glaive encarmine and 6th edition

[madmutt]

Apologies if this has already been answered somewhere, but I wasn't able to find it.

 

I REALLY want to get some sanguinary guard, however with the changes to power weapons I am a little confused with what the glaive encarmine counts as.

 

At the moment the box has 2 axe-shaped weapons, and 3 large sword ones - do they count as 2 power axes and 3 power swords? in that case can I model them as all having axes? Or is there something that I am missing?

[Xenith]

Reread the section of unique power weapons, and then the glaive encarmine entry in the BA codex.

 

The glaive is a 2 handed MC power weapon, the 2 handed being a unique rule, so they are all AP3 no matter what the weapon looks like.

[Cydrone]

;) IS IT?! Stickied edition: http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...howtopic=255523

[masterchief4911]

My San guard unit has (2) axes, (2) swords, and a power fist. I'm currently playing it as what the individual guard is modeled with, therefore my (2) swords hit at the models initiative (AP3), then the (2) axes hit at Initative 1 (AP2 +1 STR), and finally the power fist hits at initiative 1 (AP 2 X2 STR). As per the rulebook Page 61.

[Tamwulf]

At this point, as far as I am concerned, it can be played either way. Just confer with your opponent before the game begins, and tell him what you are playing each weapons as.

 

If they have a lot of heartburn about it, then they are probably not worth playing.

[Xenith]

^_^ IS IT?! Stickied edition: http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...howtopic=255523

 

That poll is inherently wrong, as they have not included all of the rules for the glaive.

 

Power weapons are one handed, the glaive is two handed, making it unique, and therefore AP:3, I:as user.

 

I'll not be entering more debate on this one.

[Marik]

No matter how you have them modeled they fall under the unique power weapon rule so are STR and AP 3. There is no way around it Two-handed and Master Crafted in their entry make them unique. This is supported also by the Blood Crozius being specifically FAQed to be a Master Crafted Power Maul.

[Chairman_woo]

This isn't as black and white as some people are making out in that ALL the rules for glaives are standard rulebook rules (i.e. mastercrafted & two handed). There is still wiggle room and I suspect a reasonable opponent would be ok with either interpretation if you are clear about it at the start of the game (& if not its not a massive skin of your nose to just go with whatever they think if they wont budge).

 

Strictly RAW you might be more inclined towards "unusual power weapons" however I feel the intention of that rule was for genuinely unique/unusual weapons rather than just anything with a longhand description. i.e. Astoraths axe being an almost entirely unique weapon in function and description (i.e. fits no existing type or rule), wheras glaive encarmine & dante's axe have no rules that do not appear in the BRB.

 

All of that said my playgroup has a "flawless" system for this:

"Does that dude have what looks like an axe?"

"Does it make sense that dude would have an axe?"

"Is the thing that looks like an axe described in the codex as an axe? or possibly carrying an axe?"

"Is the thing on that dude that looks like and axe, makes sense as an axe, described/named in the codex as an axe and is infact an axe, an axe?"

.....................

"Yup that dude has an axe........" -_-

 

^ Not going to get you anywhere with the "RAW trumps RAI always" crowd but has proven nice and straight forwards with fluff oriented players like myself.

 

If you can walk into a battle quite prepared to take that ruling either way after discussing with your opponent you can't go too far wrong tho I think. It's not that likely to mess with your overall strategy (unless you modeled all your sanguard with axes for terminator hunting or something, tho that doesn't strike me as playing to the units strengths).

[Noctus Cornix]

This is as black and white as people are making it out to be. The glaive encarmine is described as a master crafted power weapon that requires two hands to use. Standard rules or not, those rules are unique to the weapon that it requires a special excerpt in the codex itself. It's just like a relic blade, only you switch the +2 strength for master crafted.

 

Rule of thumb is if it has a special excerpt in the armoury, then it's probably unique. I mean look at hellblades. They don't confer anything special. All they count as are power swords and nothing else. Same thing for a crozius. Its a power maul, nothing else. There's no 'room for interpretation' because the rules are very clearly defined.

