If Ol' Rockfist throws his Thunder Hammer at say a Bloodthirster, does a wound, and then a rune priest tries Jaws of the WOlf on said Bloodthirster, does he test at Initiative 1? I know it is a ranged attack but it is a T. Hammer and it says wounds caused by T. Hammers lower the targets Initiative to 1. I dont play Wolves and I despise Marines, but unfortunately this tactic seems viable. Thoughts???

Not having my rule book on me at the moment, I dont have access to exact wording to back up my following opinion.

But If I recall correctly, a model wounded by a Thunder Hammer strikes at Int 1 in the following assault phase.

If it indeed says in the following assault phase, then it would have no affect on Jaws of the World Wolf as it is used in the shooting phase.

Yeah that was my first response also but BRB says pg 42 "...all models that suffer an unsaved wound from a T. Hammer and are not killed will be knocked reeling, reducing their Initiative value to a value of 1 until the end of the next players turn."

You appear to be correct in interpreting it this way.

With that being the exact wording then I to agree that its Int is reduced and what is used for purposes of the Jaw's power.

but is it a thunderhammer once thrown? The close combat thunder hammer has this rule. But the thown weapon, although a "hammer" has a completely different profile as a ranged weapon. And no ranged weapon has the abilities here posed.

So does Rockfist's ranged attack then count as having been made with a Thunderhammer?

Do the rules for suffering an unsaved wounds apply outside of the Assault Phase?

I guess that's what's left to look at.

::EDIT:: Ninja'd.

The Foehammer is "a thunder hammer that can be used as a ranged weapon with the following profile", so even when being thrown I think it is still a thunder hammer, and it is still potentially wounding the target so I think the thunder hammers I1 rule would come into effect.

I dont think it works this way. I think its a thunderhammer that is thrown with profile x. It doesnt benefit from the thunderhammer rules, and since a thunderhammer is an assault weapon i see no reason why it would make the target initiative 1.

But the Foehammer clearly says that it is a thunder hammer, and if you throw it and wound someone, then that person is taking a wound from a thunderhammer.

Drunkspleen wrote:But the Foehammer clearly says that it is a thunder hammer, and if you throw it and wound someone, then that person is taking a wound from a thunderhammer.

Which can be thrown with the stats of***.
Nowhere in that statline does it mention thunderhammer.

I suppose it's a question of whether "can be used as X" is implying that it is no longer what it normally is (a Thunder Hammer) when being used in that fashion. i.e. X is a Y that can be used as a Z. Is Z a Y? Is a wound caused by Z also caused by X, and if so is that wound caused by a Y as well?

This doesn't sound like an issue that will be too easily resolved by either side.

I think it counts as a thunderhammer and will cause the opponent to fight at Ini 1 in the following assault.

I think that stat tests are always taken from the base value regardless of modifiers so this modifier is moot for the test in question.

Interesting that the weapons name is Foehammer. If I recall correctly, Gandalf carried a sword from the horde of the three trolls, in the Hobbit. There were two blades of obvious magical nature, elf forged. One was Orcrist, translated as Goblin Cleaver, and the orcs and goblins called it Biter. Thorin Oakenshield claimed Orcrist, and it was laid on his breast when he was interred in the mountain.

Gandalf took up Glamdring, the Foehammer, which the orcs and goblins called beater. It's the sword he is carrying in the Lord of the Rings films.

Even though it says it is a Thunderhammer, the thunderhammer rules only apply in Close Combat, because it only has rules as a "special close combat weapon."

Since the ranged profile does not have that special rule, it does not reduce the target's initiative.

This is the same idea that a guy brought up a while back about using Pariahs. He was claiming that since the Gauss Blaster they carry is integral to a War Scythe it got the same save-ignoring properties as the war scythe.

Krak_kirby wrote:Interesting that the weapons name is Foehammer. If I recall correctly, Gandalf carried a sword from the horde of the three trolls, in the Hobbit. There were two blades of obvious magical nature, elf forged. One was Orcrist, translated as Goblin Cleaver, and the orcs and goblins called it Biter. Thorin Oakenshield claimed Orcrist, and it was laid on his breast when he was interred in the mountain.

Gandalf took up Glamdring, the Foehammer, which the orcs and goblins called beater. It's the sword he is carrying in the Lord of the Rings films.

Foehammer is like, the name of the ship, in the first halo game. Reading is for sissies bruh

It states it uses a specific profile - which does not include the "Thunderhammer" rule anywhere.

Additionally proifle tests use your unmodified stat, therefore even if your I is reduced it won't effect JotWW.

I have to say no, it is not.

In any case, Characteristic Tests are made off the unmodified statistic IIRC.

Gwar! wrote:I have to say no, it is not.

That's my take based on the different profile for the ranged attack.

In any case, Characteristic Tests are made off the unmodified statistic IIRC.

That's what I thought too, but when I looked in the book I didn't see any reference to using the unmodified characteristic in the section on characteristic tests.

Gwar! wrote:I have to say no, it is not.

In any case, Characteristic Tests are made off the unmodified statistic IIRC.

I can't find any such rule. It would make leadership modifiers pretty pointless would it not?

Drunkspleen wrote:

Gwar! wrote:I have to say no, it is not.

In any case, Characteristic Tests are made off the unmodified statistic IIRC.

I can't find any such rule. It would make leadership modifiers pretty pointless would it not?

Very true. I think I am getting Editions/Games mixed up in my head.

In Any case, it's not being used as a thunder hammer, so it won't cause the I1 effect. You wouldn't claim a Combi Melta is AP1 on the Bolter Half would you?

Krak_kirby wrote:Interesting that the weapons name is Foehammer. If I recall correctly, Gandalf carried a sword from the horde of the three trolls, in the Hobbit. There were two blades of obvious magical nature, elf forged. One was Orcrist, translated as Goblin Cleaver, and the orcs and goblins called it Biter. Thorin Oakenshield claimed Orcrist, and it was laid on his breast when he was interred in the mountain.

Gandalf took up Glamdring, the Foehammer, which the orcs and goblins called beater. It's the sword he is carrying in the Lord of the Rings films.

Space Puppies love those films! They all secretly want to be Legolas.

When used as a ranged weapon, Foehammer uses the ranges weapon profile given in the codex. Nowhere in that weapon profile does it state that you use the rules for a thunder hammer. As has been said, Foehammer is a short ranged rail gun when used as a ranged weapon. That is it, nothing more.

I guess the grey area comes down to the description of the weapon. S Wolf codex pg 51. " Foehammer: .....The foehammer is a thunder hammer that can be used as a ranged weapon with the following profile; Range 6" S10 AP1 Assault 1." So the question is when they describe it as a thunder hammer that can be thrown with the following profile are we to interprate that as it keeps the thunder hammer rules as well as the shooting profile or do you forget it is a t. hammer and it has the following profile. The codex does remind us it IS a t. hammer with the following profile. Dont know. I play Necrons and I remember the Warscythe guass blaster debate and I agree the guass blaster does not take away saves altogether. The reason I agree is because it was a melee weapon and a seperate weapon description for the shooting profile, a guass blaster. Combi weapons are fired as the main weapon but one turn per game fire as a seperate type of weapon. This codex does say it is a t. hammer with the following profile. I hate the wolves but I think it will be allowed.

Norbu the Destroyer wrote:I hate the wolves but I think it will be allowed.

And I love the Wolves (have played them exclusively for 10+ years) and I would never under any circumstances let someone try this, because it simply is not supported by the rules.

willydstyle wrote:Even though it says it is a Thunderhammer, the thunderhammer rules only apply in Close Combat, because it only has rules as a "special close combat weapon."

Since the ranged profile does not have that special rule, it does not reduce the target's initiative.

This is the same idea that a guy brought up a while back about using Pariahs. He was claiming that since the Gauss Blaster they carry is integral to a War Scythe it got the same save-ignoring properties as the war scythe.

Agree.

Gwar! wrote:

Norbu the Destroyer wrote:I hate the wolves but I think it will be allowed.

And I love the Wolves (have played them exclusively for 10+ years) and I would never under any circumstances let someone try this, because it simply is not supported by the rules.

I dont know, at first I said no to this whole shenanigans, but after carefully reading the rules involved I can see how this would work, and by all means should.

maybe its worth a second read and dissection.

It is used as a Thunder Hammer only in the Assault phase. You do not claim that a Gauss Blaster with Warcythe negates all saves do you?

My melta gunner now has a power weapon that rolls 2d6 for armor pen in the assault phase.

Eidolon wrote:My melta gunner now has a power weapon that rolls 2d6 for armor pen in the assault phase.

And it gets a +1 to the damage table too! Pretty sweet!

Eidolon wrote:My melta gunner now has a power weapon that rolls 2d6 for armor pen in the assault phase.

Can I have a Wolfguard in TDA with a chainfist and combi-melta who gets Str 8 + 3d6?

