Seismic Hammer

[Brother-Chaplain Gaius]

I just recently finished my new Ironclad, and equipped it with the seismic hammer and DCCW.

 

My question is, does the Ironclad get 3 str 10 attacks with +1 to roll on vehicle damage chart?

 

Or does it get its base 2 attacks with DCCW and no positive modifier to vehicle damage chart, and ONLY a single attack with seismic hammer with the +1 veh. damage chart mod? (for its total of 3 attacks)

[stinkenheim]

i assume it would be played the same as any other model armed with two special weapons, you decide which you are using and all attacks gain the bonuses of that weapon.

if played like that then i would also assume that you do not gain bonus attacks for 2 CCWs, but i could be wrong here.

[Grey Mage]

i assume it would be played the same as any other model armed with two special weapons, you decide which you are using and all attacks gain the bonuses of that weapon.

if played like that then i would also assume that you do not gain bonus attacks for 2 CCWs, but i could be wrong here.

 

Walkers get +1A per additional weapon after the first, as per their rules. *pg. 73, insert*

 

Its why the Ironclad is listed as having 3 attacks after modifiers.

[stinkenheim]

been a while since i last looked at the marine codex, lol. I knew they got bonus attacks for additional DDCW didnt realise it also included ANY combat weapon they would carry... thank for that GM.

[Brother-Chaplain Gaius]

Ok, so the way Im understanding it is that the seismic hammer only gives you a single attack with the bonus to roll on veh. damage chart. thanks

 

all the more reason to keep that melta gun on there :P

[Grey Mage]

Ok, so the way Im understanding it is that the seismic hammer only gives you a single attack with the bonus to roll on veh. damage chart. thanks

 

all the more reason to keep that melta gun on there ;)

No, you can take all your attacks with the seismic hammer if youd like... or with the DCCW, as normal.

[jbdevega]

every one i know say its both. Iron Clads hit at s10 and get +1 to the damage chart all the time.

[Grey Mage]

every one i know say its both. Iron Clads hit at s10 and get +1 to the damage chart all the time.

That would be because a seismic hammer IS a DCCW, so gets the S 10 ;).

[DevianID]

Walkers get +1A per additional weapon after the first, as per their rules. *pg. 73, insert*

Its why the Ironclad is listed as having 3 attacks after modifiers.

 

This is an incorrect logical reading of the rules, and by RAW the ironclad profile is also incorrect. Walkers fight like normal infantry, except for the listed differences. One difference is that infantry only gain a single +1 attack for 2 or more close combat weapons. Walkers, on the other hand, gain a +1 attack for each extra ccw after the first.

 

However, walkers still follow the rules for special close combat weapons--which is more specific than the rule stating dreads get +1 attack per additional ccw--a dreadnaught power weapon still follows the power weapon special rules for example. A models armed with 2 different kinds of special CCW, like an Ironclad, is not eligable for ANY multiple ccw bonus it may be entitled to have--such is the penalty for wielding too many complex weapons.

[Grey Mage]

Walkers get +1A per additional weapon after the first, as per their rules. *pg. 73, insert*

Its why the Ironclad is listed as having 3 attacks after modifiers.

 

This is an incorrect logical reading of the rules, and by RAW the ironclad profile is also incorrect. Walkers fight like normal infantry, except for the listed differences. One difference is that infantry only gain a single +1 attack for 2 or more close combat weapons. Walkers, on the other hand, gain a +1 attack for each extra ccw after the first.

 

However, walkers still follow the rules for special close combat weapons--which is more specific than the rule stating dreads get +1 attack per additional ccw--a dreadnaught power weapon still follows the power weapon special rules for example. A models armed with 2 different kinds of special CCW, like an Ironclad, is not eligable for ANY multiple ccw bonus it may be entitled to have--such is the penalty for wielding too many complex weapons.

No. its really not.

 

The Walker rule is more specific. Why?

1) Its a Walker-specific rule.

2) It states that its ruling is the case, even though its not normal.

 

The Ironclads profile is correct. In fact, since its in print it would be against RAW to not use the Ironclads profile.

[DevianID]

Grey Mage, your logic is flawed.

 

All walkers gain +1 attack for having more than one CCW. This is more specific than the regular rule that states all models only get +1 for having 2 or more CCW.

