Is there a rule? Leading Question.

[s_harrington]

With the exception of Instant Death wounds, Sweeping Advance, and esoteric wargear that specificlly calls for base characteristics; is there any rule in existence that says that all other characteristics tests must be on a model's base characteristic without modifiers?

I expect the answer to be no, but I'm looking for a little confirmation before I move forward with my train of thought.

[Denzark]

I think you have covered all circumstances here. The answer is (to my mind) no. But only because outside the conditions you have set I can't think of something that would increase a base characteristic to test.

Interested to see where you are going with this - you're not thinking of Halberd Grey Knights versus JOTWW per chance?

[s_harrington]

I don't believe Halberds vs Jotww work, since the halberds say they only give the +2 for striking, not as a general stat increase.

No, I'm thinking more along the lines of thunder hammers and powerfists.
These actually just say the models Strength is doubled. It doesn't stipulate only being for close combat attacks.
In addition, it doesn't reduce their init to 1, only that their attacks are delivered at init 1.

The last two codex's have had wargear/powers that force strength tests. (Stern's power and the DE mindphase gauntlet)

Both of these tests vs a marine would be at strength 8 if I'm not mistaken.

There are a few other instances of this out there, but it's interesting to see how a well used piece of weaponry gains a whole new effect when then new codexs came out.


How do you effectively neuter Brother Captain Stern's Psychic power? Thunderhammer marines. Yes sir.

[Wildeybeast]

I don't believe Halberds vs Jotww work, since the halberds say they only give the +2 for striking, not as a general stat increase.

No, I'm thinking more along the lines of thunder hammers and powerfists.
These actually just say the models Strength is doubled. It doesn't stipulate only being for close combat attacks.
In addition, it doesn't reduce their init to 1, only that their attacks are delivered at init 1.

The last two codex's have had wargear/powers that force strength tests. (Stern's power and the DE mindphase gauntlet)

Both of these tests vs a marine would be at strength 8 if I'm not mistaken.

There are a few other instances of this out there, but it's interesting to see how a well used piece of weaponry gains a whole new effect when then new codexs came out.


How do you effectively neuter Brother Captain Stern's Psychic power? Thunderhammer marines. Yes sir.

You seem to be applying the rules in a rather biased way there. I'd agree that you are only I1 when striking with the weapon but then on that basis you also only double your strength when striking with it. I know the rules don't actually say that, but in the intro to close combat wepaons it does say that these bonuses apply to the models using them i.e. actually hitting something with them. I think in this case you have to go down the route of RAI - clearly the bonuses only actually apply when using the wepon. If a pyschic power forces you to take a strength test, this is to represent a power trying to rip apart your body at a molecular level or something similar. Having a big glove is not going to help you with that. You would not claim that a model with a lascannon takes S tests on a 9, so why would you do so when armed with a thunder hammer?

Weapon bonuses work differently to that of wargear in that they don't actually modify your stats, you only get the bonus when using the weapon (e.g. shooting or combat). So for example, having two hand weapons does not actually give you another attack to your profile, merely a bonus one in combat whereas a Tau battlesuit does actually modify your strength and toughness on your profile.

[Tynskel]

read pages 3-10 in the main rulebook.

[Wildeybeast]

read pages 3-10 in the main rulebook.

Actually, its only pages 6-8 that deal with charcteristics and page 8 that deals with characteristic tests. That only tells you how to make them, it doesn't specifically deal with this issue. Having re-read that section, along with close combat wepaon section, I have to conclude that weapons are not modifying your characteristic, merely giving you a bonus in combat.

[s_harrington]

Ok, I went back and read pages 6-8, then pages 3-10, and then the section on close combat weapons.

I haven't found what you guys are pointing out to me though. I'm not trying to be difficult, I genuinely can't find anything that says modifiers from weapons are for close combat only.

I do agree that most weapons are carefully worded as to make sure this is how they work, but either the powerfist was badly written or....


I did find another weapon that installs non-CC effects. Please review this and decide wether it has any bearing here.

GK Daemonblade: Deathlust, Dark Ressurection, and Familiar.
You'll notice that the blade gives abilities, USRs, etc outside of Closecombat.

Thanks for taking the time to look this over and consider it.

Sean

[Nabterayl]

I think what you're overlooking is the fact that power fists only double the user's Strength. Models only use a power fist when making close combat attacks.

