Fulgrim and sublime swordsman

[Jimm]

I don't play ec but have played against, seen and over heard people using fulgrim and his sublime swordsman rule and noted some people play it a little differently so wanted to know what everyone thought.

 

So the the rule if people aren't aware is along the lines of....

In a challenge he gains the number of attacks equal to the difference between his and his opponents initiative.

 

So what do you think vs a powerfist praetor. Would you use his profile ini of 5 or the modified ini of 1 due to unweildy?

 

I've seen it played both ways, logically I'd lean towards the modified ini of 1 as I suppose this rule is mean to act like fulgrim hits more times between the two trading blows but as written it could be argued as the profiled ini.

 

Discuss. :)

[Slips]

I don't play ec but have played against, seen and over heard people using fulgrim and his sublime swordsman rule and noted some people play it a little differently so wanted to know what everyone thought.

So the the rule if people aren't aware is along the lines of....

In a challenge he gains the number of attacks equal to the difference between his and his opponents initiative.

So what do you think vs a powerfist praetor. Would you use his profile ini of 5 or the modified ini of 1 due to unweildy?

I've seen it played both ways, logically I'd lean towards the modified ini of 1 as I suppose this rule is mean to act like fulgrim hits more times between the two trading blows but as written it could be argued as the profiled ini.

Discuss.

No, unwieldy only means that when you fight in the fight subphase, you do so at initiative 1 it doesn't actually reduce your initiative characteristic to 1.

Page 174 of the BRB, its pretty clear and unambiguous.

[olsol]

I have a similar problems about his sublime swordsman rule. When he is fighting in a challenge against someone with a charnable sabre (which confers +1 I in a challenge) does Fulgrim lose an attack because his opponent has 1 higher initiative?

 

The same could be said for BA day of revelation +1 I on the charge or EC LA rule.

 

For example Fulgrim attacks a Praetor from the Emperors Children with a charnable sabre. Instead of Fulgrim getting +3 attacks (initiative 5 vs 8) he wouldn't get any because the praetor would be striking at initiative 8.

- please tell me I'm wrong.

[Slips]

I have a similar problems about his sublime swordsman rule. When he is fighting in a challenge against someone with a charnable sabre (which confers +1 I in a challenge) does Fulgrim lose an attack because his opponent has 1 higher initiative?

 

The same could be said for BA day of revelation +1 I on the charge or EC LA rule.

 

For example Fulgrim attacks a Praetor from the Emperors Children with a charnable sabre. Instead of Fulgrim getting +3 attacks (initiative 5 vs 8) he wouldn't get any because the praetor would be striking at initiative 8.

- please tell me I'm wrong.

Yeah, thats how that'd work.

 

However, the Praetor would only be I7 not I8 (5 + 1 Saber + 1 LAEC/BA RoW/Etc) so Fulgrim would still get +1A since he's I8. It would require a base Initiative 6 and 2 Sources of +1 Initiative for Fulgrim to be tied and not have his Attack Bonus.

 

That said, if the Bonus initiative is a charge bonus, on the following turn they would lose it and Fulgrim would gain another attack.

 

However, if you concuss the target he's fighting against and reduce their initiative to 1, he'd gain 7 Attacks, effectively.

 

Fulgrim also wouldn't lose any attacks for being against someone with Higher initiative. All it does is give him more attacks if hes faster than them.

[Terminus]

The concussion bonus is fun, although someone else would have to whack the challenger with a thunder hammer.

[Slips]

Well, it would make a Cataphractii Bodyguard with a few Thunderhammers in with the usual mix of both types of fists a worthwhile investment at that point.