Current Space Wolf Codex FAQ

[Grey Mage]

Chaps, this is a 40 K forum. We don't make up stuff about "Ghost Bears", here in the Inner Sphere.

If you think Im making it up, you obviously have never hunted on the icebergs of Asaheim....;)

[Hfran Morkai]

Have we settled the thunder hammer thing then?

 

Because I think its still highly contested and I will do the thing that makes sense (to me) and let my opponent decide whether it counts or not. Then again currently Arjac is only planned in my apocalypse force so one stunning thrown thunder hammer isn't really going to break the game, or is it?

[SamaNagol]

People are unable to break down wording. It makes RAW very difficult to implement because people seem to read things and glean INTENT from sentences, not just taking the words as written and applying cold logic to them.

 

'A thunder hammer which may be used as a ranged weapon with the following profile' completely negates the Thunder Hammer part if you use it as a ranged weapon. It uses the profile which follows when used as a ranged weapon.

 

You need to break these rules down properly.

[Hfran Morkai]

People are unable to break down wording. It makes RAW very difficult to implement because people seem to read things and glean INTENT from sentences, not just taking the words as written and applying cold logic to them.

 

'A thunder hammer which may be used as a ranged weapon with the following profile' completely negates the Thunder Hammer part if you use it as a ranged weapon. It uses the profile which follows when used as a ranged weapon.

 

You need to break these rules down properly.

 

I agree with this because it should say for the sake of clarity "A thunder hammer which may be used as a ranged weapon with the additional profile:"

 

But GW like obscurity or so it seems.

 

Problem is I can see it from both viewpoints so discuss with opponent seems an idea for me

[Catheras]

SamaNagol: You got my point exactly, this kind of discussion i have seen time and time again when ppl are trying to read a sentence for what it is not to get some benefit that just is not there. I'll admit that GW makes it easier and easier to make a claim like that of the Thrown thunderhammer discussion we are now having.

You all need to stop trying to analyze the sentence to death and just read it plain and simple, no mention of stun in the profile.....ok then....end of discussion.

I'm afraid some of you have gone into this with the intent of covering all the possible ways that this can be twisted that you have forgot what it actually says in the sentence along the way.

 

This is not meant to be directed at anyone in particular, but rather a general observation.

I know that sometimes things just don't add up, but this, I think is really simple. I know I'm not always right, although i like to be ;) and I'll admit if i think I'm wrong even if it makes my mouth fill with gall just to utter the words, you were right.......... ;)

[Grey Mage]

*shrugs* I wouldnt have thought of the stun idea personally, but then I wasnt really looking either. Now that its been brought up I feel it deserves some attention before dismissal or approval, unlike the idjit ideas of S 6 WLs from two frostblades.

[Morticon]

I am fairly amused at how many non-SW players (at least, they are new to this portion of the forums) that are now posting constantly here. ;)

 

;)

Glad myself and other "guests" can add to your amusement. ;)

 

If your amusement ever wears off and devolves to irritation, please dont hesitate to remind yourself that all areas of the board are open to all BnC members- chapter specific or otherwise, with hour old memberships or years old.

 

If that fails, you can try repeating to yourself that this isn't Fenrisian Space, youre not Logan Grimnar and you don't get to fire on what you feel are nosey Ecclesiarchy.

 

All you get to do is read the opinions expressed by others in a board appropriate manner and offer your opinions in agreement or disagreement in a board appropriate manner....

If your amusement ever wears off, of course ;)

 

 

Back to Foehammer -> (accurate pun considering :P )

 

To those in favour of the hammer keeping its stun ability, I have to ask how a ranged weapon can be a close combat weapon at the same time?

 

Additionally from the codex (pg60) under thunder hammers "See the assault phase chapter of WH40k rulebook for the rules that apply to thunderhammers"

 

Thunderhammer only has an entry for rules on pg 42 in that book - listed under "Close Combat Weapons"

 

Once again, how is a ranged weapon a close combat weapon? Or how is it used in the assault phase?

 

 

Arjac, Foehammer - "Foehammer is a thunderhammer that can be used as a ranged weapon with the following profile".

