Battleground Games Forum
Games Workshop => Warhammer 40K => Topic started by: Sir_Prometheus on July 02, 2012, 02:23:30 PM
-
I am not a fan of the power weapon changes.
hrmm, I both like it and don't.
It returns the primacy of 2+ armor, which is good, in some ways. Artificer and Termie armor was feeling a bit pointless on most ICs, who usually had a invo save, and were going to be targeted by a power sword anyway.
I worry that this exacerbates the supremacy of TH/SS termies, though. However, it does reinforce the primacy of dakka as how to kill termies, so....
Very few things have AP2 but don't strike at I1 besides MCs. Warscythes (but they're i2, so what's the difference) and the demi-flaives of incubi sergeants, which drazar also has, so he's super dangerous.
A few interesting things about the big heavyweight ICs....Mephiston versus Draigo is basically a slap fest, until presumably Meph misses a save and gets his soul sucked. But there's a half decent chance (after 3 or 4 turns) meph wins. On the other hand, Ghazgull can pretty clearly beat Draigo.
None of the DE archons special crazy weapons are AP2. You're only option for him is to give him a power weapon, model it as an axe, and I see basically no one doing that. Also, elves with axes looks silly.
Generally speaking, IC will try to get 2+ armor where they can, and then mostly fail to hurt each other in CC. You might see some SM captains with power fists now.
Oh! There is point to having power weapon and rending now.
It has what I see as some pretty massively unintended consequences, too. DCAs I'm going to model with both an axe and a sword. Then they can go at I6 or 1, as they wish, and still get the +1 attack. This also aids with "sniping" various models. If only one model is going at i6, the model it's in Btb with (if there's only one) has to take the wound. I don't see any reason not have my i3 crusaders modeled with axes.
-
Ok so now I am confused about the idea of power weapons. I give my Captain a power Weapon for +15 points now depending on what Actual Weapon the Model is holding is the type of Power Weapon it is? Example: Assault Marines come with a Power Sword and Power Axe if I give him the Axe does it still costs the +15 points and get the Power Axe Abilities. Does this go for stuff like Chainswords as well? Can I model a couple of Assault Marines with Eviscerators or 2-Handed Chainswords?
-
Yes, power weapons may be modeled as swords, axes, or mauls as you like. It's just "as modeled".
No, on the eviscerators, that's an upgrade that only some armies even get access to. 2 handed chaninswords, I don't think so, either, but I'm less sure on it.
-
Crikey... I really hope it is not "stick whatever weapon you want the guy to have on there"... if it is, Death Cult Assassins got buffed, not nerfed. Just give them one axe and one sword. Now they can use the axe versus terminators, and the sword versus everyone else. Please tell me this isn't legal.
-
Not to mention, they could choose to use the axe when assaulting vehicles.
2 mix & match power weapons FTW.
-
Crikey... I really hope it is not "stick whatever weapon you want the guy to have on there"... if it is, Death Cult Assassins got buffed, not nerfed. Just give them one axe and one sword. Now they can use the axe versus terminators, and the sword versus everyone else. Please tell me this isn't legal.
Yes, that's exactly how it is. And it was, in fact, my plan. It's worse than you think, actually. Picking different initiatives let's you "snipe" more effectively.
-
I haven't found a section in the rulebook for 'modeling for advantage', but I think putting axes on DCA, for example, would be.
The section under power weapons tells us to look at the model. When looking at the GW DCA model, it has two power swords. When I look at the GW SM Captain, on the other hand, I see a bunch of different options, as the Captain comes with all sorts of bits (I assume...I've never actually put a SM captain together).
Barring explicit permission to model things with different weapons than the model itself is equipped with, I'd be wary of doing so.
-
Bull. My DCAs are already scratch built anyway. but beside that, it's pretty clear they WANTED you to be able to switch oout power weaposn for axes and mauls, as a way to deal with termies. Probably weren't thinkign of DCAs, though.
-
I think it's honestly hard to tell what they "meant to do" here.
My DCA's are also non-GW models. In the last tourney I had a unit of 5 of them plus a crusader + jacobus (costing about 200) take out 5 deathwing terminators plus belial while losing only 1 crusader. This is not all that unusual and it is simply too good. If death cultists were stuck at AP3 they would still be very good, but not broken. Givng them the ability to kill snipe and kill vehicles at easily is not good for game balance.
Not to mention, I can't picture a graceful whirling assassin holding an axe or god forbit a maul in her hand.
-
I (honestly) have no idea what they intended. It seems just as reasonable that they intended some models (Chaplains) to have power Mauls, some (DCA) to have power Swords, and some (Captains) to be able to choose between them.
DCA (the model) comes with power swords, and the rules tell us to look at the model to see what it has. It seems the natural way to tell what weapons a model has is to look at the model GW gives us, just like the natural way to tell what size a model is would be to look at the model GW gives us. Actually, come to think of it, the rules for Power Weapons and the rules for True Line of Sight are very similar; they both tell us to look the model to see how it interacts with the game. Why would it be ok to give a model different weapons and not be ok to have it lying down or on stilts?
-
Until it's addressed in an FAQ somewhere, we are going to base things off of what weapons the GW model has.
I agree that with the new changes to power weapons that switching them up would be modeling for advantage.
-
Aww... I liked the idea of modeling fun, but can see the problems with it... I was already getting ready for my Crusaders (to accompany the DCA) with axes or mauls, or even power lances (spears).
-
The swords to Axes plan is an integral part of their new AP scheme. Without, some armies, such as DE, can't even fight terminators in CC.
-
The swords to Axes plan is an integral part of their new AP scheme. Without, some armies, such as DE, can't even fight terminators in CC.
I don't know a lot about DE, but aren't Wyches supposed to be pretty good against them?
-
Beyond that they have lots of attacks, not especially, no. They will lose combat, for sure, whether they win in the end depends upon weather they got enough pain tokens for fearless. Unlikely.
-
I have no problem with scrath built or models modeled a certain way for looks.
But in a situation like this where DCAs are clearly intended to have swords (as 40k is a gw product and the official DCAs come with swords) anyone trying to give a model a different weapon than intended that is not a wargear option or codex option is basicly cheating
So i dont care if your DCAs are wielding salami sandwiches, they are still going to be stricking at ap3 not ap 2
-
I have no problem with scrath built or models modeled a certain way for looks.
But in a situation like this where DCAs are clearly intended to have swords (as 40k is a gw product and the official DCAs come with swords) anyone trying to give a model a different weapon than intended that is not a wargear option or codex option is basicly cheating
So i dont care if your DCAs are wielding salami sandwiches, they are still going to be stricking at ap3 not ap 2
It nothing like cheating. You are clearly meant to switch out swords for axes, otherwise terminators just pwn everyone. Is that what you want? Do you want terminators to be absolutely, undoubtedly, only beat by other terminators?
-
Until it's addressed in an FAQ somewhere, we are going to base things off of what weapons the GW model has.
I agree that with the new changes to power weapons that switching them up would be modeling for advantage.
I'm wary on this one.
a) DCA models (both the crusader and DCA model) (as is) are one piece metal (and soon to be re-released as finecast). They come with, per codex "power weapon"
b) Death Company troops are multi-part plastic models, and, per codex can get a "power weapon" for 15 points each. As they are multi-part model, each one can be modeled separately so that one can have an axe, one can have a sword, one can have a maul, and so on. The same can be said for most of unit's that have been re-done as plastic (Orks, Space Marines, Eldar, Dark Eldar and so on).
