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.

Hey, @Warpsolution, this:

"But aside from that, I'm not arguing that you're stuck with 1 unit each of an enchanted arrow because it's too good otherwise. I'm not even arguing that you can't field multiple units with the same arrows at all.
What I am saying is, the BRB says you can only have one of each instance of magic item. And enchanted arrows are Enchanted Items.
...but since every model in the unit has that Enchanted Item, there's already an issue right there."

is really interesting. I don't know if I misread earlier, (or just missed it), but the possibility that you would have only one unit each of the various arrows had not occurred to me. That does make sense, as you say. I thought the question at the start was: If you pick one type of enchanted arrow, do ALL your units of shooters have to run the same one? Which seems worse to me than having no more than one of each.

Either way, the grey area you describe certainly exists. You'd think that with all the play-testers and people employed in Nottingham they could write rules that are crystal clear in this regard. Any idea when a FAQ for Wood Elves is coming out? I can't even find the link on the GW page now.

But are Enchanted items Magic items? Just because there are Enchanted items that are magic items it doesn't necessarily follow that all enchanted items are therefore magic items. "Magic Items" in every other instance of the term (and correct me if there are army specific exceptions) refers to items purchased from the magic item list, with it's own points allocation and almost exclusively by characters, not rank and file models. Enchanted items are a subsection of that list, but that subsection refers only to the enchanted items that are actually magic items.
Bare in mind that in the Wood Elf book the enchanted arrows are listed under the armoury section- not the magic item section.

It's like saying bananas are yellow and bananas are fruit so therefore all fruits are yellow.
[edit]I think. This simile is giving me a headache. Let's see; the "bananas" are "enchanted items on the magic item list", the "magic item list" is "yellow" and "all fruits" refer to "enchanted arrows". Yeah. Solid.[/edit]

 Aben Zin wrote:
But are Enchanted items Magic items? Just because there are Enchanted items that are magic items it doesn't necessarily follow that all enchanted items are therefore magic items. "Magic Items" in every other instance of the term (and correct me if there are army specific exceptions) refers to items purchased from the magic item list, with it's own points allocation and almost exclusively by characters, not rank and file models. Enchanted items are a subsection of that list, but that subsection refers only to the enchanted items that are actually magic items.
Bare in mind that in the Wood Elf book the enchanted arrows are listed under the armoury section- not the magic item section.

...yes. Yes it does. The Wood Elf book says enchanted arrows are Enchanted Items. So, how do we know what Enchanted Items are? We look in the BRB.
Lots of unit champions can take magic items. And units take magic standards.
Correct you if there are army-specific restrictions? Okay. Wood Elves.

 Aben Zin wrote:
It's like saying bananas are yellow and bananas are fruit so therefore all fruits are yellow.

What is that, the Fallacy of Consequence? Either way, that's not what this is. I'm saying: enchanted arrows are Enchanted Items. Enchanted Items follow certain rules. Therefore, enchanted arrows follow certain rules.

 pantheralegionnaire wrote:
I don't know if I misread earlier, (or just missed it), but the possibility that you would have only one unit each of the various arrows had not occurred to me. That does make sense, as you say. I thought the question at the start was: If you pick one type of enchanted arrow, do ALL your units of shooters have to run the same one? Which seems worse to me than having no more than one of each.

I...don't know why you'd be stuck with one type of enchanted arrow. There aren't any rules to enforce or support that theory.

...but, if you were shoe-horned into one type of arrow, take Hagsbane tips. There's a thread on here from a while back that shows the numbers, and Hagsbane is easily the best.

I do wonder, though. Does anyone field regular ol' Glade Guard now?

What your saying is that because enchanted arrows are enchanted items they are therefore MAGIC ITEMS. Please quote exactly the point in the BRB that indicates that all Enchanted items are Magic items. In return, here is the summary of the Armoury of Torgovann (in which enchanted arrows are listed):
"In this section you will find descriptions and rules for a number of weapons and upgrades available to the units and characters of the Wood Elf army."

Please note the lack of mention of magic items.

And here is the description of the Heirlooms of Athel Loren:
"On the following pages are magic items available to Wood Elf armies. These can be taken in addition to any of the Magic Items in the Warhammer rule book."

Please note the use of the words Magic Items.
So the while the wood elf book does call enchanted arrows enchanted items, it lists them under unit upgrades, far, far away from the later list of magic items. So how are they magic items?

With regard to fielding regular glade guard, I was wondering that myself. I suspect the best reason for doing so would be to take the flaming banner- it costs less than upgrading 3 GG to firey arrows so would make a certain amount of sense if you didn't know what you were facing.

