Nemesis Falchions and number of attacks

[thade]

My search-fu is failing me, which is a bit of a surprise because I can't see how this hasn't yet come up.

 

Nemesis Falchions come in pairs (there are two of them); their rule says they add +1 attack. There are naturally (and sadly) two sides to come down on here:

1. This is a reference to the fact that there are two CCWs, which give you +1A for having an (identical, in this case) offhand.
   
2. Not only do you get +1A for having an (identical) offhand, but you gain +1 additional attack for taking this weapon.
   

Now, naturally I would like for it to be (2) but I'm pretty sure it's (1), given that it is a dirt cheap upgrade. One additional attack for giving up your storm bolter for so cheap is pretty good; getting two attacks would be amazing.

 

Still, I'm not 100% on this. Have people encountered this? Where are your local clubs settling with regards to it?

[DarkGuard]

This has been argued so much in the OI forum, and there are two different camps, with people in-between. Me? I'm in-between. Would like it to be second, considering the pricing compared to halberds, but can accept the first.

 

One thing though thade, you don't lose the storm bolter, the only thing you trade in is your force sword. You keep the storm bolter as well, it's wrist mounted.

[Grey Mage]

My personal belief, based on reading over it several times and reading through the debate in the OI forum is that it is +1 attack total.

 

IF they were purchased as a nemesis falchion for a couple points each, and the effect was it gives you +1 attack, then yes- +1 for weapon effect, +1 for paired weapons. There is never a case where this is possible however.

 

You are buying a pair of weapons, wich gives you +1 attack because they are a pair. Much like GW has previously published other core rules in their codices, I believe this has been done again.

 

I can understand why people might think this is not the case. I simply think theyre being overly optimistic about it.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

My search-fu is failing me, which is a bit of a surprise because I can't see how this hasn't yet come up.

 

Nemesis Falchions come in pairs (there are two of them); their rule says they add +1 attack. There are naturally (and sadly) two sides to come down on here:

1. This is a reference to the fact that there are two CCWs, which give you +1A for having an (identical, in this case) offhand.
   
2. Not only do you get +1A for having an (identical) offhand, but you gain +1 additional attack for taking this weapon.
   

Now, naturally I would like for it to be (2) but I'm pretty sure it's (1), given that it is a dirt cheap upgrade. One additional attack for giving up your storm bolter for so cheap is pretty good; getting two attacks would be amazing.

 

Still, I'm not 100% on this. Have people encountered this? Where are your local clubs settling with regards to it?

 

Well you are losing the +1 to ++ saves by losing the sword. Taking the termie from 4++ to 5++

 

A second lightning claw in C:BT is 5 pts. And that is for a "Level 3" Character, in the shape of the Marshal.

 

Swap +1 save for +1 attack, then pay 5 pts for a second +1 attack.

That doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

 

But GW has pushed the second lightning claw up to the same price as the first one in the Wolf Dex, which is crazy, so who knows?

 

I think it is +2 attacks, but if I was a GK player, I wouldn't claim the benefit as it is up in the air. You wouldn't want to claim something you mightn't be entitled to, eh?

 

 

Just lightly glue the arms on, or magnetise, and don't paint those ones yet :huh:

[Brother Valerius]

I agree that there is no clear answer. For balance purposes, I certainly hope the FAQ rules that it is +2A, otherwise it is essentially a non-option. A halberd is better and cheaper, if the falchions give +1A. It's certainly a legitimate reading of the rules, but it would make me pretty sad if the weapons are ruled in such a way that they become useless, because they certainly are cool.

[Grey Mage]

I agree that there is no clear answer. For balance purposes, I certainly hope the FAQ rules that it is +2A, otherwise it is essentially a non-option. A halberd is better and cheaper, if the falchions give +1A. It's certainly a legitimate reading of the rules, but it would make me pretty sad if the weapons are ruled in such a way that they become useless, because they certainly are cool.

Theyd hardly be useless. Doubling the potential damage output of several units is certainly something I would argue is worth a quarter of their value. Halberds are a defensive option in most cases- youll get all of your attacks, reducing the chances that others will kill you in the process. Flachions are offensive, giving you more opportunity to destroy your opponents.

