Ulrik and our other Wolf Priests...

[dswanick]

"Unique close combat rules" are close combat rules applied to a unique wargear item - what constitutes a unique wargear item is clearly defined. Seriously, you're trying to grasp at metaintellectual straws to justify seeing a loop-hole which doesn't exist.

 

Ulrik is only armed with "Power Weapon".

Cool. Agreed. A Power Weapon. That looks like...a Crozius?

 

You see, these things aren't so hard when you learn to English.

It looks like a Crozius if you take the stock model without modifications. If you're faced with an altered model, or a custom-made conversion - it will look like whatever the owner modeled it to look like (axe, sword, spear, maul, spade, or spoon). So given the two topics of your above post I would suggest you "learn" a little "english".

[Khine]

Of course, you focus on the word unique, right? Well here's the definition of "unique":

It's not the word 'unique' you're looking for. It's 'unique close combat rules' you want.

 

What 'unique close combat rules' do Glaive Encarmines have?

Two-handed? No, that's a special rule on pg 43.

Master-Crafted? No, that's a special rule on pg 39.

 

So there's two special rules, but there are no further special rules there? Cool. So it's a Power weapon that is either a Sword, Axe, Maul or Lance. Page 61 tells you to look at the model. Most of those models are swords and axes.

 

So, what is unique about them? They're unique to the BA? Whoop-de-doo.

 

Unique and unique close combat rules are two different things.

Do they make opponents re-roll successful Invul saves?

Do they always wound Daemons on a 2+ and stop psychic powers on a 4+ within 24"?

Can it be used as 2 different types of weapon in the same round of combat?

 

If the answers to the above and questions that have no rule explaining them in the BRB are no, then you probably don't have a unique weapon.

 

Ulrik is only armed with "Power Weapon".

Cool. Agreed. A Power Weapon. That looks like...a Crozius?

 

You see, these things aren't so hard when you learn to English.

 

the point your missing though storm is that YES the Ulrik and games day model come with what looks like a blunt weapon. What happens if you shave the two ends so the both taper to an edge? its still the same model but now it looks like a retarded axe. What people are trying to get across is that we have the capacity to re-sculpt/convert our non-existent GW standard wolf priest with any of the varieties of power weapons into a Crozius Arcanum (power weapon). Yes the pictures we have of Wolf Priests do show them with blunt style weapons but whose to say that some of the pictures with axes or swords aren't really other variants of wolf priests? actually i take that back about the only pictures we have comment. Page 35 of our rule book, that weapon hes holding looks far more like an axe to me than it does a maul.

[Wulfebane]

non-existent GW standard wolf priest

 

I’m gunna get rid of everything but what's the most important part. We can't use Ulrik or the GD'08 WP for every priest in our army, and when converting models every player is restricted by the rules of their codex, not the stock models' given armaments. Our codex says 'power weapon' , so our options are wide open.

[Stormbrow II]

Page 35 of our rule book, that weapon hes holding looks far more like an axe to me than it does a maul.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, Khine.

 

I'm looking at Ulrik and Sternhammer models as I type and they both look to be holding club-like weapons to me tbh. I'm trying to keep things simple and go with what page 61 suggests - look at what they're armed with. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

 

the point your missing though storm is that YES the Ulrik and games day model come with what looks like a blunt weapon. What happens if you shave the two ends so the both taper to an edge?

Wouldn't that be modelling for advantage?

 

Most arguments on combat weapons will boil down to:

 

I want/do not want an AP 3 weapon.

I want/do not want an I 1 weapon.

 

See dswanick's arguments for example.

 

"Unique close combat rules" are close combat rules applied to a unique wargear item - what constitutes a unique wargear item is clearly defined.

No they aren't. UCCR is a collective term, not fragmented as you suggest. I've given an example of UCCR's in my previous post. Glaive Encarmines don't have any. Nor does the Axe Mortalis for that matter (M-C does not give a weapon unique status). Astaroth's Axe does however.

 

There are named unique weapons: weapons restricted to one army or character.

