Eversor's Neuro-Gauntlet

[Red Lost Soldier]

Just started getting back into playing SM and DH and ran into this issue the other day.

 

Back in 3rd Ed, when Codex DH was released there was no mention of poisoned weapons in the rulebook, not many were around and they were detailed how they worked in the individual codex. In 4th Ed the rules for poisoned weapons were added into the rulebook. In the 5th Ed rulebook you can find the rules for poisoned weapons on pg 42, and they've been given a nice new bonus, rerolls to wound against equal toughness or less. It states that "[poisoned weapons]...do not rely on a comparison of Strength and Toughness to wound - they always wound on a fixed number, generally shown in brackets. In most cases this is 4+.

 

I was running an Eversor Assassin, who comes with a Neuro-Gauntlet (NG), rules are on pg 28 of the DH codex. It's pretty much a copy paste description lifted from 4th Ed rulebook and the first part of the 5th Ed rulebook. I figured that means his weapon was a poisoned weapon, but my opponent disagreed because it doesn't specifically state that they are poisoned.

 

Back to the issue. The DH codex says that the NG is a close combat weapon. Fine, open rulebook to close combat weapon page. Next the DH codex states that the NG always wounds on a 4+. Fine look to rulebook and fine the exact same wording under the poisoned weapon catagory, and nowhere else. Surely that makes it count as a poisoned weapon?

 

From what evidence I gather they meant the NG to be poisoned, but obviously did not anticipate them getting extra bonuses down the line. They probably also didn't anticipate assassins getting weakened with 'Defenders React' and TLOS either. I imagine 'Accept any Challenge' and 'Feeder Tendrils' weren't supposed to be as awesome as they are either. But intentions aren't rules. IF BT (BTW I was fighting BT that game) and Tyranids can get a tiny boost from 5th, is it legal for my Eversor to get a tiny boost?

 

Are there any precedents or things I've missed?

[Frosty the Pyro]

Its very questionable. I personaly tend to work anything that wounds on a fixed result as poisened, but this IS essentialy a house rule. If the BrB listing of poisened weapon a definition that goes both ways?. For example if special character x has a uniwue powersword that rerolls to wound, is that powersword a lighning claw, and could it claim a two weapon attack bonus if it was paired with a ligtning claw? To compound that, 'nid toxen mines are also technicly NOT a piosened attack (instead they are defined as having a strength equal to the targets toughness) though less important as it's a ranged attack.

 

 

 

 

(on a side note the nid bonus from feeder tendrells is mostly a wash with the reduction of rending, wereas this is a pure boost to the assasin armies)

[werewolf_nr]

I would tend to go with the RAW unless it was agreed on before the game.

 

Normally poisoned weapons have a Poison (X+) in their statline. Things that aren't written as such aren't unless you agree on it with your opponent.

 

Furthermore, I would tend to go a bit easy on the =][= players as the gear in their codex is so expensive. (A 40 pt Force weapon? It better ignore Eternal Warrior).

[Red Lost Soldier]

Normally poisoned weapons have a Poison (X+) in their statline. Things that aren't written as such aren't unless you agree on it with your opponent.

Yeah post 4th Ed codices have that in their statline, but this is a 3rd Ed. codex when having such in a statline would be meaningless as it was not in the rulebook. Another problem is that the NG doesn't have a statline, it's a unique weapon so it's only described in the rules for the assassin.

 

Furthermore, I would tend to go a bit easy on the =][= players as the gear in their codex is so expensive. (A 40 pt Force weapon? It better ignore Eternal Warrior).

Yeah DH being considered bottom of the pile, assassins more so with KP and kill zones removed, I would have though so. BT seem a great deal harder in 5th than 4th.

 

Its very questionable. I personaly tend to work anything that wounds on a fixed result as poisened, but this IS essentialy a house rule. If the BrB listing of poisened weapon a definition that goes both ways?. For example if special character x has a uniwue powersword that rerolls to wound, is that powersword a lighning claw, and could it claim a two weapon attack bonus if it was paired with a ligtning claw? To compound that, 'nid toxen mines are also technicly NOT a piosened attack (instead they are defined as having a strength equal to the targets toughness) though less important as it's a ranged attack.

Very true. Are there any examples of such?

 

Though ranged attacks are handled differently, and having strength equal to toughness may be functionally the same as wounding on a fixed roll, though slightly different mechanisms.