 Aben Zin wrote:
What your saying is that because enchanted arrows are enchanted items they are therefore MAGIC ITEMS. Please quote exactly the point in the BRB that indicates that all Enchanted items are Magic items.

...in the Magic Item section. I don't have a book on me, but I'm pretty sure that the BRB classifies Magic Weapons, Magic Armour, Talismans, Magic Standards, Arcane Items, and Enchanted Items as magic items.

So the Wood Elf book puts them under a different listing. That doesn't clarify anything.

I can't believe this is actually an argument. If Enchanted Items are not magic items...what are they? What sort of rules do they follow?
Would you argue that not all Magic Weapons, Magic Armour, or Magic Standards are Magic Items?

Again. If you want to argue that you can take one type of enchanted arrow multiple times, that's a perfectly reasonable stance to take. But don't try to prove it with this nonsense. Instead, you can argue that, if you're only allowed one instance on enchanted arrows, then taking it on 15 Glade Guard breaks that rule 14 times. Now there's evidence that actually stands up to scrutiny.

It's not clear, one way or the other. You could even try to argue that, since you're not allowed duplicates of Enchanted Items, you can't take enchanted arrows on units of more than one model. Which is stupid. But anyway, it's a grey area. Nuff said.

Considering that the arrow options:

- are not presented in the magic items section, as opposed to, for example, the Hail of Doom Arrow;
- are meant to be taken in multiples, as all models from a unit are equipped with one instance of the same arrow type;
- are similar in rules to warpstone weapons and daemonic troop weapons - all of them being magic weapons as well;
- are described as being "enchanted items", as opposed to "Enchanted Items", implying that the expression used is not rules terminology, just as " movement" is not equal to "Movement";
- in bigger games you'd run out of options faster than you'd run out of units to be equipped;

The intent seems crystal clear to me; to be honest I find preposterous that there is people that still argue for allowing only one unit to be equipped with each type of arrow.
Luckily for me I am not really interested in playing at an event that will enforce this peculiar interpretation. As such I can simply shrug and avoid to play against anyone who would like to push forward this limitation.

Warpsolution wrote:
...in the Magic Item section. I don't have a book on me, but I'm pretty sure that the BRB classifies Magic Weapons, Magic Armour, Talismans, Magic Standards, Arcane Items, and Enchanted Items as magic items.

It's the other way round- the BRB classifies magic items as magic weapons, magic armour etc.
The magic arrows follow the rules for unit upgrades, because that's what they are. Why would something that's so common to wood elves that they're given to the most basic infantry that they field be in the same section as a weapon that "a fortunate hoarder of rare trinkets would consider himself lucky to see one example of a 'common' magic item in his lifetime".

So what that they're described as enchanted items? How else would you describe items that are enchanted by magic?

 Aben Zin wrote:
It's the other way round- the BRB classifies magic items as magic weapons, magic armour etc.

Oh! So...it says Magic Weapons are Magic Items? And Magic Armour? And...Enchanted Items? Enchanted Items are Magic Items, you say? Good to know.

 Aben Zin wrote:
Why would something that's so common to wood elves that they're given to the most basic infantry that they field be in the same section as a weapon that "a fortunate hoarder of rare trinkets would consider himself lucky to see one example of a 'common' magic item in his lifetime".

This is all irrelevant to The Rulez.
Again. I'm not saying that you're limited to one instance of each enchanted arrow per army. I do not believe that is what the designers were going for. If my opponent wants to run all Hagsbane, fine. I'm totally cool with that.
But the rules are not clear on it. That's all.

 Aben Zin wrote:
So what that they're described as enchanted items? How else would you describe items that are enchanted by magic?

...are you serious? How else would I describe ITEMS that are enchanted by MAGIC? Well, gee golly wiz, that sure is a tricky one! How about...oh, I don't know...MAGIC ITEMS?

All they need to do is not call them Magic Items (they're magical. Obviously. But so are Ensorcelled Weapons and the bows used by the Sisters and all sorts of other stuff. Just take the Capital Letters, and we're gravy). Or say that the one per army rule doesn't apply to them. Whatever.

@Aben Zin: If they wanted them to have their given effects and not be affected by the rules for Enchanted Items, all they have had to do is not call them Enchanted Items. They could have just been made into a Special Rule upgrade.

Warpsolution wrote:

 Aben Zin wrote:
It's the other way round- the BRB classifies magic items as magic weapons, magic armour etc.

Oh! So...it says Magic Weapons are Magic Items? And Magic Armour? And...Enchanted Items? Enchanted Items are Magic Items, you say? Good to know.