Then, there are Unusual power weapons that one or more unique rules, and if they have one or more unique close combat rules it's an AP 3 weapon. Again, Glaives don't have any unique rules (remember: Master-crafted and Two-handed are defined in the rulebook) so they can't be said to be unusual power weapons.

 

Unique power weapons? Yes - only certain BA units/characters can have them.

Unusual power weapons? No - they don't have unique close combat rules.

 

It looks like a Crozius if you take the stock model without modifications.

Cool. So we're agreed.

 

If you're faced with an altered model, or a custom-made conversion - it will look like whatever the owner modeled it to look like (axe, sword, spear, maul, spade, or spoon).

So modelling for advantage is ok? Not to me. Counts-as is fine but Special Characters and Chaplains of all hues are lumped with what's on the model so if someone want's to use a counts-as then they'll have to use what the actual model is equipped with and not try to take the piss about it. Oh look: Dante has a sword is suddenly I5 again. Horray. ;)

 

Seriously, you're trying to grasp at metaintellectual straws to justify seeing a loop-hole which doesn't exist.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-nRGCBJ98wDQ/TtiETKy6VNI/AAAAAAAABxY/CIurW6bhwGQ/s1600/pot_kettle_black.jpg

[dswanick]

This will teach me to never hit the "View this post" link on someone I've blocked...

[eyeslikethunder]

on the unique rules front GW 's reply to James1 suggests that MC is enough to be considered a unique item

Good Morning James

 

Thanks for the email about the New Warhammer 40'000 rules. We would be happy to answer your questions about the new Warhammer 40'000 rules, Are you running a Blood Angel army at the moment and what are you running in your list?

 

1) There has been some debate over what qualifies as a unusual power weapon (or Force weapon). Here are a few examples and I am wondering if they qualify. All have special rules, which by page 61 says they do not go look at the weapon to determine type.

 

Dante's Axe Mortalis

Glaive Encarmines

Astorath's Executioner's Axe

Relic Blades

Demon Weapons

Ahriman's Black Staff.

 

All of these weapons do count as Unusual power weapons and are AP3 in close combat, as they all have other rule other than being a power weapon.

 

2) Does Captain Tycho have an AP Value? Or does he just ignore all armor saves?

 

Brother Captain Tyco just Ignores all armour saves with the Dead Mans Hand, and rolls a extra D6 for armour penatration. How cool is that?

 

3) If I use a signum to make a shooter BS5, does that override the snapfire restriction for firing a moving heavy weapon or shooting a flyer?

 

Yes but it can only be used in the Shooting phase, not when being charged.

 

4) Can Artillery fire overwatch (assuming the artillery is not blast such as Ork Artillery)

 

Yes as long as the weapon is not a blast weapon.

 

Hope that this helps and if you have any other questions please contact us again.

[dswanick]

on the unique rules front GW 's reply to James1 suggests that MC is enough to be considered a unique item

Good Morning James

 

Thanks for the email about the New Warhammer 40'000 rules. We would be happy to answer your questions about the new Warhammer 40'000 rules, Are you running a Blood Angel army at the moment and what are you running in your list?

 

1) There has been some debate over what qualifies as a unusual power weapon (or Force weapon). Here are a few examples and I am wondering if they qualify. All have special rules, which by page 61 says they do not go look at the weapon to determine type.

 

Dante's Axe Mortalis

Glaive Encarmines

Astorath's Executioner's Axe

Relic Blades

Demon Weapons

Ahriman's Black Staff.

 

All of these weapons do count as Unusual power weapons and are AP3 in close combat, as they all have other rule other than being a power weapon.

And the metaintellectual loop-hole goes up in a *poof* of common sense...

Queue the "it doesn't count until it's in an FAQ", "what do those GW trolls know", "ask again and you'll get different answers". :(

[eyeslikethunder]

LOL

Well a "unique rule" was always going to be a bit bugbear

How unique does it have to be? If some one else gets is it still unique

Counter attack was unique when we first got it in 3rd ed

venerable dread rule the same

What if my unique rule gets FAQed to a standard rule in BRB

 

The fun of 40k :(

[Stormbrow II]

And the metaintellectual loop-hole goes up in a *poof* of common sense...