 

(on a side note the nid bonus from feeder tendrells is mostly a wash with the reduction of rending, wereas this is a pure boost to the assasin armies)

Assassins are pretty bad in 5th, 'Stealers rock harder than ever.

[Frosty the Pyro]

(on a side note the nid bonus from feeder tendrells is mostly a wash with the reduction of rending, wereas this is a pure boost to the assasin armies)

Assassins are pretty bad in 5th, 'Stealers rock harder than ever.

 

Average MEQ wound per stealer attack in 4th 0.250 Average MEQ wound per stealer attack in 5th. 0.259. Mostly a wash (4% bonus). If you put them against a 2+ save 4th ed ones win out (though by an insignifigant margin, only a 0.5% bonus). When you start putting in higher toughness enemies 4th ed was distinctly better for genestealers. Vs T6 and 3+ armor old stealers are 25% better.

 

The more you know.

 

 

anyway

fluff is against nero guantlent being poison, mechanics are iffy.

 

 

On the side of =I= being at the bottom of the barrel. Grey kngiths will still kill an equal point value of marines, and could probably even take a unit of sternguard. (they all get Str 6 attacks and storm bolters and have 2 attacks regardless of if they charge or not, the justicar is esentualy weilding a relic blade with three attacks, thats only a little less killy than a space marine captain with a relic blade/stormbolter). Their landraiders are superior. and the terminators arnt bad either. Their problem comes from a lack of good AV special weapons. Which is why they shine as allies more than they do as a stand alone force.

[Grey Mage]

What possible advantage or disadvantage would there be to it being poisoned anyways?

[Frosty the Pyro]

Poisened close combat weapons can reroll to wound if the model weilding it has a equal to or higher strength than the targets toughness.

[Grey Mage]

Ahh, knew I was missing something there. Fair enough.

 

Then- RAW, No.

 

But I wouldnt say no to a house rule about it either.

[GTang]

The Callidus Assassin has poisoned blades. So, I don't think it's possible to treat the Eversor omission as unintended.

[Narthecium]

Nah it doesn't say poisoned, so it's not. As pointed out there are weapons that specifically say "poisoned" in the same codex, so I would say that although it's rules are the same basically, it's still not poisoned unless it specifically says so. I think they probably did that on purpose to keep him from being any beastlier.

[Red Lost Soldier]

Not everything is about MEQ kills Frosty. I think Outflank has been a huge boon to 'Stealers. Creates a 18" zone of danger on both sides of the both for relatively cheap, and the re rolls make them much more deadly against lighter armoured foes. Though they have definitely lost out against vehicles.

 

The Callidus poison blades in the DH codex, aren't actually 'poisoned,' by that same logic. Though their mechanic is almost identical, but for the Eversor's ignoring armour saves and actually being stated as a close combat weapon. Neither have statlines in the summery because they are unique weapons, and were written at a time when the rulebook didn't have mention of poisoned weapons as a catagory. If the NG doesn't count, then the Callidus poison blades don't count either unfortunately.

 

There is more to DH than GK. Though a Justicar is nice, I've seen GK squads wiped by Captains with relic blades. WS6, I5 and an invlunerable save make a huge difference. Sternguard and GK are quite different squads, though I'd put money on the Sternguard winning.

[Narthecium]

Except for the fact that you could assume that "poison blades" would mean that they were poisoned. I mean, if you say 'i'm going to stab you with a poison blade" I assume I'm about to get stabbed by something, well, poison. But GW is funny like that.

 

RAW though, if neither of them have the poison classification, then neither of them are poisoned weapons, right? Besides, the poison blades specifically have their own mechanic, which would tell me that the mechanic for the rule "poison" doesn't apply to them (being as they're not listed as a poisoned weapon, and they have their own individual mechanic). I would assume the same for the neuro gauntlet, since it doesn't have the "poison" rule and it also has it's own mechanic.

 

House rules I suppose it would be fine to count it as a poisoned weapons but I think RAW tournament rules, they wouldn't allow it.

[Red Lost Soldier]

Yeah I agree now, RAW wise they don't. I do think it was intended though, remember these rules were written in a time when nothing had the poisoned classification written in it's profile because the rulebook had nothing to say of such weapons. I would have assumed that anything that functions exactly the same as a poisoned weapon, would count as one. Alas, RAW wise they do not.