 Aben Zin wrote:
Why would something that's so common to wood elves that they're given to the most basic infantry that they field be in the same section as a weapon that "a fortunate hoarder of rare trinkets would consider himself lucky to see one example of a 'common' magic item in his lifetime".

This is all irrelevant to The Rulez.
Again. I'm not saying that you're limited to one instance of each enchanted arrow per army. I do not believe that is what the designers were going for. If my opponent wants to run all Hagsbane, fine. I'm totally cool with that.
But the rules are not clear on it. That's all.

 Aben Zin wrote:
So what that they're described as enchanted items? How else would you describe items that are enchanted by magic?

...are you serious? How else would I describe ITEMS that are enchanted by MAGIC? Well, gee golly wiz, that sure is a tricky one! How about...oh, I don't know...MAGIC ITEMS?

All they need to do is not call them Magic Items (they're magical. Obviously. But so are Ensorcelled Weapons and the bows used by the Sisters and all sorts of other stuff. Just take the Capital Letters, and we're gravy). Or say that the one per army rule doesn't apply to them. Whatever.

Going off memory here.
The BRB defines magic items as coming from one of several categories (which are then listed)
Enchanted arrows say they are enchanted items that do not prevent you taking another enchanted item.
The only way enchanted arrows would prevent taking another enchanted item is if they were enchanted items.
Enchanted arrows do not prevent you taking other enchanted items
Therefore they are not enchanted items.
They are magic items that do not come from one of the categories of magic items.
They do not fit the definition of magic items, thus are not magic items.

That's how I read it, based purely off memory (can't find my books lol).

Additionally from memory, the WE bsb entry states that if you take a magic banner, you cannot take further magic items or enchanted arrows, if they were indeed magic items, this distinction should not be necessary.

Have I missed anything?

 Krellnus wrote:

Additionally from memory, the WE bsb entry states that if you take a magic banner, you cannot take further magic items or enchanted arrows, if they were indeed magic items, this distinction should not be necessary.

Have I missed anything?

That is actually true.And very clear. I had not noticed that.

Actually, that's pretty much defining.
Good job.

Az

 Krellnus wrote:
Enchanted arrows say they are enchanted items that do not prevent you taking another enchanted item.
The only way enchanted arrows would prevent taking another enchanted item is if they were enchanted items.
Enchanted arrows do not prevent you taking other enchanted items
Therefore they are not enchanted items.

That's not necessarily a logical extrapolation.

An equally valid interpretation is that they are Enchanted Items that have a special rule bypassing the normal restrictions. (This interpretation being exactly what their own description says they are.)

A better interpretation is that if they weren't Enchanted Items, they wouldn't have been called Enchanted Items.

That's totally irreverent. The BSB entry clearly states you can't have magic items OR enchanted arrows. Thus the arguement ends- Enchanted arrows are not magic items, whether they're Enchanted Items or not.

 Krellnus wrote:
Enchanted arrows say they are enchanted items that do not prevent you taking another enchanted item.
The only way enchanted arrows would prevent taking another enchanted item is if they were enchanted items...Therefore they are not enchanted items.

WHAT?!

That is absolutely absurd.

 Krellnus wrote:
the WE bsb entry states that if you take a magic banner, you cannot take further magic items or enchanted arrows, if they were indeed magic items, this distinction should not be necessary.

This has some weight to it. But, oh wait! If this is true, then why would they need to say you can take another Enchanted Item...unless they, too, were Enchanted Items? You can't use this sort of thinking here, but ignore it in the previous section. You've got to pick one. Or, you could accept the Truth of the matter, as I have: the book is not clear on how this is supposed to work.

The second comment is interesting, but it doesn't offer anything more than circumstantial proof. The statement "if the BSB takes a magic banner, they cannot take further magic items, magic weapons, or magic armour" is a true statement. It's just also redundant.
Again: I certainly believe that you can take multiples of the same type of arrow. Because it's pretty clear that's what they meant to allow (as the BSB entry you mentioned shows). But the RAW are not clear on that.

Seriously. They're enchanted items that let you take other enchanted items, therefore they're not what we just effing said they are? That's your case-and-point?

 Aben Zin wrote:
That's totally irreverent. The BSB entry clearly states you can't have magic items OR enchanted arrows. Thus the arguement ends- Enchanted arrows are not magic items, whether they're Enchanted Items or not.

It also clearly states that enchanted arrows are Enchanted Items. And, hey, would you be so kind as to define "Enchanted Items"? I believe you will find them in the section detailing the various sorts of Magic Items...
Also, I believe you were looking for "irrelevant". Not trying to criticize your grammar; just thought I'd let you know.