Gwar! wrote:It is used as a Thunder Hammer only in the Assault phase. You do not claim that a Gauss Blaster with Warcythe negates all saves do you?

What if the Warscythe had a shooting profile? I would also lean towards 'no' but the comparisons to Warscythes and combi-weapons fall short because they're essentially two weapons which can be used in limited either/or scenarios.

Foehammer, on the other hand, is simply a Thunderhammer that can be shot at people. You're adding wording to the rules by specifying Thunderhammers only specify close combat (although I'd certainly agree it's implied) or that by using its shooting profile Foehammer suddenly becomes not a Thunderhammer.

It is a Gauss Blaster with built in Warscythe. So yeah, it kind of does have a shooting profile.

In any case, nothing says you can use the Assault Phase Special rules in the Shooting phase, so you cannot.

It is a Gauss Blaster (refer to rules for a Gauss blaster) with a built in Warscythe (refer to rules for a Warscythe).

Likewise a combi melta is a bolter (refer to rules for a bolter) with a one-shot meltagun (refer to rules for a meltagun).

Foehammer "is a thunder hammer that can be used as a ranged weapon".

There is nothing which prevents the ranged weapon from still being a thunder hammer.

nothing says you can use the Assault Phase Special rules in the Shooting phase

Do the Thunderhammer special weapon rules specifically state that they are assault-phase only? That would be the most obvious ixnay prefenting the OP's original scenario. I don't have my book on me so I can't check.

They are in the Assault Phase part of the rules, in the section "Close Combat Weapons".

There is nothing saying you can use them outside of the assault phase, so you cannot.
"It doesn't say I can't" is not an argument.

This strikes me as silly ! It's a Thunder hammer, no matter what you do with it ! The main effect of a thunder hammer comes from the energy released UPON IMPACT, which is unlikely to change no matter how that impact is delivered.

For example, I'm in the garden building a dog-house, using my hammer to hit nails. A neighbour annoys me so I throw my hammer at him. When it hits, it's still a hammer !

It hasn't suddenly become a piece of cheese in mid air, so it's still gonna hit with all the effect of it's original design, which is designed to transfer energy into the target upon impact !

That's entirely too simplistic an argument to say that it refutes the OP's scenario.

Foehammer clearly states that it is a special weapon that is a Thunderhammer and that the Thunderhammer can also be used as a ranged weapon.

Thunderhammer rules being located in the assault phase section is not enough by itself; Foehammer clearly states that it links a ranged weapon profile to the assault phase weapon. "It doesn't say I can" can just as easily be refuted with "Codex > Rulebook".

What's interesting is that the rules say you can, but it's so wildly against precedent that we're inclined (including myself) to believe it can't.

This strikes me as silly ! It's a Thunder hammer, no matter what you do with it !

This is what you have to find reasoning against; what about either Foehammer's special rule would detach the 'is a thunder hammer' clause from the 'can be used as a ranged weapon' clause.

sourclams wrote: "It doesn't say I can" can just as easily be refuted with "Codex > Rulebook".

Codex > Rulebook is not true, and you know it.

It's Specific > General.

In this case, the specific rules for Thunderhammers being used in the Assault phase over-ride the general shooting rules.
Nowhere in the shooting profile does it state it has the Thunderhammers Assault phase effect, so it does not.

And again, that's not a RAW argument.

Unless the Thunderhammer effect states specifically that it only applies in the assault phase, Foehammer's specific rule that links a ranged profile to a thunder hammer supercede the general close combat rules in the main book.

So? Theres a reason it has a profile of S10 Ap1!

It is not a Thunderhammer when used as a ranged weapon - it gives you a specific profile: you use THAT profile only and any special rules attached.

"Thunderhammer" is not listed in tyhe special rules (as it would be stupid to list a CCW there....) so it ISNT a Thunderhammer when shooting.

sourclams wrote:Unless the Thunderhammer effect states specifically that it only applies in the assault phase,

It does, because it is in the Assault Phase part of the rules. It doesn't get more specific than that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:So? Theres a reason it has a profile of S10 Ap1!

It is not a Thunderhammer when used as a ranged weapon - it gives you a specific profile: you use THAT profile only and any special rules attached.

"Thunderhammer" is not listed in tyhe special rules (as it would be stupid to list a CCW there....) so it ISNT a Thunderhammer when shooting.

Thank you!

I can picture it now...

..."Yes, your honour, I did throw my hammer at him, but by the time it met his head it had become a fatally hard cheese scone !"

ludicrous, really. An object cannot change it's state or nature in flight (transformers notwithstanding).

Of course, if we were talking about throwing a bolt pistol the situation would be different, but as I pointed out last post, the T-hammer's effect comes from release of energy upon impact, so the delivery mechanism becomes irrelevent as it's going to be about impact whether it's swung or thrown.

Where Thunderhammer is located in the rulebook is irrelevant. Foehammer already states that it is a Thunderhammer and has a ranged profile. What, because Logan Grimnar isn't listed under the Independent Character special rules in the main book suddenly means he's not one?

There's no coherency to your argument.

"Thunderhammer" is not listed in tyhe special rules (as it would be stupid to list a CCW there....) so it ISNT a Thunderhammer when shooting.

Foehammer says it is. Explicitly.

Gwar! wrote:It is used as a Thunder Hammer only in the Assault phase. You do not claim that a Gauss Blaster with Warcythe negates all saves do you?

The gauss blaster isn't shooting people with warscythes, it rather has a warscythe attached as a bayonet of sorts. So this isn't really a good analogy. The foehammer is basically shooting a thunderhammer at an opponent.

I would think that an opponent hit with a foehammer would end up fighting at initiative 1 in the following assault phase just as if they were hit with a thunderhammer in said phase.

Not in the ranged profile it gives it isn't. It is NOT in the special rules FOR THE RANGED WEAPON.

When shooting you use the profile given for the weapon plus any special rules it has.

A Thunderhammer is a CCW only - all its effects apply just ot close combat. Stop hunting, Easter's a few months away.

When used as a ranged weapon, I am inclined to think the profile listed is what is used.
If it was meant to have the special close combat rules invoked as well, I would think that would have been mentioned/listed/made a big deal of.

I can understand the question though.

/shrug

nosferatu1001 is, as ever, correct.

@Reaper6: Stick to rules arguments please.

Gwar! wrote:@Reaper6: Stick to rules arguments please.

I was simply using an example to illustrate my position, the essential core of which is that no matter how the strike is delivered the weapon istelf is still a thunder hammer, which (as I keep repeating) works by delivery of energy upon impact.

The provision of a statline for ranged use is, I assume, because the current BRB lacks rules for throwing weapons (such as calculating maximum range, strength etc) which previous incarnations did include (primarily for throwing grenades in the shooting phase which I sadly miss). Of course, if someone HAS found such rules in the current edition then please inform me as to where.

Reaper - as I said: this is the reason it is not a S4 AP- weapon, it is S10 AP1 - that seems, to me, to PERFECTLY simulate the energy release upon impact. Think about it - why else is it so strong and high AP? If it isn't using the TH effects then it would be base strength of the model and no armour pen - a blunt hammer is not exactly known for its abilities to cut through TDA like butter...

nosferatu1001 wrote:Not in the ranged profile it gives it isn't. It is NOT in the special rules FOR THE RANGED WEAPON.

The ranged weapon is a thunder hammer.

Thunderhammers are not AP1

sourclams wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Not in the ranged profile it gives it isn't. It is NOT in the special rules FOR THE RANGED WEAPON.

The ranged weapon is a thunder hammer.

No, it is a Ranged weapon with a Profile of 6" S10 Ap1 Assault 1

nosferatu1001 wrote:Reaper - as I said: this is the reason it is not a S4 AP- weapon, it is S10 AP1 - that seems, to me, to PERFECTLY simulate the energy release upon impact. Think about it - why else is it so strong and high AP? If it isn't using the TH effects then it would be base strength of the model and no armour pen - a blunt hammer is not exactly known for its abilities to cut through TDA like butter...

Which only helps confirm that it IS still a T-hammer and should be entitled to all it's listed effects.

@Gwar : I normally refrain from posting in this forum because I usually agree with your opinions, but this time I've had to speak up because I disagree with you. Sorry dude.

Why are people talking about "release of energy?" I kept looking in the rulebook for rules on "release of energy" and could not find any. Is it in Gwar!s faq?

huh?

So you mean it should strike at Initiative 1 as well? Or when you say "all" do you mean "only those which benefit me"?

The thrown TH has a specific profile with no special rules attached - you use that profile only.

Sourclams - I assume you're just trolling now, as you currently don't have a real argument.

It can be thrown with the following profile

R 6 S 10 AP 1 Assault 1

thats it. far as im concerned the fact he throws a railgun represents the thunder hammers effects well.

Reaper6: your physics arguments are poor, as the impact of a device depends on the manner in which it is delivered. Obviously throwing a hammer would have different effects then hitting someone with one. Which is represented by S10 AP1.

willydstyle wrote:Why are people talking about "release of energy?" I kept looking in the rulebook for rules on "release of energy" and could not find any. Is it in Gwar!s faq?

