Dante, The Sanguinor and Sanguinary Guard

[Leksington]

DAboarder has brought to our attention the following:

 

 

From the Blood Angels Codex, page 23, last sentence of the first paragraph under the "Equipment" heading:

 

"When an item is unique, it is detailed in the relevant entry for its owner, and where an item is not unique it is detailed in the wargear section.

 

A good example is the Axe Mortalis, a potent weapon wielded by Commander Dante. As such, its rules are detailed in Dante's entry."

 

 

Cut, clean and dusted I say?

Nope. As I pointed out in the thread in the rules forum:

 

RAW-wise, the BRB doesn't care if the weapon is unique. It only cares that the weapon's rules are unique. This one is still up in the air in my mind.

 

Close but no cigar Mort. :P

[JamesI]

Nope. As I pointed out in the thread in the rules forum:

 

RAW-wise, the BRB doesn't care if the weapon is unique. It only cares that the weapon's rules are unique. This one is still up in the air in my mind.

 

Close but no cigar Mort. :P

Actually the rules care if you have Special Rules to determine if you can look at axe/sword/whatever.

 

Glaives and the Axe Mortalis do, so no chart.

[Drunken Angel]

What a relic blade is, is irrelevant ... its an item from another codex. Glaives are listed on the wargear page alongside other wargear, just because you have to go to another page or book to understand a thunder hammer or any other weapon alongside the Glaive wont help you describe that as unique either. Glaives are mentioned in wargear and are available to 3 different units, they are not unique.

 

 

The codex says where it is DESCRIBED to determine uniqueness. You are using a different definition of unique from the codex.

 

 

Also, you have not answered my other point. How can a glaive be an axe if according to the rulebook we only go to the chart if it has no special rules?

 

Respectfully and very politely James I would point out in response

 

The glaives master crafted rule is on the wargear page, thats not special thats a wargear entry. The top of the page details that this part of the codex lists the weapons and equipment used by the Blood Angels

 

The non unique Glaive Encarmine and the master crafted rule for its use is on the wargear page.

Actually master crafted is now defined by Page 39 of the rulebook, the section called Special Rules. So Master crafted (and Two handed in the case of glaives) are Special rules.

 

So, again, no axe/sword/mace/spear due to special rules.

 

We will have to agree to disagree

 

From the Blood Angels Codex, page 23, last sentence of the first paragraph under the "Equipment" heading:

"When an item is unique, it is detailed in the relevant entry for its owner, and where an item is not unique it is detailed in the wargear section.

A good example is the Axe Mortalis, a potent weapon wielded by Commander Dante. As such, its rules are detailed in Dante's entry."

 

Unless FAQ'd codex trumps BRB, other Blood Angel weapons were FAQ'ed and addressed. The Glaive Encarmine was left unchanged. Unless FAQ'ed otherwise the Glaive Encarmine is listed as a wargear entry, rules for using the Glaive as wargear are on the codex wargear page. The glaive not unique by any definition in the BA codex nor by FAQ. The Glaive is used by 3 seperate Blood Angels units.

That to me is a pretty strong argument for non unique wargear.

 

So, willing to call this one a draw? Both of us walk away as neither are going to change our minds until a FAQ?

 

Absolutely thank you for your patience and the spirit of good will in the discussion. I think it has exposed the bare bones of the issue both arguments have substance and BA players can only benefit from reading this. :D

[Leksington]

Actually the rules care if you have Special Rules to determine if you can look at axe/sword/whatever.

 

Glaives and the Axe Mortalis do, so no chart.

"Unique rules" is the standard set by page 61 of the BRB. Not "special rules."

 

We still need a GW ruling.

[JamesI]

Actually the rules care if you have Special Rules to determine if you can look at axe/sword/whatever.

 

Glaives and the Axe Mortalis do, so no chart.

"Unique rules" is the standard set by page 61 of the BRB. Not "special rules."

 

We still need a GW ruling.

PAge 61 says "A power weapon with no further special rules looks at the chart to determine type"

 

So, if a power weapon has a special rule, no axe/sword/maul...

[JamesI]

So, willing to call this one a draw? Both of us walk away as neither are going to change our minds until a FAQ?

 

Absolutely thank you for your patience and the spirit of good will in the discussion. I think it has exposed the bare bones of the issue both arguments have substance and BA players can only benefit from reading this. :P

I think you and I just read the Codex definition of Unique given on page 23 differently. That seems to be the entire issue between us, if we could agree on that, everything else would fall into place.