To (dis)allow models to have different weapons based on their casting material is perhaps heavy-handed, especially in a game based on a modelling hobby; otherwise one could simply state that any converted model should not be allowed to have certain weapons, simply because the original model did not have them at time when the model was stuck in the assembly line.
-
I have no problem with scrath built or models modeled a certain way for looks.
But in a situation like this where DCAs are clearly intended to have swords (as 40k is a gw product and the official DCAs come with swords) anyone trying to give a model a different weapon than intended that is not a wargear option or codex option is basicly cheating
So i dont care if your DCAs are wielding salami sandwiches, they are still going to be stricking at ap3 not ap 2
It nothing like cheating. You are clearly meant to switch out swords for axes, otherwise terminators just pwn everyone. Is that what you want? Do you want terminators to be absolutely, undoubtedly, only beat by other terminators?
There are lots of things that have AP2 weapons. Just not death cultists.
-
It nothing like cheating. You are clearly meant to switch out swords for axes, otherwise terminators just pwn everyone.
How do you know that GW didn't CLEARLY mean to sell a lot more terminator models? You don't.
Either everyone who can purchase "power weapons" can freely switch, or no one can. There is not a great organized way to do this as one Store/TO can decide one thing and another can decide the opposite.
-
Out of curiosity, who in the DE codex can take power weapons? Its just the ICs, right? They aren't an answer to Terminators whatever they're armed with. DE kill terminators with tons of poisoned shots, just like they did a month ago.
I don't think this is a particularly cut and dried issue. But it would have been very easy for GW to say 'if the entry says 'power weapon' then you can chose whichever type you want as long as you model it appropriately'. But then, I wouldn't be super surprised to find they do want you to be able to chose and just cannot word things appropriately.
And damn, I want a Salami sandwich now.
-
I have no problem with scrath built or models modeled a certain way for looks.
But in a situation like this where DCAs are clearly intended to have swords (as 40k is a gw product and the official DCAs come with swords) anyone trying to give a model a different weapon than intended that is not a wargear option or codex option is basicly cheating
So i dont care if your DCAs are wielding salami sandwiches, they are still going to be stricking at ap3 not ap 2
It nothing like cheating. You are clearly meant to switch out swords for axes, otherwise terminators just pwn everyone. Is that what you want? Do you want terminators to be absolutely, undoubtedly, only beat by other terminators?
if you were clearly meant to switch out swords for axes then GW would not of put in the rule book "if a models wargear says it has a power weapon which has no further special rules, look at the model to tell which type of power weapon it has"
b) Death Company troops are multi-part plastic models, and, per codex can get a "power weapon" for 15 points each. As they are multi-part model, each one can be modeled separately so that one can have an axe, one can have a sword, one can have a maul, and so on. The same can be said for most of unit's that have been re-done as plastic (Orks, Space Marines, Eldar, Dark Eldar and so on).
Seems like death company DOES have the option for multiple power weapons, while DCAs obviously do not
There are lots of things that have AP2 weapons. Just not death cultists.
exactly, the bottom line is we have to go off of the OFFICIAL model unless GW FAQs it, using the logic that "DCAs have no chance against terminators" is not an arguement
-
There are lots of things that have AP2 weapons. Just not death cultists.
Really? There are fists/hammers. SOme armies have one per unit, many don't have any. There are also MCs. Beyond that, nothing. Outside of a few special characters, no models currenlty have "power axes" is it your proposition that those SCs be the only one to get axes?
-
There are lots of things that have AP2 weapons. Just not death cultists.
Really? There are fists/hammers. SOme armies have one per unit, many don't have any. There are also MCs. Beyond that, nothing. Outside of a few special characters, no models currenlty have "power axes" is it your proposition that those SCs be the only one to get axes?
I think GK have plenty of twin linked rending shots... plus you can take some Deathwing allies now!
-
]"if a models wargear says it has a power weapon which has no further special rules, look at the model to tell which type of power weapon it has"[/b]
You are reading this wrong. This is an invitation to model/convert, i.e. hobby. I'm sure plenty of folks already had things modelled different ways.
Seems like death company DOES have the option for multiple power weapons, while DCAs obviously do not
It didn't say, "how the model came packaged with" Conversely, re: bases, they very much do say, "What base the model came with". But for weapons, they say "modelled with" i.e., it's a wysiwyg consideration.
To think what a model designed 5, 10, 15 years ago, came packaged with, purely for fluff considerations, has actual in-game applications, is crazy.
Either everyone who can purchase "power weapons" can freely switch, or no one can.
This
-
There are lots of things that have AP2 weapons. Just not death cultists.
Really? There are fists/hammers. SOme armies have one per unit, many don't have any. There are also MCs. Beyond that, nothing. Outside of a few special characters, no models currenlty have "power axes" is it your proposition that those SCs be the only one to get axes?
Well, I haven't one through all of the armies, only the ones I own.
Daemons have lots of MC's and Dreadnought CCW's.
Sisters of Battle have walkers and Eviscerators (hello Sisters Repentia).
Necrons have Monstrous Creatures and Warscythes.
Dark Eldar have... not much, I'll grant you, beyond the Talos Pain Engine monstrous creatures. But, they do have the ability to spam a ton of AP2 shots.
I would say none of these armies are worried about a "tide of terminators". Maybe I just got lucky.
-
There is nothing lucky to playing sisters.
-
Oh, and add "anything rending" to the list of AP2 stuff. Very relevant for Daemons, at least.
-
Your mom is AP 2.
(I don't think I know you, but that really is meant in fun)
Point is, how the model was designed x years is sorta meaningless for rules questions, and "how it's modeled" is an invitation to convert, not a restriction.
Compare this with the bases, for instance, where it does say "the base it came with" not "however you modeled it".
Generic power weapons, with no other special rules, can be swords, axes, mauls or even lances, just make sure it's WYSIWYG.
-
Bam ready to kick this argument up a notch. I have a captain with a power sword his arm comes off and I give him a Power Axe in the next round because I can't find another Power Sword to use. What would then happen. As for DCAs you give them one power axe one sword In theory they would either lose an attack or go ar Initiative 1 all the time. I choose to use my Power sword means you donwe't use your axe at all since it would be unwieldy to use to get extra attacks. Getting the benefits of the axe you would strike slower and make more sense but your power sword wouldn't have the striking capability as the axe.
-
if you were clearly meant to switch out swords for axes then GW would not of put in the rule book "if a models wargear says it has a power weapon which has no further special rules, look at the model to tell which type of power weapon it has"
exactly, the bottom line is we have to go off of the OFFICIAL model unless GW FAQs it, using the logic that "DCAs have no chance against terminators" is not an arguement
From a pure rules standpoint, Death Cult Assassins out of the Grey Knights codex are equipped with two power weapons. Power weapons with no special rules.
Per the rulebook on power weapons, as stated above "if a models wargear says it has a power weapon which has no further special rules, look at the model to tell which type of power weapon it has"
Not "original model at time of release". Not "official model". Model. IE a self-scratch built imperial guardsman with 2 weapons - This is my Model.
Otherwise what you are saying is, that for people to use Death Cult Assassins, they MUST only use the original model, they cannot use any conversions, they cannot use any other model to represent a DCA; They must in fact spend over 160 dollars for you to be correct.
