Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So I know you need to be careful reading too much into an FAQ that is for a different army, but in this case it serves to illustrate a rather important point, that ranged attacks are in fact a form of attack.

The Chaos Daemons FAQ contains the following:



Lelith Hesperax's "The Penetrating Blade" rule similarly says "Her attacks ignore armour saves."

of some note is that "attacks" is not capitalized as it is when referring to a game term, such as in "A League Apart" where it says "Lelith gets a number of bonus Attacks equal to..."

so since a ranged attack is still a subset of the broader attacks, and Lelith's attacks ignore armour saves, can she throw her plasma grenades in the Shooting Phase and have them ignore an opponent's armour saves?

I haven't found any RAW that reigns this in. Boom.

Good find. Also, good luck explaining this mid-game to somebody.

never came up in 5th because she doesnt have a pistol(or any other shooting weapon)

seems her grenades are really well placed

So, finally the character with the highest (I believe) BS in the game actually has something to use it with.

Saldiven wrote:So, finally the character with the highest (I believe) BS in the game actually has something to use it with.

Yes, this is secsie (as is the unit it buffs )

not as bad as Castellan crowe or the 2+ wound ap1 the necron have

As much as taking advantage of this wording may be a little TFG (and perhaps against RAI - who knows?), it's not actually that big a deal. Lelith is only one model, if you use her grenade then noone else in her unit can use one that turn, and let's face it - if you're within 8" of Lelith and in fear of a single plasma grenade, you're pretty much fethed anyway. :p

It could be a pretty big deal to assault a squad of terminators, kill a couple with a single thrown grenade, then mop up in cc.

Like I said in the other thread, I never would've noticed this, but reading the rule as it is written, it does seem to be the case.

Whether intended or not, I think it makes sense, too. She's the most elite gladiatrix in the galaxy; throwing a precision grenade or two shouldn't be an issue to her.

Rules as written supports it.

Fluff supports it.

Looks OK to me.

Yup, its looks the case. Of course this means Crowe's Cleansing Flame ignores armor saves and the DKs Greatsword applies to all its attacks, ranged and melee

Grey Templar wrote:Yup, its looks the case. Of course this means Crowe's Cleansing Flame ignores armor saves and the DKs Greatsword applies to all its attacks, ranged and melee

Hooray for ambiguously written rules!

(Oh and regarding your signature, it's Chemistry.)

D'oh

I hate not having spell check on my browser.

As Grey Templar very subtly points out... I honestly don't think this is RAI, though at present it's RAW, I expect it'll be FAQ'ed. The entire point of using weaponry is that you use its abilities rather than your own - though it's usually stronger.

To give a rhetorical example. Say you've somehow managed to arm a Bloodthirster with a bolter. What Strength and AP would you expect to fire the bolter at?

Bad example. Smash only applies to melee attacks.

Anyway, I currently play the Greatsword only applying to melee attacks(but it does help the Doomfist. You are using it to get +1A, its special rule could fluffly be seen as applying) and Crowe's Cleansing Flame is NOT rending.

Oddly enough, Crowe's Cleansing Flame being rending wouldn't be a huge deal. It would actually make him a decent unit that could do something besides stand there and make Purifiers Troops.

Grey Templar wrote:Yup, its looks the case. Of course this means Crowe's Cleansing Flame ignores armor saves and the DKs Greatsword applies to all its attacks, ranged and melee

Quick question...how would Crowe's Cleansing Flame start ignoring armor saves due to the above conversation? His attacks are rending on a 4+, and it specifies melee attacks. What am I missing?

EDIT: Heh, somewhat ninja'd.

FAQ classifies Cleansing Flame as a CC attack.

Gotcha, thanks.

Since when does one thing written in one armies codex/faq directly translate to RAW for another army?

besides her attacks (general) ignore armour saves, plasma grenades (specific) are ap4.

It doesn't, but it does establish a precedence in interperting future rules. So if a rule is FAQ'ed one way and there is a similer non-FAQ'ed rule you are safest to interpert it the way the similer rule was FAQ'ed.

There are a number of rules that can be crossed FAQ the perfect example is moving flat-out/popping smoke during Scout moves in 5th edition.

spongemonkee wrote:besides her attacks (general) ignore armour saves, plasma grenades (specific) are ap4.

and a close combat weapon is ap- what's your point?

spongemonkee wrote:besides her attacks (general) ignore armour saves, plasma grenades (specific) are ap4.

As much as I'd like that to be correct, I think you have that backwards. Close combat attacks are normally AP- and Plasma grenades are normally ap4 (General as this is how it would be applied to any model weilding them). Her attacks ignore armor saves (Specific as it relates only to her attacks).

Grey Templar wrote:It doesn't, but it does establish a precedence in interperting future rules. So if a rule is FAQ'ed one way and there is a similer non-FAQ'ed rule you are safest to interpert it the way the similer rule was FAQ'ed.

It establishes a precedence yes but it's still not RAW, It's a grey area I'll admit that much, and even though I probably wouldn't argue against someone insisting we interpret it that way I wouldn't try it in a competitive game.

spongemonkee wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:It doesn't, but it does establish a precedence in interperting future rules. So if a rule is FAQ'ed one way and there is a similer non-FAQ'ed rule you are safest to interpert it the way the similer rule was FAQ'ed.

It establishes a precedence yes but it's still not RAW, It's a grey area I'll admit that much, and even though I probably wouldn't argue against someone insisting we interpret it that way I wouldn't try it in a competitive game.

I would only try it in a competitive game. Friendly games arn't the best for getting nitpicky.

ThePhish wrote:It could be a pretty big deal to assault a squad of terminators, kill a couple with a single thrown grenade, then mop up in cc.

a 175 point model might actually kill a terminator or two? shocking!

a blast is only going to ever hit 2 terminators. One will wound, then either a 5++ or a 3++(4++ for Tzeench) Then she will charge and get 9 attacks, 6 hits, 2 wounds and then agian a 5++ or a 3++(4++ for Tzeench and GK) So her grenade and charge net you 1-3 terminators depending on ++ save. Not the end of the world. Also note that you can and should challenge her! Also on the return hits, 5+ then 2+ then if she fails her 3++ she dies.

With the use of tankshock, you can hit a lot more than two terminators.

nosferatu1001 wrote:With the use of tankshock, you can hit a lot more than two terminators.

I guess with your allied falcon grav tank?

shock prow raider..