Nothing about release of energy, but V1.5 covers the Ranged attack situation.

DONWLOAD IT PEWAOPLE!

Gwar! wrote:

willydstyle wrote:Why are people talking about "release of energy?" I kept looking in the rulebook for rules on "release of energy" and could not find any. Is it in Gwar!s faq?

Nothing about release of energy, but V1.5 covers the Ranged attack situation.

DONWLOAD IT PEWAOPLE!

I guess my lack of smilies shut down your sarcasm detector

nosferatu1001 : If initiative is ever a factor during the shooting phase, then sure I'd apply the Int=1 to the firer, just as I'd apply the effects of being hit with a T-Hammer and it's attendant Int reduction to the target

willydstyle : BRB, page 42; Codex Space Marines, p99; Codex Space Wolves p60 Thunder Hammer description first sentence in all books named (some 2nd ed codices give more detail). Apologies, just noticed Sarcasm Sensorium readings

Ah right, so just because you cant apply the rule you thinkl you should apply all the other benefits?

Sorry, if you want to easter egg hunt then you can have al the negatives. Biggest one being that you need to determine how to apply Initiative in shooting. If you cant do so then perhaps you shouldnt be looking so hard.

Or, you know, you could just use the fact it gives you a RANGED WEAPON PROFILE and just use the RANGED WEAPON PROFILE if gives you?

A TH is strictly CC

sourclams wrote:Where Thunderhammer is located in the rulebook is irrelevant. Foehammer already states that it is a Thunderhammer and has a ranged profile. What, because Logan Grimnar isn't listed under the Independent Character special rules in the main book suddenly means he's not one?

There's no coherency to your argument.

"Thunderhammer" is not listed in tyhe special rules (as it would be stupid to list a CCW there....) so it ISNT a Thunderhammer when shooting.

Foehammer says it is. Explicitly.

And that ranged profile does not include anything about Initiative etc............

nosferatu1001 : No, I feel that if a player's chosen action carries a negative then that should be applied if there are rules to cover it, such as the Int=1 for striking in CC.

If the rules don't allow for such a penalty in shooting that's a different debate.

If a weapon's BASIC description has an effect which is not modified by HOW the blow is landed then those effects should be applied, after all they have been listed as fundamental to the weapon's design (and are the very reason for it being named THUNDER hammer !)

As another example, purely for illustrative purposes, just because the BRB doesn't cover the possibility of a player choosing the throw a photon grenade instead of shooting, that doesn't mean that it would cease to be a photon grenade if a way was found to allow the throw within the rules. It would still have the capability to blind the opponent as that is integral to it's design and function within the game.

All I can say is that if this somehow magically works out in the wolfie's favor, my Chaos termies better be able to throw Chainfists in the next codex.

And Tyranid MCs get 2d6 at range - the guns are using their Str after all.

kirsanth wrote:And Tyranid MCs get 2d6 at range - the guns are using their Str after all.

And TMC with Chainfists Get 6D4, just to shake things up!

@Gwar: Stick to rules arguments please.

Touche ? Sorry, couldn't resist

Reaper6 wrote:

@Gwar: Stick to rules arguments please.

Touche ? Sorry, couldn't resist

Huh? I have been. You are the one making things up.

If you mean my comment about TMC with Chainfists getting 6D4, you need to grow a sense of humour.

Gwar! wrote:You are the one making things up.

This should be interesting ! What, exactly, are you implying I have "made up"?

Reaper6 wrote:

Gwar! wrote:You are the one making things up.

This should be interesting ! What, exactly, are you implying I have "made up"?

Fluff argument.

Anyone else get the Forgotten Realms refernce to the Foehammer?

The part that gets me is the way the rule is written.

The Foehammer is a thunder hammer that can be used as a ranged weapon with the following profile: (Lists ranged profile).

Usage of a colon - A colon informs the reader that what follows proves and explains, or simply elements of what is referred to before.

I am on the fence about this one. I can see how in one instance, CC, that GW would be thinking that this character would be running into CC against MCs and ICs so striking at the same init would be a neat character perk.

On the other hand it may not have been intended such as using JAWS with his ranged attack.

In either case it is not a very game breaking ability, 6" inch range to a BT can be hard to do and they still have invul saves.

@Gwar : PM sent.

Clay Williams wrote:In either case it is not a very game breaking ability, 6" inch range to a BT can be hard to do and they still have invul saves.

No but a 5/6 chance of instakilling a DP with no Saves is.

Hmm, it appears Gwar is reluctant to communicate re his doubt of my fluff knowledge on the T-Hammer, so I'll throw this info into the debate:

Given the limited information provided in the current BRB & codecise, I'll quote from the 2nd ed Wargear book which gives a little more detail on the nature of the weapon. Those who bother to read it will notice that the current descriptions are merely distilled from this original text.

2nd Edition Wargear book, page 12.

Thunder Hammer.

This is a weapon used by Terminator Space Marines and is normally used in conjunction with a Storm Shield. The Thunder Hammer is a large hammer with a power generator which energises only when the hammer strikes its target. This allows the weapon to store a tremendous amount of energy and release it only at the moment of impact, producing a terrific blast of energy and a sound like the crack of thunder. Were it not for his Terminator Armour the Space Marine himself would probably be knocked over by the impact.

This should, if nothing else, give a better awareness of the functioning of the Thunder Hammer. Note that the passage quoted specifically refers to the energy being released at the moment of impact, which gives the weapon both it's name and it's defining strength which, you'll notice, is reflected in the ranged weapn profile provided in the SW codex.

It is upon this knowledge of the workings of the Thunder Hammer that my position in this debate is based.

And yet time and time again we see that the rules that govern how these things work in the game are completely different from what the fluff says.

Descriptions aren't rules, silly

Arschbombe : Unfortunately this is often true, but the point here is that even using the ranged profile to allow the character to throw the weapon doesn't change what it is,or that it's effect is the result of impact not pulling a trigger, so it's effects should still be used

Which would explain AP1.

Something Thunderhammers definitively do not have otherwise.

kirsanth wrote:Which would explain AP1.

Something Thunderhammers definitively do not have otherwise.

I suspect that the better AP is to represent the strength of the weapon with the added momentum of being thrown by a character noted for his strength, and is also much closer to the original profile for a thunder hammer btw

kirsanth wrote:Which would explain AP1.

Something Thunderhammers definitively do not have otherwise.

No, since it is AP1 in its ranged profile, it definitely would not be less powerful in melee! After all a thrown weapon cannot possess the same kinetic energy at the point of impact than it did when it left the throwers hand (except in a vacuum) so the energy release would be just as powerful in melee, if not moreso than it would be thrown. Therefore, because of the energy release, which has a firm basis in the rules, the thunderhammer is str D in hand to hand.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Reaper6 wrote:

kirsanth wrote:Which would explain AP1.

Something Thunderhammers definitively do not have otherwise.

I suspect that the better AP is to represent the strength of the weapon with the added momentum of being thrown by a character noted for his strength, and is also much closer to the original profile for a thunder hammer btw

Physics fail!

I figure fluff-wise the AP1 is the ranged equivalent of the Thunder Hammer special rules.

It makes at least as much sense as the alternative, really.

willydstyle wrote:Physics fail!

So, a hulking brute standing at almost point-blank range (in comparative terms), throwing a massive energised hammer in your face is going to hurt less than if he just bopped you with it ?

On a side-note, where did Gwar go ? I was enjoying his contributions.

Actually, yes. The kinetic energy of the hammer is going to be less at any point after it leaves the throwers hands.

Which is why the thunderhammer is str D in close combat. Thank you for leading me to this epiphany.

Reaper6 wrote:

willydstyle wrote:Physics fail!

So, a hulking brute standing at almost point-blank range (in comparative terms), throwing a massive energised hammer in your face is going to hurt less than if he just bopped you with it ?

On a side-note, where did Gwar go ? I was enjoying his contributions.

I left to do other, more enjoyable things than listen to someone quote outdated editions fluff during a rules debate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

willydstyle wrote:Actually, yes. The kinetic energy of the hammer is going to be less at any point after it leaves the throwers hands.

Which is why the thunderhammer is str D in close combat. Thank you for leading me to this epiphany.

Yay! Strength D ftw!

Because it's the only thing stronger than str 10 AP1, amirite?

willydstyle wrote:Because it's the only thing stronger than str 10 AP1, amirite?

How about Strength DD (the best strength IMO) and AP -1

Reaper6 wrote:nosferatu1001 : No, I feel that if a player's chosen action carries a negative then that should be applied if there are rules to cover it, such as the Int=1 for striking in CC.

If the rules don't allow for such a penalty in shooting that's a different debate.