Therefore, in an effort to be transparent and fair based on what you are allowed for wargear, and what an OFFICAL model actually has sculpted on it; This is to say the Torso, Legs, Arms and Legs as sculpted to represent what the model comes with, because going off of what you are arguing above, the wargear purchased MUST be represented on the model at all times
1) You will never be allowed to use the signum for a Devastator, unless it is actually attached to the model.
2) If you do not have a grenade pack attached to each model, then you cannot use grenades.
3) Your vehicle must have the legal spotlight attached to its hull, or you cannot use the searchlight rule.
4) All your Ork vehicles must be painted red, or they cannot use the "red goes faster" upgrade.
And so on.
I want you to tell me exactly where it says, in any rulebook, FAQ, Errata, Official White Dwarf update or universally accepted ETC ruling that says in a hobby based on modeling and converting at tournaments that give prizes for best looking model/army, I am not allowed to convert my miniatures in whatever way I choose.
You don't like it? Sorry, not my problem. Per the rules on power weapons, Death Cult Assassins can have any combination of weapons I choose to convert on it's model.
-
Bam ready to kick this argument up a notch. I have a captain with a power sword his arm comes off and I give him a Power Axe in the next round because I can't find another Power Sword to use. What would then happen. As for DCAs you give them one power axe one sword In theory they would either lose an attack or go ar Initiative 1 all the time. I choose to use my Power sword means you donwe't use your axe at all since it would be unwieldy to use to get extra attacks. Getting the benefits of the axe you would strike slower and make more sense but your power sword wouldn't have the striking capability as the axe.
Negatory, good sir.
Both the Power Sword and Power Axe are listed as Melee weapons, and neither are Specialist Weapons. As such, a model armed with two melee weapons will maintain an extra attack for 2 weapons. Unwieldy simply means you strike at Initiative 1 if that is the weapon you are using.
IE; Your Captain armed with Power Sword and Power Axe. 3 attacks base, 4 for 2 Melee weapons. During the Fight Sub-Round, I must declare which weapon I am using for that round. I can either choose to have 4 attacks at Initiative 4 using the Power Sword rules, or 4 attacks at Initative 1 using the Power Axe rules.
The same holds true for DCA. This is due to the fact that weapon type is Melee. It's under the rules for assault and how many attacks you get.
-
Either way it's dumb.
-
Oooh, oooh! Is it time to post GW rules that are dumb?
I have been waitign for this moment my whole life!
-
Either way it's dumb.
Yep. Thank god I'm going back to Nurgle CSM with Nurgle Daemons as Allies, using Epidemus and Typhus and I will have armywide FNP on 3+ and all my shooting attacks are effectively AP 2, since they will ignore armor.
-
To further add;
The Crusader model from GW has a Storm Shield and Power Sword. The Enforcer model from GW (Necromunda) has a Storm Shield and Power Maul. Both are OFFICIAL GW models and as such are also modeled WYSIWYG per the codex, and as such, are perfectly legal models to use.
So what if I choose to use the Enforcer model, as it has Storm Shield/Power Weapon, modeled as Maul. Are you then saying that I cannot use the Enforcer model, and MUST use the Crusader model because the army entry says "Crusader" and not "Enforcer"?
Are you now dictating what models I can and cannot use in my army?
-
I don't like the new power weapons at all really. I will probably continuye using a Relic Blade which is probably AP 3 that resolves my hits at STR 6 at normal Initiative.
-
Oooh, oooh! Is it time to post GW rules that are dumb?
I have been waitign for this moment my whole life!
This being the highlight of your life could explain some things I've always wondered about you matt.... ;)
-
It's pretty obvious we are not going to come to a consencus on this so unless GW comes out with and FAQ any time soon (which i doubt) we are just going to have to wait for INAT.
In the meantime for tournaments its going to be up to Chase and Sam to decide what to do
but here's some food for thought, look at page 60 instead of page 61 at the force weapon entry, there is the exact same paragraph about if there are no further special rules look at the model.
So we can start swapping force swords for force axes and staves?
by gluing an axe on a model willy nilly your basicly given how ever many models you want AP2 at initiative 1. Or gluing mauls on all of them your giving all those models the concussive powers of a thunder hammer with reduced str and reduced AP.
my opinion is stick with the GW model and don't try to model for advantage, if Chase and Sam want to go the other way that is their call.
Until an FAQ or INAT come up it is anyone interpretation
-
Sam is going to post this thoughts at some point. He is aware of the discussion and brought his rulebook home with him.
I support rules debate and discussion 100% but if we could keep this thread reserved for peoples questions for Sam that would be fantastic. Later on, I may move large parts of this thread to another spot.
-
Slapping axes on Death Cult Assassins is modeling for advantage, and the models would be removed at any tournament I'm judging.
Ok, so, in fact a number of my DCAs (and one crusdaer) already have axes, because that's just the bits I had when I was modelling them, and in fact I was going for a little bit of a berserker theme. (didn't have enough sexy chicks)
Are you saying I cannot use those models? Or merely that we have to count them as swords?
-
Are you saying I cannot use those models? Or merely that we have to count them as swords?
Yeah, we'd probably go that way (swords).
-
-"Can I use a Necromunda model that has the wargear options I want?" That's a bit trickier. I'm thinking not, for the same reason that you couldn't grab a power weapon you like from a Death Company sprue and throw it on one of your Bloodclaws. If we're restricting people to what the official model for that unit has, then we're doing it across the board.
So you are banning conversions in Plainville?
-
So you are banning conversions in Plainville?
Of course not. In fact, nothing changes.
Players are not allowed to model for advantage by giving a model *statistically* options not included on the original GW model.
It is well understood that players have custom armies and awesome conversions already built. In this case, as it has been before, any questionable models should be presented in some fashion to the TOs before the tournament. And as before, any player with converted models should have a suitable replacement in case their opponent exercises their right to not play against non-WYSIWYG models.
So again, nothing changes and the answer is the exact opposite of what your question implies.
-
I'm not arguing with judge here, but I do maintain that the option to switch out weapons for axes is an intended change, and all this talk of "modelling for advantage" is starting to feel a little pejorative.
-
I'm not arguing with judge here, but I do maintain that the option to switch out weapons for axes is an intended change, and all this talk of "modelling for advantage" is starting to feel a little pejorative.
Modelling for advantage:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUxjS-wOxNY&feature=plcp (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUxjS-wOxNY&feature=plcp)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrGbabRU_dY&feature=context-cha (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrGbabRU_dY&feature=context-cha)
Also, I tried to find a picture of the infamous "peeper-fex" - the Carnifex built in such away it could see over terrain for LoS purposes but would always get a cover save.
Those are my examples of what I thought were "modelling for advantage".
I never thought weapon swaps, based on raw (and rai), in a highly converted game, could be considered cheating. By the logic presented prior, no tactical squad of marines could ever have lascannons let alone power axes.
-
[/quote]
So you are banning conversions in Plainville?
[/quote]
i am sure that is not going to happen. of course, if it did, 25% of my Ork army would be unplayable.
-
So you are banning conversions in Plainville?
Of course not. In fact, nothing changes.
Players are not allowed to model for advantage by giving a model *statistically* options not included on the original GW model.
It is well understood that players have custom armies and awesome conversions already built. In this case, as it has been before, any questionable models should be presented in some fashion to the TOs before the tournament. And as before, any player with converted models should have a suitable replacement in case their opponent exercises their right to not play against non-WYSIWYG models.
So again, nothing changes and the answer is the exact opposite of what your question implies.
