Bending or Beardy

[david5th]

Watch the following -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P21DphJtXw8

Is this clever bending of the rules or is an example of what was known as being ' beardy 'i.e. cheesy power gaming but using your ' veteran ' status as an excuse for it.

I personally feel thta while it is technically legal and within the rules it kind of goes against the spirit of the game.

[Denzark]

Bending or beardy.....
.
.
.
.
Or just plainly talking utter ****e.

[Nabterayl]

I'm surprised that nobody discussed the following. These are all taken from page 42, but I'm numbering them for ease of reference:



#1: SPECIAL CLOSE COMBAT WEAPONS
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.

#2: Of course, if a model is using a two-handed close combat weapon ... it may not use it together with another weapon.

#3: Two different special weapons
When it is their turn to attack, these models must choose which weapon to use that turn.

##1 and either 2 or 3 answer the thunder hammer and lightning claw scenario pretty squarely, I think. If a thunder hammer is a one-handed weapon (which it is by default), then #3 requires that the model choose whether to "use" the lightning claw or the thunder hammer that turn. If a thunder hammer is a two-handed weapon (which it normally isn't, but a particular codex could make it so), then #2 prevents the model from "using" its thunder hammer at the same time as its lightning claw. #1 grants the lightning claw's bonuses only to a model that is "using" a lightning claw. Since neither a one-handed nor a two-handed thunder hammer can be "used" in the same turn as a lightning claw, the model cannot benefit from the bonuses of both.

We turn now to the scenario of bolter and lightning claw. In order to be able to re-roll wounds in this scenario, the model must be able to fire its bolter while using its lightning claw. Recall from #1 that the lightning claw confers no bonuses simply by virtue of being equipped. During the Shooting phase, the model may fire its bolter (subject to the normal rules for shooting, which I'll skip here unless anybody thinks there's a reason not to). However, no rule permits the model to use a weapon in the Shooting phase. Consequently, the bolter may be fired, but the lightning claw may not be used, and the lightning claw's bonuses do not apply.

Anticipating two objections:

Objection the First: That No Rule Says the Lightning Claw Cannot Be Used in the Shooting Phase. I really hate it when people use the phrase "permissive rule set" in 40K arguments, because I think it obscures some important nuances, but that really is the answer here. The rulebook also doesn't say that rapid fire weapons cannot fire twenty shots at targets up to 30" away, but that is not a warrant for doing so.

Objection the Second: That No Rule Covers Every Situation Where a Reasonable Player Could Expect to Use a Lightning Claw. In other words, "But Nab," somebody might say, "You're being entirely too literal about this. We can't just comb the rulebook looking for authorization to 'use' special close combat weapons. I mean, what about a model that has a single lightning claw and no other weapons? Page 42 tells me I can use a two-handed close combat weapon, and it tells me I can use a single-handed close combat weapon if I have another single-handed weapon ... but it doesn't say I can use a single-handed close combat weapon if that's the only weapon I have! Doesn't that prove that you're too hung up on this 'use' BS?"

"Not at all, I reply. "Consider page 35: 'All engaged models will fight in this turn's Assault phase with their full number of Attacks and use any special close combat attack they have.'" In other words, page 35 presents the general authorization for "engaged" models to "use" their special close combat weapons during any Assault phase in which they are engaged. Page 42 presents a number of restrictions that pare back the general case of page 35. An engaged model whose only wargear was a single lightning claw would be authorized to "use" it in that turn's Assault phase, and since none of page 42's restrictions would apply, that would be the end of it."

Neither of Darrel's scenarios are even technically legal for the reasons presented above. This is too long to post in Youtube comments, but it's the answer.

[DarkLink]

Right, I think they totally missed the 'using one special weapon excludes the use of another'.

[Culven]

I agree with the others. They need to read the Special Combat Weapon rules, which will deal with trying to reroll when using a different CCW. As for trying to reroll when shooting, I think that someone just needs to go with the assumption that weapon special rules only work when using that weapon, which is implied by the Two Special Close Combat Weapons rules.

[Nabterayl]

I think that someone just needs to go with the assumption that weapon special rules only work when using that weapon, which is implied by the Two Special Close Combat Weapons rules.
It's stated outright by "These ... confer bonuses, and sometimes penalties, to the models using them."

Okay, it's not technically stated outright. It doesn't say "These confer bonuses, and sometimes penalties, only to the models using them." But a model can't take a SCCW's bonus when not using the SCCW for the same reason that model A can't benefit from model B's lightning claws.

Player 1: "My tac marine is going to re-roll his failed rolls to wound."
Player 2: "He doesn't have a lightning claw!"
Player 1: "No, but his sergeant does!"
Player 2: "It says right here, "Special close combat weapons confer bonuses, and sometimes penalties, to the models using them."
Player 1: "Yeah, but it doesn't say only to the models using them!"

[BuFFo]

Yeah, they are trying to create controversy due to their lack of reading.

When combat starts, you pick one weapon to use, and only one. It doesn't matter what your 'off' weapons do, because they are not being used at all in anyway. You are only using ONE weapon that turn of combat.

As others have said, if you want to have the lightning claw work all the time, then you can use it to reroll shooting (space wolf claws), reroll shooting wounds, etc.... it gets pretty stupid and ridiculous.

I really hate seeing in a video, or real life, the kinds of stupid arguments that should only be done online, because in real life, players like that in my area don't find many games to play, at all.

I respect someone who takes the time to make their own army general with house rules infinitely more than I do a rules lawyer who can't read.

So I vote Breaking the Rules.