The argument, by the way, ends when one side relents. And, honestly, I can't see a single leg to stand on the other side of this debate.

They are Enchanted Items. That is plain as day, and only the most blindingly false of claims can offer an alternative. The book says they are. Therefore--gasp!--they are.
The actual question is: what exceptions to the normal Magic Item rules are made in this case? We know of one for sure: a character can take an enchanted arrow and still take another Enchanted Item. But what about duplicates of that same enchanted arrow? On that, the book contradicts itself.

Christ it's like the more supporting evidence, even DIRECT STATEMENTS, we find. the more you come back to the same, stupid quibble over semantics.
Enchanted items are not the same thing as magic items! Yes there are magic items that are enchanted items, but there are also enchanted items that are NOT magic items! Which is why it says magic items OR enchanted arrows!

What makes an item a Magic Item is where you choose it from- ie. the magic item list. Enchanted arrows ARE NOT ON THAT LIST, they are on the list for upgrades.
The book IN NO WAY says they are magic items. The BSB entry CLEARLY STATES that they are separate (magic items OR enchanted arrows).

I really don't see how you are not getting this. Excuse my somewhat irrelevant tone here.

Az

 Aben Zin wrote:
Enchanted items are not the same thing as magic items! Yes there are magic items that are enchanted items, but there are also enchanted items that are NOT magic items!

Provide evidence please.

 Aben Zin wrote:
What makes an item a Magic Item is where you choose it from- ie. the magic item list. Enchanted arrows ARE NOT ON THAT LIST...The book IN NO WAY says they are magic items.

A'hem...:

from page 500 of "WARHAMMER: The Game of Fantasy Battles"--

"Magic items are divided into six categories: Magic Weapons, Magic Armour, Talismans, Enchanted Items, Arcane Items, and Magic Standards"

So. Enchanted Items are a category of magic item. Not all magic items are Enchanted Items, but all Enchanted Items are magic items.

The entry in the Wood Elf book about the BSB further adds to the grey area, but it does nothing to prove it, one way or the other. It certainly wouldn't be the first time a Games Workshop book had confusing/redundant/non-nonsensical statement.
"Magic items or enchanted arrows" leads us to believe as you said. That said arrows are not magic items. But the enchanted arrow entry states they are Enchanted Items, which, by definition, must also be magic items.
Since the first statement is suggestive and the second is definitive, the second statement is stronger.
...but then we move on to the other issues with the original question.

Provide evidence please.

How about dragon armour? It is undoubtedly magical armour but doesn't count as a magic item. The bows of the maiden guard? Definitely magical weapons, not magic items.
My lack of familiarity of other books hinders my abilities to find other examples.

Besides, the rulebook in no way state that all enchanted items are magic items- there is a type of magic item that are enchanted items, but it in no ways states that all enchanted items are magic items.

In fact there is only one sure way of knowing if something is a magic item: that it is listed in the magic item list, either the one in the main book or the individual ones in the army books. That is the only sure way we can define a magic item.

As all, literally all, the other evidence points to enchanted arrows not being magic items I really struggle to see how your still trying to make this argument.

 Aben Zin wrote:

Provide evidence please.

How about dragon armour? It is undoubtedly magical armour but doesn't count as a magic item. The bows of the maiden guard? Definitely magical weapons, not magic items.
My lack of familiarity of other books hinders my abilities to find other examples.

Besides, the rulebook in no way state that all enchanted items are magic items- there is a type of magic item that are enchanted items, but it in no ways states that all enchanted items are magic items.

In fact there is only one sure way of knowing if something is a magic item: that it is listed in the magic item list, either the one in the main book or the individual ones in the army books. That is the only sure way we can define a magic item.

As all, literally all, the other evidence points to enchanted arrows not being magic items I really struggle to see how your still trying to make this argument.

Dragon armour is mundane armour that has a 6+ ward save. It's not magical. It's a character upgrade. It's mundane armour that [rovides a 5+/6++. It does not say anywhere that they're magical.

As for the bows. They themselves are mundane. But they fire magical arrows. Just like Tomb King bows. The bows aren't magical, the arrows are. The key phase here is under Arrows of Isha. "Any shooting attack made by these bows...."


As for the enchanted item thing, are you dense, or just being purposefully silly? It says it in clear wording on page 505, under Enchanted Items. "They are often the most prized magical items to possess."

And the Wood Elf book clearly states they're enchanted items, which, as I stated, the BRB states are a type of magic item. Thus, Arrows are magical items.