Actually, that is exactly what Sam just said, I was just boiling it down. The example of using a death company power weapon, on a blood claw is quite clear, both units can use power weapons, so who cares where it came from?
Back on the death cult assassin, Codex Grey Knights states they are armed with power weapons. The nice Rule book for sixth states "If a models war gear says it has a pwer weapon which has no further rules, look at the model to tell what type of power weapon it has". It goes on to define look to rules.
So if I model something that is allowed by the codex to have a power weapon, to have a power axe, then it is perfectly legal, and suggesting that we cannot swap bits between kits is ridiculous.
You all need to recognize that GW accepts conversions as part of the hobby and encourages it. The rule book and codex provides the rules and parameters for those conversions.
-
... all this talk of "modelling for advantage" is starting to feel a little pejorative.
This is probably because when I say "modeling for advantage", I mean it in the most pejorative way possible.
As far as the Rules as Intended argument, back to Page 8. Is it fun for both you and your opponent? If the answer is no, then don't do it.
-
Starting to see the other side of the power weapon conversion argument.
There has to be some non-ambiguous way to determine which units are allowed to bring which Power weapon variants.
I am realizing that it doesn't make any sense for GW to publish a rule that says "Look at all models Citadel has produced for this unit. If and only if any of them have something that appears to be an axe, you're allowed to treat this as a power axe. "
Is there even a database of all models that have been used for e.g. Crusaders?
If I do some Googling and find out that in 1998, there was a Games day model for some inquisitorial henchman that would be categorized as a Crusader, and that had an axe in its belt, can I produce a photo of this as proof that Crusaders should be allowed to have power axes?
Are we going to get into arguments over which sprue a given axe-looking thing bit from? "Actually, there was a little-used hatchet bit on the 2001 Black Templar captain sprue. Therefore, all black templar captains (unlike other Space Marine captains) are allowed to wield power axes".
This is just silly. If GW (or anyone running a tournament) intends for this to be the rule that governs power weapons, then someone REALLY needs to publish a comprehensive matrix of exactly which models have been produced with which weapons. Otherwise, if someone shows up at a tournament with their Dark Angels techmarine holding a club, how exactly will we resolve the dispute about what the techmarine is allowed to carry?
I don't think that Inquisitorial Henchment should be allowed to use anything other than power swords, but that's purely based on power level - I don't think that the argument for divining GW's intent can lead to a consistent ruleset.
The problem with page 8 Ben is that it doesn't provide any way to resolve disputes. When there is anything (even pride) at stake, disputes happen. There needs to be a framework in place to quickly resolve these disputes, so that people don't end up having the same argument over and over again. To Space Marine player A, it seems perfectly reasonable that their Captain should be able to wield a power axe. To his Tyranid opponent, it might seem wrong. There needs to be a way to get past this disagreement beyond a "contest of wills".
-
@Achillius: The position is that when the rule book says 'look at the model', the model they are referring to is the official GW model, not the model on the table. If this is the case, certain instances of modeling (axes on DCA) are not WYSIWYG because the rulebook/codex doesn't allow for those models to have power axes.
Now, reasonable people can disagree with that position. But that position is manifestly not the position that you can't convert models. It is the position that, by RAW, DCA can only have Power Weapons. If you want your DCA to use Ork bodies, Eldar heads, IG legs, and Daggers from some other game company, and your opponents can tell what they're supposed to be, I'm sure Battlegrounds is fine with that. But if you model them with axes, that is a problem, just like if you model all of your Space Marines with lascannons, that's a problem. The codex doesn't allow them to all have lascannons, and the codex doesn't allow DCA to have axes (at least according to the position taken above, which, again, reasonable people can disagree with).
Perhaps we can split this conversation off to another thread? I have actual rules questions I want to ask without them getting lost:)
-
OK I danced around a lot in that post without quickly summarizing the main point:
Although the "model it how you want" approach to power weapons could lead to some undesirable game balance ramifications (most obviously in the case of Death Cult Assassins), at least the rule is clear.
Without a published list of which units are allowed to use which power weapon variants, the "only use what the GW model(s) originally came with" approach will not work for competitive play.
-
Don't worry, you made your point well the first time around.
And it has merit, even if I'm arguing the other side:)
-
OK I should probably stop beating this horse (sorry Simon) but here's a perfect example. Triarch Praetorians (current model):
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2002735a_99120110012_TriarchVoidbladeSquad360_445x319.jpg
Wtf is that? A sword? An axe? It's kind of like a sword-axe. Under the "however it's modelled" rule, there's no problem, just make it clear in your army list & to your opponent whether it's a sword or an axe. Under the "only official GW poses" policy, there needs to be a standardized interpretation about whether that's a sword or an axe, or just have to argue about it every time.
-
This topic has been assembled from posts in the rules thread. It may or may not read well / make sense. If it does not, I apologize.
-
So, I have a question for Sam (and Sam rather specifically):
My GK techmarine, metal model, comes with what looks to me like an axe. I have options, whihc I pay pts for, to switch it out for various NFW, which would be legal, and require conversions. But changing that axe to a regular sword would be "modelling for advantage" by the same logic, right?
Furthermore, other chapters use the same model. SInce they don't have options to switch out the main weapon, does that mean all regular techmarines have power axes now? +1 Str, i1?
My question from before, which arguably belong in this thread.
-
It is a question that could be in this thread, but it's also a rule question for Sam so I left it behind. He just answered it too!
-
I saw that, just sec too late. Thanks.
-
I expect codex legion will clear up alot of questions like this. If the unit entries say things like "may be given any power weapon for 15 points. Or may be given a power sword, power axe, power maul, or power lance for 15 points" then it will be clear that you should get your choice. After all there are pros and cons for each. On the other hand if it reads "may take a power sword for 15 points" it will indicate that each entrie is unique.
-
I dearly hope either a general FAQ or inat clears this up before the next codex. And no, I don't particularly see that helping.
-
I have just used logic on this. DCA are decribed as women in tight body glove armer weilding Katanas in many cannon I have read. Can I link it? No but thats what I have read. A katana is a graceful fienese weapon, an axe is not and would look silly being wielded by assassins that are supposed to be graceful. A marine? He can use what ever he wants. A gaurdsman? The same sure why not? I have just used simple logic to figure out who could wield or should wield what. Yes models are WUSIWUG and should always be. I think DCAs are supposed to be graceful assasinating ninjas. When do you hear of Ninjas being graceful with axes?
-
@Achillius: The position is that when the rule book says 'look at the model', the model they are referring to is the official GW model, not the model on the table. If this is the case, certain instances of modeling (axes on DCA) are not WYSIWYG because the rulebook/codex doesn't allow for those models to have power axes.
Great post, but you must have the collectors edition of the book because mine makes no reference to the offical GW model at all. Now my rule book does say look at the model, does provide sub types for power weapons, and even has rules for what to do if you have two different types.
WYSIWYG is the key here, model away (per the hobby section of the book where they talk about weapon swaps) but keep it within the guidelines of the rules as written, not as you would like them to be written.
-
@Achillius: The position is that when the rule book says 'look at the model', the model they are referring to is the official GW model, not the model on the table. If this is the case, certain instances of modeling (axes on DCA) are not WYSIWYG because the rulebook/codex doesn't allow for those models to have power axes.
I've seen this argument in a number of places now...
The argument is: we have to look at the official GW model and follow what is there, correct?