[Wildeybeast]

I don't have the GK codex, so I don't know how those rules work I'm afraid. I agree entirely with you that there does not seem to be a specific wording covering this. I've checked the FAQ as well and there is nothing there.
However, I think the powerfist wording is badly done. It is clear that the iniative penalty only applies in CC, but he strenght bonus is not clear merely saying "it doubles the users strength". You can make a case to say that the strength applies at all times, and maybe this was GW's intent, but for my personal opinion I would say that since other 'standard' weapon bonuses only apply when the weapons are being used, this is the case also. It just doesn't seem to make any sense that the strength bonus would apply at all times, but not the iniative penalty!

Perhaps further clarification can be found in the section 'a normal and special weapon' which states that power fists, lightning claws and thunder hammers only confer their bonuses to attacks made with that weapon, which to me would say that the S bonus would not apply to characteristic tests.

Do you have any other examples of characteristic modifiers?

[s_harrington]

Outside of the Daemonblade in Codex: Grey Knights, I found one other example, Abbadon's weapons.
The +4 to strength is actually included in the his profile in a visible manner. "4 (8)"

Outside of these 2, and the powerfist, every single weapon I've seen that has a characteristic boost, says it only works in combat, very specificly.

*chuckles*

Regardless of how this turns out, gotta give me credit for finding the Abbadon example.

Nabterayl, I'm not ignoring your assesment. Your point of contention is actually what is being discussed right now. The statement; the effects of weapons only happen when your making a close combat attack, is what is under debate since there isn't actually a rule that states that.

Each and every weapon, except the three above, specificly call out they can only be used in close combat. The Daemonblade is very obvious that it can be used outside of combat. Abaddon's weapons, I think, will be seen as giving him the str bonus outside of combat. So, why not a powerfist? Perhaps the authors did write the powerfist badly, but I cannot know that for certain since I didn't write the book, nor asked the authors. I would be doing nothing more then guessing if I looked at it from a RAI, when there are other exceptions in existence that are similar in nature.

[Tynskel]

the point is that weapons don't change your initiative of the user in the case of Initiative tests, unless there is a test that is required of the model at the time of using the weapon. (I am unaware of any such test)

However, there are plenty of weapons and wargear that have an effective duration to the initiative.
Ex.
Lash Whips make your opponent I1 during that assault phase. This is great in combination with Acid Blood checks, because the test is taken during the assault phase. As a specific example: A tyrant with Lash Whips and Acid Blood taking 1 wound can decimate a squad of marines, due to every model in base to base taking the Initiative test at I1.


Thunder Hammers make models I1, ect

[s_harrington]

I'm pretty confused by your answer Tynskel.
If you would clarify, I would appreciate it.

Here's what I'm confused about:
I'm not sure what initiative or initiative tests have to do with the thread.
I'm not sure what 'effective duration' has to do with the thread since we're talking about weapons with no duration given in their rules.
I'm not sure why a Thunder Hammer would drop a model's initiative to 1. I thought it only made them deliver their blows at initiative 1, not change the characteristic.

Things I am not confused about:
Lash Whips + Acid Blood is a nasty revenge combo, and I agree that it works.

Thanks



Sean

[Tynskel]

I'm pretty confused by your answer Tynskel.
If you would clarify, I would appreciate it.

Here's what I'm confused about:
I'm not sure what initiative or initiative tests have to do with the thread.
I'm not sure what 'effective duration' has to do with the thread since we're talking about weapons with no duration given in their rules.
I'm not sure why a Thunder Hammer would drop a model's initiative to 1. I thought it only made them deliver their blows at initiative 1, not change the characteristic.

Things I am not confused about:
Lash Whips + Acid Blood is a nasty revenge combo, and I agree that it works.

Thanks



Sean

Initiative tests are a type of characteristic test.

I am sorry I wasn't clear: weapons that don't have a duration are simply instantaneous. If they do not state they apply to anything else, then that is it. This even prevents special abilities, such as the halberd's +2, ect.

Thunderhammers make your opponent Initiative 1, and lasts through to the next round. That's a change in Initiative characteristic.

[Nabterayl]

Nabterayl, I'm not ignoring your assesment. Your point of contention is actually what is being discussed right now. The statement; the effects of weapons only happen when your making a close combat attack, is what is under debate since there isn't actually a rule that states that.
Page 42 specifies that the benefits of the weapons described work only when actually wielding or using the weapon. That's why a model with a boltgun and lightning claw doesn't get to re-roll bolter wounds.

[s_harrington]

Thank you Tynskel, I understand your meaning now, and I find I can't dispute anything you've said.

Though I'm still working on those 3 weapons that have permanent duration effects.


Oh, Nabteryal, I read the lightning claw entry. Man that was written poorly, huh? All the other entries talk about rerolls for wounds or hits in close combat but they left it off the lightning claw.
Silly GW.