 Aben Zin wrote:

How about dragon armour? It is undoubtedly magical armour but doesn't count as a magic item. The bows of the maiden guard? Definitely magical weapons, not magic items.
My lack of familiarity of other books hinders my abilities to find other examples.

Does Dragon Armour ever explicitly say it is "Magic Armour" or a magic item? Because, if not, it isn't either of those things, according to the definition of the game term (like you said; it's undoubtedly armour with magical properties. But, for some reason, GW has decided to define that differently from Magic Armour).
If my memory serves, the Maiden's bows are clearly established as equipment that has the Magical Attacks special rule, but otherwise follows no other rules for magic items.

 Aben Zin wrote:
Besides, the rulebook in no way state that all enchanted items are magic items- there is a type of magic item that are enchanted items, but it in no ways states that all enchanted items are magic items.

Enchanted Items are listed as a category of magic items. That is the only place they appear, and the only time they are described or defined.
Show me where Enchanted Items are described as anything other than magic items. The Wood Elf book, by the way, sort of implies it here and there, but it doesn't actually say anything definitive.

That's like saying that not all rapiers and sabers are swords, only that there are types of swords called rapiers and sabers. It is a false statement.

 Aben Zin wrote:
In fact there is only one sure way of knowing if something is a magic item: that it is listed in the magic item list, either the one in the main book or the individual ones in the army books. That is the only sure way we can define a magic item.

Or, you know, if it tells you that it's a magic item. Which the Wood Elf book does, when it tells us that they're Enchanted Items.
Now, I will say, the fact that they're listed in the Armoury instead of the magic item section is contradictory. But again. That's circumstantial. It offers no clear evidence.

 Aben Zin wrote:
As all, literally all, the other evidence points to enchanted arrows not being magic items I really struggle to see how your still trying to make this argument.

By "all" evidence, do you mean the two points of (a) they're not listed under magic items and (b) the comment under the BSB section?
How am I still making this argument. I'll tell you: because the Wood Elf book says they're Enchanted Items. So I looked up Enchanted Items. Which are a type of magic item.

Once again, though. I'm not arguing that you can't take multiples of one kind of arrow. I'm just saying there's a bunch of grey area here. And I do believe they intended to let you take multiples.

Warpsolution wrote:

 Aben Zin wrote:

How about dragon armour? It is undoubtedly magical armour but doesn't count as a magic item. The bows of the maiden guard? Definitely magical weapons, not magic items.
My lack of familiarity of other books hinders my abilities to find other examples.

Does Dragon Armour ever explicitly say it is "Magic Armour" or a magic item? Because, if not, it isn't either of those things, according to the definition of the game term (like you said; it's undoubtedly armour with magical properties. But, for some reason, GW has decided to define that differently from Magic Armour).
If my memory serves, the Maiden's bows are clearly established as equipment that has the Magical Attacks special rule, but otherwise follows no other rules for magic items.

They're established as a mundane weapon that have the Arrows of Isha rule. That rule gives them the magic attacks.

Ok, to summarise the points of both arguments:
Are enchanted arrows magic items?

For:

- They are listed as enchanted items.

Against

- They are placed in the Armoury section of the wood elf book, not the magic item section.

- The BSB magic banner upgrades states "magic item OR enchanted arrows"

- They are listed separately from the magic items in the character upgrades in the army list

- They are bought for entire regiments, something that magic items are traditionally not bought for

- When bought for regiments they are given to multiple models, which would violate the "unique" magic item rule


I've raised over the course of this, now completely derailed, topic counters to that first argument without having any of the arguments against countered at all, and any further discussion would be merely repetition.
Could we perhaps settle this with a poll on the rules discussion portion? See what the majority think?

 Aben Zin wrote:
Ok, to summarise the points of both arguments:
Are enchanted arrows magic items?

For:

- They are listed as enchanted items.

Against

- They are placed in the Armoury section of the wood elf book, not the magic item section.

- The BSB magic banner upgrades states "magic item OR enchanted arrows"

- They are listed separately from the magic items in the character upgrades in the army list

- They are bought for entire regiments, something that magic items are traditionally not bought for

- When bought for regiments they are given to multiple models, which would violate the "unique" magic item rule


I've raised over the course of this, now completely derailed, topic counters to that first argument without having any of the arguments against countered at all, and any further discussion would be merely repetition.
Could we perhaps settle this with a poll on the rules discussion portion? See what the majority think?

The argument for them being magic items trumps EVERY argument against, as they're listed as enchanted items, which are definitively magic items. And NOTHING in the book contradicts or supercedes that.