(http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1241950_99060107007_DCAssassinsmain_873x627.jpg)
Those are the official DCA models. The one on the right clearly has one, single, sword held by both hands. Does that mean that I have to use only the model on the left if I want to claim the "2 power weapons" listed in the codex entry for Death Cult Assassins? Their wargear says they have 2, but the model clear only has one - and apparently model sculpt trumps the codex entry...
Why is allowing "power weapons" to be swords, axes, or halberds as per page 61 because the GW model only has a sword different from preventing half of all death cult models from gaining the extra attack for having 2 power weapons, because one sculpt clearly has only one sword?
The rules on this are very clear... if a "power weapon" in a models wargear has no special attributes it can be a sword, an axe, or a maul. You look at the specific model to decide its specific weapon. If how the GW model has been sculpted trumps what is written in the codex entry then half of DCAs need to lose 1 attack. Not to mention the slew of other even more ridiculous cases we can think up...
If subtracting one attack from half of DCA models was brought up last edition it would be laughed off as ridiculous, just like it should be in this edition. The sculpt of a model has never trumped its wargear in a codex entry - why is this different? Using axes/mauls/halberds on DCA is not MFA, it is just following the rules - poorly written as they may be.
-
She has a Sword hidden in the other sword if you notice how her hands are she is about to pull it out. Actually that is a really akward way to hold that sword how I came to the conclusion.
This seems to be drawling out into I want to bend the Rules in or out of context type discussion.
Model really doesn't trump rules Imo but If you want to look at it I agree with Steve A Big Burly Axe is not an Assassin's weapon Smaller Hand Hatchets maybe but those are more along the lines of Power Sword as they are small and fast and don't have the weight of a Big Burly Axes.
Look at Those Same models and Imagine them using
(http://www.modelbits.co.uk/images/assault_squad_power_axe_large.jpg)
in the same Manner.
In my head it looks silly and I think that in itself Justifies it. But why Would you want to go at Initiative 1 with your Guy with Initiative 6 and WS 5 to get 1 Additional Str and AP 2. Go Right ahead Im just going to throw more attacks into you before it happens. A 5+ invuln is only going to get you so far and even with the 1 Additional STR and AP 2 I just don't think it is Worth using the Axe at all.
-
Totally with you on the fluff standpoint that an assassin should not be wielding a massive battle axe, but if we start arguing things like a hand axe isn't an axe its a sword where does that end?
For all the vague rules GW has written over the years, this is not one (as much as people want it to be). The rules are clear, "power weapon" is either an axe, a sword, or a maul based on what is on the model. Coupled with WYSIWYG this is a pretty decisive case. Resorting to arguments that "it is not fluffy" rather than the rule is telling enough.
I *definitely* agree with you about how to kit out a DCA, trading S4 I6 into S5 I1 does not make sense to me, but if people want to, they are able to.
-
Fluff should never factor into rules calls.
The only time where fluff helps is in obscure cases where we're trying to figure through the rules as they're intended. This usually only matters for the Megabattle, because we're most interested in that game playing how we'd like to see it played. Tournaments are a whole different animal.
Anyways I think there's some compelling arguments here, Alan's latest post specifically. I do not own a book, but I'd be interested in reading the parts he's referring to.
Sam has ruled in the way that he feels is best and I support that, however.
-
Fluff should never factor into rules calls.
The only time where fluff helps is in obscure cases where we're trying to figure through the rules as they're intended. This usually only matters for the Megabattle, because we're most interested in that game playing how we'd like to see it played. Tournaments are a whole different animal.
This.
-
OK.
More questions that would need published official rulings if we go the "GW model must have X weapon" route.
Dark Eldar Archon. here's the only current model:
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat440231a&prodId=prod1160049a
That's a sword, but most people interpret it as a Huskblade. If it IS a huskblade (and really, who knows?), there is no current Archon model that has any kind of a normal power weapon. Does that mean we are free to make a Dark Eldar archon with any kind of power weapon?
If the answer is that we have to start Googling older eldar Archon models to see if there were any that were made that had normal power weapons of some sort, and only use those, does that mean that tournament organizers need to be aware of the contents of all past Citadel miniature sales in order to provide rulings? That's impossible, so again I come back to "this will only work if someone makes a spreadsheet that lists all the valid options for each model."
Another one. Here's the current GW model for a Succubus:
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat440231a&prodId=prod1160050a
Is that a Lance, or an Axe? Need an official ruling.
I found these two very quickly looking only at one army (which I have an interest in because I play Dark Eldar). I have to believe that this is only the tip of the iceberg.
Also. If we're limiting the options based on Citadel mini models, I strongly advise you to require that the specific type of power weapon be included on any army lists. That way, you can validate that the person is making a legal choice, and the person bringning the model doesn't get surprised in response to a complaint in the middle of the tournament that he now must play the model differently than he thought he was going to have to play it.
-
Also. If we're limiting the options based on Citadel mini models, I strongly advise you to require that the specific type of power weapon be included on any army lists. That way, you can validate that the person is making a legal choice, and the person bringning the model doesn't get surprised in response to a complaint in the middle of the tournament that he now must play the model differently than he thought he was going to have to play it.
Agree with everything in the post, but one thousand times this.
Sister Superior models only come with power mauls or swords... from what I read in the other thread where the ruling was made, that means I can never take a power axe in my SOB army, correct?
-
Also. If we're limiting the options based on Citadel mini models, I strongly advise you to require that the specific type of power weapon be included on any army lists. That way, you can validate that the person is making a legal choice, and the person bringning the model doesn't get surprised in response to a complaint in the middle of the tournament that he now must play the model differently than he thought he was going to have to play it.
This will absolutely be the case.
-
Fluff should never factor into rules calls.
The only time where fluff helps is in obscure cases where we're trying to figure through the rules as they're intended. This usually only matters for the Megabattle, because we're most interested in that game playing how we'd like to see it played. Tournaments are a whole different animal.
Anyways I think there's some compelling arguments here, Alan's latest post specifically. I do not own a book, but I'd be interested in reading the parts he's referring to.
Sam has ruled in the way that he feels is best and I support that, however.
Chase, Are you going to be in the Plainville store tomorrow (thursday)? I have the day off and need to pick up my collectors editio n, so I'd be happy to point it out to you. Obviously I have strong feelings on it, but I think I can keep it objective.
The truth is, people probably wouldn't be having this debate if all models only had one power weapon. You have a space marine captain, and you choose to switch out his AP3 weapons for a +1 Str, AP2 but Initiative 1 weapon, that's a pretty clear trade off. Truth, almost everyone would either pay for a power fist or just stick to AP3. Of course, various special characters (all BA and SW, I think) come modelled with an axe, so there's that. But then again, if that power weapon has any special rules, at all (besides something like master crafted) it's back to a regular initiative AP3 weapon, so it' not like it's simple to start with.
I don't see any archon voluntarily taking an axe, for instance, even though it would be his only way to fight terminators.
Anyway, where it gts eird is something like the DCAs, where they have two weapons. Read as written, there's really nothing to stop them from taking 1 axe, 1 sword, and choosing which weapon to use each round. I'll readily agree it's very powerful, perhaps too powerful, but it's not like their aren't tons of other things like that.
-
I am not likely to be there tomorrow at all. If I am I will stop in later that night. I've got a lot of errands I need to run and I need to finish a few projects around my place.