[jeffersonian000]

Right now, I only use NFF's to make a model unique for wound allocation abuse. While I'm in the camp that believes it should be treated as +2 attacks (+1 from its rule, +1 for back 2 of the same CC weapons), I'll be running them as +1 attack until a FAQ states otherwise. Wound abuse is worth the concession.

 

SJ

[timmytool]

I believe the +2 attacks is the way it is mainly due to the NFW "Further Abilities" paragraph(C:GK p54) it boils down to all NFW have abilities above and beyond being force weapons and the daemonbane rule. So the Falchions "Ability" is +1attack this is then increased by +1attack due to the BRB's "Rule" that 2 identical special weapons give +1 attack.

 

Counting as 2 special weapons when they are clearly purchased as a pair is not an "Ability" thus the ability is +1 attack while still preserving the rule for 2 special weapons.

 

but as always it wont be solved until a FAQ is released.

[Chengar Qordath]

I agree that there is no clear answer. For balance purposes, I certainly hope the FAQ rules that it is +2A, otherwise it is essentially a non-option. A halberd is better and cheaper, if the falchions give +1A. It's certainly a legitimate reading of the rules, but it would make me pretty sad if the weapons are ruled in such a way that they become useless, because they certainly are cool.

Theyd hardly be useless. Doubling the potential damage output of several units is certainly something I would argue is worth a quarter of their value. Halberds are a defensive option in most cases- youll get all of your attacks, reducing the chances that others will kill you in the process. Flachions are offensive, giving you more opportunity to destroy your opponents.

I wouldn't really think of halberds as a defensive weapon, unless we're going by the standard of killing your opponent before they get a chance to attack as a good form of defense.

 

While the RAW is ambiguous, when it comes to game balance it's hard to argue that a single extra attack at the same time/after your opponent attacks is better than hitting your opponent before they get a chance to attack at all. For that matter, even at +2 attacks, halberds would still be my weapon of choice.

[Seahawk]

Also, it's easy to show why the Falchions give +2 attacks, as there is a precedent for this type of equipment writing style.

 

Marneus Calgar's power fists: "These are a matched pair of power fists." (pair = 2 = extra attack in close combat)

 

Nemesis Falchions: "The wielder of a pair of Nemesis Falchions gets +1 Attack." (pair = 2 = extra attack in close combat; additional special rule gives extra attack too)

 

It's painfully obvious that using two of the same special CC weapons gives +1 attack; that's why it's included in the main rules and not any codex. Calgar's power fists are written in this way and don't need the +1 qualifier. We know they give +1A already. They don't need to write +1A for the falchions either; that should then be a special rule, granting a second attack.

 

It's the same author that wrote both rules too, so it's consistent.

 

 

But since that "defies logical thought," we must wait another year for a FAQ.

[Grey Mage]

That is indeed why they are a defensive weapon- they lower your potential damage output but gaurantee what output you have will get used.

 

It's painfully obvious that using two of the same special CC weapons gives +1 attack; that's why it's included in the main rules and not any codex. Calgar's power fists are written in this way and don't need the +1 qualifier. We know they give +1A already. They don't need to write +1A for the falchions either; that should then be a special rule, granting a second attack.

 

Kind of like how its painfully obvious what a dedicated transport is? Yet GW has repeatedly put their rules in the codices? Thus causing a horrible ruckus in 5th edition when the transport rules changed again.

 

Or how about how its obvious what the scouts rule does, yet GW felt the need to clarify what was RAW at the time in the DA codex, thus screwing over ravenwing a bit for years in 5th edition?

 

Or how about the incredibly straightforwardness of what a powerweapon is- yet its reprinted in C:CSM.

 

The fact is that GW reprints core rules in codices on a willy-nilly basis and so this is inconclusive.

[Brother Valerius]

I agree that there is no clear answer. For balance purposes, I certainly hope the FAQ rules that it is +2A, otherwise it is essentially a non-option. A halberd is better and cheaper, if the falchions give +1A. It's certainly a legitimate reading of the rules, but it would make me pretty sad if the weapons are ruled in such a way that they become useless, because they certainly are cool.