[I AM THE AWESOME]

I'd say RAW and RAI they don't. Because the Neuro-Gauntlet messes with your opponent's mind, it's got nothing to do with poison.

[Chengar Qordath]

I'd say RAW and RAI they don't. Because the Neuro-Gauntlet messes with your opponent's mind, it's got nothing to do with poison.

Not all weapons with the poisoned USR actually use poison according to the background/fluff. Poisoned is simply a catch-all term for weapons that use the mechanics listed under the USR.

[Narthecium]

Yeah I agree now, RAW wise they don't. I do think it was intended though, remember these rules were written in a time when nothing had the poisoned classification written in it's profile because the rulebook had nothing to say of such weapons. I would have assumed that anything that functions exactly the same as a poisoned weapon, would count as one. Alas, RAW wise they do not.

 

 

Yeah unfortunately it also doesn't explain why the grey knights are toting around inferior storm shields, but superior force weapons and psychic hoods. :)

 

Oh well, such is the world of the Inquisition.

[chromedog]

Not everything with a fixed 'to wound' roll is poisoned.

 

Sniper weapons are not poisoned (wound on 4+).

 

Neuro gauntlet is not a poisoned weapon. RAW/RAI. Otherwise is a house rule.

[KhorneHunter57x]

Not everything with a fixed 'to wound' roll is poisoned.

 

Sniper weapons are not poisoned (wound on 4+).

 

Neuro gauntlet is not a poisoned weapon. RAW/RAI. Otherwise is a house rule.

 

But Sniper weapons are not CC weapons, so that is not the best example.

 

However, Eldar Witchblades and Singing Spears are both CC weapons and are not poisoned (wound on 2+).

[Grey Mage]

Not everything with a fixed 'to wound' roll is poisoned.

 

Sniper weapons are not poisoned (wound on 4+).

 

Neuro gauntlet is not a poisoned weapon. RAW/RAI. Otherwise is a house rule.

 

But Sniper weapons are not CC weapons, so that is not the best example.

 

However, Eldar Witchblades and Singing Spears are both CC weapons and are not poisoned (wound on 2+).

And a Chemdog is a ranged weapon, is poisoned 2+.

[Frosty the Pyro]

looking at more up to date dex's isnt realy relivent, especialy ones that are 5th ed dex's. For example the hellfire rounds in both the old marine dex and in the vindicare entries are simply wounds on an X+ but the current marine dex treats them as poisened weapons. While these are ranged as oposed to a CCW it is something to consider. But as always dex trumps, so it doesnt mater, by RAW you have no grounds, and unless you want to downgrade your force weapons and psychic hoods, you wont have moral gounds.

[Red Lost Soldier]

Not everything with a fixed 'to wound' roll is poisoned.

 

Sniper weapons are not poisoned (wound on 4+).

 

Neuro gauntlet is not a poisoned weapon. RAW/RAI. Otherwise is a house rule.

 

But Sniper weapons are not CC weapons, so that is not the best example.

 

However, Eldar Witchblades and Singing Spears are both CC weapons and are not poisoned (wound on 2+).

Thank you, I knew I had missed something. Witchblades and SS, written in rules after poison rules were added to the rulebook.

 

Not everything with a fixed 'to wound' roll is poisoned.

 

Sniper weapons are not poisoned (wound on 4+).

 

Neuro gauntlet is not a poisoned weapon. RAW/RAI. Otherwise is a house rule.

I agree with you, RAW it is not. However RAI is different. I do believe, based on how and when it was written, that it was supposed to be a poisoned weapon. I do not play it as such though.

 

looking at more up to date dex's isnt realy relivent, especialy ones that are 5th ed dex's. For example the hellfire rounds in both the old marine dex and in the vindicare entries are simply wounds on an X+ but the current marine dex treats them as poisened weapons. While these are ranged as oposed to a CCW it is something to consider. But as always dex trumps, so it doesnt mater, by RAW you have no grounds, and unless you want to downgrade your force weapons and psychic hoods, you wont have moral gounds.

As has been pointed out, ranged weapons have completely different rules. I already downgrade my Force Weapons, as that is a rulebook change. I do not however downgrade Psychic Hoods, as that is only in one specific Codex, not rulebook.

 

Thanks for all the input, it has been enlightening.