Anyways, I did as you suggested and read page 42. Twice. I'm still not able to find any passage that says that a weapons benefits can only happen during close combat. If you could guide me to the paragraph, I'd appreciate it.

It's interesting though, because if there is a passage that says that, it would invalidate Abbadon the Despoilers strength characteristic in the Chaos Marine codex except during combat.
In addition, it would only let an inquisitor with a daemonblade benefit from Feel No Pain and +1 Mastery Level during close combat and not during the rest of the turn. (Neither of those weapons outright state they work outside of close combat, but they don't state they don't either.)
Curiously, this ruling would also allow an Inquisitor to ignore the part of Rage USR imparted by the Daemonblade, the part that forces movement in the movement phase.

One way or another, were going to figure out if a) The powerfist is stronger then we thought, or b) Drachnyen/Talon of Horus and a Daemonblade are weaker then we thought.



Oh, thanks again for keeping this thread civil. It keeps it interesting.

[Nabterayl]

You're looking for the third full paragraph on the page, which states "These include more complex and powerful weapons that enhance the wielder's combat skills and confer bonuses, and sometimes penalties, to the models using them." Cross-reference page 35, "All engaged models will ... use any special close combat attack they have."

In other words, to get any benefit from a weapon (close combat or otherwise; the rules don't technically distinguish between the two), you have to be "using" or "wielding" it, which is different from having it on your person. If you have a power fist, but use your power sword, your attacks ignore armor but strike at normal Initiative and Strength, because a power fist only doubles the "user's" Strength.

This is why lightning claws don't affect shooting attacks, and why if you have a poisoned weapon and a power weapon you cannot have poisoned power attacks (it's not enough to simply be "armed with" a power weapon, per the fourth full paragraph; you also have to be "using" or "wielding" it per the third).

[s_harrington]

Haven't given up, just trying to find the time to further study and discuss this.

[Wildeybeast]

There's not a lot to study mate, you only get charateristic bonuses when actually using the weapon to shoot/hit something. Extra toughness from armour, bikes etc is always there since you are always 'using' the bike/armour.

[s_harrington]

To those that haven't posted yet: I hope you take the time to read this and keep an open mind. I know a lot of people immediately adopt the mindset that they must defeat every rules question posted, but I really believe you might find this an entertaining debate if you read it in full and not just try to pick it apart without doing the due diligence.

Ok, I've gone through it over and over. I've followed every reference that everyone has given me. So far no one has been able to pinpoint anywhere in the rules that says "benefits from weapons only occur when they are used in close combat".

I agree, up till now, that's how everyone has played it, but that doesn't mean its right.

Wildeybeast, in response to your last post, I would ask you take a look further down this post at the section about the Daemonblade, more specificly the power called Vampyre. This will actually show you that characteristics can be added by a close combat weapon and stick around outside of combat.

Nabterayl has tried to lead a persuasive counter argument, but each thing he's shown discusses the fact that when a person uses a weapon in combat, there are benefits applied to it. It's never actually said that effects cannot be applied outside of close combat. I've seen assumptions made from this, but as we all know, assumptions can be wrong. Hell, up till now I made the same assumption. And I've been playing since 1995.

Now had the Powerfist been an isolated instance, I would have written it off as an author's mistake, but in fact I have found two more incidents, one from 4th edition, and another from the latest codex in 5th edition, Grey Knights

If we say that the ruling applies to the 4th edition Chaos Codex, then we acknowledge that Abaddon's stat line is incorrectly printed and we have an illegal character.

But then again, it is a 4th edition codex so we can also make an assumption that it's one of the wrinkles between editions.

Before I continue, I want to reinforce the fact that every other weapon in the entire line of rules, be it from the rule book or from the codexs, has the words "when used in close combat" or something similar. The only exceptions are Abaddon's weapons, Powerfists, Daemon Weapons, and unfortunately the lightning claw. I firmly believe the lightning claw is a error since it tries to alter the abilities of another weapon and not its user.

Now we run into the daemon blade in this edition's Codex: Grey Knights, which is what triggered this line of thought for me.

The Daemonweapon is clearly placed in the weapon's section of the Wargear portion of the codex. So we can establish it is a weapon, without a doubt. 5 of the 9 powers of this blade have a direct bearing here.


1. Warpflame: In this case the model receives +3 strength. The wording carefully states that it is only applied to attacks made by the weapon. So we can see the author (all other things aside) isn't a moron and just forgot for other purposes. I've listed this here so we can see the distinction is made.

2. Vampyre: This heals the user wounds in return for causing them. It can take the user above his normal number up to 10. Do these extra wounds only exist in close combat and then vanish after close combat is over? Well perhaps we can make an exception just this once... although the wording clearly says "its wielder immediately gains +1 wound (to a maximum of 10)." and wounds are a characteristic. Let’s move on.