 

However, SOME walkers have special close combat weapons, and even fewer are armed with multiple special CCW. There is a specific rule for when a model not only has one special case weapon, but 2 of them. In this case, the specific rules for 2 special weapons comes into play. This rule is MUCH, MUCH more specific than the rule that says all walkers may get a bonus attack for each ccw after the first. Thus, the special weapon rules are more specific.

 

Greymage, you are asserting that the walker rule, which details how walkers fight different from infantry, ALSO changes the rules for special weapons, which are not model specific. Thus I hope you see why i feel your logic is flawed. Do you also assert that the ironclad ignores the chainfist rule that says you dont get a bonus attack?

[Grey Mage]

Grey Mage, your logic is flawed.

 

All walkers gain +1 attack for having more than one CCW. This is more specific than the regular rule that states all models only get +1 for having 2 or more CCW.

 

However, SOME walkers have special close combat weapons, and even fewer are armed with multiple special CCW. There is a specific rule for when a model not only has one special case weapon, but 2 of them. In this case, the specific rules for 2 special weapons comes into play. This rule is MUCH, MUCH more specific than the rule that says all walkers may get a bonus attack for each ccw after the first. Thus, the special weapon rules are more specific.

 

Greymage, you are asserting that the walker rule, which details how walkers fight different from infantry, ALSO changes the rules for special weapons, which are not model specific. Thus I hope you see why i feel your logic is flawed. Do you also assert that the ironclad ignores the chainfist rule that says you dont get a bonus attack?

So... because the rules for special close combat weapons are NOT model specific, they are somehow more specific than the walker rules, wich ARE model specific?

 

I hope you can see the irony in saying the broad rule is the specific one.

 

A SCCW is still a type of CCW, and any type of CCW will give the walker +1 attack- wether it is a DCCW, a chainfist, or a wet noodle that is mentioned as functioning as an additional CCW.

[Legatus]

On page 42, where the basic normal and special close combat weapon are described, there is a section titeled 'Fighting with two Single-Handed Weapons', which then describes the different combinations of two weapons a model might use --> Two normal close combat weapons, two of the same special weapon, a normal and a special weapon, two different special weapons.

 

None of these rules apply to walkers, because walkers have their own entry describing how two or more weapons affect their attacks.

 

"If a walker is armed with two or more close combat weapons, it gains one bonus attack for each additional weapon over the first."

(5th Edition Rulebook, page 73)

 

The rules for models fighting with two weapons do not apply, because they woud not adequately describe all the possible combinations. Imagine if a Dreadnought was equipped with 2 DCCWs and then two different other special CCWs. Would that dread now only get +1 attack for the two DCCWs, while the special CCWs would not grant any further bonus? Or would he get no additional attacks at all, as the rules for 'Two different special weapons" state that "they never get the bonus attack for using two weapons (such is the penalty for wielding too many complex weapons)"? Those rules just are not intended for models with three or more weapons. If you go by the walker rules, he gets +3 attacks, as he has three close combat weapons over the first.

[DevianID]

While it is true that there may be a walker that could have enough (3 or more) different special close combat weapons and regular CCW that the current special weapon rules would not be accurate, no such walker exists. We do have 2 walkers now, however, that have 2 different special CCW, the Libby dread and the Ironclad dred.

 

To say that some of a special weapons rules, such as when the special weapon is allowed to grant bonus attacks, does not apply to walkers, but that other special weapon rules, such as double strength, init 1, and 2d6 armor pen, continue to apply as normal, is cherry picking rules.

 

All walkers would normally gain +1 attack for multiple weapons (general), UNLESS the weapons specificly says otherwise (specific to the weapon in question). The 2 different SCCW specificly says otherwise, thus you would specificly override the ability to claim +1 attack.

 

Legatus, remember there is a regular rule for non walkers that says you get +1 attack for multiple weapons. If the special CCW is overriden by a base rule such as the walker rule, then models with a lightning claw in one hand and a powerfist in another would get +1 attack, as the special weapon rules denying that bonus attack are overridden by the base rule for 2 CCW.