Queue the \"it doesn\'t count until it\'s in an FAQ\", \"what do those GW trolls know\", \"ask again and you\'ll get different answers\". msn-wink.gif

You take the good with the bad.

 

Astorath\'s Executioner\'s Axe

Relic Blades

Demon Weapons

Ahriman\'s Black Staff.

I\'ve no problems with these.

 

Dante\'s Axe Mortalis

Glaive Encarmines

I\'d disagree with them on this but seeing as a GW put this out, I\'m willing to go with it. Let\'s just hope they\'re consistent with this.

 

3) If I use a signum to make a shooter BS5, does that override the snapfire restriction for firing a moving heavy weapon or shooting a flyer?

 

Yes but it can only be used in the Shooting phase, not when being charged.

What? Cool. Take page 2 and pee all over it, sure.

 

The fun of 40k biggrin.gif

More like the inconsistency of poor rules-writing and choice of language. I wonder how much money and how many customers and developers they\'ve lost because of it? At least they put out pretty models.

[eyeslikethunder]

Dante's Axe Mortalis

Glaive Encarmines

I'd disagree with them on this but seeing as a GW put this out, I'm willing to go with it. Let's just hope they're consistent.

me too

 

just waiting now for someone to argue adding MC to their Poweraxe makes it unique

[Wulfebane]

And the metaintellectual loop-hole goes up in a *poof* of common sense...

Queue the "it doesn't count until it's in an FAQ", "what do those GW trolls know", "ask again and you'll get different answers". msn-wink.gif

You take the good with the bad.

 

Astorath's Executioner's Axe

Relic Blades

Demon Weapons

Ahriman's Black Staff.

I've no problems with these.

 

Dante's Axe Mortalis

Glaive Encarmines

I'd disagree with them on this but seeing as a GW put this out, I'm willing to go with it. Let's just hope they're consistent.

 

Coming off hypocritical, I guess. All this "debate" over wysiwyg power weapon archetypes and in the end you're ok with GW's ruling on one "Axe" but not the other.

[Stormbrow II]

Coming off hypocritical, I guess. All this "debate" over wysiwyg power weapon archetypes and in the end you're ok with GW's ruling on one "Axe" but not the other

Not quite.

 

Astaroth's has that funky rule (re-roll to Invuls) which isn't included/explained in the BRB so slotted nicely under UPWs.

Dante's/Sang Guard's rules are in the BRB so didn't fit as comfortably under the UPW rule.

 

Fwiw, I'm friends with some of the Warhammer World nerds (Events) and we've been playing it like the same ways, as above i.e. Astaroth a UPW, Dante with an Axe.

 

Problem?

[Lord Ragnarok]

Some testy comments in the thread. Let's tone it down and keep it clinical please.

[ironking]

Chaplains all carry a Crozius Arcanum, Wolf Priests (who play the role of Chaplains and more) all carry a Crozius Arcanum (per wargear in respective codex)... a crozius arcanum is a power weapon, in all probability a Power Maul - now stay with me here because here is where the infinitely huge logic jump comes in... Ulrik is a Wolf Priest - (post hoc ergo propter hoc) he has a crozius arcanum aka power maul... yeh it looks a bit axe'y in the artwork but read the GW site description:

 

"When he goes into war he is a terrifying figure indeed, resplendent in his black armour, the Wolf Helm and the crackling Crozius Arcanum that acts as his badge of office."

GW Site Description for Ulrik

 

why all the fuss?

 

Does anyone even use the expensive bugger?