3. Deathlust: Here the bearer gains the USRs Furious Charge and Rage. FC is easy enough, it only occurs during the assault phase. Rage on the other hand has an effect every single phase! During the movement, you must move. During the shooting phase it controls your model if you decide to run. During the assault phase it controls your consolidate moves. Very clearly this happens outside of assault. Let's move on and see what else is evident.

4. Dark Ressurection: The bearer of the Daemonblade gains the USRs of Feel No Pain and Eternal Warrior. If we follow the traditional model, the bearer would only be able to use these in close combat. Seems lame then, but we'll let this one go as it is feasible that it might only work in Close Combat.

5. Familiar: The bearer counts as one Mastery Level higher than normal. Wow. Pretty cool. I can see how the indirect benefits of this only help the model in close combat, (powering his force weapon) but, well there it is.
The other powers for this weapon all directly state they have a bearing on close combat only and are very obviously not for other phases, but I want to repeat, they are all clear that they only work in close combat.
So now I ask, why would powers 2 thru 5 each not state they only effect the model in close combat when the other 5 powers do state they only work in close combat?

I'd venture a guess and say: because they affect the model outside of close combat.

For me, that establishes the rule that effects of weapons do work outside of close combat.

Before you start yelling about how that would destroy the game and all the powers of weapons are not meant for any other phase, remember, there are only 3 weapons (as far as I've found) that do not specifically state "this power is only used in close combat". Well 4, but I count a thunderhammer as a powerfist in this debate. Why would they have been so careful to include the exception on every single weapon to leave it off of these?

I think that is all I have to say on this, and I'll take this chance to thank Nabterayl, Tynskel, and Wildeybeast for posing thoughtful and well researched answers, those debates pushed me to examine this from more angles then I started with, and eventually led me to the above.

I'll also thank Denzark for being brave enough to answer my original post and pave the way for me to continue along this line of thinking.

Thanks for keeping it civil gents, and thanks for pushing me to look harder for the answers!

Sean

[thecactusman17]

OP, I would only allow that argument if your thundrehammer/powerfist/chainfist/eviscerator model was also always I1 regardless of circumstance.

Basically, outside of actually rolling to wound in CC, they are base strength unless the model itself would increase S by +x, where x is a defined integer. For example, combat drugs which last the entire game.

[Nabterayl]

Ahh, I understand the crux of the question now. Thanks, s_harrington!

Nabterayl has tried to lead a persuasive counter argument, but each thing he's shown discusses the fact that when a person uses a weapon in combat, there are benefits applied to it. It's never actually said that effects cannot be applied outside of close combat. I've seen assumptions made from this, but as we all know, assumptions can be wrong. Hell, up till now I made the same assumption. And I've been playing since 1995.
True enough. Let's recall, though, that we'll need a very good reason to read the rules as permitting us to do something they don't actually tell us we can. I don't say it's impossible (keep reading), but "the rules don't tell me I can't" isn't a good warrant.


If we say that the ruling applies to the 4th edition Chaos Codex, then we acknowledge that Abaddon's stat line is incorrectly printed and we have an illegal character.
We absolutely say that Abaddon's stat line is incorrectly printed, if we read S4(8) to mean that Abaddon is S8 for purposes of, say, taking Strength tests. As Abaddon's rules say, "Abaddon counts as equipped with a Daemon Weapon that doubles his Strength (to Strength 8, as shown in his profile) instead of the normal +1," and again, on page 93: "the wielder attacks with +1 Strength in close combat." Looking at the rules, rather than the shorthand profile, I think it's quite clear that Abaddon is only Strength 8 when he wields the weapon known as the "daemon sword Drach'nyen and Talon of Horus" (technically a single weapon two-handed weapon).


Now we run into the daemon blade in this edition's Codex: Grey Knights, which is what triggered this line of thought for me.

The Daemonweapon is clearly placed in the weapon's section of the Wargear portion of the codex. So we can establish it is a weapon, without a doubt. 5 of the 9 powers of this blade have a direct bearing here.

2. Vampyre: This heals the user wounds in return for causing them. It can take the user above his normal number up to 10. Do these extra wounds only exist in close combat and then vanish after close combat is over? Well perhaps we can make an exception just this once... although the wording clearly says "its wielder immediately gains +1 wound (to a maximum of 10)." and wounds are a characteristic. Let’s move on.

