Lamprey's Bite on the Charge

[WG Capt. Iagn Thunderclaw]

Deleted - Double Post

 

Sorry About that

[WG Capt. Iagn Thunderclaw]

"So is the comma being used as a seperation of clause, or to join an item in a list?

"

 

I contend that the comma is used to separate two separate clauses that when interpreted together defines for us a "normal" condition 24a and a condition which is in addition to that which is normally expected 24b.

 

1) 24a uses terms to describe unit characteristic profiles (Strength, Toughness, Initiative, etc). All of which are normally associated with every unit and model in the GW line. In our case Screamers who's normal characteristic profile includes 3 Str 4 attacks in CC.

 

Lampreys Bite modifys this Normal Characteristics Profile by replacing all 3 str 4 attacks in CC with 1 str 5 ap2 attack in CC.

 

2) 24b then comes into play for either the normal 3 S 4 attacks or 1 s 5 ap2 attck and gives a bonus for charging.

 

To illustrate the separate clause piece of this argument I would point to the italicized example below BB pg 24a,b.

 

In this illustration we have 24a) 5 space marines normally accordong to their characteristics profile having 5 attacks.

 

And 24b) these same 5 space marines bebefiting from a charge bonus above that which is expected from their characteristic profile resulting in 10 attacks or 1 bonus attack each.

[Gentlemanloser]

I rather see it as used to join an item in a list.

 

A mini has a number of attacks equal to the following;

 

Thier 'A' characteristic

Any bonus attacks granted from charging, two weapons and other wargear/special rules

 

These items combined form the 'normal' allotment of attacks a mini has avaialble to it.

[WG Capt. Iagn Thunderclaw]

I understand you, I just see the comma as separating two independant conditional clauses.

 

24a) Normal Characteristic Attacks given on the Profile which can be replaced by lampreys bite before 25b bonus for the condition of charging.

 

BTW- just as an added note 100+ comments on this thread. Its been very interesting. I only hope Phil Kelley or someone at GW monitors B and C so they can make a FAQ in a timely manner.

[Gentlemanloser]

:)

 

Indeed!

 

So, if it's seperation of clause, and only the A characteristic is 'normal', when you LB on the charge, what profile does the charge attack use?

[Nehekhare]

I contend that the comma is used to separate two separate clauses that when interpreted together defines for us a "normal" condition 24a and a condition which is in addition to that which is normally expected 24b. [...]

 

italicized example below BB pg 24a,b. [...]

In this illustration we have 24a) 5 space marines normally accordong to their characteristics profile having 5 attacks.

[bold letters used to denote inserted assumption]

 

nice :)

 

you seperated the phrase "number of attacks" in the paragraph of the same name from the rest of the content of the paragraph.

 

So what this means is that "Attacks (A)" as indicated in the profile is not the same as "bonus Attacks". mind blown ;)

 

I am afraid, though, that by doing this, you didn't proove your assumption that "normal" means only the seperated phrase (24a) in the first place - nowhere does it say those profile attacks are "normal" (or that "bonus" attacks are not).

 

so when you cite the italicized example below to illustrate your argument, you had to insert the assumption of what you wanted to proove ("normally"), thus falling for circular logic. 

 

yet still, the "number of attacks (A) as indicated on its [i.e. the model's] characteristics profile, plus the following bonus Attacks [i.e. charge, 2weapons, other bonuses such as USRs, etc.]" together constitute "all of its [...] close combat attacks", don't they?

 

so the seperation in fact didn't change anything. you're still making assumptions about normality, when it isn't even necessary to understand the lamprey's bite rules.