Daemonbane, Dreadnought Nemesis Doomfists

[Grimtooth]

you are all over looking this. lets break this down i have the book next to me

 

pg. 39: The Titansword. The Titansword is a master-crafted force weapon with the daemonbane rule. ( see page 54 ) Additionally, any close combat attackes that Draigo directs against a unit that contains one more daemons or Psykers are resolved at Strenght 10

 

ALRRRIGHT lets goto page 54

 

I am going to write BOTH entries on Nemesis Force Weapons.

 

Force Weapons: All nemeis weapons are force weapons, as detailed in the Warhammer 40k rulesbook. Note that a unit of grey Knights with the brotherhood of the pysker special rule needs to take only single psyhic test to " activate" all of its force weapons ( although IC must still role separately ) if the test is passed, all wounds caused by the units NFW that phase inflict instand death if the unit is striking at intitative orders, take the psychic test to " activate" the foce weapons immediately after the first unsaved wounds are caused any further wounds by the NFW that phase will be bound by the result of the psychic test.

 

ok by that wording it would seem that draigo doesnt fall into that rule. because they use the word Nemesis force weapons not just force weapons. but now read the daemonbane rule which would fall back to the point he does have the rule.

 

Daemonbane: any daemon or psyker that suffers one or more unsaved wounds from NFW must take a leadership test at the end of the assault phase . if the test is passed, nothing happens. if the test is failed the model is removed as a caualty. this abiltiy applies regardless of whether or not the NFW have been successfully activated.

 

NOW. this is a case of bad wording its oblvious. but by reading all entries here what you can look at

 

1: draigo has a sword that can goto str 10 if a psyker or daemon is in it.

2: the sword is master crafted

3: the sword has daemonbane

4: the daemonbane rule says it causes psyker and daemons only to take a ld test if they fail to save ( now here we go ) REGARDLESS if the NFW rule has activated.

5: draigo is a lvl 2 psyker ( there must be a reason why they did that )

 

 

so by everything here yes he can roll to activate which would mean this

 

1: any NON psyker or daemon who has an unsaved wound is inflicted by ID

2: any psyker and daemon is inflicted by ID also to unsaved wounds

3: if the psyker or daemon has EW that means the NFW is nullified

now here where everyone is missing

4: THAT SAID PYSKER OR DAEMON NOW MUST TAKE A LD ROLL AND PASS IT AT THE EN OF ASSAULT PHASE OR THE MODEL IS REMOVED FROM PLAY.

 

so in all

draigo has both rules

 

the whole reason it was stated this way was so he couldn't be 2+/2++ in CC

 

for the TL;DR people

 

Draigo has both rules just is a 2+/3++ model.

 

Your argument stumbles with the first sentence of Daemonbane,

 

"Any Daemon or psyker that suffers one or more unsaved wounds from Nemisis force weapons must take....."

 

An unsaved wound from Titansword is not an unsaved wound from a NFW. It is an unsaved wound from a master-crafted force weapon and therefore never forces a Leadership test.

[jeffersonian000]

Except that on pg54, under Nemesis Force Weapons, Force Weapons are listed just above Daemonbane. A literal reading could imply that that the Titansword follows all codex rules as mention under this listing, which are specifically referenced on pg54. In context, it is implied that we look at pg54 for the Daemonbane rule only; however, in literal legal sense, both "force weapon" and "daemonbane" are being referenced in the same sentence. This means that GW intended us to reference pg54 specifically to note the rules for Daemonbane (which the Titansword has permission to use), as well as the definition of Force Weapon (which the Titansword is stated to be). As such, the Titansword has permission by the rules in the codex to be treated as a Nemesis Weapon, with all of the rules inherent there in, specifically because it is a "force weapon" with "daemonbane" per pg54.

 

On the flipside, GW needs to write tighter rules to prevent these arguments from going in circles.

 

SJ

[Prathios]

Except that on pg54, under Nemesis Force Weapons, Force Weapons are listed just above Daemonbane. A literal reading could imply that that the Titansword follows all codex rules as mention under this listing, which are specifically referenced on pg54. In context, it is implied that we look at pg54 for the Daemonbane rule only; however, in literal legal sense, both "force weapon" and "daemonbane" are being referenced in the same sentence. This means that GW intended us to reference pg54 specifically to note the rules for Daemonbane (which the Titansword has permission to use), as well as the definition of Force Weapon (which the Titansword is stated to be). As such, the Titansword has permission by the rules in the codex to be treated as a Nemesis Weapon, with all of the rules inherent there in, specifically because it is a "force weapon" with "daemonbane" per pg54.