 

And Legatus, as to the 3 or more weapon comment, I absoutely agree that the rules do not handle models with tons of weapons well... take calgar for example, who is armed with 2 kinds of special CCW and 3 weapons total... as he comes armed with 2 kinds of special CCW, he can never gain a bonus attack by those rules at face value. However, poor rules for models with 3 or more weapons dont change the ironclad situation, which only has 2 weapons.

 

Also, while the seismic hammer is the OP, the chainfist is also important to the disscussion. The chainfist has yet another special weapon rule saying you dont get +1 attack in addition to the multiple special weapon rule that states you dont get +1 attack. Do you ignore this additional restriction as Grey Mage does?

[ShinyRhino]

While it is true that there may be a walker that could have enough (3 or more) different special close combat weapons and regular CCW that the current special weapon rules would not be accurate, no such walker exists. We do have 2 walkers now, however, that have 2 different special CCW, the Libby dread and the Ironclad dred.

 

 

Don't Ork Deff Dreds allow you to select up to four different arms?

 

The Ironclad Dread's profile clearly shows it has 2 base attacks, which is modified to 3 when armed with an additional close combat arm (hammer or chainfist). If you decide to arm the Ironclad with a non-CCW arm (hurricane bolters), your A characteristic drops to the base 2.

Walker rules are self-contained as a subset of all other game rules. They explain how walkers, move, shoot, and fight in CC. Trying to apply "multiple special weapons" rules to a subset feels counter-intuitive. You could evenlook at it sequentially. The rules for two special CCWs appear on page 42. The rules for walkers fighting with more than one CCW arm are on p73. P73 is a linear modification or addition to p42.

[stinkenheim]

quick question (and i could answer it myself if i could find my rule book) is a DCCW listed under the special weapons page? If it isn't, and it mentions nothing about it being classed as a special weapon then it wouldn't be effected by the 2x SCCW rule.

[Grey Mage]

quick question (and i could answer it myself if i could find my rule book) is a DCCW listed under the special weapons page? If it isn't, and it mentions nothing about it being classed as a special weapon then it wouldn't be effected by the 2x SCCW rule.

It is not. It is listed in the vehicle section, in the same insert that says any CCW on a walker gives +1 A.

 

And frankly, thats all there is to it- a walker gets +1 A per CCW, of any type, it is equiped with after the first. The profiles in C:SM and C:BA support this, as does the organization of the main rulebook.

 

Its not cherrypicking rules- its applying the ones that are applicable. In this case, using the rules for Walkers gaining extra attacks from weapons instead of the generalized rules for gaining attacks from extra weapons.

 

Just like we use the rules for bikes moving 12" instead of the general rules for moving 6" a turn when discussing space marine bikers.

 

Indeed DevianID, if walkers merely followed the exact same rules for gaining additinal attacks as every other model then why would they mention it at all? Why would, were they to mention it, they not simply say "a walker gains additional attacks following the same rules as other models, or 'as infantry'?

 

Because its not the same. They have their own rules, and we should not ignore them in favor of other, more general, rules.

[stinkenheim]

if its not listed as a special close combat weapon then there is no issue regarding which rule outranks the other.

[DevianID]

Stinkenheim--DCCW are special weapons by defination, as they modify the dreads base attack by doubling strength and ignoring armor saves. Also, the rules do make a distinction between a CCW on a walker and a DCCW on a walker--if every kind of ccw on a dreadnaught was also a DCCW then the libby forceweapon would be s10, for example.

 

To shiny rhino--> ork dreads allow you to take 4 DCCW. They are all identical, thus dont invoke the 'different special weapon' clause that denies attacks. Also shiny, chainfists additionally states that they do not get bonus attacks. To state that the chainfist rule doesnt apply, in addition to the two different special weapons rule not applying, is only asking for trouble. Also shiny, I think you know that the page the rule is on has no bearing to determine what rule is more specific. Finally, the walker rules do not by any means replace the rulebook rules in all cases.

 

Indeed DevianID, if walkers merely followed the exact same rules for gaining additinal attacks as every other model then why would they mention it at all?

Obviously they mention it because Walkers can get MORE than +1 attack for multiple weapons, infantry can not. That is a signifgant difference by itself for dreads with 4 arms, but makes no difference to an ironclad because it only has 2 weapons.