 

It wouldnt matter if it said, the Foehammer is a fish and chip sandwich that can be used as a ranged weapon with the following profile...

 

The following profile is still the following profile. And that does not have any rules for stun.

 

Anyone remember the Tellion debate?

"He has a bolter with the following profile..."

But Tellion cant use his bolter as a bolter (FAQed if i remember correctly). Precedent? Check!

 

Just my thoughts on the matter and im happy to change my opinion when im proved wrong.

 

Additionally, and for the record, as ive said before my best buddy plays wolves. Hes not on BnC 1/10th as much as I am and doesnt have the time to express what we chat about. A lot of what I post is stuff we're bouncing off each other. My thoughts, opinions and experience all comes from the last 10 years of playing and chatting to him- Including taking 1st place in a huge doubles tournament (wolves/ba). So instead of seeing new peeps around and getting all shirty and cliquey about it, how bout a bit more BnC spirit, yeah? Failing that how bout wolfy spirit and offer the man an ale..or is that only after the first punches are thrown??

 

 

edit: PS: frustratingly enough, i see no reason fluffwise why this shouldnt work !

[Marshal Wilhelm]

*shrugs* I wouldnt have thought of the stun idea personally, but then I wasnt really looking either. Now that its been brought up I feel it deserves some attention before dismissal or approval, unlike the idjit ideas of S 6 WLs from two frostblades.

 

....I have not yet found it in RAW but I am pushing for a Thunderhammer riding a thrown Thunder Wolf with four Frostblades (one for each paw) as a TROOP choice, surely RAI.... surely! ;)

 

....and even if you don't think I'm funny, I do ;)

 

....next you'll be telling me "Smoke Jaguars" are on the Icebergs of Asaheim, too.... pfft, humbug, humbug I say.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

It wouldnt matter if it said, the Foehammer is a fish and chip sandwich that can be used as a ranged weapon with the following profile...

 

It would....Mum wouldn't like that.... at all....

;)

[maznaz]

With regards to the thunderhammer argument (and bear in mind I am a space wolf gamer, and have never been anything else in 40k) imagine a scenario where there was a gun underslung on a chainfist. The combo was endowed on a special character and given the name, chainygunnything. How would the rules be written to be clear and precise?

 

"chainygunnything is a chainfist which can be used as a ranged weapon with the following profile" - and nobody would try and confer the rules of the chainfist to the ranged weapon. If the intention was for the chainfist rules to be conferred to the ranged weapon it would have to specify as much, with something like: "chainygunnything is a chainfist which can be used as a ranged weapon WHICH COUNTS AS A CHAINFIST WHEN IT HITS".

 

This is exactly how the English language interprets the text as written, and frankly the other interpretation is incorrect in a linguistic sense. For fluff reasons or reasons of logic you could argue that foe hammer should have thunderhammer rules when it hits, but the specific english language text does not say this. I can't put it any clearer than that.

[Oldenhaller]

Anyone remember the Tellion debate?

"He has a bolter with the following profile..."

But Tellion cant use his bolter as a bolter (FAQed if i remember correctly). Precedent? Check!

 

I remember that debate - in rambled on for ages....was tones of fun :P

 

~O

[LPetersson]

If your amusement ever wears off and devolves to irritation, please dont hesitate to remind yourself that all areas of the board are open to all BnC members- chapter specific or otherwise, with hour old memberships or years old.

 

Yes, obviously, and no one would want it any other way.

What WLL might be annoyed about (If he is annoyed at all) are the numerous repeated questions from people who can't be botehred to use the search function and sometimes ask a question that someone else has asked and which is still on the first page of the SW forum...

I for one welcome all the pups :P

 

With regards to the thunderhammer argument (and bear in mind I am a space wolf gamer, and have never been anything else in 40k) imagine a scenario where there was a gun underslung on a chainfist. The combo was endowed on a special character and given the name, chainygunnything. How would the rules be written to be clear and precise?