 

On the flipside, GW needs to write tighter rules to prevent these arguments from going in circles.

 

SJ

 

Lol, justification to give Draigo a 2++ in CC >.< Not that I think that's exactly what you're saying but the thought makes me chuckle.

[RedemptionNL]

Lol, justification to give Draigo a 2++ in CC >.< Not that I think that's exactly what you're saying but the thought makes me chuckle.

 

He's not trying to justify that at all. And even if it was a Nemesis Force Weapon, it still wouldn't be a Nemesis Force Sword, which is the NFW that gives the improved invulnerable save.

 

To be clear:

- Technically, by pure RAW, Daemonbane wouldn't work on the Titansword because of (yet another example of) crummy rules writing in the GK codex.

- Everyone agrees that by RAI, Daemonbane works with the Titansword just fine. Not that it matters much, Daemonbane isn't even that good anyway, apart from the once in a blue moon occurance of it killing a Greater Daemon or something.

 

If Mat had just written the Titansword was a master-crafted Nemesis Force Weapon, there would be no argument at all, but alas.

[KnowThyEnemy]

perhaps he did it that way so that all of Draigo's wounds don't cause ID (like a NFW), instead just 1 does (like a regular force weapon). Just a thought ^_^. and again, it says he has the rule. why would he say he has that rule and then not be allowed to use any bit of it? same as doomfists. why give them (dreadknights) the equipment if they dont get to use it?

[Angelis Mortis]

Not that it matters much, Daemonbane isn't even that good anyway, apart from the once in a blue moon occurance of it killing a Greater Daemon or something.

 

Actually I disagree with you there. If the Greater Daemon has lost the assault, he will have several penalties to his Ld making it fairly possible to snuff him right out, if you haven't already done it by activation.

[Brother Valerius]

Does that Ld penalty apply to the Daemonbane test? I thought it was just for the purposes of the morale check to run or to stay.

[Angelis Mortis]

Does that Ld penalty apply to the Daemonbane test? I thought it was just for the purposes of the morale check to run or to stay.

 

Ahhh... fair point... it does say Leadership test and not morale test. I think your right and it would be at straight leadership then and then its kind of bleh. Better than nothing tho.

[RedemptionNL]

Not that it matters much, Daemonbane isn't even that good anyway, apart from the once in a blue moon occurance of it killing a Greater Daemon or something.

 

Actually I disagree with you there. If the Greater Daemon has lost the assault, he will have several penalties to his Ld making it fairly possible to snuff him right out, if you haven't already done it by activation.

 

Activating does nothing against most Daemons, as pretty much all of them have Eternal Warrior.

[XaClocKWorKoX]

the daemonbane rule and the NFW weapon rule cause two different things

 

I believe draigo would have both considering he is one hell of a pricey model

 

the NFW just causes ID to anyone who doesnt have EW

 

butttt if the daemon or pysker has EW the daemonbane rule takes affect (now here where the wording gets messy ) REGARDLESS if he has activated his NFW trait.

 

*******again all GW was trying to do was not make sure he was a 2+/2++ character******

[Angelis Mortis]

Not that it matters much, Daemonbane isn't even that good anyway, apart from the once in a blue moon occurance of it killing a Greater Daemon or something.

 

Actually I disagree with you there. If the Greater Daemon has lost the assault, he will have several penalties to his Ld making it fairly possible to snuff him right out, if you haven't already done it by activation.

 

Activating does nothing against most Daemons, as pretty much all of them have Eternal Warrior.

 

Where do you read that? I just went through the entire Chaos Daemon codex and see no eternal warrior on anything. Not on the Greater Daemon out of C:CSM either.

[Angelis Mortis]

butttt if the daemon or pysker has EW the daemonbane rule takes affect (now here where the wording gets messy ) REGARDLESS if he has activated his NFW trait.

 

*******again all GW was trying to do was not make sure he was a 2+/2++ character******

 

Thats correct, because it says removes the model not causes instant death.

[nurglez]

all daemon's from the daemon codex have eternal warrior. Daemon bane removes psykers or daemons if they fail a ld check after suffering a wound.

