 Codex Space Marines: "Dreadnought close combat weapon (with built in storm bolter)"

 

No mention is made of the storm bolter.

It is in the part I quoted.

 

The entry for the Ironclad dreadnought specifically mentions that you loose the storm bolter "Replace Dreadnough close combat weapon and storm bolter with a hurricane bolter"

It is very considerate of them to point out that if the DCCW is lost, the stormbolter that is built into the DCCW is lost as well. After all, how could the Dreadnought have a stormbolter buitl into it's DCCW if it does not have a DCCW? Considerate to point it out specifically, but not neccessarys. Of course, pointing it out for some built-in weapons but not for others creates confusion. Thinking about it, maybe it was not really considerate.

 

I think people just assume that you loose the SB as its generally modelled onto the arm.

An impulse to adhere to WYSIWYG probably. That "built-in" thing may play a part as well.

[Isiah]

"Built in" has no real bearing when swapping weapons. You can swap a stormbolter for a heavy flamer without needing to swap the "built in" DCCW arm too for instance. On wysiwyg issues, it's interesting that the FW MkIV Dread has it's stormbolter mounted on its body – not "built in" to it's DCCW arm. So models don't dictate the rules – the rules should dicate the models.

 

Also from the entry for Dreadnought and Venerable Dreadnought, page 137 Codex Space Marines: "Dreadnought close combat weapon (with built in storm bolter)"

These are your brackets L, not as is written :lol: so I'm not sure what your point is there. Unless you mean what you think they should have written but didn't, in which case it won't cut much ice in the OR, even though I have to agree with you.

 

Either way, going back to the Ironclad, the rules are clear enough.

[Legatus]

These are your brackets L, not as is written

You might want to double check that... :)

[Bran Scalphunter]

Isiah, that's how it's written. Legatus isn't changing the wording there. I've got my Dex in front of me as I type this.

 

Edit: In fact, all three C:SM Dreads use the same language to describe their built-in ranged weapon.

[Bannus]

But isn't it interesting that the built-in weapon is not mentioned in the CF upgrade?

 

If the weapon gets destoyed, the built in weapon goes with it, but I think that the wording is interesting enough that it could be argued that the melta-gun is retained in the swap 9since the storm bolter is specifically mentioned as lost in the ML upgrade).

[Legatus]

The stormbolter is mentioned in the Ironclads option for a Hurricane Bolter. But neither for the regular Dreadnought nor for the Venerable Dreadnought does it mention that the Stormbolter is lost when the DCCW is upgraded to a Missile Launcher. Previous Codices stated it, as does the current Codex Chaos Space Marines.

I noticed the Blood Angels Codex does not mention that the Stormbolter is replaced either. Perhaps the author did go back and mention the stormbolter for the Hurricane Bolter to make extra sure that you don't get a stormbolter on top of your three twin linked boltguns.

[Isiah]

These are your brackets L, not as is written

You might want to double check that... :P

 

You're right it is but it is not next to the weapon options bit for Vennies or normal dreads. As such it has no bearing on what and how weapons can be swapped – it merely comes into play when determining a weapon destroyed result.

 

Personally I think the wording regarding stormbolter & DCCW swaps needs revising via an eratta :D. But until it is ...

 

Cheers

I

[jeffersonian000]

Why can't you drop the siesmic hammer w/ melta for a chainfist w/ melta? Seems like that is the intent of the rule as it is written.

 

SJ

[Legatus]

Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Do you think it is the intent of the regular and venerable dreadnought's rules that the DCCW with stormbolter is replaced with a missile launcher with stormbolter? Even though the stormbolter always had been lost in previous Codices, and still is lost in Codex Chaos? Personally, I don't think that is the intent.

[Steelmage99]

Your "guess" at the intent is just that, a guess.

Me, I'll stick to what the rules tell me to do.