Sam will be there tomorrow from open - the evening. I would like him to have a conversation with anyone who has thought this whole thing through in a major way. It is far from cut and dry (like I thought it was at first). I'm glad he's the one making the call here. It's a big deal and I likely would have flipflopped 4 times by now.
Your book is waiting for you, in all its glory (and it's glory is vast).
-
This seems to be drawling out into I want to bend the Rules in or out of context type discussion.
I think who is "bending" the rules is a matter of perspective, and best left alone, Pat.
-
I think people really need to relax. A DCA is amazing in close combat against anything that's not a 2+ armor save. I mean really how many models have a 2+ armor save in the first place? Are you really afraid of pure termie lists? Im not. Plenty of answers for them and power weapons isnt one of them. Really go to CVS go get a tampon and call it a day.
What im confused on, are we not allowed to equip bits to represent a specific weapon any more? I have a Space marine Sarg with a power axe long before this came out. Is this model not illegal? I just need to know if i need to do a weapon swap.
-
And it was a Matter of Opinion that I decided to post my thoughts. It is a thread right now with things basically being repeated like every 3rd post. I didn't put anyone on the spot but on both sides it is.
The Rule can be bent both ways we dont know where it is supposed to sit at. Players can bend it towards Official GW models and you can bend it saying its a Hobby with Conversions.
I already posted I think its Silly to give DCAs a Power axe based on my experience with the game. You been playing longer than me and in a more Tournament type style and maybe your seeing something I don't. I accept that may be the case and maybe I will see it eventually. But I don't right now and that is an opinion that some people may agree with atm.
I support the Games-workshop model deal to an extent because it deals with Fluff and Lore of Characters.
I also support the player who wants to go through the effort to make his model different to get an advantage as long as it confirms to the rules. Making Combi-Meltas or Specialized Power Weapons is some of that.
This came about with the Conga Line Topic and the Death Ray Model Count Topic. Both were based on a wording that was not clearly construded by Games-workshop. This is one of those times where it can be looked at 2 ways. Their model or Models in General. Those points are being restated in different wording probably through out the whole topic.
The truth is, people probably wouldn't be having this debate if all models only had one power weapon. You have a space marine captain, and you choose to switch out his AP3 weapons for a +1 Str, AP2 but Initiative 1 weapon, that's a pretty clear trade off. Truth, almost everyone would either pay for a power fist or just stick to AP3. Of course, various special characters (all BA and SW, I think) come modelled with an axe, so there's that. But then again, if that power weapon has any special rules, at all (besides something like master crafted) it's back to a regular initiative AP3 weapon, so it' not like it's simple to start with.
I would Disagree on this point because Looking at this I can see the Advantages for a Space Marine Captain to take Both especially if he Takes a Bike. He would become a Very Heavy Assault Based Commander. Hammer of Wrath+ The Choice for extra AP and STR or the ability to go before your Opponent With 5 Attacks on the Charge and an Automatic STR 4 hit for charging in after shooting the person in the face with 2 Bolter Shots. This coupled with a 3+ save, a 4+ Invuln, Toughness 5, and 3 wounds makes him a Severe threat to Anyone. You run the numbers and being 165 points is a Bargain compared to being restricted.
But then again this comes down to am I allowed to do It. I would like to now that the idea is there but no model Exists for a Captain on a bike and Neither the Bike or Commander Sprues come with an Axe only my Assault Weapon sprue for Space Marines. So this is where the argument can be made for the model doesn't exist but neither Sprue that would make a part of that has said axe.
The difference with say a Techmarine and a DCA is that those models do exist from Games-workshop and even though I can auto-cad and 3d print a DCA with an Axe and a Techmarine with a power sword those are not Games-workshop models. The ruling has been made clear for 2 models so far and like any tournament if a Model comes into question you talk to Sam beforehand to make a calling if it is Legal.
I did not make any gestures as to who was bending the rules but for either side right now its how far can you bend the wording and the perspective of the rule before you break it. That is how any debate dealing with a ruling turns out and it just hits that point.
I think people really need to relax. A DCA is amazing in close combat against anything that's not a 2+ armor save. I mean really how many models have a 2+ armor save in the first place? Are you really afraid of pure termie lists? Im not. Plenty of answers for them and power weapons isnt one of them. Really go to CVS go get a tampon and call it a day.
What im confused on, are we not allowed to equip bits to represent a specific weapon any more? I have a Space marine Sarg with a power axe long before this came out. Is this model not illegal? I just need to know if i need to do a weapon swap.
This is again the confusion. I feel like if you could find a bit from your army that fulfills the role on your model than it should be fine. In a fluff sense your Space Marine Assault Squad pulls the Power Axe out of your Armory what is to stop the Tactical Sergeant from doing the same. But then it may sound like I am playing favorites so it would be best just to confirm it with Sam.
-
I think people really need to relax. A DCA is amazing in close combat against anything that's not a 2+ armor save. I mean really how many models have a 2+ armor save in the first place? Are you really afraid of pure termie lists? Im not. Plenty of answers for them and power weapons isnt one of them. Really go to CVS go get a tampon and call it a day.
What im confused on, are we not allowed to equip bits to represent a specific weapon any more? I have a Space marine Sarg with a power axe long before this came out. Is this model not illegal? I just need to know if i need to do a weapon swap.
You relax. Your entire second paragraph outlines the problem. It's not about DCAs, it's about how the rule works.
For instance with the rule in place as I think it should, a DE wych sergeant (whatever they're called) can take plain power weapon instead of the agonizer, make it an axe, an be able to kill termies.
I wouldn't really worry about DCAs, btw. It takes basically all day to assault using rhinos now, and they tend to die in the sunlight. Basically unless someone's also taking a LR, you won't see them.
-
As posted in the rules thread;
What kind of Power Weapon is a Burna? Because the model doesn't come with one as sculpted on it.
The minute you tell me that the Orks can model an axe on the end of their flame thrower, all the arguments about DCA not being allowed to take one is null and void.
-
Actually I can definitely see people wanting to take Axes or Lances on their Succubi & Archons (and all sorts of sergeants), because all of the cool expensive Dark Eldar combat weapons got hit with the AP3 bat.
It's going to get fluffy in this paragraph, but I guess I'm sort of trying to flesh out the different considerations here. Succubi are supposed to be these celebrities of the bloodthirsty Commorragh gladiatorial arena. I'm sure that there are succubi who are experts in the Power Lance, Power Axe, Power Whip, Power Knitting Needle, Power Broom Handle, Power Scissors, and tons of other weapons that we have no words for. It feels very arbitrary to say that because the one pose GW has produced for a Succubus happens to be holding a whip some sort of a pole arm, it means that we can't play Succubi with swords.
-
I would Disagree on this point because Looking at this I can see the Advantages for a Space Marine Captain to take Both especially if he Takes a Bike. He would become a Very Heavy Assault Based Commander. Hammer of Wrath+ The Choice for extra AP and STR or the ability to go before your Opponent With 5 Attacks on the Charge and an Automatic STR 4 hit for charging in after shooting the person in the face with 2 Bolter Shots. This coupled with a 3+ save, a 4+ Invuln, Toughness 5, and 3 wounds makes him a Severe threat to Anyone. You run the numbers and being 165 points is a Bargain compared to being restricted.
Here's the thing: I actually think that is a great build, and exactly the sort of thing the new rule is meant to let you build. SM captains have been under-utilized for a long time. But you can't do it, apparently, unless a SM Captain package comes with an axe (no idea). Maybe you wanted to do a Maul and Axe? Definitely can't do that.