[Grimtooth]

Except that on pg54, under Nemesis Force Weapons, Force Weapons are listed just above Daemonbane. A literal reading could imply that that the Titansword follows all codex rules as mention under this listing, which are specifically referenced on pg54. In context, it is implied that we look at pg54 for the Daemonbane rule only; however, in literal legal sense, both "force weapon" and "daemonbane" are being referenced in the same sentence. This means that GW intended us to reference pg54 specifically to note the rules for Daemonbane (which the Titansword has permission to use), as well as the definition of Force Weapon (which the Titansword is stated to be). As such, the Titansword has permission by the rules in the codex to be treated as a Nemesis Weapon, with all of the rules inherent there in, specifically because it is a "force weapon" with "daemonbane" per pg54.

 

On the flipside, GW needs to write tighter rules to prevent these arguments from going in circles.

 

SJ

 

All that does is tell you that all NFW are force weapons. That does not tell you that all force weapons are NFW.

 

The Titansword is a force weapon that GW tried and failed to give Daemonbane through crappy rules writing,

[Brother Valerius]

Except that on pg54, under Nemesis Force Weapons, Force Weapons are listed just above Daemonbane. A literal reading could imply that that the Titansword follows all codex rules as mention under this listing, which are specifically referenced on pg54. In context, it is implied that we look at pg54 for the Daemonbane rule only; however, in literal legal sense, both "force weapon" and "daemonbane" are being referenced in the same sentence. This means that GW intended us to reference pg54 specifically to note the rules for Daemonbane (which the Titansword has permission to use), as well as the definition of Force Weapon (which the Titansword is stated to be). As such, the Titansword has permission by the rules in the codex to be treated as a Nemesis Weapon, with all of the rules inherent there in, specifically because it is a "force weapon" with "daemonbane" per pg54.

 

On the flipside, GW needs to write tighter rules to prevent these arguments from going in circles.

 

SJ

 

All that does is tell you that all NFW are force weapons. That does not tell you that all force weapons are NFW.

 

The Titansword is a force weapon that GW tried and failed to give Daemonbane through crappy rules writing,

 

Depends on your definition of failure. 99% of players are going to recognize that the sword is supposed to be able to utilize the Daemonbane rule and aren't going to worry about the technicalities. I wouldn't say that they failed simply because if the rules are interpreted as strictly as possible, a few bad eggs can try to spoil it for the rest of us.

[RedemptionNL]

Not that it matters much, Daemonbane isn't even that good anyway, apart from the once in a blue moon occurance of it killing a Greater Daemon or something.

 

Actually I disagree with you there. If the Greater Daemon has lost the assault, he will have several penalties to his Ld making it fairly possible to snuff him right out, if you haven't already done it by activation.

 

Activating does nothing against most Daemons, as pretty much all of them have Eternal Warrior.

 

Where do you read that? I just went through the entire Chaos Daemon codex and see no eternal warrior on anything. Not on the Greater Daemon out of C:CSM either.

 

Read the 'Daemon' rule on page 27, under the 'Invulnerable!' heading. :D The only Daemon I can think of without Eternal Warrior is the Eldar's Avatar. I don't know about the Daemons in C:CSM, never met anyone that used them. ;)

[Angelis Mortis]

Not that it matters much, Daemonbane isn't even that good anyway, apart from the once in a blue moon occurance of it killing a Greater Daemon or something.

 

Actually I disagree with you there. If the Greater Daemon has lost the assault, he will have several penalties to his Ld making it fairly possible to snuff him right out, if you haven't already done it by activation.

 

Activating does nothing against most Daemons, as pretty much all of them have Eternal Warrior.

 

Where do you read that? I just went through the entire Chaos Daemon codex and see no eternal warrior on anything. Not on the Greater Daemon out of C:CSM either.

 

Read the 'Daemon' rule on page 27, under the 'Invulnerable!' heading. :) The only Daemon I can think of without Eternal Warrior is the Eldar's Avatar. I don't know about the Daemons in C:CSM, never met anyone that used them. :)

 

 

Ahh I see it now, thanks for that. It would prevent an activation, but it doesn't prevent Daemonbane. Daemonbane isn't an instant death effect, it says it removes the model from play. Eternal Warrior wouldn't protect them from this.