[Lerra]

Good catch Nab. I think we can all agree that terminators with one lightning claw and one combi-weapon that reroll to hit/wound are a tad bit broken! I'm glad we don't have to FAQ this one or get out the beatstick.

As much as I would love for my terminators to get a free reroll ;)

[Tynskel]

You know, my book mentions thunderhawks in the army- I guess that means I can take thunderhawks!



This is an example of taking a quotation out of context. As nab has pointed out, the individual weapon rules are linked to overall weapon mechanics- they are not separated from each other, and micro rules do not reflect back up to macro rules.

This is something I have been pointing out regularly on the forums: you cannot just focus on one word without bringing in the surrounding information. One word is meaningless without the context.

[Nabterayl]

Nothing says you can't!

[Tynskel]

Nothing says you can't!

I always recommend bringing a baneblade to tournaments-- whenever someone tries to pull some junk like what 'darrel' is doing, you can just say that your baneblade has come in from reserves!


bwahahahahah!

[TSINI]

I think the point he was tryingto make was that by being armed with a lightning claw - he may re-roll ANY rolls to wound

it doesnt say these only apply to the lightning claw

so even if he chose to use the thunder hammer and not the lightning claw, by being armed with the lightning claw, he gains the ability to re-roll any wounds - hence their argument for re-rolling wounds from his pistol

lets just imagine there is a piece of wargear like a trophy or something, that granted the wearer a re-roll of all rolls to wound, it would be worded exactly the same as this

trophy skull: any model with this piece of wargear may re-roll any rolls to wound.

so the argument here is that by simply having a lightning claw - the model gains the ability to re roll any rolls to wound


I dont agree with this at all, but it does go towards pointing out reading the RAW is entirely rediculous at times, and common sense should always prevail (even in demolisher cannons stats inBA codexes :D)

[Bean]

I think people understand what the guy's argument is. The point is that the guy's argument is wrong.

Being armed with the lightning claw isn't enough to grant you the benefit of the lightning claw--you have to actually be using the lightning claw to benefit from it's rules. This is made clear in the "Special Close Combat Weapons" paragraph on page 42 of the BRB, where it says, "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."

The lightning claw "allows the wielder to re-roll any failed roll to wound," but this isn't the same as saying, "a model with a lightning claw can re-roll any failed roll to wound." Given the context set by the general description of special close combat weapons, what it is really saying is, "a model using a lightning claw can re-roll any failed roll to wound."

Given that there are fairly specific rules governing what special close combat weapons can be used by a model at what times, this does a pretty good job of preventing a model from gaining partial benefit from the lightning claw while actually using another weapon.

[gannam]

This is my problem. These guys started off by making great videos about unboxing's, assembly, and even rules questions, but lately they have really been straining their credibility with these controversy questions.

They need to get darrell off the crack and put him back to standing there making the other's look good, or they are going to start losing fans over this crap.

[Old_Paladin]

I'm with Gannam, John and the guys used to seem pretty bright and informative; but if this is the stuff they want to get into...

This is easily the stupidest debate I've heard. It's neither cheesy nor beardy; it's simply cheating. It doesn't have to say 're-roll wounds in close combat' because the term 'in close combat' is said with every other reference. It's a close combat weapon and may only be used in close combat. It's a power weapon, and thus may only be used in close combat. It's a special weapon which means that ALL of it's abilities may NEVER be used in conjuction with ANY other special weapon.

Or going with what Bean said: the lightning claw doesn't say "a model that simply includes a claw in it's wargear may re-roll every to-wound roll it fails..." It's attackes made by the lightning claw.

This is why you need to read all the rules to play the game; applying only a single line out of a paragraph of text will almost always give you the wrong method of play.

[Melissia]

I think the point he was tryingto make was that by being armed with a lightning claw - he may re-roll ANY rolls to wound

Yep, that was his point.

He was hilariously wrong.k

[DarkLink]

I think the point he was tryingto make was that by being armed with a lightning claw - he may re-roll ANY rolls to wound

it doesnt say these only apply to the lightning claw


What he forgot, though, is that you may only benefit from one special weapon at a time. When you use a lightning claw, you may reroll wounds. But you can't use a lightning claw at the same time you use a thunderhammer. Thus, no rerolls to wound.

[Docmani]

Let me start by saying the guy is flat wrong.

With that said, I think this is an extension of the same question that came up concerning the wording of the close combat weapons in the new Tyranids codex. The wording in this codex is a great deal more specific saying that "A model with a single set of scything talons re-rolls any To-Hit rolls of a 1 in close combat". This suggests that a model with a bonesword and a set of scything talons would get both.

So, are scything talons normal close combat weapons that confer a special ability to the model or a special close combat weapon that cannot be combined with another? I can see it both ways and it can be argued both ways.

Now in the case above, with lightning claws, it says it allows the wielder to re-roll, but it is explicitly stated that this is a special close combat weapon. I think that is a clearer case, but I can understand why this gentleman might be confused (as the ability is poorly worded....)

When (if?) GW FAQs this stuff, they really need to focus on keeping their wording consistent. It would avoid a great deal of arguing....

[eriochrome]

I thought easter was last month. This is not RAW. They specifically say that special close combat weapons give bonuses when using them and that you must pick which to use when you have more than 1. But now that someone has put this out there you will see people trying to do it and get away with it from people not wanting to argue or not knowing the rules well themselves and hence continuing down the line.

Now this might work for something like the mandiblaster or attack squip that gives you an extra cc attack to your profile so that it gets the reroll but not another special close combat weapon or a ranged weapon.