 

"chainygunnything is a chainfist which can be used as a ranged weapon with the following profile" - and nobody would try and confer the rules of the chainfist to the ranged weapon. If the intention was for the chainfist rules to be conferred to the ranged weapon it would have to specify as much, with something like: "chainygunnything is a chainfist which can be used as a ranged weapon WHICH COUNTS AS A CHAINFIST WHEN IT HITS".

 

This is exactly how the English language interprets the text as written, and frankly the other interpretation is incorrect in a linguistic sense. For fluff reasons or reasons of logic you could argue that foe hammer should have thunderhammer rules when it hits, but the specific english language text does not say this. I can't put it any clearer than that.

 

But in that example it's the gun that's shooting bullets, it's not shooting Chain Fists (Although that would be pretty damn cool).

 

Personally I'm in favour of the stun since 1) It's a Thunderhammer and 2) A Thunder Hammer stuns.

If they FAQ it one way or antoher, fine, I don't care because I'll rarely, if ever, use Arjac outside of Apocalypse where it hardly matters...

[maznaz]

But in that example it's the gun that's shooting bullets, it's not shooting Chain Fists (Although that would be pretty damn cool).

 

Personally I'm in favour of the stun since 1) It's a Thunderhammer and 2) A Thunder Hammer stuns.

If they FAQ it one way or antoher, fine, I don't care because I'll rarely, if ever, use Arjac outside of Apocalypse where it hardly matters...

 

But that was my whole point. It was your knowledge of the intention that was causing the specific interpretation of the rules, not reading and interpreting the wording.

 

That is what everyone who is arguing for thunderhammer special rules for the ranged weapon attack is doing. Allowing their interpretation (based on logic, fluff, desirability etc) to influence their comprehension of the wording.

 

The chainfist example shows that quite clearly I thought.

[Wulf Vengis]

Yes but its the Thunder Hammer itself (not the model wielding it) that causes the stun ability. Ergo why would the Thunder Hammer work properly in melee but in ranged? Essntially a Thunder Hammer is a power wepon that doubles strength and stuns vehicles. Now from what weve gleaned about power weapons over the years its safe to say that the hammer has a switch, a button or a toggle of some sort. You turn the hammer on and voila its encased in energy. You hit something or someone and BAM the energy explodes outwards creating a jarring blow. What I fail to see in this little debate is the fact that when this hammer gets thrown it magically becomes something that is not a Thunder Hammer. Its still a hammer and should technically still follow the rules as such as well as its additinal ranged rules.

[maznaz]

Yes but its the Thunder Hammer itself (not the model wielding it) that causes the stun ability. Ergo why would the Thunder Hammer work properly in melee but in ranged? Essntially a Thunder Hammer is a power wepon that doubles strength and stuns vehicles. Now from what weve gleaned about power weapons over the years its safe to say that the hammer has a switch, a button or a toggle of some sort. You turn the hammer on and voila its encased in energy. You hit something or someone and BAM the energy explodes outwards creating a jarring blow. What I fail to see in this little debate is the fact that when this hammer gets thrown it magically becomes something that is not a Thunder Hammer. Its still a hammer and should technically still follow the rules as such as well as its additinal ranged rules.

 

 

Again, you're using your interpretation of the rules to cloud your understanding of what is written. Forget everything you read from fluff sections and just consider the rules. The rules are meant to be different when the weapon is used in a ranged manner and this is clearly discernible from the wording which reads "a thunder hammer which can be used as a ranged weapon with the following profile" which then goes on to list DIFFERENT rules including AP1 from the standard thunder hammer.

 

In short, read what I have already written, which is that your intepretation based on anything other than the rules as written don't matter.

 

Marek

[Oldenhaller]

I agree with maznaz here, very succincly put.

 

If we were to use all of the close assault rules which would normaally apply to a thunderhammer then in addition it'll also double the users's strength (so S20?), ignore armour saves as well as being AP1 and strike against the back armour of any vehicles it's thrown at (it can teleport so that's ok right?