-
Sam normally you do a pretty good of rules intervention, but here you are way off base. Not only are you ingnoring the RAW and adding in stipulations that are not in the book, but you have just made using power weapons way more complicated than it needs to be.
Your reasoning, MFA! An interesting concept, most often associated with modeling size and height for advantage, but is now being applied to valid weapon swaps. Giving a space marine sgt a combi-melta is modelling for advantage, but this is part of the hobby and allowed. To get a combi melta on say a terminator sgt I have to scratch build one, or take one from another model. Both of which by these rulings are now no longer valid in Plainville tournaments. Neither came with the original model and the second actually came in a different kit. How are we proposing to solve this?
We're looking at having to put together matrixes of what GW model has what weapon and what it must look like. Does that not begin to suggest that you are overthinking this?
If the rules provide the option (that nice expensive book we bought), then it is up to the player to represent this in a wysiwyg fashion, if you stick to that simple rule, you will save a hell of a lot of time and effort.
I'm done for now, I'll be playing RAW, my Black Templar castellean on a bike with an axe won't be apologizing for anything, and nor will the one in terminator armour, the bretheren using Space wolf power weapons will also stand tall, all 2 inches ;)
As for DCA (i don't play them though they are cool models) having an axe and sword is cheesy, but its legal. I'll mock you if we play and you have that but I'll not lose sleep over it.
-
To try to argue that when GW says "look at the model", they mean, "look at the most recently released model/non special release model, games workshop only" Is reading what you think GW intended to write. What if I have an old model I love, it is not longer illegal, or considered modeling for advantage? Do I need to convert an old model? Do I have to take the time to explain to all opponents, that it isn't really an axe, but a sword, or vice versa, because.....
Rules as written, it is the model you are putting on the table. I don't think this is a huge problem in most cases. But if you have any doubt, don't be that guy!
I also certainly think that if I have an independent character and buy him a power weapon, I should be able to model it however I want.
-
I'm going to take Chase's advice and talk over the power weapon thing tonight. I'll post again either tonight or tomorrow night, and let you all know if my thinking has changed by then. Until than, play casual. I don't think we have any tournaments scheduled for the next 48 hours, so whatever your opponent agrees on is fine by me.
-
I think people really need to relax. A DCA is amazing in close combat against anything that's not a 2+ armor save. I mean really how many models have a 2+ armor save in the first place? Are you really afraid of pure termie lists? Im not. Plenty of answers for them and power weapons isnt one of them. Really go to CVS go get a tampon and call it a day.
What im confused on, are we not allowed to equip bits to represent a specific weapon any more? I have a Space marine Sarg with a power axe long before this came out. Is this model not illegal? I just need to know if i need to do a weapon swap.
You relax. Your entire second paragraph outlines the problem. It's not about DCAs, it's about how the rule works.
For instance with the rule in place as I think it should, a DE wych sergeant (whatever they're called) can take plain power weapon instead of the agonizer, make it an axe, an be able to kill termies.
I wouldn't really worry about DCAs, btw. It takes basically all day to assault using rhinos now, and they tend to die in the sunlight. Basically unless someone's also taking a LR, you won't see them.
no you relax. You seem to be the one getting upset over a game with plastic and pewter little men. Im going with Alan except one point. My models are very well painted and converted. To say I can not use a power axe on a Space marine Sargent is silly. My only disagreement with Alan is I know there is a chaplain model out there that has both the Crosarius and a power fist and a Dark Angels old model that had a Crosarius and a power sword. My models will be as they are and will Make sence which is ultimately I think the problem. DCAs with power axes just don't make seance to me. I think its case by case. If some one took a power axe from the marines bits and attached it to a DCA then I would have a problem.
-
I wasn't terribly upset. But I don't terribly enjoy being told to calm down (when I tell my wife to calm down, she hits me....and she does not hit like a girl) because the insinuation is it doesn't matter. Well, of course it doesn't matter, it IS a game, right? But it matters a proportional amount to the time, energy and thought we spend on this hobby, which is frankly, a fair bit.
It is, in essence, the trivializing of an opposing position.
-
I wasn't terribly upset. But I don't terribly enjoy being told to calm down (when I tell my wife to calm down, she hits me....and she does not hit like a girl) because the insinuation is it doesn't matter. Well, of course it doesn't matter, it IS a game, right? But it matters a proportional amount to the time, energy and thought we spend on this hobby, which is frankly, a fair bit.
It is, in essence, the trivializing of an opposing position.
He said "I think people need to relax" He didn't say "Matt calm down". You are over-reacting to his comment.
-
I wasn't terribly upset. But I don't terribly enjoy being told to calm down (when I tell my wife to calm down, she hits me....and she does not hit like a girl) because the insinuation is it doesn't matter. Well, of course it doesn't matter, it IS a game, right? But it matters a proportional amount to the time, energy and thought we spend on this hobby, which is frankly, a fair bit.
It is, in essence, the trivializing of an opposing position.
He said "I think people need to relax" He didn't say "Matt calm down". You are over-reacting to his comment.
Sooooo....relax? :P
-
Frankie tells me to relax. Don't do it. When you want to go to it. Relax don't do it
When you want to come. Relax don't do it. When you want to come
For the record, I agree with the RAW argument (DCA can have axes) regardless how weird or modelling for advantage it is. I mean, it says it right there and it might seem like abuse but there are far worse game abuses that were seen as 100% a-ok. I don't play no stinkin grey knights either, I play chaos and I sure as anything don't want DCA ruining Typhus' day but thems the rules, right?
-
I'll hit all ya'll.
-
Frankie tells me to relax. Don't do it. When you want to go to it. Relax don't do it
When you want to come. Relax don't do it. When you want to come
For the record, I agree with the RAW argument (DCA can have axes) regardless how weird or modelling for advantage it is. I mean, it says it right there and it might seem like abuse but there are far worse game abuses that were seen as 100% a-ok. I don't play no stinkin grey knights either, I play chaos and I sure as anything don't want DCA ruining Typhus' day but thems the rules, right?
I agree with ya. It would looks silly and wrong but i suppose DCA can be modeled with power axes.
-
Apparently there is a lengthy thread about this very question in the Dakka rules forums: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/459398.page
I haven't read the entire thing, and it obviously isn't directly pertinent to the Battleground ruling (Sam isn't bound by Dakka threads), but I thought it might be worth looking at.
I must admit, I've changed my mind a couple of times on this issue, although I think I'm back where I started. The thing that (I hope) we can all agree on is that there isn't any clear answer to the question. Either GW meant 'look at the model on the table' or they meant 'look at the model that we sell' and I cannot imagine how we'd know when they meant. The language they used surely doesn't give us any hints.
It comes down to, I think, which interpretation causes more problems for the game, and I think the restrictive interpretation is less problematic. But then, writing clear rules in the first place would be least problematic.
-
I agree with everything Simon just wrote and feel the exact same way.
I'm probably going to read that Dakka thread later. Until then, I'm going to play with my new toy!!
I'm excited to use the new website in an environment that offers others to mess with it too.
If anyone discovers any problems or "clunky" issues please let me know.
-
I viewed the introduction of multiple power weapon types as a way to further add character to the models that make up our armies. The diversity and decision making they introduce is exciting, both as a player and a modeler. It would be a shame to be forced to only use only what GW saw fit to put on the sprue.