Theyd hardly be useless. Doubling the potential damage output of several units is certainly something I would argue is worth a quarter of their value. Halberds are a defensive option in most cases- youll get all of your attacks, reducing the chances that others will kill you in the process. Flachions are offensive, giving you more opportunity to destroy your opponents.

I wouldn't really think of halberds as a defensive weapon, unless we're going by the standard of killing your opponent before they get a chance to attack as a good form of defense.

 

While the RAW is ambiguous, when it comes to game balance it's hard to argue that a single extra attack at the same time/after your opponent attacks is better than hitting your opponent before they get a chance to attack at all. For that matter, even at +2 attacks, halberds would still be my weapon of choice.

 

Indeed. I'm too lazy to crunch numbers right now, but my gut says that if you assault something with a squad that has halberds, you will achieve a more favorable result than with falchions. That is, you will still kill them, and you will do it with less casualties to yourself as you're removing things before they get to strike. I wouldn't always take falchions at +2A, but they'd at least be a viable option. IMO, there is no reason to ever take falchions at +1A.

 

Kind of like psilencers vs. psycannons... one is clearly better than the other.

[Isiah]

Back to Falchions.

 

My reading of this has always been you get the +1 for having them as per GK Codex which is essentially their special weapon ability, plus the standard bonus for having a matched pair of cc weapons as per BRB. So +2A overall.

 

Part of this view is based on the reasoning that as a pair of cc weapons we already know from the BRB that there is a +1 attack bonus thus there is no need to repeat it in a Codex. The Codex +1 is another quite separate bonus reflecting the fluff/special ability of the weapon.

 

Until it gets FAQ'd or not that is ... :tu:

 

Cheers

I

[Sabadin]

It's painfully obvious that using two of the same special CC weapons gives +1 attack; that's why it's included in the main rules and not any codex.

 

But since that "defies logical thought," we must wait another year for a FAQ.

 

Just like it was painfully obvious that being an IC a Tyranid Prime could join a unit in a dedicated transport..alas painfully obvious and GW obvious cannot always be counted on to be the same thing.

[thade]

Right now I have a good dozen GK modeled with halberds (last edition models) so one motivator here is variety. :) Also, knowing that the storm bolter is not lost makes it seem more appealing. Instead of 1 init6 attack, the model gets 2 init 4 attacks...like an assault trooper with a power weapon.

 

I can see Seahawk's and Isiah's points, but I'm not confident that it actually implies +2A versus +1A; I'm not ashamed to say it, but I kind of attribute it to Matt Ward's style in writing these codecies. He may have been just been trying to be "informative".

 

Though Init 6 w/ 2 attacks vs Init 4 w/ 4 attacks does make for an interesting choice. It's like saying, point for point, an initiative increase is worth an extra attack (in the pocket case that are GK).

[greatcrusade08]

i think i should mention the real issue, no-one has quite put thier fingers on it yet.

the issue isnt are they 2 ccw, of course they are, the issue is whether or not the rule in the GK dex is specific to the fact they are NFW or specific to the fact that they are a pair.

the rule doesnt state falchions get +1A, it states a pair of falchions get +1A..

its very ambiguous wording, and it could very logically mean youd only get the +1A overall.. simply becuase you take them as a pair.

[thade]

its very ambiguous wording, and it could very logically mean youd only get the +1A overall.. simply becuase you take them as a pair.

Yea, GC08, that is in fact what I'm stuck on. :\ Guess I'll just ask my club(s) what the local ruling(s) is(are) and go with it for now.

[Race Bannon]

Not that I know it all but going by RAW, GC08 has it: the pair gives you +1. That's it. That's all it says, so that's all it does.

 

I'm looking at it as a bonus catagory specific to the Grey Knights. You get an armored man who is a psyker. He comes with a Storm Bolter. Add some grenades. Then he has another weapon. That weapon is standard but is part of a group: Nemesis weapons. The Nemesis weapons give a particular bonus and the falchions give +1 attack. That's their bonus.

 

So, where one Nemesis weapon adds to a save, these add to attacks. And for their CHEAP cost, that's awesome, in relation to the rest of the Nemesis weapon bonus catagory.

 

It's sad that I have to talk with each GK opponent about this first, but that's what I have to do.

