Jacinda Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 Do you see where it says ONE? That is where it says you can do it ONE time. Then we can never get twin lightning claws by that logic... I believe you are confusing the Ranged Weapons (where it says "may replace one") with the Melee Weapons. Melee weapons say "and/or" which implies you may trade the bolt pistol for one item AND the ccw with one item. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperors Immortals Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 also the TL bolter on the bike is part of the bike, and not seperate wargear on the bike, therefore IF your argument COULD be used (which it CAN NOT) then you would be forced to swap the entire bike for that 3rd piece of gear. Since you cant do what you are trying to do though, it is completely moot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatefires Posted October 17, 2012 Author Share Posted October 17, 2012 There is clearly a drop down menu (iPad version) that tells you that you can take one claw in exchange for your melee weapon, then in the list of ranged weapons there is the option to take a second claw. After reading this I called up my buddy with an iPad Chaos Codex, I was unaware of the iPad drop down menus, which would seem to indicate GW’s intention even though the book codex that I have is written poorly for the melee section. As Jacinda and Angerjag pointed out there was an implied meaning to the melee weapons section but then we were taking the Chaos artefacts section RAW, I struggled with this as taking one rule on the same page as implied and the other as RAW didn’t seem right, but as I am now aware of the iPad version does have these dropdown menus to insert another claw, while not letting you get more than one Chaos Artefact per HQ, so the iPad version displays the intention of GW but the book did not because the book version was written poorly. As to the question of whether or not the Chaos Lord can replace the twin-linked bolter on the Chaos bike depends on the distinction of weather you believe the weapon on the bike lies within the ownership of the Chaos lord. Seemingly, the level of response I received from the community varied from Harsh “No!” s and “probably not” s. All the while the intent was to come up with a lord which could go first (initiative), with some AP2 attacks , and have the Brand to reduce the amount of overwatch fire taken. I was planning on having a lord on a bike or steed with the Burning brand, while being toughness 5 so I couldn’t be instadeathed by a Str 8 attack. It seems this is not possible with any combination… The lord would roll with a squad of Slaaneshi marked Warp Talons, as they do not have assault grenades I was thinking the lord could break away in the movement phase, charge and then have the warp talons unit charge into cover but since said enemy unit is already engaged the Warp Talons would get there initiative 5. Anyway, failed attempt, Thanks to those who had constructive criticism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinsanity Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 As Jacinda and Angerjag pointed out there was an implied meaning to the melee weapons section but then we were taking the Chaos artefacts section RAW, I struggled with this as taking one rule on the same page as implied and the other as RAW didn’t seem right, but as I am now aware of the iPad version does have these dropdown menus to insert another claw, while not letting you get more than one Chaos Artefact per HQ, so the iPad version displays the intention of GW but the book did not because the book version was written poorly. As I've said before, I don't see where the reading of the two sections differs in any way. One section (Chaos Artifacts) says you can replace one weapon, the other (Melee weapons) says you can replace either your CCW and/or your BP. The fact that you want to read it otherwise doesn't mean it is poorly written... As to the question of whether or not the Chaos Lord can replace the twin-linked bolter on the Chaos bike depends on the distinction of weather you believe the weapon on the bike lies within the ownership of the Chaos lord. Seemingly, the level of response I received from the community varied from Harsh “No!” s and “probably not” s. Look at the Warpsmith. He has as part of his wargear Mechatendrils. Does his wargear also list a Meltagun and a Flamer? These are part of the Mechatendrils, they're not his equipment (the 'tendrils are). He can't upgrade his mechatendrils' flamer or meltagun... Otherwise, why didn't they list the extra weapons as part of his equipment instead of saying it's part of the backpack? The lord would roll with a squad of Slaaneshi marked Warp Talons, as they do not have assault grenades I was thinking the lord could break away in the movement phase, charge and then have the warp talons unit charge into cover but since said enemy unit is already engaged the Warp Talons would get there initiative 5. Btw, keep in mind that marked characters cannot join units bearing any other mark... Therefore for your lord to be able to join these Slaaneshi Talons he'd need to either be unmarked or bear the MoS... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatefires Posted October 17, 2012 Author Share Posted October 17, 2012 Melee Weapons: “A model can replace his bolt pistol and/or close combat weapon with one of the following:” Chaos Codex 6th edition Book (non iPad) As I've said before, I don't see where the reading of the two sections differs in any way. One section (Chaos Artifacts) says you can replace one weapon, the other (Melee weapons) says you can replace either your CCW and/or your BP. The fact that you want to read it otherwise doesn't mean it is poorly written... The wording does not use the word "either" This is why Jacinda and Angerjag both used the word "Implied" Maybe you are using the iPad version and it says somthing different? Which I dont have access to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinsanity Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 The wording does not use the word "either" This is why Jacinda and Angerjag both used the word "Implied" Maybe you are using the iPad version and it says somthing different? Which I dont have access to. Determinereither 1. Each of two. (from 9th c.)- 1936, Djuna Barnes, Nightwood, Faber & Faber 2007, p. 31: - Her hands, long and beautiful, lay on either side of her face.2. One or the other of two. (from 14th c.)- 2006 December 5, Jackie Mason, quoted in “Mason drops lawsuit vs. Jews for Jesus”, USA Today: - You can't be a table and a chair. You're either a Jew or a gentile. Synonyms (one or the other): (each of two): both, each Could you please elaborate how and/or differs from either? Disregarding the poor wording which can be interpreted as saying you can replace both for a single weapon, the rule here says you can replace both weapons. On the other hand, the rule for Chaos Artefacts says you can replace one weapon. I still fail to see how one could argue that two Artefacts can be taken on a single model. Look at the wording on the Helbrute : "May replace any power fist with..." "May replace one power fist with..." There is a very clear and definite distinction between "replace one" and "replace any". Can you still argue that a character who can "replace one weapon with [a Chaos Artefact]" can take two such artefacts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.