[Venemox]

It is as black and white as it appears... for a different reason. You only use the power weapon table if the weapon has no 'special rules' other than 'power weapon'. That is black and white in the BRB. Since both Two Handed and Master Crafted are , by BRB definition, 'Special Rules', you cannot use the table to define them by looking at the model. Additionally, the Codex: Blood Angels specifies that any weapon with it's own weapon entry in a unit's description is 'unique'. These two, very black and white statements, leave us with only one reasonable option: Glaive Encarmines are unique power weapons and therefore strike at user I and S with AP 3. As well, of course, as being Master Crafted and 2 Handed.

[Chairman_woo]

I'm going to try not to derail this much further with a lengthy discussion, there are threads for that purpose elsewhere. I was simply explaining to the OP that dispite what some people seem to think the rule is infact not entirely clear either way hence the pages and pages and pages and pages of arguements on the matter. (and my caveat that strict RAW players are likely to be inclined towards "unusual power weapons")

 

There is an e-mail from GW stating they are unusual power weapons but this is not much better than asking a red/blueshirt (i.e. not an official ruling) but the interpretation that ANY extra rules makes a PW "unusual" is not black and white at all. Thats why its created such lengthy arguements. There is an ambiguity in the wording as to wether it means ANY special CC rules, or simply UNIQUE cc rules.

 

This one does not go to bed untill we have an FAQ ruling one way or the other, hence my attempt to expound how one might go about dealing with this inevitable conflict in their own games. I was attempting to answer the OP's question with reference to the "real" world where people play "real games" with "real people", who as some of the sharper ones amongst you may have noticed often have conflicting oppinions on some things in life. Its no good him walking into a game with what he belives to be a cast iron "this is demonstrably the only way this rule could work or be interpreted" when infact there are many of those who feel otherwize, and moreover that they still have an arguement to make.

 

And further to any purely RAW based arguement there are still people out there who subscribe to a permissive, "common sense" atitude to such conflicts anyway. i.e. if its not entirely clear RAW then go with what would make sense to a layman. Hence the whole "looks like and axe, called and axe, conflicts with no other rules by being an axe" thing. Its not a way to win a RAW arguement on a forum (nor am I trying) but proves remarkably usefull (and conducive to mutual enjoyment) with a great many people.

 

It can be silly to treat something so easily resolved as this as a exscersise in rules lawyering when pure competition is not the main motivator for either player. And furthermore avoids the sillyness of having to explain that "this axe is not an axe dispite what its's called and how it looks as the strictest interpretation of a slightly ambiguous rule says so".

[Spagunk]

There is also the top of page 23.

[Venemox]

My only issue with this is having a resonable expectation of what your models are going to do when you show up to the table. SG boxes come with multiple swords and axes for GE's, but not enough to build 5 of either. I'm using 5 boxes to build 3 squads to avoid this very argument on the table top, but I see that as an unreasonable epxectation for the average player.

 

The 'look and see' rule is nice, for individual models. What's that your armis only Librarion/Techmarine/Captain has in his hand? An axe it looks like so an axe it is. I lvoe the GE bitz, and will be using them in several places as 'look and see' weapons.

 

If someone insists the GE's shaped like axes, and therefore 3/5 or 2/5 of your DanteWing Army (depending on whether you used 2 or 3 axes from each box) stirke at I 1, I'll feel free to have them strike at normal I against someone else's army.

 

Or, for a nice euphamism... FAQ that.

[JamesI]

We already have several threads going on this issue.

 

Mainly the one listed above by Cydrone.

 

The poll is not in any way official (and Xenith I apologize for forgetting to add in two handed in the poll, I did ask if I had forgotten anything and no one informed me I had). But the discussion is illuminating on the issue.

 

The response from GW is they are Unusual power weapons (at least the response I got).

 

Closing this as we don't need 2 threads on it.