 

Please GW FAQ this soon.

[Deschenus Maximus]

Gentlemen, there is no right answer in this case. Both the Axe Mortalis and the Glaives have special rules (so can't be standard power weapons) but neither have unique special rules (so can't be unique power weapons). They fit neither description at this time.

 

A FAQ is most definetely needed.

[JamesI]

Gentlemen, there is no right answer in this case. Both the Axe Mortalis and the Glaives have special rules (so can't be standard power weapons) but neither have unique special rules (so can't be unique power weapons). They fit neither description at this time.

 

A FAQ is most definetely needed.

I worry about declaring unique to be entirely unique as all that means is if someone in the chaos codex get a weapon that duplicates Astorath's axe and no neither is a unusual power weapon?

 

I really hope they FAQ out the unique wording.

[General Ravensong]

Careful everyone, if we tread too closely into the RAW we'll all have to disassemble our Sanguinary guard and Sanguinor's, because if they're all equipped with glaives and as such will need to use the rules for power spears. we have to give them polearms. As mentioned earlier: we'll need to see what the next set of FAQs say before we start going for each others' throats. I think the variation in powerweapons was a wonderful idea that just needed a little more grease and polish before it was set upon the masses.

[toaae]

I'm having trouble seeing why the names of the weapons matter at all.

 

The Axe Mortalis states that it is a power weapon. The rules for power weapons state to look at the model. Call it what you will, but if you modeled your Dante with a sword, it's a power sword.

 

Modeling for advantage doesn't have to be a bad thing, especially if there isn't a consensus best choice. That's called options.

[SevenExxes]

Careful everyone, if we tread too closely into the RAW we'll all have to disassemble our Sanguinary guard and Sanguinor's, because if they're all equipped with glaives and as such will need to use the rules for power spears. we have to give them polearms. As mentioned earlier: we'll need to see what the next set of FAQs say before we start going for each others' throats. I think the variation in powerweapons was a wonderful idea that just needed a little more grease and polish before it was set upon the masses.

 

What? That doesn't make any sense I'm sorry. Some Glaive Encarmines look like a sword and so therefore they're a sword. Some Glaive Encarmines are an axe and so therefore are most probably an axe.

[General Ravensong]

Careful everyone, if we tread too closely into the RAW we'll all have to disassemble our Sanguinary guard and Sanguinor's, because if they're all equipped with glaives and as such will need to use the rules for power spears. we have to give them polearms. As mentioned earlier: we'll need to see what the next set of FAQs say before we start going for each others' throats. I think the variation in powerweapons was a wonderful idea that just needed a little more grease and polish before it was set upon the masses.

 

What? That doesn't make any sense I'm sorry. Some Glaive Encarmines look like a sword and so therefore they're a sword. Some Glaive Encarmines are an axe and so therefore are most probably an axe.

A glaive, by definition, is a polearm. The word is also apparently used to refer to the Roman Gladius, which is also not a two handed sword.

[daboarder]

I'm sorry but you people can be ridiculous.

 

You have RAW stating that if a weapon has additional rules you CANNOT look to see what the weapon is

 

You have RAW stating that unique weapons have their rules stated in the relevant codex and are AP3

 

You have the RAW in the codex stating that Dante's Axe by name is a unique weapon.

 

But you still argue that is must be an axe? Simply because of the use of such poor wording as "unique" last I checked Dante's axe was the only 1-handed, master crafted, power weapon in codex BA.

 

Really bleh!

[Leksington]

Actually the rules care if you have Special Rules to determine if you can look at axe/sword/whatever.

 

Glaives and the Axe Mortalis do, so no chart.

"Unique rules" is the standard set by page 61 of the BRB. Not "special rules."

 

We still need a GW ruling.

PAge 61 says "A power weapon with no further special rules looks at the chart to determine type"

 

So, if a power weapon has a special rule, no axe/sword/maul...

So from your part it doesn't go to the chart.

From my part it doesn't get assigned AP3.

Where does that leave it? In a crack between the two rules where it gets nothing!

 

If we want to play by the strictest RAW reading, Dante's axe and the GE have no AP value. :P Clearly that is not RAI.

 

FAQ is required.