No, it isn't: you want to use the rules for a TH, despite hgaving NO RULES to do so, so I will make you determine exactly how you are going to do so. So you now need to find rules for using Init in shooting.

If you cannot you cannot use the Foehammer at all.

Done egg hunting yet?

Reaper6 wrote:If a weapon's BASIC description has an effect which is not modified by HOW the blow is landed then those effects should be applied, after all they have been listed as fundamental to the weapon's design (and are the very reason for it being named THUNDER hammer !)

Yes, it is modified: it gives you, very clearly, exactly what the weapon is doing. At any point IN THE RANGED PROFILE does it state it is stilla thunderhammer? No? THen it isn't a thnuderhammer.

Reaper6 wrote:As another example, purely for illustrative purposes, just because the BRB doesn't cover the possibility of a player choosing the throw a photon grenade instead of shooting, that doesn't mean that it would cease to be a photon grenade if a way was found to allow the throw within the rules. It would still have the capability to blind the opponent as that is integral to it's design and function within the game.

No, you don't get this: you are making up rules. IF they allowed you to throw photon grenades it could indeed do something different than in CC, as you only have the ranged profile ot go off.

Here they specifically give you a ranged profile which encapsulates everything about the weapon: enhanced strength and ignoring armour really, really well.

If you have some actual rules here please post them, otherwise, and I say this with respect: fluff /= rules.

Ignoring Reaper's fluff arguments, here's the part that works purely off of rules as written:

Foehammer: is a thunder hammer, the thunder hammer has a ranged profile.

Thunder hammers, quoting from the rule book, ""an unsaved wound from a thunder hammer...reduces Initiative to a value of 1"

Note that it says nowhere that the wound is suffered in close combat, simply that any unsaved wound from a thunder hammer reduces initiative to 1.

Here's the point that you're arguing: "Being a special close combat weapon means that a thunder hammer is only a thunder hammer in close combat"

Here's why this is not a RAW argument:

RAW Fail 1 - Close combat weapons are not limited to close combat. They typically can only be used in close combat because they have no range. Foehammer does have a range; this does not prevent it from being a close combat weapon/special close combat weapon/Thunderhammer. The rule in the SW codex is quite explicit.

RAW Fail 2 - Ranged weapons are undefined in the rulebook. There is simply a blanket statement "Every weapon has a profile that consists of several elements, for example:" with a listing of a normal weapon profile.

Saying that a weapon profile [game term] unlinks the Thunderhammer [game term] descriptor because it's a ranged weapon [non-game term] is a fluff argument. You're using non-game terms to argue game terms.

To intelligently disagree with me, you have to show how either 1. the main rules disallow special close combat weapon rules to be used at range (explicitly, not supposedly; saying that close combat weapons don't have weapon profiles obviously doesn't work because that's specifically what the Foehammer rule does) or 2. that the wording of Foehammer specifies that the Foehammer is no longer a Thunderhammer when the player uses its ranged weapon profile.

It is a thunderhammer with the profile below.

The profile, nowhere, states any special rules of a thunderhammer. A thunderhammer is explicitly defined as a close combat weapon.

So if you beileve it is a TH at range then please show, with rules, how you determine you are firing at INit 1. You don't get to pick and choose, so you MUST show this. If you cannot do so intelligently then I will never let you "fire" foehammer, as you cannot resolve all the rules.

Ok can we stop this right now we have Shooting & Assault phases. Some weapons can be used in ether phase but the rules for the different phases don't interact with one another.

Take a Plasma Pistol. Its Str 7 AP2 ... being a pistol it can be used as a close combat weapon but it does not ignore armour saves; even though it would make sence to still have an AP of 2 which would still cut through armour (side note I think it would be nice to have some cheap CCW that have an AP value ... D6 would make a fun one for an ork or the dark eldar)

That's a very good argument.

Here's the counter: Power Fists attack at Initiative 1. 'Attack' is actually a game term, defined as 'the number of dice a model rolls when fighting in close combat'.

Since Foehammer has a weapon profile that allows it to fire at range, this circumvents the I1 restriction because you're not in a close combat.

And, again, there is nothing stating that close combat weapons are limited to close combat, only the mechanics of not having a weapon profile with a range actually limit them in such a fashion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tri wrote:
Take a Plasma Pistol. Its Str 7 AP2 ... being a pistol it can be used as a close combat weapon but it does not ignore armour saves; even though it would make sence to still have an AP of 2 which would still cut through armour

This is covered explicitly in the rulebook, "in close combat, pistols count as normal close combat weapons and so the Strength and AP of the pistol are ignored." If the phases don't interact, then why the need for this specific rule? (I know what the need is, to prevent this exact thing from having to be FAQed for the zillionth time, but this is YMDC RAW after all).

We can claim that the rules for different phases don't interact with one another, but we can just as easily say that this is exactly what the wording of Foehammer is allowing Arjac to do.

So it's also doubling the users strength? I don't see that in the profile....

sourclams wrote:

Tri wrote:
Take a Plasma Pistol. Its Str 7 AP2 ... being a pistol it can be used as a close combat weapon but it does not ignore armour saves; even though it would make sence to still have an AP of 2 which would still cut through armour

This is covered explicitly in the rulebook, "in close combat, pistols count as normal close combat weapons and so the Strength and AP of the pistol are ignored." If the phases don't interact, then why the need for this specific rule? (I know what the need is, to prevent this exact thing from having to be FAQed for the zillionth time, but this is YMDC RAW after all).

We can claim that the rules for different phases don't interact with one another, but we can just as easily say that this is exactly what the wording of Foehammer is allowing Arjac to do.

Right but in this case your told that it can be used at range with the following profile .... so we use the profile at range ... which doesn't have any thing to do with thunder hammers.

Shooting = 6" Str10 AP1 Assault 1
Assault = Thunder hammer

It is not both at the same time. Next it'll be people saying it's AP 1 against vehicles in CC.

If it counts as a thunderhammer then you have to throw it at initiative one, after all other models have shot. All armies shooting must be done unit by unit, on initiative basis.

As pointed out it does not count as AP1 in close combat such as Lysander's thunder hammer, so no it does not lower initiative to 1 when used as a shooting attack.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:As pointed out it does not count as AP1 in close combat such as Lysander's thunder hammer, so no it does not lower initiative to 1 when used as a shooting attack.

G

Lysanders thunderhammer does not count as AP1, it just ignores all armor saves and adds +1 to the damage roll on the chart, which although mechanically is the exact same thing, it is not actually AP1.

in close combat you cannot have an AP value, at range you cannot have an Init value, if they dont apply then they dont apply and that arguement ends there.

However, the Foehammer is a thunderhammer, and as previously stated it never stops being a thunderhammer, and the special rules for thunderhammers means that if you suffer an unsaved wound from a thunderhammer you are then at I1.

lets run an example to see how this actually affects the game, lets say my Rockfist and Njal and standing a couple inches away from your key HQ model (tactial mistake on your part, you would avoid this situation at all costs) Arjac throws! 83.3% chance to hit, roll to wound! 69.4% chance to also wound! lets say 5+ invul save now its only a 46.2% chance to deal the wound. Assuming a S10 wound doesnt outright kill your character, Njal casts Jaws! 42.43% chance to get to this point, and a total chance of 35.36% to kill your character outright.

I fail to see how this is considered overpowered, anyone who has played more than a couple of games with Runepriests knows that Jaws is only very situationally useful. to utilize this combo you need a arjac within assault range of the target, the target cannot be in a unit, (because you allocate the wound, not me) I have to roll to hit, roll to wound, then you get any invul saves, then I take a psychic test, then you have to fail an Init test.



So, lets look at what characters people would be running solo, to see what targets could be taken advantage of...
Ghazgkull, I know plenty of people run him solo, because he is faster that way, if someone throws a hammer at him, Call a Waaagh and get a 2+ invul save, now you are unlikely to take a wound, and likely to pass your I test.
Calgar, has a 4+ invul save, which brings the total chance down to 26.5% So the Space Wolf player paid at least 288 points for a 27% chance to nuke your Clagar... good job!
Chaos demons? aside from being monstrous creatures that get a bonus to the I test, they tend to have good invul saves at well,
'Fexes and 'Rants? already at a low I, so are mostly unaffected by this combo.



people are fighting prettey vehemently about this combo, even though by RAW it seems to work, the only counter arguement I have been able to sift out of this is that the rules for Thunderhammers are in the Special Close Combat section of hte rulebook, but where something is in the rulebook has very little to do with its interaction with other rules.

The vehicle damage chart says that when a vehicle is immobilized it is no longer able to move, but that is not in the movement section of the rules, so in the movement phase it obviously CAN move!. this is the same arguement that is being presented, and its total bullcock.


The Foehammer is a Thunderhammer, you follow all applicable rules for thunderhammers, the rules for reducing initiative down to 1 apply to wounds caused by thunderhammers. When you throw a thunderhammer as a ranged attack it does not sudden become a nameless shooting attack, it is still a thunderhammer. we are not advocating an "it doesnt say you cant" stance on this, we are advocating a "it doesnt say that it loses its special rules" stance.