The BSB thing doesn't prove anything. As it's done because, and this is a major reason, EACH ARROW HAS A SEPARATE POINTS VALUE.

And the armoury thing has a portion of validity, except that it's done because they're upgrades, not unique entities.

And the fact that you buy them for regiments means absolutely nothing. There is one other example of this. Ensorcelled weapons.

And the reason they can be duplicated on units comes from the line; "but do not prevent the bearer from having a second enchanted item."


The bottom line is this, your arguments have little to no validity. They are magic items, this is concrete. Whether they are or not, holds nothing in relation to the duplication argument, because, as enchanted items, they are magic.

 thedarkavenger wrote:

The argument for them being magic items trumps EVERY argument against, as they're listed as enchanted items, which are definitively magic items. And NOTHING in the book contradicts or supercedes that.

Says you.

The BSB thing doesn't prove anything. As it's done because, and this is a major reason, EACH ARROW HAS A SEPARATE POINTS VALUE.

That isn't a major reason.
It doesn't even make sense. They are listed separately because they are not magic items.

And the armoury thing has a portion of validity, except that it's done because they're upgrades, not unique entities.

Not unique entities? You mean like magic items are? You've just been arguing that they are magic items and are therefore unique and now you're saying they're not unique?

And the fact that you buy them for regiments means absolutely nothing. There is one other example of this. Ensorcelled weapons.

Bless you. The perfect example of a magic weapon that isn't a magic item.
Was looking for one of them.

And the reason they can be duplicated on units comes from the line; "but do not prevent the bearer from having a second enchanted item."

So your saying your reading "but do not prevent the bearer from having a second enchanted item." as "cannot be taken by more than one regiment or character"? Because those are completely separate sentences, that are nothing alike in structure or meaning.

The bottom line is this, your arguments have little to no validity. They are magic items, this is concrete.

Nope!

Magic Items refers to the items purchased from the magic item lists, not every item of a vaguely magical nature. Enchanted arrows are not on the magic item list. ergo they are not magic items and don't follow the rules for them.

Whether they are or not, holds nothing in relation to the duplication argument, because, as enchanted items, they are magic.

So you're saying if they aren't magic items the duplication rule (which applies only to magic items) would still apply because they are magic?

A) You are the only person who left who is arguing that they're not magic items. They are. The BRB says so. End of discussion.

B) It is a major reason. To save space. If they entered them in the magic items section, then it'd just add to it, and take space away elsewhere. By doing it this way, with minimal entries, and due to them being magic upgrades, they can save on space.

C) Magic items are unique entities. However, they're also a category. Under which you have magic weapons, armour, talismans, arcane items, and finally, the category which these come under; Enchanted items. However, where the arrows differ, is that they're both magic items, and a unit upgrade. This means that they're both magic items, AND a separate entity.

D) As for the Ensorcelled weapon point, I retract that. Upon looking at the book, they aren't actually magic weapons at all. They're mundane, with the special rule of magic attacks.

E) It's a construed meaning. Yes they're upgrades. And yes, an entire unit can take them. Simply because they state that they don't follow the rules for standard magic items for the bearer. Some people will argue against that, and some for it. But the bottom line is that they are a subtype of magic item. The army book states this in clear wording. "These are enchanted items".

F) As I previously stated, it is set in stone that they're enchanted items. Which are magic items.

G) Read what I said. I said, this entire debate holds no relation to the topic of whether they can be duplicated.

Enchanted Items are a type of magic item. That's a fact. Like how Impact Hits are a type of close combat attack. Nothing can be the first, but not the latter.

Enchanted arrows states they are Enchanted Items. So that's what they are. They do, however, have rules that make them different from other Enchanted Items. This does not make them not Enchanted Items, any more than the special rules regarding Impact Hits makes them suddenly not close combat attacks.

The fact that the arrows are listed in the armoury and the stuff in the BSB entry is confusing, redundant, and/or contradictory.

There are two rules regarding all magic items quoted below, from p.500 of the BSB:

"UNIQUE
Magic items are considered to be unique--you can only have one of each in your army unless otherwise stated in the magic item's rules."

--this rule is not addressed in the Wood Elf book, so it would seem that you can only have one of each enchanted arrow. But since you can give a whole unit enchanted arrows, they obviously work differently than normal magic items, so there's still plenty of ambiguity here. I favor the idea that enchanted arrows are not subject to this rule.

"BALANCE OF POWER
Usually, only characters can carry magic items. Each model can only carry one of each type of magic item."