 

Ascribing additional rules from close combat to which have not been given to it is unfortunately an incorrect interpretation of the rules

 

~O

[Wulf Vengis]

The strength of the ranged hammer however is already doubled and having a base strength of 5 makes it 10 (simple math and observational skills would show you this), then its AP is made 1 taking away the original AP of strength+D6. Frankly the AP of 1 is only there to indicate that even as a ranged weapon its still a power weapon. The assault 1 just tells you that he can move and throw, which is a bit unnecessary since hes wearing TDA which makes him relentless if Im not mistaken (if I am mistaken on relentless I apologize).

 

I think maybe Im just failing to understand how people can forget that its a thunder hammer whether its in his hands or not. Then again the group of players I usually play with is all about exploiting every wording flaw in their codices to the point of calling GW and making us listen to the phone guys on speakerphone about how they can do it just because its in their codex regardless of it seeming broken, beardy or cheesy (look to eldar and nids for the most common abusers).

[Oldenhaller]

While it is badly worded you're choosing to apply some of the rules to your own advantage. If you cannot apply all of the rules which would apply then you should apply none. It states that it has the following profile then you must use that profile...while it'd be great if it had the stun (love using arjak) i cannot make myself read that extra line into it. The assumption that the AP1 is because it's a power weapon and that the str is 10 is because it's already doubled are all well and good but if they're going to give you all of those rules would they not also include that it stuns aswell?

 

~O

[Wulf Vengis]

if they're going to give you all of those rules would they not also include that it stuns aswell?

 

I dont know exactly since its the thing theyre (GW) most apt to do every time I argue an obscure rule with other players I cant see why they wouldnt.

[Toasterfree]

I just sliced my finger open working on my old metal wolf guard. Thus, bleeding.

 

So, tomorrow, after I am done explaining to you stravag freebirths exactly why it is that the Crusader cause is the most honorable, and why the Jade Falcons should of been the ilClan, I will go through the rules issues presented. Seyla!

I bid 1250pts, 1 HQ, 3 troops, 1 elite, 2 HS, 1 FA. For the Ghostbears.

 

And be careful for goodness sakes.

i bid 1000pts no HQ 2 troops 1 elite 1 HS and no FA for the steel vipers.

 

really this is a 40k forum?

 

on the Arjac issue, back to seriousness, Foehammer says that it is a thunderhammer, and i will quote

When the rune-etched weapon known as Foehammer leaves Arjac's massive fist, its inbuilt teleport device ensures it will quickly return to his gauntlet ready to be used again. The Foehammer is a thunder hammer that can be used as a ranged weapon with the following profile

emphasis mine of course.

 

Foehammer is a thunder hammer. this thunder hammer can be used as a ranged weapon. this ranged weapon thunder hammer has the following ranged profile R 6" S10 AP 1. when this thunder hammer hits, is it a thunder hammer? when this thunder hammer hits something, or a vehicle, and does not kill it do the thunder hammer effects work? does the description anywhere in this thunder hammers section suggest that when it is used as a ranged weapon, that the thunder hammer effects do not occur?

 

simple check list. even though it does not say for the ranged profile that it has a stun effect doesnt matter. its because that there IS NO USR for stunning weapons. if you notice any special rule for a weapon that is listed, there is a USR for it. funny, last i looked there is no USR for stunning weapons. the profile says that Foehammer IS a thunder hammer. there for if it IS something, then it has those effects.

[Wulf Vengis]

there for if it IS something, then it has those effects.

 

Thats what Im saying...if it IS a thunder hammer than it IS a thunder hammer ALL the time.

[Toasterfree]

there for if it IS something, then it has those effects.

 

Thats what Im saying...if it IS a thunder hammer than it IS a thunder hammer ALL the time.

i was not saying that you were wrong, only that for it to be something, it just doesnt turn off. there has never been a turn off option for any weapons in the game.

[Wulf Vengis]

Precisely which is why even as a ranged weapon the Foehammer stil stuns vehicles.

[Oldenhaller]

We can go back to the Telion example - it states it's a bolter with the following profile. By your rationelle it can be fired as a bolter aswell as it states it's a bolter which has a defined profile. However it doesn't. It follows the specific rules layed down in the entry for it.

 

~O

[Toasterfree]

then by that rational foehammer will never stun, because its ranged profile says it doesnt, and because of that its just a hammer you can throw at s10