Init values may not work in shooting - that is the point. You want to use TH rules I will make you use all of them - in which case you must find rules allowing Init in shooting, as you MUST strike at Init 1 with a TH - you have NO CHOICE in the matter.

The foehammer is a thunderhammer THAT HAS A RANGED PROFILE. THe shooting rules give no permission for shooting weapons to have effects not contained within their profile - in effect you must show where the rules are stating it is a thunderhammer when thrown.

A thunderhammer is defined as a special CCW, and has no allowance for being used outside of this. There is no explicit allowance in AR rules to use a TH in shooting, so he cannot.

Demogerg wrote:

in close combat you cannot have an AP value, at range you cannot have an Init value, if they dont apply then they dont apply and that arguement ends there.

Actually its stated nowhere that you can't have an AP value in CC or an Initiative value in shooting. Both have rules that could be made to work in the other phases. The only reason they don't is weapons are group into two type Shooting and CC. Any weapon that works in both must have rules for both phases and each phases rules are for that phase only.

This is one of the Reason that we have rending twice in the rule book, Once for the Shooting phase and Once for the Assault phase.

Okay, usually I am the one asking questions, but to me the rules for this are perfectly clear.

1.) First off, some shooting weapons can have the Close Combat Weapons rules (pg. 42 of the BRB). An example is Assault Cannons which have rending. HOWEVER, Rending IS Covered by the BRB, under the heading on pg. 29 - Additional Weapon Characteristics (Rending is listed on pg. 31 of the BRB). Under the heading of Additional Weapon Characteristics, it says that "These extra weapon characteristics are represented by additional rules that are added to a weapon's type."

2.) All of these Additional Weapon Characteristics are covered in the SHOOTING STAT LINE.
a.) Flamer - Covered under range.
b.) Lance - Covered under type.
c.) Rending - Covered under type.

3.) The problem with assuming that Arjac Rockfist gets the Thunder Hammer ability on his shooting attacks is the fact that it is not mentioned in the weapons profile.

"...can be used as a ranged weapon with the following profile:"

Range: 6", Strength: 10, AP 1, Type: Assault 1

No mention of Thunder Hammer.

4.) The closest weapon I can find to this is the Eldar Laser Lance. On the turn you charge it is a Str 6 power weapon. But in the Shooting Phase it has a completely different set of statistics.

Gurilla wrote:
"...can be used as a ranged weapon with the following profile:"

Ran*e: 6", Strength: 10, AP 1, Type: Assault 1

No mention of Thunder Hammer.

Except for the part where it says it "Is a Thunderhammer"

As it stands there are 2 interpretations here, RAW, where it IS a Thunderhammer and follows all rules as such, and another where its implied that the ranged profile does not follow the rules for being a Thunderhammer, Which is implied based solely on what section the rules are listed under, and never explicitly stated.

so we have the explicit and the implied, one of which is RAW, the other is an assumed RAI.

Demogerg wrote:Except for the part where it says it "Is a Thunderhammer"

As it stands there are 2 interpretations here, RAW, where it IS a Thunderhammer and follows all rules as such, and another where its implied that the ranged profile does not follow the rules for being a Thunderhammer, Which is implied based solely on what section the rules are listed under, and never explicitly stated.

so we have the explicit and the implied, one of which is RAW, the other is an assumed RAI.

I say you have it exactly backwards. The shooting profile of the weapon is clearly defined. That's the RAW. Appending Thunderhammer to it is someone's notion of RAI.

Arschbombe wrote:
I say you have it exactly backwards. The shooting profile of the weapon is clearly defined. That's the RAW. Appending Thunderhammer to it is someone's notion of RAI.

Agreed. The Weapons shooting profile DOES NOT mention Thunder Hammer. Every other weapon that have additional weapon characteristics mention it in the weapons shooting stat line. Once again, see page 29 of the BRB. Using the weapons shooting stat line as it is written, is the RAW.

Implying that the word Thunder Hammer should be on the shooting stat line is the RAI; because you are assuming that something is suppose to be there. This is because every other weapon for every other race has the additional weapon characteristic mentioned somewhere in the shooting stat line.

Demogerg : Your argument is very well put, and I particularly applaud your summary

The Foehammer is a Thunderhammer, you follow all applicable rules for thunderhammers, the rules for reducing initiative down to 1 apply to wounds caused by thunderhammers. When you throw a thunderhammer as a ranged attack it does not sudden become a nameless shooting attack, it is still a thunderhammer. we are not advocating an "it doesnt say you cant" stance on this, we are advocating a "it doesnt say that it loses its special rules" stance.

Just a shame others can't see the sense of this and insist that the ranged profile somehow overrides the description stating clearly that the Foehammer IS a Thunder Hammer.

Arschbombe wrote:It doesn't say that in the shooting profile it tells you to use.

"is a thunder hammer... with the following profile:"

there is no USR for being a thunder hammer, there are rules however for thunder hammers.

if there was a USR it would be listed, because there is not a USR for being a thunder hammer it is described in the preface as being a thunder hammer. let me give another example...

"all frost blades or frost axes are power weapons that add +1 to the user's Strength"

Frost blades dont ignore armor saves directly, they are power weapons that add strength, but as power weapons they ignore armor saves.

Gurilla wrote:The Weapons shooting profile DOES NOT mention Thunder Hammer.

It doesn't have to, it's defined in the weapon's description !

A Bolt Pistol's shooting profile doesn't repeat that it is a BOLT pistol, does that override the weapon's description which states what type of pistol it is ? Of course not, that would be redundant, so where is the Foehammer's description/profile combination different in that regard ?

Reaper6 wrote:

Gurilla wrote:The Weapons shooting profile DOES NOT mention Thunder Hammer.

It doesn't have to, it's defined in the weapon's description !

A Bolt Pistol's shooting profile doesn't repeat that it is a BOLT pistol, does that override the weapon's description which states what type of pistol it is ? Of course not, that would be redundant, so where is the Foehammer's description/profile combination different in that regard ?

So? It doesn't matter if it is "Bolt" or not. It is a S4 Ap5 12" Pistol. That is it.

Gwar! wrote:So? It doesn't matter if it is "Bolt" or not. It is a S4 Ap5 12" Pistol. That is it.

Then why does your camp (for want of a better phrase) seem to insist that the ranged profile for the Foehammer must repeat what it's description states in order for it to remain a Thunder Hammer ?

Reaper6 wrote:

Gwar! wrote:So? It doesn't matter if it is "Bolt" or not. It is a S4 Ap5 12" Pistol. That is it.

Then why does your camp (for want of a better phrase) seem to insist that the ranged profile for the Foehammer must repeat what it's description states in order for it to remain a Thunder Hammer ?

Oh, probably because things like meltaguns have profiles like this:

Meltagun: S8 Ap1 Assault 1, melta.

That clearly tells you to use the melta rule for the gun. Melta bombs, whose name includes melta don't benefit from the melta rule. Arjac could have a magic banana with the S10 Ap1 Assault 1 profile and it would still be the same. The profile defines the rules for the weapon. The name doesn't matter.

Reaper6 wrote:

Gwar! wrote:So? It doesn't matter if it is "Bolt" or not. It is a S4 Ap5 12" Pistol. That is it.

Then why does your camp (for want of a better phrase) seem to insist that the ranged profile for the Foehammer must repeat what it's description states in order for it to remain a Thunder Hammer ?

That is actually the strongest point of their arguement, I do not know why you are trying to press this as an arguement in favor of allowing the special rules for Thunder Hammers to apply to the shooting attacking profile listed.

Another example of a special rule for shooting that applies to a unit, but is not listed in the weapon profile is under Sternguard, in the Space Marine Codex, Special Issue Ammunition applies to the Boltguns that Sternguard use, however the weapon profiles listed do not make mention of the Special Issue Ammunition special rule. Under the presumptions that all special rules must have a note made in the "type" section of their profile would mean that Sternguard cannot use Dragonfire Bolts, Hellfire Rounds, Kraken Bolts, or Vengeance Rounds.

Demogerg wrote:the target cannot be in a unit, (because you allocate the wound, not me)

Except that is not how JOTWW works :

C:SW pg 37 wrote:As a psychic shooting attack, the Rune Priest may trace a straight line along the board, starting from the Rune Priest and ending 24” away. This line may pass through terrain. MC, beasts, calvary, bikes and infantry models that are touched by this line must take an initiative test (see Characteristic Tests in BRB). If the model fails the test, it is removed from play. MC may subtract one from their dice roll due to their tremendous size and strength, though remember that the roll of a 6 is always a failure.

It is a shooting attack BUT it has several unique rules that trump the BRB.

the Rune Priest may trace a straight line along the board, starting from the Rune Priest and ending 24” away. This line may pass through terrain.