[SevenExxes]

Careful everyone, if we tread too closely into the RAW we'll all have to disassemble our Sanguinary guard and Sanguinor's, because if they're all equipped with glaives and as such will need to use the rules for power spears. we have to give them polearms. As mentioned earlier: we'll need to see what the next set of FAQs say before we start going for each others' throats. I think the variation in powerweapons was a wonderful idea that just needed a little more grease and polish before it was set upon the masses.

 

What? That doesn't make any sense I'm sorry. Some Glaive Encarmines look like a sword and so therefore they're a sword. Some Glaive Encarmines are an axe and so therefore are most probably an axe.

A glaive, by definition, is a polearm. The word is also apparently used to refer to the Roman Gladius, which is also not a two handed sword.

 

This is Warhammer 40k not the Roman Empire. The weapon is a Glaive Encarmine not a glaive or gladius. The weapons themselves look like swords and axes as there are two variants.

[toaae]

Again, that's an issue of "name", which is just a bit of fluff. The rules state power weapon, and power weapons say "what does it look like?"

 

If you wanna keep using Dante's I6, you have to model him with a sword. Sanguard are equipped with whichever weapon you modeled them with.

[Radiation]

It literally says the Axe Mortalis is unique on page 23.

 

If an opponent wants to play it as AP 2 I would totally be cool with it because it is a buff, especially for the Glaives. I would be very wary of becoming a "that guy" if you go about insisting it is AP 2 and slaughtering the heavy troops of your opponent because of an extremely slight wording issue. The problem is no one found this entry until just recently and we were all assuming "unique" was, well, a unique new word that wasn't in the rule set, when it actually was and has been for sometime hiding under our noses. We may be debating this in a BA bubble in this forum, but I can see a lot of players who rely on terminators telling you to look at page 23 of your codex. Will I hold my breath for a new FAQ? Nope. Do I hope they FAQ it either way? Yes, and I would prefer it to be AP 2. Right now as it is written, AP 3 Melee seems to be the clear choice, as well as not being a buff. There is also a similiar entry in Space Marines Codex on page 51 and a condensed version in Grey Knights on page 21 at the very top of the page.

[daboarder]

Again, that's an issue of "name", which is just a bit of fluff. The rules state power weapon, and power weapons say "what does it look like?"

 

If you wanna keep using Dante's I6, you have to model him with a sword. Sanguard are equipped with whichever weapon you modeled them with.

 

 

Please stop saying this, as this is not what the rules says.

[toaae]

Again, that's an issue of "name", which is just a bit of fluff. The rules state power weapon, and power weapons say "what does it look like?"

 

If you wanna keep using Dante's I6, you have to model him with a sword. Sanguard are equipped with whichever weapon you modeled them with.

 

 

Please stop saying this, as this is not what the rules says.

 

Oh? And what does it say? Something other than:

 

"If a model's wargear says it has a power weapon which has no further special rules, look at the model to tell which type of power weapon it has:"

 

Cause that's what mine says. Yep. Pretty much the exact thing you quoted.

[daboarder]

Again, that's an issue of "name", which is just a bit of fluff. The rules state power weapon, and power weapons say "what does it look like?"

 

If you wanna keep using Dante's I6, you have to model him with a sword. Sanguard are equipped with whichever weapon you modeled them with.

 

 

Please stop saying this, as this is not what the rules says.

 

Oh? And what does it say? Something other than:

 

"If a model's wargear says it has a power weapon which has no further special rules, look at the model to tell which type of power weapon it has:"

 

Cause that's what mine says. Yep. Pretty much the exact thing you quoted.

 

that little point there changes the entire purpose of the sentence. and you'll find that it also invalidates the claim you have made above in which case I am accurate is saying that what was initially quoted is not what the rules say.

[toaae]

edit: wait are we arguing the same thing and did I read your initial statement incorrectly?

 

I'm not so sure. My argument is based on the idea that both the Glaive Encarmine and the Axe Mortalis don't fall under unusual power weapons (cause that heading states it has to have unique rules, and Master-Crafted is not unique). Since they aren't unusual, they would have to follow the normal power weapon rules, which don't care what the weapon is named, just what it looks like.

 

I'm not arguing whether or not the weapon is an Unusual Power Weapon. I feel it isn't, but the whole point of my argument is that you don't have to use Dante with a Power Axe even if the weapon isn't Unusual.