 

The rules for two special CCWs appear on page 42

The base rules for regular models getting multiple attacks is NOT found in the special weapon rules. The walker rules do NOTHING for special weapon rules, they replace the regular assault rules that are NOT found on page 42.

 

a walker gets +1 A per CCW, of any type

Greymage, you made up the 'of any type part.' That is not a rule in any rulebook under the walker section. If the quoted rule said 'of any type of ccw' we would not be having this discourse.

The profiles in C:SM and C:BA support this

Profiles have been wrong, and contradictions do exist, but regardless the profile in the c:sm doesnt change the rulebook rules.

 

As to the specific issue, there is 3 rules in question, not the 2 you keep mentioning.

 

Rule 1, least specific: All models armed with 2 ccw gain a +1 attack. They only gain +1 attack even if they have more than 2 ccw.

Rule 2, more specific: All walkers armed with more than 1 ccw gain +1 attack for each ccw after the first.

Rule 3, most specific: A specific walker unit is armed with the following 2 specific weapons, a DCCW and a Seismic Hammer. Both are power weapons plus additional benefits, and power weapons are one of the base special weapons. We must now go to the special weapon section of the rulebook to determine what powerweapons do. In the rules for special weapons, we see that the penality for wielding 2 different special weapons, the DCCW and the Hammer, is that we do not get the +1 attack that we normally would get, because the multiple special, non standard weapons we carry come with a minor penalty. If the 2 weapons were instead both regular DCCW, then this specific clause would not be invoked, and we would keep the +1 attack.

[DevianID]

Stinkenheim--DCCW are special weapons by defination, as they modify the dreads base attack by doubling strength and ignoring armor saves. Also, the rules do make a distinction between a CCW on a walker and a DCCW on a walker--if every kind of ccw on a dreadnaught was also a DCCW then the libby forceweapon would be s10, for example.

 

To shiny rhino--> ork dreads allow you to take 4 DCCW. They are all identical, thus dont invoke the 'different special weapon' clause that denies attacks. Also shiny, chainfists additionally states that they do not get bonus attacks. To state that the chainfist rule doesnt apply, in addition to the two different special weapons rule not applying, is only asking for trouble. Also shiny, I think you know that the page the rule is on has no bearing to determine what rule is more specific. Finally, the walker rules do not by any means replace the rulebook rules in all cases.

 

Indeed DevianID, if walkers merely followed the exact same rules for gaining additinal attacks as every other model then why would they mention it at all?

Obviously they mention it because Walkers can get MORE than +1 attack for multiple weapons, infantry can not. That is a signifgant difference by itself for dreads with 4 arms, but makes no difference to an ironclad because it only has 2 weapons.

 

The rules for two special CCWs appear on page 42

The base rules for regular models getting multiple attacks is NOT found in the special weapon rules. The walker rules do NOTHING for special weapon rules, they replace the regular assault rules that are NOT found on page 42.

 

a walker gets +1 A per CCW, of any type

Greymage, you made up the 'of any type part.' That is not a rule in any rulebook under the walker section. If the quoted rule said 'of any type of ccw' we would not be having this discourse.

The profiles in C:SM and C:BA support this

Profiles have been wrong, and contradictions do exist, but regardless the profile in the c:sm doesnt change the rulebook rules.

 

As to the specific issue, there is 3 rules in question, not the 2 you keep mentioning.

 

Rule 1, least specific: All models armed with 2 ccw gain a +1 attack. They only gain +1 attack even if they have more than 2 ccw.

Rule 2, more specific: All walkers armed with more than 1 ccw gain +1 attack for each ccw after the first.

Rule 3, most specific: A specific walker unit is armed with the following 2 specific weapons, a DCCW and a Seismic Hammer. Both are power weapons plus additional benefits, and power weapons are one of the base special weapons. We must now go to the special weapon section of the rulebook to determine what powerweapons do. In the rules for special weapons, we see that the penality for wielding 2 different special weapons, the DCCW and the Hammer, is that we do not get the +1 attack that we normally would get, because the multiple special, non standard weapons we carry come with a minor penalty. If the 2 weapons were instead both regular DCCW, then this specific clause would not be invoked, and we would keep the +1 attack.