Do you roll to hit using the RP BS? No. Does this attack target units (like flamers)? No. What does the rule tell you to do? Draw a 24" line across the board. The target is the area on the board over which the line travels across. The attack is therefore indescrimate. Therefore, JOTWW ignores all targeting restrictions such as LOS, friendly models, ect until GW FAQ it.

MC, beasts, calvary, bikes and infantry models that are touched by this line must take an initiative test (see Characteristic Tests in BRB). If the model fails the test, it is removed from play.

Are any wounds caused? No. What happens? Models are removed from play. Which models? The ones touched by the line that fail thier INT save. You may not remove models that were not touched by the line. Why? First, you may only allocate wounds and there were no wounds caused. Secondly the rule specifically states only models hit by the line may be removed. May you take an armour, cover, invulnerable save? No, again, you call only take saves on wounds and no wounds were inflicted. Unless GW FAQs it, this is how the power functions.

So JOTWW is a Psychic Shooting Attack:

Does not cause wounds

Does not need LOS

Targets an area of the board rather than units

Removes models touched by the line that fail an INT test...any models friend or foe

Does not cause wounds

Does not allow armour, cover, or invulnerable saves

Nice try Reaper6, but your point is false. Bolt, is not an additional weapon characteristic. Does being bolt make a weapon act different? NO! Melta makes a weapon act different, Lance makes a weapon act different.

Show me one other weapon, in any other codex - that has a shooting profile - THAT DOES NOT mention the additional weapon characteristic in the Shooting Stat Line.

Thunder Hammer is an additional weapon characteristic just like rending - Shooting weapons that have rending mention it in the weapon shooting stat line. I play Tyranids primarily, and all of my weapons that have Living Ammunition, mention it in the Shooting Stat Line.

I fail to see how you can't understand this.....the abilities of a weapon during the shooting phase are always mentioned in its Shooting Stat Line. ALWAYS!!!! . Foehammer does not state it is a Thunderhammer in is Shooting Stat Line because

1.) Thunderhammer is a Close Combat Ability for this type of weapon
2.) They did give it this ability in the shooting phase.

Arschbombe : I never said the name mattered, but the description should ! You could call a Plasma Gun a Hot Cheese Cannon for all I care as long as the description defines it's type.

Reaper6 wrote:Arschbombe : I never said the name mattered, but the description should ! You could call a Plasma Gun a Hot Cheese Cannon for all I care as long as the description defines it's type.

But the description does NOT define it's type. It never has (in 5th anyway ) and never will. It is the Profile that tells you what the weapon does.

Because theyre looking for easter eggs, and ignoring rules that they find inconvenient (double S, MUST strike at init 1)

You hvae a shooting stat line, you use EXACTLY what that stat line gives you. Nothing else.

wyomingfox wrote: Words

I completely understand, however, the Foehammer is a regular shooting attack, and follows all rules for wound allocation.

Gurilla wrote:Nice try Reaper6, but your point is false. Bolt, is not an additional weapon characteristic. Does being bolt make a weapon act different? NO! Melta makes a weapon act different, Lance makes a weapon act different.

Show me one other weapon, in any other codex - that has a shooting profile - THAT DOES NOT mention the additional weapon characteristic in the Shooting Stat Line.

Thunder Hammer is an additional weapon characteristic just like rending - Shooting weapons that have rending mention it in the weapon shooting stat line. I play Tyranids primarily, and all of my weapons that have Living Ammunition, mention it in the Shooting Stat Line.

I fail to see how you can't understand this.....the abilities of a weapon during the shooting phase are always mentioned in its Shooting Stat Line. ALWAYS!!!! . Foehammer does not state it is a Thunderhammer in is Shooting Stat Line because

1.) Thunderhammer is a Close Combat Ability for this type of weapon
2.) They did give it this ability in the shooting phase.

I gave an example that breaks your arguement here, please read above.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Because theyre looking for easter eggs, and ignoring rules that they find inconvenient (double S, MUST strike at init 1)

You hvae a shooting stat line, you use EXACTLY what that stat line gives you. Nothing else.

Well, to be fair, the Double Strength part is correct. But that is about it. Nothing else even remotely suggests it uses the TH Close Combat rules in the Shooting Phase.

On an unrelated note, I am glad to see about an equal number of people for each side this time, and that there are SW vets on both sides, rather than "Gwar! vs The People who are jumping on the Spess Puppeh Waggon"

Actually, Sternguard Veteran do have a Shooting Stat Line for all of their special ammunition types:

1.) Dragonfire Bolts - Range: 24", Strength: 4, AP 5, Type: Rapid Fire, Ignores Cover*
2.) Kraken Bolts - Range: 30", Strength: 4, AP 4, Type: Rapid Fire

They still mention their special abilities in the Shooting Stat Line.....show me a Shooting Stat Line that does not mention the weapons special ability in the Stat Line.

Demogerg wrote:

wyomingfox wrote: Words

I completely understand, however, the Foehammer is a regular shooting attack, and follows all rules for wound allocation.

Oh, duhh! Sorry, my bad

It could be listed as a "Lascannon* with the following profile" and you would still have to use the following profile, not the rules for Lascannons*.

(* or Forceweapon see: DH or WH)

Gurilla wrote:Actually, Sternguard Veteran do have a Shooting Stat Line for all of their special ammunition types:

1.) Dragonfire Bolts - Range: 24", Strength: 4, AP 5, Type: Rapid Fire, Ignores Cover*
2.) Kraken Bolts - Range: 30", Strength: 4, AP 4, Type: Rapid Fire

They still mention their special abilities in the Shooting Stat Line.....show me a Shooting Stat Line that does not mention the weapons special ability in the Stat Line.

No, Sternguard have the Special Issue Ammunition rule.

There are profiles listed for weapons on page 63 are not listed explicitly as "Special Issue Ammunition" in their profile, therefore you cannot apply the special rule to them. This means that Sternguard could only fire their bolters as bolters, because none of the supposesed special issue ammo is actually "Special Issue Ammuntion"

or at least thats what your arguement would mean.

The Sternguard entry further proves my point --- actually…and I quote:

"Each time a SGVS fires, the controlling player can choose which type of ammunition is being used"

“Each special ammunition type replaces the boltgun profile, with the one shown here”

It then lists each and everyone one the Shooting Profiles for the type of Ammunition used!

No where in Foehammer’s shooting profile does it mention Thunderhammer…..every other weapon out there shows additional special abilities in the weapons shooting profile (stat line).

Gurilla wrote:Thunder Hammer is an additional weapon characteristic just like rending

No, Thunder Hammer is the NAME of the weapon in it's basic form, whilst Foehammer is the name of a single variation of the Thunder Hammer.

So, the general point of the "opposition" is that the statline should read as :

Foehammer Range:6" Str:10 AP:1 Assault1,Thunder Hammer

By that definition, EVERY weapon should make a reference to it's type in it's statline, thus even weapons of accepted and unquestioned types should read as, for example,

Lasgcannon Range:48" Str9 AP:2 Heavy1,Laser,

However, they don't contain this redundant statement because the weapon's description serves to make this clear instead.

In answer to your Sternguard point, with the Foehammer there is NO option to choose from because it is a Thunderhammer no matter what you do with it ! You are not changing the type of head on the hammer, for example, so there is no need to choose. The profile only exists to allow the player to throw the thing because the BRB doesn't provide rules for such an action.

Except that "Laser" doesn't have any special rules.

Thunder Hammer does.

It isn't in the Profile

Thus it does not have the special rules.

It is THAT simple.

Gurilla wrote:The Sternguard entry further proves my point --- actually…and I quote:

"Each time a SGVS fires, the controlling player can choose which type of ammunition is being used"

“Each special ammunition type replaces the boltgun profile, with the one shown here”

It then lists each and everyone one the Shooting Profiles for the type of Ammunition used!

No where in Foehammer’s shooting profile does it mention Thunderhammer…..every other weapon out there shows additional special abilities in the weapons shooting profile (stat line).

Yes, they may choose an ammunition type, which means that either

A. This special rule, (Special Issue Ammunition) which is not listed in the profile of the weapons applies to them, and they may still fire, hence a special rule can apply to weapons and not be in the weapon profile.
or B. This special rule, (Special Issue Ammunition) which is not listed in the profile for the weapons then definately does NOT apply to them, becuase you use ONLY the profile for the weapon, not the special rules that realtes to them but are not listed on said profile. In this case you CANNOT fire any rounds other than normal bolter rounds.

If A is true, sternguard are fine, and the Foehammer uses the special rules for being a thunder hammer in its shooting attack.
If B is ture, sternguard are broken, and the Foehammer does not use the special rules listed for being a thunder hammer, and we must go back and reevaluate the special rules for all shooting attacks in the entire game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gwar! wrote:Except that "Laser" doesn't have any special rules.

Thunder Hammer does.

It isn't in the Profile

Thus it does not have the special rules.

It is THAT simple.