[dswanick]

Chaplains all carry a Crozius Arcanum, Wolf Priests (who play the role of Chaplains and more) all carry a Crozius Arcanum (per wargear in respective codex)... a crozius arcanum is a power weapon, in all probability a Power Maul - now stay with me here because here is where the infinitely huge logic jump comes in... Ulrik is a Wolf Priest - (post hoc ergo propter hoc) he has a crozius arcanum aka power maul... yeh it looks a bit axe'y in the artwork but read the GW site description:

 

"When he goes into war he is a terrifying figure indeed, resplendent in his black armour, the Wolf Helm and the crackling Crozius Arcanum that acts as his badge of office."

GW Site Description for Ulrik

 

why all the fuss?

 

Does anyone even use the expensive bugger?

Ulrik the Slayer

Wargear:

• Power armour

• Plasma pistol

• Frag and krak Grenades

• Power weapon

• Fang of Morkai

• Wolftooth necklace

• Wolf amulet

• Wolf Helm of Russ

[Stormbrow II]

why all the fuss?

 

Does anyone even use the expensive bugger?

I doubt it actually - he's a bit overpriced for what he does. It is nice to have rules clarifications though.

 

now stay with me here because here is where the infinitely huge logic jump comes in... Ulrik is a Wolf Priest - (post hoc ergo propter hoc)

Leave your logic and common sense out of this: this is a GW rules argument, damn it, and those things have no place here.

[Wulfebane]

Wolf Priests (who play the role of Chaplains and more)

 

Right. They're more. Just as Space Wolves break away from standard Astartes structure, their leaders and wargear do not necessarily fit with what is commonly expected for that given role. Your chaplains have power mauls as cookie cutter, one-size-fits-all crozius arcanums, whereas our wolf priests wield crozius arcanums of a weapon archetype as befits each wolf priest's individual preference (per RAW).

 

Coming off hypocritical, I guess. All this "debate" over wysiwyg power weapon archetypes and in the end you're ok with GW's ruling on one "Axe" but not the other

Not quite.

 

Astaroth's has that funky rule (re-roll to Invuls) which isn't included/explained in the BRB so slotted nicely under UPWs.

Dante's/Sang Guard's rules are in the BRB so didn't fit as comfortably under the UPW rule.

 

Fwiw, I'm friends with some of the Warhammer World nerds (Events) and we've been playing it like the same ways, as above i.e. Astaroth a UPW, Dante with an Axe.

 

Problem?

 

 

I'm looking at Ulrik and Sternhammer models as I type and they both look to be holding club-like weapons to me tbh. I'm trying to keep things simple and go with what page 61 suggests - look at what they're armed with. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

 

... Its probably an axe.

 

Nope, no problem at all.

[Stormbrow II]

Fwiw, I'm friends with some of the Warhammer World nerds (Events) and we've been playing it like the same ways, as above i.e. Astaroth a UPW, Dante with an Axe.

And? Astaroth's Axe fitted under UPW rules better than Dante's did. I'm not the only gaming group that has played it like that: even the BA players were divided on the issue.

 

This could go on and on.

[Grimtooth]

To Storm and the few others that share his opinion on Glaive Encarmines and the Axe of Mortalis,

 

How do you rectify the RAW conflict by taking the stance that you do?

 

Per the RAW, the only time you ever look to what is modeled to determine power weapon type/rules is when it is a generic power weapon. By default, power weapons do not come two-handed nor do they come with the ability to reroll one missed hit when used in melee. To keep insisting that Dante has a power axe and is therefore str +1/init 1, you are breaking the RAW as the wargear entry says that it has a special rule (master-crafted) and therefore you are never given the permission to look at what the model is armed with to determine type/rules.

 

This then leads to your second opinion that master-crafted is only special, but not unique. So how do you resolve the rules for the Axe of Mortalis?

 

1. You are specifically disallowed from looking at the model to determine type/rules.

2. Your opinion is that MC is not unique, so therefore it can't be ap3, user str/init.

 

So Dante makes user str/init close combat attacks with no AP and able to reroll one missed hit in melee? Yet that then conflicts with his wargear entry that tells you he has a master-crafted power weapon.