 

 

Frankly, I think we're actually at two different points of the debate ;)

[Drunken Angel]

It literally says the Axe Mortalis is unique on page 23.

 

If an opponent wants to play it as AP 2 I would totally be cool with it because it is a buff, especially for the Glaives. I would be very wary of becoming a "that guy" if you go about insisting it is AP 2 and slaughtering the heavy troops of your opponent because of an extremely slight wording issue. The problem is no one found this entry until just recently and we were all assuming "unique" was, well, a unique new word that wasn't in the rule set, when it actually was and has been for sometime hiding under our noses. We may be debating this in a BA bubble in this forum, but I can see a lot of players who rely on terminators telling you to look at page 23 of your codex. Will I hold my breath for a new FAQ? Nope. Do I hope they FAQ it either way? Yes, and I would prefer it to be AP 2. Right now as it is written, AP 3 Melee seems to be the clear choice, as well as not being a buff. There is also a similiar entry in Space Marines Codex on page 51 and a condensed version in Grey Knights on page 21 at the very top of the page.

 

The same section on page 23 that details Dantes axe as unique also clears up the ambuguity of glaives.

The Glaive Encarmine is not unique it is detailed in the wargear section this defines it as non unique , that part of our codex is very clear the glaive has no special rules under a character entry it is used by three seperate units in fact. The Glaive is detailed under wargear has wargear rules and is listed as a two handed master crafted power weapon. The glaive power weapon therefore falls into the category of being able to use axe or sword profiles.

 

You can have Dante as an AP3 axe weilder by the definition as unique found by Daboarder, I am cool with that. The same paragraph gives Sanguinary Guard, The Sanguinor and Vanguard Veterans the axe option, both in our codex and in the BRB. You can define Dante's axe as AP3 if you do that I am fine with that because all 3 units using Glaives are getting axes if I wish to model them that way.

 

I have Sanguinary Guard. I am damned if I will remodel any of them unless the BA codex is FAQ'ed. That the glaive has not been FAQ'ed tells me we have a non unique weapon the entry on page 23 is very clear. I will take axes AP2 and glaives AP3 and the profiles will be what I give the models before a game.

 

I am not discussing this I am pointing out that you have a choice here depending on which way you wish to read the codex and BRB. Dante's axe to AP3 = Sanguinary Guard and Vanguard Vets AP2 awesome axes. I would be unhappy if an opponent accepted Dante at AP3 and then used that argument to define the other three units modeled with Glaives as only AP3 when they can take AP2 axes by the same section of our codex that requires Dante to use an AP3 weapon.

[daboarder]

Frankly, I think we're actually at two different points of the debate ;)

 

Yeah we are I just reread the thing. So again I submit to you that regardless of what Dante's weapon looks like the rules specifically say that you do not look at the model to see what it is.

[JamesI]

The same section on page 23 that details Dantes axe as unique also clears up the ambuguity of glaives.

The Glaive Encarmine is not unique it is detailed in the wargear section this defines it as non unique , that part of our codex is very clear the glaive has no special rules under a character entry it is used by three seperate units in fact. The Glaive is detailed under wargear has wargear rules and is listed as a two handed master crafted power weapon. The glaive power weapon therefore falls into the category of being able to use axe or sword profiles.

I don't see how Glaives do not meet the Page 23 definition of unique. Page 23 does not require the rules to be detailed on a character entry but on its owner's entry.

 

They are not detailed in the wargear section. You can not look at the wargear section of Codex BA and know how to play them, their rules are detailed on the page for Sanguinary Guard.

 

And the glaive can not use axe/sword anyway by the rulebook since it has a special rule (2 in fact).

 

 

If all of this were up to me, I'd pick what is probably the easiest solution. Go with the model, if you want Dante to have an AP3 normal initiative weapon, give him a sword. If you want the axe rules, give him an axe. Same with Glaives.

 

GW just needs to FAQ this so we have one consistent set of rules.

[JamesI]

I've added a poll.

 

Out of curiosity I want to see what people think is correct. Obviously, which ever wins the poll does not mean it is the right answer, that will likely not be settled until the FAQs are updated.

 

If I left out any options (I think I got everything I've seen suggested) let me know and I can add them. IF you feel I need to add an option, do not vote as that might not be fixable.

 

 

BTW I've added Astorath's axe to the poll. I have not seen any arguments about his axe, but felt for completeness I'd toss it in.