Except that "thunder hammer" is not a special rule, its an item which has special rules associated with it, and this item IS a thunder hammer

Reaper6 - Does Laser change the ability of the weapon? No, it is a Strength 9 weapon.

However:

Multi-melta - Range: 24", Str 8, AP 1, Heavy 1, Melta ==> Why the reference to its type, because the type modifies the way it works!
Assault Cannon - Range 24", Str 6, AP 4, Heavy 4, Rending ===> Why the reference to its type, because the type modifies the way it works!
Thunderfire Cannon: Subterranean - Range 60", Str 4, AP -, Heavy 4, Blast, Tremor ===> Why the reference to its type, because the type modifies the way it works!
Devourer - Range: 18" Str: S-1, AP -, Assault2X, Living Ammunition, Max Str 6 ===> Why the reference to its type, because the type modifies the way it works!

They do not give every weapon a reference to its type in it's statline --- unless it changes the ability or the way the weapon works.

However, if the weapon does have a special or additional ability it is mentioned in the statline! No if's, and's, or but's!!!




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gwar is faster than I am and made the point first!

i don't know the space wolves codex well but from reading this i would give it to the wolf player. It says its a thunder hammer that can be used in range combat with profile X. Its still a thunder hammer. Those are my thoughts, i am in no means the smartest warhammer player but i would still give it to them.

Demogerg wrote:

Gwar! wrote:Except that "Laser" doesn't have any special rules.

Thunder Hammer does.

It isn't in the Profile

Thus it does not have the special rules.

It is THAT simple.

Except that "thunder hammer" is not a special rule, its an item which has special rules associated with it, and this item IS a thunder hammer

Thunder hammer is a item which can be used in close combat as a weapon. It has rules for the effect in close combat. It does not have rule for an effect in the shooting phase.

Gurilla wrote:

However, if the weapon does have a special or additional ability it is mentioned in the statline! No if's, and's, or but's!!!

Please read my above posts.

Demogerg wrote:
Yes, they may choose an ammunition type, which means that either

A. This special rule, (Special Issue Ammunition) which is not listed in the profile of the weapons applies to them, and they may still fire, hence a special rule can apply to weapons and not be in the weapon profile.
or B. This special rule, (Special Issue Ammunition) which is not listed in the profile for the weapons then definately does NOT apply to them, becuase you use ONLY the profile for the weapon, not the special rules that realtes to them but are not listed on said profile. In this case you CANNOT fire any rounds other than normal bolter rounds.

If A is true, sternguard are fine, and the Foehammer uses the special rules for being a thunder hammer in its shooting attack.
If B is ture, sternguard are broken, and the Foehammer does not use the special rules listed for being a thunder hammer, and we must go back and reevaluate the special rules for all shooting attacks in the entire game.

Yes, but the special rule DOES list the abilities of the special issued ammunition in a statline that REPLACES the standard boltgun statline. How can you not see that?

If they wanted the Foehammer to effect its target like a Thunder Hammer in the shooting phase they would have listed it as such...I am sorry that a Mini-Railgun is not enough for you, but I can't see how the wording of the rules can be misconstrued here....guess I am to logical.

Demogerg wrote:
Yes, they may choose an ammunition type, which means that either

A. This special rule, (Special Issue Ammunition) which is not listed in the profile of the weapons applies to them, and they may still fire, hence a special rule can apply to weapons and not be in the weapon profile.
or B. This special rule, (Special Issue Ammunition) which is not listed in the profile for the weapons then definately does NOT apply to them, becuase you use ONLY the profile for the weapon, not the special rules that realtes to them but are not listed on said profile. In this case you CANNOT fire any rounds other than normal bolter rounds.

If A is true, sternguard are fine, and the Foehammer uses the special rules for being a thunder hammer in its shooting attack.
If B is ture, sternguard are broken, and the Foehammer does not use the special rules listed for being a thunder hammer, and we must go back and reevaluate the special rules for all shooting attacks in the entire game.

False choice. The special ammunition rule replaces the bolter profile with 3 other profiles. The named "ammunition" types are in terms of rules 3 completely different weapons. The regular bolter profile remains an option if the sternguard choose not to use any of the special ammunition. Arjac's foe hammer has two profiles; one for close combat and one for shooting. The two profiles have nothing to do with each other.

Tri wrote:

Demogerg wrote:

Gwar! wrote:Except that "Laser" doesn't have any special rules.

Thunder Hammer does.

It isn't in the Profile

Thus it does not have the special rules.

It is THAT simple.

Except that "thunder hammer" is not a special rule, its an item which has special rules associated with it, and this item IS a thunder hammer

Thunder hammer is a item which can be used in close combat as a weapon. It has rules for the effect in close combat. It does not have rule for an effect in the shooting phase.

Thunder hammer is a special close combat weapon that has special rules that apply to it, normally this is only used in close combat, the Foehammer is an exception to the normal rules and it is a thunder hammer used as a shooting attack, you still follow the special rules associated with it. In this case, a model that suffers a wound from a thunder hammer has its I reduced to 1 untill the end of the next players assault phase.

i am with demogreg on this

Gurilla wrote:

Yes, but the special rule DOES list the abilities of the special issued ammunition in a statline that REPLACES the standard boltgun statline. How can you not see that?

If they wanted the Foehammer to effect its target like a Thunder Hammer in the shooting phase they would have listed it as such...I am sorry that a Mini-Railgun is not enough for you, but I can't see how the wording of the rules can be misconstrued here....guess I am to logical.

No, the special rule "Special Issue Ammunition" does not list the ammo types, it says "replaces with the one shown here" but none of the weapons listed there have the "Special Issue Ammunition" rule listed under their type. therefore none of those weapons are actually special issue ammo, because that special rule cannot apply to them unless you agree to A in my previous post.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Arschbombe wrote:
False choice. The special ammunition rule replaces the bolter profile with 3 other profiles. The named "ammunition" types are in terms of rules 3 completely different weapons. The regular bolter profile remains an option if the sternguard choose not to use any of the special ammunition. Arjac's foe hammer has two profiles; one for close combat and one for shooting. The two profiles have nothing to do with each other.

But you cannot select the 3 other profiles unless you agree that special rules can apply to shooting profiles without having the special rule listed in the weapons profile.

Demogerg wrote:Thunder hammer is a special close combat weapon that has special rules that apply to it, normally this is only used in close combat, the Foehammer is an exception to the normal rules and it is a thunder hammer used as a shooting attack, you still follow the special rules associated with it. In this case, a model that suffers a wound from a thunder hammer has its I reduced to 1 untill the end of the next players assault phase.

No the burden of proof is with you to prove that an effect that happens in the Assault phase happens during the shooting phase. It has a weapons profile that's all you use. If the weapon behaves differently then it must have an additional characteristic add to the end of the profile. That is how shooting works.

Tri wrote:

Demogerg wrote:Thunder hammer is a special close combat weapon that has special rules that apply to it, normally this is only used in close combat, the Foehammer is an exception to the normal rules and it is a thunder hammer used as a shooting attack, you still follow the special rules associated with it. In this case, a model that suffers a wound from a thunder hammer has its I reduced to 1 untill the end of the next players assault phase.

No the burden of proof is with you to prove that an effect that happens in the Assault phase happens during the shooting phase. It has a weapons profile that's all you use. If the weapon behaves differently then it must have an additional characteristic add to the end of the profile. That is how shooting works.

The proof is in the precedent.

some weapons have special rules that apply to them that are NOT listed in the weapon type, but are prefaced before the weapon profile. This is one of those cases. If you refute this case then you also refute that Sternguard cannot fire anything but their normal Bolter rounds.

Demogerg wrote:
No, the special rule "Special Issue Ammunition" does not list the ammo types, it says "replaces with the one shown here" but none of the weapons listed there have the "Special Issue Ammunition" rule listed under their type. therefore none of those weapons are actually special issue ammo, because that special rule cannot apply to them unless you agree to A in my previous post.

And your statement would be valid if the Special Issue Ammo rule wasn't a special rule for the unit. The unit uses its special rule, the weapon profile changes, and the model fires using the new profile. Where does the need for Special Issue Ammo on the profile come in?

Demogerg wrote:
The proof is in the precedent.

some weapons have special rules that apply to them that are NOT listed in the weapon type, but are prefaced before the weapon profile. This is one of those cases. If you refute this case then you also refute that Sternguard cannot fire anything but their normal Bolter rounds.

No you have a special rule that lists you may take the following Rounds and use them. Then lists the rounds and there profiles. Each profile telling you exactly how its used. Where as Foehammer tells you its a thunder hammer that can be thrown with the following profile. The profile tells you exactly how its used.

Going back you told what you are need to use the Foehammer, it is a thunder hammer (you can now use it in close combat) and it can be thrown (you can use this profile for a ranged attack)

You are missing the point….I am assuming intentionally…..even the special ammunition types list their special or additional abilities on their stat line. Every weapon that has a unique, special, or different ability lists it in the stat line.