--this is the rule that enchanted arrows are explicitly allowed to ignore. They don't count towards a character's Enchanted Item slot.
Enchanted arrows don't follow this rule, but that does not suddenly make them stop being magic items.
If you still feel the BSB section offers any validity at all, because "if they say OR, that must mean they're different", then this point clearly conflicts with it for the exact same reasoning; if they're not magic items, why does it say they get to ignore one of the rules that only applies to magic items?

I believe the most sensible thing to do would be to either retract the statement that they are Enchanted Items, or add in a clause that states they are immune to the Balance of Power rule.
...though I do think it's sad that Bodkins, (Star/Moon)fire, and Swiftshiver are all so sadly sub-par compared to Trueflight and Hagsbane.

Ok. To thedarkavenger

A) There are 3 people still continuing this argument. You, me and warpsolution. An overwhelming majority in your favour perhaps, but as it's only us three playing the numbers game here is rather moot.

B) Then why not save further space by just saying magic items? If it was so clear that that's what enchanted arrows were then the distinction would not be necessary.

C) Magic items, at least by normal definitions, are the things bought from the magic item lists, either from the rulebook or the individual army books. They are bought, as the rulebook says, mostly for characters- standard bearers being the obvious exception.
Again the stupid banana metaphor applies here, but how about another one:
Say gum comes in 3 flavours; Peppermint, Spearmint and Pomegranate. Now toothpaste can come in spearmint flavour, but does that make it gum? No.


D) And why do they get those rules? Is it because they are magically enchanted? That sure makes them sound like magic weapons.

E) Which is still your only argument.

F) Ditto

G) Then what are we arguing about? I thought the whole point of this argument was that as magic items the magic arrows couldn't be duplicated on different regiments/characters. Are you accepting they can now?
If so, exactly what rule of magic items do magic arrows follow?

I think maybe the problem here resolves around whether you use "magic item" in a literal interpretation, ie. any item that is magical and "magic item" from a rules perspective.
Now the first of these certainly does include the listed magic items, but would also include Ensorcelled weapons (after all they gain their power from a magical source), Dragon Armour (ditto) and such things as Elvish Waystones- All of which are undoubtedly magical and certainly items but wouldn't follow the rules for magic items in the game itself.

Anyway, to Warpsolution's question:
Why does it say they get to ignore that rule? The only way to know for certain would be to ask the books author(s), but it seems to me that it was included because as enchanted arrows are described as enchanted people would say "Ah! That character has enchanted arrows! That means he can't have any other enchanted items!".
So in clarifying one potential rules query they created another one.
The BSB point is that it grammatically puts enchanted arrows as separate from magic items. OR means specifically one or the other. If they wanted to classify enchanted arrows as being magic items while at the same clarifying that BSBs with magic banners couldn't take them they would have said
"may not take magic items, including enchanted arrows". Saying "or" in this way explicitly prevents them from being magic items.

Of course, that's purely from a grammatical point of view, but combined with enchanted arrows be placed in the armoury, not the magic items section just further backs this up.

To go further, purely from a logical point of view: Armybook rules top rulebook rules, right? The armybook rules say that the enchanted arrows are upgrades, not magic items. It does say that they are enchanted items but by putting them in the armoury section it removes them from the category of magic items, therefore they are upgrades and not magic items.

Edit:
Yeah, I agree about the other arrow types. I'm not sure they're sub-par, in terms of actual usage at least. If you know what you're facing they definitely have potential. The main issue I think is with the cost- I've felt no desire to experiment with them because they take the cost per model to damn high!
I'm still tempted to try the swiftshiver/hand of glory combo, but I think that might just be a one trick pony.

 Aben Zin wrote:
Ok. To thedarkavenger

A) There are 3 people still continuing this argument. You, me and warpsolution. An overwhelming majority in your favour perhaps, but as it's only us three playing the numbers game here is rather moot.

B) Then why not save further space by just saying magic items? If it was so clear that that's what enchanted arrows were then the distinction would not be necessary.

C) Magic items, at least by normal definitions, are the things bought from the magic item lists, either from the rulebook or the individual army books. They are bought, as the rulebook says, mostly for characters- standard bearers being the obvious exception.
Again the stupid banana metaphor applies here, but how about another one:
Say gum comes in 3 flavours; Peppermint, Spearmint and Pomegranate. Now toothpaste can come in spearmint flavour, but does that make it gum? No.


D) And why do they get those rules? Is it because they are magically enchanted? That sure makes them sound like magic weapons.

E) Which is still your only argument.