[thade]

Not that I know it all but going by RAW, GC08 has it: the pair gives you +1. That's it. That's all it says, so that's all it does.

 

I'm looking at it as a bonus catagory specific to the Grey Knights. You get an armored man who is a psyker. He comes with a Storm Bolter. Add some grenades. Then he has another weapon. That weapon is standard but is part of a group: Nemesis weapons. The Nemesis weapons give a particular bonus and the falchions give +1 attack. That's their bonus.

 

So, where one Nemesis weapon adds to a save, these add to attacks. And for their CHEAP cost, that's awesome, in relation to the rest of the Nemesis weapon bonus catagory.

 

It's sad that I have to talk with each GK opponent about this first, but that's what I have to do.

 

RAW is not as clear cut as you assert here, sadly. (Hence, my conundrum.) By RAW he's got a "pair" of weapons; a pair is two identical weapons. They are power weapons. Their special ability is +1A, in the same stint that Lighting Claw special abilities allow you to re-roll wounds.

 

So is he like Calgar? Calgar has a pair of power fists, and - having an identical offhand - he gets an offhand attack per the BRB, thus the +1A is in fact an additional attack? Or is it simply a gross oversight, and they are noting what we already know (that an offhand awards a bonus attack)?

 

Pure RAW I'm pretty sure it's +1A for the weapon power AND +1A for the offhand, cumulative. Given that it's SO DIRT CHEAP, I have severe doubts.

[Race Bannon]

So ... are you saying that because they are dirt cheap ... then it IS only +1 attack total?

[thade]

So ... are you saying that because they are dirt cheap ... then it IS only +1 attack total?

I am saying that because the point cost seems so low to me, that I believe it should be only +1 attack total. I have very little precedent for this; only a gut-feeling, really. Nevertheless, I had a similar gut feeling about PotMS firing through smoke, and I was wrong there too. Still, RAW seems to be +2 attacks. Boggles my mind how after this many editions they make so many mistakes; must rush them out, counting on the FAQs to solve things now.

 

I mean, don't they read this forum? ;)

[DarkGuard]

Personally I don't understand the dirt cheap statements being thrown around. I mean, they cost in most places at least 5pts more than a halberd, and considering the halberd lets you strike before MEQ, other I5 stuff, and at the same time as Stealers and all that, that doesn't seem particularly dirt cheap. I mean, yes, you can double your damage output, but you're more likely to lose guys, and for an elite army like the GKs that's bad. I don't know, I suppose that when we consider Terminator Honours in C:BT are +1A and cost 15pts, I can understand 5-10pt falchions being +1A. Still, I'd prefer for them to be +2A, if only to make them more competitive alongside halberds. That being said, with the recent White Dwarf having an article by Matt Ward specifying them as +1A (I know he says they're 2+ invulnerable save as well, but that's clearly a typo, he obviously meant warding stave), I wouldn't hold out much hope for +2A.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

That being said, with the recent White Dwarf having an article by Matt Ward specifying them as +1A (I know he says they're 2+ invulnerable save as well, but that's clearly a typo, he obviously meant warding stave), I wouldn't hold out much hope for +2A.

 

What WD and page number?

[Seahawk]

US WD 377, p 61:

Bottom of the paragraph before the "Great Guns" header.

 

 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v232/veritas117/mod/scanned009.jpg

 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v232/veritas117/mod/scanned010.jpg

[timmytool]

I dont get how people say falchions are dirt cheep.... all the models in the army have better then power weapons built into their cost they cost less then normal power weapons because EVER SINGLE MODEL in the army MUST pay for them so all in all their are substantially less models in a average army. Falchions is a standard upgrade that is consistently the most expensive, in a list the include +1invulnerable save +2initiative *2strength.

 

in comparison to normal troops(vs strike sq) 30 pts for 2or3 power weapon attacks is average but if you add back the 10pts discount that all strike sq models get due to them all having basic extra costs 40 pts is the same cost as a assault terminator with lightning claws but less armor/invulnerable save and no wound rerolls.

 

paying 10pts for what would amount to a costless additional CC weapon upgrade for any other army, if you believe falchions only give +1attack seems a little over priced to me but right on for +2 attacks

 

EDIT: last paragraph