-
I viewed the introduction of multiple power weapon types as a way to further add character to the models that make up our armies. The diversity and decision making they introduce is exciting, both as a player and a modeler. It would be a shame to be forced to only use only what GW saw fit to put on the sprue.
This.
-
So, funny thing I noticed.
Sam was mentioning the fact that recent codexes say "power weapon" (DE< GK, presumably necrons, except they all got better stuff anyway). And the FAQ went around and specifically updated older codexes (such as SM) from power "sword" to power "weapon." He took this as an indication that "power weapon" might be a category meant to be modded into 1 of 4 weapons.
Now, looking at the Daemons FAQ.......it specifically says hellblades are power swords, as in, you cannot switch them out. (sorry demons, methinks you have enough MCs to make up for it though)
Doesn't that further indicate that when they say "power weapon" that's a very flexible designation?
-
So, funny thing I noticed.
Sam was mentioning the fact that recent codexes say "power weapon" (DE< GK, presumably necrons, except they all got better stuff anyway). And the FAQ went around and specifically updated older codexes (such as SM) from power "sword" to power "weapon." He took this as an indication that "power weapon" might be a category meant to be modded into 1 of 4 weapons.
Now, looking at the Daemons FAQ.......it specifically says hellblades are power swords, as in, you cannot switch them out. (sorry demons, methinks you have enough MCs to make up for it though)
Doesn't that further indicate that when they say "power weapon" that's a very flexible designation?
Assuming GW does anything intelligently or purposely for any reason other than to sell models is a mistake.
-
OK, let's just write our own rules, then!
I say at least every army needs a skyfire weapon native to their codex. SM can have flak missiles, nids can have their hive guard, I guess maybe jokaero can have another alternate firing mode, etc.....
Who's with me?
-
Oh, I thought that was the premise of this thread!
*rimshot*
(I'm just kidding, I love you guys)
-
I viewed the introduction of multiple power weapon types as a way to further add character to the models that make up our armies. The diversity and decision making they introduce is exciting, both as a player and a modeler. It would be a shame to be forced to only use only what GW saw fit to put on the sprue.
This is how I read it and would prefer to see it used. Given how the rules are ambiguous I'd just like as much advance notice as possible on whatever the BG ruling is. I had already modeled some Death Co. with a power axe when it was just a power weapon, was very excited to think I could then use the stats for the actual axe now. If I need to remodel it as a sword no problem, but I'm fussy about appearance and don't want a gray plastic weapon glued onto a model otherwise nicely painted at the last minute...
-
Blood Angels Codex Page 81 Power Weapon Entry.
A power weapon (typically a sword or axe, but sometimes a glaive,halberd or mace) is sheathed in the lethal haze of a disruptive energy field, capable of tearing through armor, flesh and bone with ease. See the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook for details of using power weapons.
-
I think the change of specific power weapon types just cared a bunch of people. Its a bit concerning for dealing with Termis but plenty of other ways to deal with a 2+ armor save. hail em in fire they are bound to fail eventualy! Just back your units up and shoot and keep away from that nasty 2+ :)
Im fortunate that most my marines are armed with powerfists in the first place and my other army is Imperial guard which really doesnt use power weapons so im not super effected.
-
Oh god ya I played Thursday and I put an Assault Terminator Squad in a Landraide and Necron Warriors wittled them down with just the hail of fire. so Many warriors :(.
-
OK, let's just write our own rules, then!
I say at least every army needs a skyfire weapon native to their codex. SM can have flak missiles, nids can have their hive guard, I guess maybe jokaero can have another alternate firing mode, etc.....
Who's with me?
dumb.
-
Satire is lost in you, sir.
-
Satire is lost in you, sir.
That's only because Ed is a serious player.
-
All right, thanks for your patience, everybody. This is a tricky one, especially since our first tournament in 6e is a Feast of Blades qualifier. Here's where things stand as of now, and where they will stand* for the tournament. Given that, of the two interpretations of the rules, abiding by "GW official model" is unenforceable at a tournament and tends to restrict the fun of hobbyists, and that the only way to deal with the more powerful applications of the other interpretation involves house-ruling (which I am loathe to do), the following interpretation of page 61 will be in effect for our tournaments:
For each undefined power weapon in your army, you may select one of the four options presented in the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook. The weapon must be modeled appropriately, and your selection MUST be included on your army list. Any power weapon not specified on your printed army list will be treated as a generic power sword.
*Note: since the upcoming tournament is a Feast of Blades qualifier, any rules judgments from them will take priority. As such, I would advise restraint; if my ruling today makes you go out and throw a zillion power axes in your list, and then Feast of Blades clarifies a different interpretation of the rule, you'll be out of luck. Naturally, any official FAQ from Games Workshop will likewise have priority over this ruling. It's pretty much the conga line all over again, only with long-term modeling considerations, so just be aware.
Again, thanks for all the input, and for letting me take the time to mull this thing over. Now get back to enjoying the damn game!
-
I believe the "look at the model" is exactly what caused all this confusion and over-thinking. That terrible phrase should just be ignored, because BG is still running tournaments WYSIWYG. Conversions are good for the hobby and good for the store, despite what GW infers.
The power weapon choices themselves seem fairly balanced.
If an option says Power Weapon - X pts, one could buy his choice of a sword, axe, maul or lance. If the options says Power Sword, then power sword.
Death Cult Assassins wield two power weapons. So if you want Death Cult Assassins wielding one power sword and one power axe, that's cool too. See "More Than One Weapon" on BRB p. 54 for relevant details. Essentially, you choose one weapon for each model for the Assault (no splitting attacks) and you get +1 Attack for dual-wielding power weapons.
Sam's completely spot-on regarding rule fluidity. Anything could change at any time, and there's very little the store can do. As always, you take your chances... or you buy magnets from the store.
-
Wait... The store sells magnets?!? Awesome! How did I miss that?
-
They usualy sell them by the paints! :)
I say hurrah to the ultimate call here. I think its a good one. Every one is cool with it which is awesome. No more arguements about modeling power weapons to "abuse rules". I hope that these new power weapons rules will bring back the use of the close combat monkey chaplain. There is one with the Crosarius in one hand and has a power fist on the other. Also Dark Angels had a special chaplain that had a MC power sword and a Crozarius so I bet he will make a return with the next Dark Angels codex.
-
But....it doesn't matter what the model came with. You can model them a you wish, (except for crozius).
-
Oh man, I wish there was another tournament here before I move.
Next to each instance of 'power weapon' on my army list, I'd specify 'look at the model'. And then I'd switch out magnetized arms between each round of combat. And then I'd flee before Sam found anything sharp and/or heavy to throw at me.
-
Ha, not so much. Sam's going to require all weapons to be accounted for on the Army List. Let's say someone said, "Look at the model," Sam would have to correct that certain person's list... again. ;D
-
Oh man, I wish there was another tournament here before I move.
Next to each instance of 'power weapon' on my army list, I'd specify 'look at the model'. And then I'd switch out magnetized arms between each round of combat. And then I'd flee before Sam found anything sharp and/or heavy to throw at me.
Poor Sam... one of these days Chase will find him crouched under a table holding the 6e rules in a death clutch mumbling things to himself like "power weapons" and "errata..... ERATTA!!!"
-
Poor Sam... one of these days Chase will find him crouched under a table holding the 6e rules in a death clutch mumbling things to himself like "power weapons" and "errata..... ERATTA!!!"
This will NOT be allowed at any time, for any reason.
That's MY house rule.