[Grey Mage]

Edit: Note, your third 'most specific' rule isnt a rule at all- its multiple rule put together to form an interpretation.

 

If a Dreadnaught is equiped with two or more close combat weapons, it gains one bonus attack for each weapon after the first.

 

That is the specific rule that applies to an IC Dread like it does to any other walker.

 

It doesnt matter what type of weapon that additional close combat weapon is- it could be a witchblade, a chainfist, a wet noodle- you get +1 A. This is a walker specific rule, and and thus trumps the more general rule for infantry gaining +1 A. All exercises of the rules to date support this interpretation.

 

I dont really see that theres any more to say on this matter.

[Legatus]

To say that some of a special weapons rules, such as when the special weapon is allowed to grant bonus attacks, does not apply to walkers, but that other special weapon rules, such as double strength, init 1, and 2d6 armor pen, continue to apply as normal, is cherry picking rules.

The rules for how a model fights with two close combat weapons are not part of the weapon's rules themselves. They are rules explaining how a model would use two weapons. Walkers have their own rules for using "two or more" weapons, so these rules do not apply to them.

 

 

All walkers would normally gain +1 attack for multiple weapons (general), UNLESS the weapons specificly says otherwise (specific to the weapon in question). The 2 different SCCW specificly says otherwise, thus you would specificly override the ability to claim +1 attack.

If a weapon's rule specified that a model would not get a bonus attack for it, then those rules would obviously apply to the walker as well. Aside from a few two-handed infantry weapons no weapons that deny the attack bonus come to my mind.

 

 

Legatus, remember there is a regular rule for non walkers that says you get +1 attack for multiple weapons. If the special CCW is overriden by a base rule such as the walker rule, then models with a lightning claw in one hand and a powerfist in another would get +1 attack, as the special weapon rules denying that bonus attack are overridden by the base rule for 2 CCW.

This is not the case of a "base rule" (walker CCWs) standing against a "specific rule" (fighting with two CCWs). Both rules explain the same circumstances, only one is more general, directed at models that are only ever able to use two weapons at the same time, while the other is for a selected group of models that can use more than two weapons at once.

 

CCW section --> "how to fight with two weapons"

 

Walker section --> "how walkers fight with two or more weapons"

 

 

And Legatus, as to the 3 or more weapon comment, I absoutely agree that the rules do not handle models with tons of weapons well... take calgar for example, who is armed with 2 kinds of special CCW and 3 weapons total... as he comes armed with 2 kinds of special CCW, he can never gain a bonus attack by those rules at face value. However, poor rules for models with 3 or more weapons dont change the ironclad situation, which only has 2 weapons.

It is still covered by the rules for walkers, as they explain how a walker fights with "two or more" weapons. If you insist to apply those rules to walkers that are only armed with two weapons, you cannot then simply ignore them once the walker has more than those two.

 

Imagine a walker with two DCCWs and two Chainfists. Would he get +1 attack, because in addition to his first DCCW he has another special CCW of the same type, but the other two special CCWs are different and cannot be combined to the first? Or would he get +2 attacks, as he has two of the same special CCWs (the DCCWs) and then another two of the same special CCW (the Chainfists)? The rules on page 42 are just not meant for that. They are specifically for model who can never use more than two weapons at a time (which is why they failed once GW released rules for a model with three special close combat weapons). However, the walker rules do take into account that the walker may have more than two weapons, and they do not distinguish between what kind of weapons that might be. And if you don't apply the rules from page 42 to a walker with more than two weapons, there is no reason why you should go back to applying them if the walker only had two (he might be dropped from three or four down to two during the course of the game, for example).

 

 

Also, while the seismic hammer is the OP, the chainfist is also important to the disscussion. The chainfist has yet another special weapon rule saying you dont get +1 attack in addition to the multiple special weapon rule that states you dont get +1 attack. Do you ignore this additional restriction as Grey Mage does?

That is not actually a part of the Chainfist's own rules. The Chainfist merely counts as a powerfist, but it is not part of the powerfist's rules either. The rules about how powerfists, lightning claws and thunderhammers cannot be combined with other CCWs to gain the bonus attack are part of the "how to fight with two weapons" rules on page 42. And as I have tried to argue, those rules should not be applied to Walkers.