 

So this leaves you with exactly one avenue that fulfills the RAW. Putting aside semantical games of what special rules are unique or not, master-crafted is a special/unique rule and thus the Axe of Mortalis is user str/init, ap3 and Glaive Encarmines are user str/init, ap3.

 

Now to whoever mentioned purchasing the uprgade to a power weapon and making it master-crafted and thus making it unusual;

 

The RAW of the rule for power weapons is specific when it mentions that if a wargear entry says it has any further rules, you look at how it was modeled. Now when you purchase a power weapon and whenn you purchase the upgrade to master-craft it, you bought a default power weapon (whose wargear entry did not have any further rules) and then added a special rule to it. That is the specific difference between a wargear entry that has special rules and a weapon that was given a special rule. In this case, you purchase or already have a default power weapon (whose type/rules are determined on how it looks) and then you master-craft that specific type of weapon.

 

Lastly, addressing Modeling for Advantage claims, GW in their infinit wisdom regarding power weapons has made it clear with their new rules that power weapon types are all on a level playing field. This is evidenced by the very fact that there is absolutely zero cost difference between any of the power weapon types of which is readily apparent with the cost differences between other weapons such as thunder hammers, power fists, chain fists, wolf claws, and etc. GW did not put a premium on power swords over spears over mauls, over axes.

 

So at anytime a model's wargear entry tells you that it has a generic power weapon, that power weapon in whatever form it takes is of equal value to any other model with the same wargear entry, a power axe is a power spear is a power sword. The rules setting them apart may be valued higher or lower based upon the opinion of the gamer, but as a value, GW has determined them all the same.

 

Now in the several cases, across several codexes and new FAQs, that a model's wargear has been desginated a generic power weapon, whatever weapon is modeled is of equal value according to the RAW to whatever other generic power weapons are modeled. It is thus impossible to accuse anyone of modeling for advantage when all are of equal value per the RAW. When it comes to wolf priests and Ulrik, whichever power weapon is thus modeled is of equal value according to the RAW and thus not modeling for advantage.

[Stormbrow II]

Good God, what's this? A reasoned post? It's ok - I see you trolling the other fora, Brother Ramses. :(

 

How do you rectify the RAW conflict by taking the stance that you do?

It's GW rules-writing? There's RAW conflicts all over the place and this is just another one to add to the pile.

 

1. You are specifically disallowed from looking at the model to determine type/rules.

2. Your opinion is that MC is not unique, so therefore it can't be ap3, user str/init.

 

So Dante makes user str/init close combat attacks with no AP and able to reroll one missed hit in melee? Yet that then conflicts with his wargear entry that tells you he has a master-crafted power weapon.

The 2nd point is a reference to the AP- strawman over on Dakka, right? That's reading too much into it tbh - there's no one suggesting its AP-, nor any rules in the BRB to suggest it is.

 

Per the RAW, the only time you ever look to what is modeled to determine power weapon type/rules is when it is a generic power weapon. By default, power weapons do not come two-handed nor do they come with the ability to reroll one missed hit when used in melee.

 

And...

 

So this leaves you with exactly one avenue that fulfills the RAW. Putting aside semantical games of what special rules are unique or not, master-crafted is a special/unique rule and thus the Axe of Mortalis is user str/init, ap3 and Glaive Encarmines are user str/init, ap3.

[Emphasis mine]

I wouldn't say M-C's a unique rule seeing as its in the BRB. The rest of it seems reasonable though.

[Arthanor]

You guys should look at this. They got an answer from the design studio over in the BA forum, which seems to put things to rest.

[Stormbrow II]

You guys should look at this. They got an answer from the design studio over in the BA forum, which seems to put things to rest.

 

You've been ninja'd, braw. :(

 

Astaroth's Axe fitted under UPW rules better than Dante's did. I'm not the only gaming group that has played it like that: even the BA players were divided on the issue.

[Arthanor]

Oh, indeed! I read the beginning and the end. Since there seemed to still be confusion, I assumed you guys hadn't noticed it. That'll teach me to skip the middle of an argument ;)