F) Ditto

G) Then what are we arguing about? I thought the whole point of this argument was that as magic items the magic arrows couldn't be duplicated on different regiments/characters. Are you accepting they can now?
If so, exactly what rule of magic items do magic arrows follow?

I think maybe the problem here resolves around whether you use "magic item" in a literal interpretation, ie. any item that is magical and "magic item" from a rules perspective.
Now the first of these certainly does include the listed magic items, but would also include Ensorcelled weapons (after all they gain their power from a magical source), Dragon Armour (ditto) and such things as Elvish Waystones- All of which are undoubtedly magical and certainly items but wouldn't follow the rules for magic items in the game itself.

Anyway, to Warpsolution's question:
Why does it say they get to ignore that rule? The only way to know for certain would be to ask the books author(s), but it seems to me that it was included because as enchanted arrows are described as enchanted people would say "Ah! That character has enchanted arrows! That means he can't have any other enchanted items!".
So in clarifying one potential rules query they created another one.
The BSB point is that it grammatically puts enchanted arrows as separate from magic items. OR means specifically one or the other. If they wanted to classify enchanted arrows as being magic items while at the same clarifying that BSBs with magic banners couldn't take them they would have said
"may not take magic items, including enchanted arrows". Saying "or" in this way explicitly prevents them from being magic items.

Of course, that's purely from a grammatical point of view, but combined with enchanted arrows be placed in the armoury, not the magic items section just further backs this up.

To go further, purely from a logical point of view: Armybook rules top rulebook rules, right? The armybook rules say that the enchanted arrows are upgrades, not magic items. It does say that they are enchanted items but by putting them in the armoury section it removes them from the category of magic items, therefore they are upgrades and not magic items.

Edit:
Yeah, I agree about the other arrow types. I'm not sure they're sub-par, in terms of actual usage at least. If you know what you're facing they definitely have potential. The main issue I think is with the cost- I've felt no desire to experiment with them because they take the cost per model to damn high!
I'm still tempted to try the swiftshiver/hand of glory combo, but I think that might just be a one trick pony.

Are you purposefully being dense?

The book lists them as a type of magic item. Therefore they're magic items. Unless you can find a specific line in the wood elf book that says, "These are not enchanted items" then they're counted as enchanted items. Discussion over. End. Finito. Finis. There is no more debating this. You are in no way right. The book states "These are enchanted items". That is a direct quote.

As for the gum quote. What are you talking about? That has no relevance, or pertinence to the discussion at hand. The arrows are magic items because the book labels them as such. "Enchanted items" being the key phrase.


As for my argument, it's based on A) The BRB, and B) The wood elf book. Which both back me up. If you can provide direct quotes to back yours, I'd be glad to explain how they're wrong.

And once more. Dragon Armour and Ensorcelled weapons aren't magical. They're mundane weapons and armour. The former gains it's magical attacks from a special rule. That doesn't make them a magic weapon. Just like the Sisters of Averlon's bows. As for Dragon armour, it's mundane armour with ward saves. The rulebook has one meaning for magic items. And that meaning comes under the Magic item section. Any magic item in the game is either a magic weapon, magic armour, arcane item, talisman, magic standard, or enchanted item.

Are you seeing a pattern here?

I'm not saying that the magical items can't be duplicated, as that's a RAW vs RAI debate. Not part of the debate of whether or not they're magical items. Which they are.

Your entire argument hinges on some misbegotten idea that they're not magical items because they're not listed under the magical items section. Which is just not true.

I don't have the Wood Elf book so I am at a disadvantage but let me try to get this straight.

1. These arrows are claimed to be Magic items because at some point in the book it refers to them as Enchanted items?

2. Someone stated there is a rule in the WE book that says the arrows do not prevent someone from taking Enchanted items...is this correct?

3. So what is the purpose of this discussion? What conclusion are we attempting to reach?

 Throt wrote:

1. These arrows are claimed to be Magic items because at some point in the book it refers to them as Enchanted items?

2. Someone stated there is a rule in the WE book that says the arrows do not prevent someone from taking Enchanted items...is this correct?

3. So what is the purpose of this discussion? What conclusion are we attempting to reach?

1. Yes. The book says they are Enchanted Items.
2. The enchanted arrow entry say something akin to "these are enchanted items that do not prevent a character from taking another enchanted item".
3. The original discussion was whether or not you can take multiple instances of the same type of enchanted arrow. Because (a) they are Enchanted Items, (b) there is nothing in the book that exempts them from the Balance of Power rule, and (c) they can be purchased for whole units as a pts/model upgrade.

So it's all a bit of a mess, really. But we've gotten hung up on whether or not all Enchanted Items are, indeed, Magic Items.