3. Deathlust: Here the bearer gains the USRs Furious Charge and Rage. FC is easy enough, it only occurs during the assault phase. Rage on the other hand has an effect every single phase! During the movement, you must move. During the shooting phase it controls your model if you decide to run. During the assault phase it controls your consolidate moves. Very clearly this happens outside of assault. Let's move on and see what else is evident.

4. Dark Ressurection: The bearer of the Daemonblade gains the USRs of Feel No Pain and Eternal Warrior. If we follow the traditional model, the bearer would only be able to use these in close combat. Seems lame then, but we'll let this one go as it is feasible that it might only work in Close Combat.

5. Familiar: The bearer counts as one Mastery Level higher than normal. Wow. Pretty cool. I can see how the indirect benefits of this only help the model in close combat, (powering his force weapon) but, well there it is.[/INDENT]
Getting back to my earlier statement, I think one of the canons of construction for 40K rules (that is, rules by which we interpret the rules) is that no rule can ever be construed so as to have no effect at the time it was written. In other words, edition changes, for instance, can invalidate rules, but no matter what, if we read a rule so that it did nothing at the time the book went to print, we're reading it wrong. This is one of the rare cases, in my opinion, where it is okay to do something that the rules never tell you you can do.

Take Deathlust, for example. Page 42 of the main rulebook is perfectly clear that you choose what weapon to wield when your Initiative comes up. Now, technically, page 42 never tells you that you can't choose what weapon to wield before then, but if somebody said, "Well, I want to choose to wield this weapon now, because the rulebook never tells me I can't," we would be quite right in rejecting their argument.

However, if somebody said, "Well, I want to - indeed, must - choose to wield this Daemonblade during the Movement phase because otherwise, the bearer of my Daemonblade will never be subject to the Rage special rule," what would our objection be?


"But neither the main rules nor the codex ever say you can do that," we would object.

"True," says the GK player, "but they also never say you can't."

"But that is no excuse for doing something," we point out.

"Quite so," the GK player agrees. "But this is: if I can't do this, this rule in my codex would do nothing on the day it was printed."

That is a winning argument. We let (indeed, we force) the Daemonblade-bearing Inquisitor to gain the benefit and hindrance of the Rage special rule because to do otherwise would violate one of our canons of construction.


For me, that establishes the rule that effects of weapons do work outside of close combat.
This, however, I don't agree with. Page 42 of the main rulebook still controls for general purposes, so a character only counts as "using" a power fist at Initiative 1. The GK codex requires special exceptions, but I don't see how the circumstances that warrant that exception warrant us reading a new general rule into the game.

EDIT: Let me clarify that. I agree that, under the right circumstances (such as those above), special weapons can affect a bearer's attributes even outside of close combat. I would disagree, however, that a power fist's increased Strength functions other than at Initiative 1 or other than for an engaged model.

[s_harrington]

Thank you. I like your reply very much.

I was giving some thought to this, and I'm beginning to believe I got ahead of myself. It may just be that Codex: Grey Knights was written for 6th edition with a cursory editting to make sure it was still compatible with 5th edition, and some of the strangeness in it's rules will make perfect sense, where the powerfist was obviously written for 5th edition.

With that in mind, It's possible that I could be using a flawed example for proof of intent towards the powerfist. The Daemonblade is very possibly a sign of things to come, and not a sign of how things should have been. I can live with that.

One other argument strikes me very intensely. Having worked with manual and non fiction writers before, I am fully aware that such books are not the product of a single author.

We both mentioned the poor wording for the lightning claw, and how it is obvious they left off the "only in close combat" wording on it unintentionally. Then the very next paragraph we have a weapon that also doesn't state "only in combat.
Every other weapon in the rule book, and every weapon throughout all of 5th edition (except Daemonweapon) and through 99% of 4th edition state "only in close combat".

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the guy who wrote the lightning claw entry also wrote powerfist. And he's obviously not the guy who wrote all the other weapons in existence.

I'm going to go forth with the belief that leaving the text out was an oversight on that writers part, since that page has other errors as well. Too much Ganja in the office that day or something.

Thanks again for all the insightful thoughts. Hope it was as interesting to you as it was to me.

Sean

[Wildeybeast]

Harrington, I think you are mistaken in the way you are using the Demonblade. I agree with you that it can give you charateristic bonuses when you are not using it to hit something. However, these are, in effect, psychic powers rather than weapon powers. It does, after all, have a demon stuck inside it. The ability comes from the demons psychic abilities, rather than the weapon itself. As such, I do not think that the Demonblade establishes a precedent.

Furthermore, I think that using codexes to establish general rules precedents is a dangerous route to go down. Yes codexes can permit things which are not allowed under the main rules, but these apply only to forces using this codex, it is very hard to extrapolate this out to apply to all rules.