 

 

A few fluff/balancing things to ponder:

 

- Using two different special CCWs is said to not grant a bonus as it is difficult to wield too many "complex" weapons. However, walkers are already much more adapt than other individualy and can use any number of weapons, not just two as any other model, so why should they then be restricted in the use of multiple "complex" weapons?

 

- Unlike other models, walkers can have their weapons destroyed and thus Attacks taken away from them, untill finally they might have no CCWs left at all, having lost all the bonuses.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

I just recently finished my new Ironclad, and equipped it with the seismic hammer and DCCW.

 

My question is, does the Ironclad get 3 str 10 attacks with +1 to roll on vehicle damage chart?

 

Or does it get its base 2 attacks with DCCW and no positive modifier to vehicle damage chart, and ONLY a single attack with seismic hammer with the +1 veh. damage chart mod? (for its total of 3 attacks)

 

The Dreadnought does get three s10 attacks with +1 to roll on vehicle damage chart.

If armed with a Chainfist, it gets three s10 attacks with 2d6 on AP rolls at initiative 1.

The Dreadnought has special rules for CCW. Rules for a specific model on pg 73 ~ located far away from the rules on pg 42, take precedent.

 

Arguing that they don't, inspite that the Ironclad profile also shows this to be true, is akin to:

 

Arguing that because you cannot shoot one unit and then assault another, pg 33, the amendment that you can shoot a transport and then assault the now disembarked passengers, pg 67, does not count because it says, on pg 67, that "if it is allowed to assault according to the Assault rules" ~ well it is not allowed to assault the passengers as they are a second unit, unless you understand that pg 67 is an amendment to the usual Assault rules.

 

So keeping on returning to pg 33 saying 'You can't, you can't!' is missing a rule that is actually there on pg 67 ~ even if not spelt out in B&W saying "This rule undoes the usual rules on pg 33". The rule is said there, even if not in a perfect and ideal manner.

Yes?

 

Likewise, pg 73 tells you all the rules for weapons on Walkers. If these were not rules only for Walkers and in preference to the other rules, they would be on pg 42.

 

Do I need to reference pg 42 to see what a Chainfist does? Yes.

Does Chainfist -> Powerfist tell me I cannot gain extra attacks for a second weapon? No.

Does DCCW tell me "If a walker is armed with two or more ccw, it gains one bonus attack for each additional weapon over the first."? Yes

Is this supported by the Ironclad profile? Yes

Is that necessary to prove "the fors" are correct? No, but it is nice.

 

Enjoy your Ironclad, my Ultramarine friend, and pray that Templars don't get them ~ with preferred enemy :devil: :angry: :)

:P

[Brother-Chaplain Gaius]

I just recently finished my new Ironclad, and equipped it with the seismic hammer and DCCW.

 

My question is, does the Ironclad get 3 str 10 attacks with +1 to roll on vehicle damage chart?

 

Or does it get its base 2 attacks with DCCW and no positive modifier to vehicle damage chart, and ONLY a single attack with seismic hammer with the +1 veh. damage chart mod? (for its total of 3 attacks)

 

The Dreadnought does get three s10 attacks with +1 to roll on vehicle damage chart.

If armed with a Chainfist, it gets three s10 attacks with 2d6 on AP rolls at initiative 1.

The Dreadnought has special rules for CCW. Rules for a specific model on pg 73 ~ located far away from the rules on pg 42, take precedent.

 

 

 

Enjoy your Ironclad, my Ultramarine friend, and pray that Templars don't get them ~ with preferred enemy :devil: ;)

:wub:

 

haha thx for finally clearing this all up Marshal, was getting out of control in here whew :jaw:

[Marshal Wilhelm]

haha thx for finally clearing this all up Marshal, was getting out of control in here whew :)

 

G M and Legs had said it too :P

It just needed to be reiterated due to the dance off :lol:

 

..... so when are you coming to join the Templars?

 

;) Be careful of the Ultramarines, Gaius. They fear you. In time they will destroy you. Let me show you the true nature of the Imperium. Only through me can you achieve a power greater than any Ultramarine. Learn to know the BLACK side of the Imperium, and you will be able to save your life from certain death. :lol: