Black Mace and MC AP ?

[Morticon]

Simple question, that im sure has popped up, I just cant find it.

 

Whats the AP of the black mace on a Daemon Prince?

 

 

Listed AP is 4 for the mace, but MCs have "smash" meaning all attacks in CC are AP2. This to me seems like a contradiction which would then follow the Codex>BRB.

 

Is there anything im missing?

[greatcrusade08]

the ruling everytime ive seen it on the interwebz is that the daemon prince gets the benefits of the black mace, but uses his AP of 2

[dswanick]

"

SMASH

All of the close combat attacks, except Hammer of Wrath Attacks, of a model with this special rule are resolved at AP2 (unless it's attacking with an AP1 weapon).

", BRB,

Pg

.42

[Gentlemanloser]

This was recently debated.

 

No AP2.

 

The codex rule for the Blacke Mace (A4) overrides the BRB smash rule, in every instance.

 

Page 7 strikes again.

 

Edit:

 

Here;s the thread. It started off about DPs and Combat familiars, and ended included in the black mace.

 

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...66219&st=25

[dswanick]

This was recently debated.

 

No AP2.

 

The codex rule for the Blacke Mace (A4) overrides the BRB smash rule, in every instance.

 

Page 7 strikes again.

 

Edit:

 

Here;s the thread. It started off about DPs and Combat familiars, and ended included in the black mace.

 

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...66219&st=25

Completely wrong. Comparing AP to Armor Save is a basic rule, as is the Weapon Profile were a weapons AP is normally given. The Codex simply lists the AP value of a Black Mace as AP4, it does not have any rules for how AP and Armor Saves interact. Therefore the Black Maces AP is normally 4, due to the BRB Basic rules concerning Weapon Profiles and AP vs Save. Smash is a BRB Advanced rule, so overrides the BRB Basic rule describing how an AP interacts with an Armor Save. In this case resolve the attack as AP2 instead of the profiles AP4.

[Gentlemanloser]

DS, weapon rules are classed as advanced;

 

Advanced rules apply to specific types of models, whether because they have a special type of weapon (such as a Boltgun), unusual skills (such as the ability to regenerate damaged flesh)

 

If the Boltgun's rule are considers advanced, so are the Maces (but being in the codex, they are by default codex rules).

 

And the conlfict isn't comparing AP versus save. It's the codex telling you your Mace attacks as AP4, while the BRB tell you your Mace attacks as AP2.

 

If you still feel this is incorrect, you' d support combat Familiars giving a DP an extra two AP2 attacks, as we'd ignore the AP- in the codex due to smash?

 

Edit: All Weapon Profiles are Advanced Rules, just checked the BRB to see if I'd brain farted. :P

[Raeven]

Doesn't matter. Smash overrides in the same way Unwieldy does. It's written directly in the rule.

 

"SMASH

All of the close combat attacks, except Hammer of Wrath Attacks, of a model with this special rule are resolved at AP2 (unless it's attacking with an AP1 weapon).", BRB, Pg.42

 

BRB only overrides when the rules are in direct contention. So, the BRB would override if there was a Black Mace entry in the BRB that had an AP5. SMASH tells us to ignore close combat weapon AP and use AP2 for all close combat attacks, unless the weapon is AP1. Black Mace is AP4. SMASH overrides.

[dswanick]

"

Armor Saving Throws

Models can take armour saves to prevent Wounds caused in close combat - provided that their armour is good enough, of course! As in the Shooting phase,

if the Wound is caused by a weapon with an AP that ignores the wounded model's Armour Save, then the save cannot be taken

(see page 17)

", BRB,

Pg

.26

 

"

Armour Piercing Weapons

Some powerful weapons are quite capable of punching through even the thickest armour.

This is shown by a weapon having an Armour Piercing characteristic

, usually referred to as AP.

 

The AP rating indicates the Armour Save the weapon can ignore

- so lower means more powerful.

 

If the weapons Armour Piercing value is equal to or lower than the model's Armour Save

, then it is sufficiently powerful to punch straight through the armour, the target gets no armour save at all.

", BRB,

Pg

.17

These are the rules which govern how you adjudicate weapon AP vs Armour Save. The first quote tells you that in close combat you compare a weapons AP to the target model's Armor Save. The second quote tells you to look at the weapons profile for its AP characteristic value. The underlined portions are the meat of the mechanics involved.

 

The Smash special rule I quoted above tells you to ignore the weapon's characteristic AP value and instead resolve it at AP2 (unless the weapon is AP1).

 

So Advanced > Basic. Unless the Black Mace has a rule which says to resolve its attacks at AP4, it having a value of 4 in its profile AP characteristic is irrelevant as the basic rules telling you to look at that value is overriden.

 

Arguing otherwise is just trying to re-debate the Signum vs Snap Fire argument, but from a weaker intellectual position as Signum was at least a Codex rule and not just a value being referenced by basic BRB rules.

[Kol Saresk]

Except that the Black Mace's AP4 is a value being referenced by the Chaos Space Marine Codex, not the BRB. The Black mace isn't even in the BRB. So technically it would be exactly similar to the Signum vs Snap Shot debate you referenced.

[Gentlemanloser]

You've convinced me. :P

 

I reread the sections and while 'Type' is a rule, 'AP' isn't. Strange as it sounds to me.

 

So Smash would effect the Black Mace, and it would also effect the combat familiar.

[Fibonacci]

Except that the Black Mace's AP4 is a value being referenced by the Chaos Space Marine Codex, not the BRB. The Black mace isn't even in the BRB. So technically it would be exactly similar to the Signum vs Snap Shot debate you referenced.

It does not matter what the weapon AP is. A MC strikes at AP2 even if it does not have a weapon at all.

The black mace has an AP of 4

Monstrous creatures have an AP of 2

Use the best AP you get.

 

Power sword : AP3

MC with a power sword : AP2

 

Chainsword: AP-

MC with a Chainsword : AP2

 

Power Maul: AP4

MC with a Powermaul: AP2

 

The Black Mace: AP4

MC with the black mace: AP2

 

No CCW equipped: AP-

MC with no CCW equipped: AP2

 

It does not get any easier that this. The MC is the one getting the AP2 no matter which weapon it uses.

[Kol Saresk]

Arguing otherwise is just trying to re-debate the Signum vs Snap Fire argument, but from a weaker intellectual position as Signum was at least a Codex rule and not just a value being referenced by basic BRB rules.

I was talking about this comment. As I will never willingly use a daemon prince or the Black Mace, the topic is only of passing interest to me so I was neither arguing for or against if the Mace should get AP2 from Smash. It just seemed to me that Dswanick was arguing that since the Black mace was in the BRB, Gentlemanloser's argument of Codex > BRB was invalid even though the Black Mace is not mentioned in the BRB at all. It was a matter of curiosity at why Dswanick was treating it like the Black Mace was not a Codex item but a BRB weapon and then saying that the Signum was different because it was a Codex item, just like the Black mace.

 

EDIT: As the topic has been resolved, there really is no need to continue it.

[Grey Mage]

I would argue that while it is found in the codex, the AP for the weapon is NOT an advanced rule. Why? Because it doesnt actually tell us what AP is or does in the codex, those are instead found in the basic rules of the BRB.

[Morticon]

Thanks for arguments and thoughts gents.

[dswanick]

I would argue that while it is found in the codex, the AP for the weapon is NOT an advanced rule. Why? Because it doesnt actually tell us what AP is or does in the codex, those are instead found in the basic rules of the BRB.

Exactly.

The Black Mace is in the Codex, but the Black Mace isn't a rule it's wargear. "4" isn't a rule. The Black Mace may have some rules about it, but "AP4" isn't a rule - it's a value. The rules for what AP is and how it interacts with Armor Saves are rules found in the BRB, in this case Basic Rules. Smash is an Advanced rule which overrides (not the Codex value of 4) but the Basic rule which tells us to look at the weapons AP value found in its characteristic profile to determine if it overrides the targets Armor Save.

As an aside, as it has been mentioned in the other referenced thread, a Combat Familiar does have a rule "A model with a combat familiar makes two additional strength 4 AP- Melee Attacks". The AP of a Black Mace is found in its Profile and compared to the target's Armor Save per the Basic rules quoted above. The Smash Advanced rule overrides this and makes those attacks AP2. The Combat Familiar Codex rule overrides even the Smash Advanced rule and makes its two additional attacks S4/AP-. So a Monstrous Creature with a Black Mace and a Combat Familiar would attack # number of times at S(model) and AP2 plus two more times at S4 and AP-.

 

Thanks for arguments and thoughts gents.

You're welcome Mort, hope this helps you give a coherent argument the next time you encounter it in a game.

[alex567]

Universal special rule 4: this is not a rule.

As rule 4 is not a rule you disregard it's meaning which means that rule 4 is a rule because it's meaning is false based on the assumption that rule 4 is infact false, making the rule a true rule, nullifying the rule's ruleness, which in turn makes it a rule...

 

Any way back on topic, I believe that the rule of ap2 is covered in the smash rule itself?

[Techmarine Data007]

It would seem to, otherwise the standard DP would be constantly reduced to smacking people around with his Whiffle Bat of Khorne.

[dswanick]

Universal special rule 4: this is not a rule.

As rule 4 is not a rule you disregard it's meaning which means that rule 4 is a rule because it's meaning is false based on the assumption that rule 4 is infact false, making the rule a true rule, nullifying the rule's ruleness, which in turn makes it a rule...

 

Any way back on topic, I believe that the rule of ap2 is covered in the smash rule itself?

I'm feeling slightly mocked... :)