Foehammer does not say Thunderhammer in the stat line. There are other unique weapons out there like Dante’s pistol, but they mention their special abilities in the weapon stat line.

I guess we shall see who is right when the FAQ comes out.

I know that the Rogue Trader events and tournaments out here have issued a FAQ that says what I stated....if it is not in the stat line you don't get it, hence Foe Hammer in the shooting phase does not count as a Thunder Hammer.

Demogerg wrote:
But you cannot select the 3 other profiles unless you agree that special rules can apply to shooting profiles without having the special rule listed in the weapons profile.

Uh, no. The sternguard have the special ammunition rule. They also have bolters. The bolter profile is irrelevant to the special ammunition rule. Fluff-wise, the sternguard are using their bolters to fire their magic bullets. But in game terms when they choose to fire their magic bullets, the bolter goes unused because they use the special ammunition profile instead of the bolter profile. It's just like chosing to fire your bolt pistol instead of your bolter so you can assault. The net effect of the special ammunition rule is similar to that of the missile launcher that can fire two kinds of ammunition. The mechanic is different because to list the ammunition types with the bolter entry would give every unit in the codex access to those special profiles.

Sternguard have a special rule, yes, but that special rule applies to the unit and the weapons they are firing, none of the weapon profiles listed on page 63 include the "special issue ammunition" rule, or anything to that effect, and thus cannot be associated with said special rule unless you agree that special rules can apply, and not be listed in thier shooting attack profile.

Gurilla wrote:I guess we shall see who is right when the FAQ comes out.

Oh to be young and innocent again

wyomingfox wrote:

Gurilla wrote:I guess we shall see who is right when the FAQ comes out.

Oh to be young and innocent again

LOL! Young I am not....not by a long shot....but I am hopeful that things will get rectified! So what if that hope is misplaced...LOL!

Demogerg wrote:rule applies to the unit and the weapons they are firing,

It replaces the weapons they are firing, actually.

kirsanth wrote:

Demogerg wrote:rule applies to the unit and the weapons they are firing,

It replaces the weapons they are firing, actually.

Irrelevant, the special rule has an effect on the weapon. This special rule is not listed as part of the weapon in its profile, and the special rule does not specifically mention which ammunition types it applies to. Unless you want to agree that a special rule can be applied to a weapon even if it is not in the weapon profile, then Sternguard only have Boltguns, and no special ammunition.

This debate is just space wolf players digging around for an easy button. The sternguard point is dumb, as they have a special rule with negates that.

Nowhere in the foehammers ranged profile does it mention thunderhammer. So it is a thunderhammer in close combat, and a railgun with a short range at range.

Every single other ranged weapon in the game states any special rules in the profile.

Here is another example. Yriel has a singing spear that ignores armor saves. So if he throws it, he can ignore the armor save of whatever he chucks it at. It does not say it is a singing spear that ignores armor saves with the profile of xxxx.

So this has degenerated into NO U and im right youre wrong as far as people wanting the TH rules to apply with shooting.

Eidolon wrote:Every single ranged weapon in the game states any special rules in the profile.

Fixed.

Demogerg wrote:Sternguard have a special rule, yes, but that special rule applies to the unit and the weapons they are firing, none of the weapon profiles listed on page 63 include the "special issue ammunition" rule, or anything to that effect, and thus cannot be associated with said special rule unless you agree that special rules can apply, and not be listed in thier shooting attack profile.

Again, no. You're hung up on the fluff. This is a discussion about rules. You want the rules to reflect fluff. Unfortunately they don't much of the time. Look at the unit entry in the codex:

(copied from GW site)
Unit Composition: 1 Space Marine Sergeant; 4-9 Veterans
Unit Type: Infantry
War Gear: Power armour; Boltgun; Bolt pistol; Special issue ammunition; Frag and krak grenades
Transport: May select a Drop Pod, Rhino or a Razorback.

Special Issue Ammunition is wargear. It is not a special rule that modfies the bolter profile. It is a special that allows for 3 kinds of shooting attacks instead of the bolter profile. What you want it seems to be:

Unit Composition: 1 Space Marine Sergeant; 4-9 Veterans
Unit Type: Infantry
War Gear: Power armour; Boltgun*; Bolt pistol; Frag and krak grenades
Transport: May select a Drop Pod, Rhino or a Razorback.
*may fire special ammunition. see page #...

But as has been pointed out numerous times in this thread, them's not the rules.

To paraphrase a line from a famous film: "luke, let go of the fluff, use the rules.".

kirsanth wrote:

Eidolon wrote:Every single ranged weapon in the game states any special rules in the profile.

Fixed.

Oh yeah, thats what i meant to say. Took me a second to realize I mistyped it. I should have spelled it out better.

Every single other ranged weapon in the game states any special rules in the profile. What makes ballsack cockfist and faphammer the exception?

Demogerk if you don't understand that +1 on the AP table equates to the same as AP1 I think that explains a lot in regards to the fallacies you present here.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:Demogerk if you don't understand that +1 on the AP table equates to the same as AP1 I think that explains a lot in regards to the fallacies you present here.

G

They do the same thing, they are not the same rule, I think you have failed to perceive what I wrote.

Do not insult me over semantics.

Modquisition on GBF lets play nice. Everyone lets remember Rule #1.

Arschbombe wrote:

Demogerg wrote:Sternguard have a special rule, yes, but that special rule applies to the unit and the weapons they are firing, none of the weapon profiles listed on page 63 include the "special issue ammunition" rule, or anything to that effect, and thus cannot be associated with said special rule unless you agree that special rules can apply, and not be listed in thier shooting attack profile.

Again, no. You're hung up on the fluff. This is a discussion about rules. You want the rules to reflect fluff. Unfortunately they don't much of the time. Look at the unit entry in the codex:

(copied from GW site)
Unit Composition: 1 Space Marine Sergeant; 4-9 Veterans
Unit Type: Infantry
War Gear: Power armour; Boltgun; Bolt pistol; Special issue ammunition; Frag and krak grenades
Transport: May select a Drop Pod, Rhino or a Razorback.

Special Issue Ammunition is wargear. It is not a special rule that modfies the bolter profile. It is a special that allows for 3 kinds of shooting attacks instead of the bolter profile. What you want it seems to be:

Unit Composition: 1 Space Marine Sergeant; 4-9 Veterans
Unit Type: Infantry
War Gear: Power armour; Boltgun*; Bolt pistol; Frag and krak grenades
Transport: May select a Drop Pod, Rhino or a Razorback.
*may fire special ammunition. see page #...

But as has been pointed out numerous times in this thread, them's not the rules.

To paraphrase a line from a famous film: "luke, let go of the fluff, use the rules.".

I am not reading into fluff, the rules are that they have special issue ammunition, the weapon profiles listed on page 63 are not actually noted as being special issue ammunition, they are merely implied to be related to the special rules associated with "Special Issue Ammunition" special rules.

Special Rules not listed on the weapon profile, but apply to the weapon. That is what this entire arguement is about, and no one has yet to disprove that there is a precedent for its existance. To crack jokes as an aside is to distract from the rules discussion at hand.

We can argue about this for another 20 pages and minds are not going to change. There have been some good arguements from both sides and it does not look like the parties involved will be changing their minds anytime soon.

This is going to be something that hopefully will be covered by the SW FAQ whenever it comes out. In the meantime we may as well make sure to talk about it pre-game with our opponents and come up with a solution suited to the game at hand.

augustus5 wrote:We can argue about this for another 20 pages and minds are not going to change. There have been some good arguements from both sides and it does not look like the parties involved will be changing their minds anytime soon.

This is going to be something that hopefully will be covered by the SW FAQ whenever it comes out. In the meantime we may as well make sure to talk about it pre-game with our opponents and come up with a solution suited to the game at hand.

I'll admit, HWIPI will be that it does not. However, IMO RAW it does. The FAQ will most likely support the oposite position to the one I have described, however as we all know, FAQs are not hard rules, and only an Errata will change the RAW in this case.

augustus5 wrote:This is going to be something that hopefully will be covered by the SW FAQ whenever it comes out.

Oh, Hai -Waves-


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Eidolon wrote:This debate is just space wolf players digging around for an easy button.

Excuse me, I am a 10 year SW player, and I am saying it doesn't.

Don't generalize please.

Demogerg wrote:

Green Blow Fly wrote:Demogerk if you don't understand that +1 on the AP table equates to the same as AP1 I think that explains a lot in regards to the fallacies you present here.

G

They do the same thing, they are not the same rule, I think you have failed to perceive what I wrote.

Do not insult me over semantics.

Frazz I did not mean this to come across as mean spirited, rude, insolent or just plain outright nasty. I was just saying...



G

Coolio GBF

Yah! Rockfist sounds like someone who spanked it then fell asleep before they cleaned up. Hurrrrrr!

G

Gwar! wrote:

augustus5 wrote:This is going to be something that hopefully will be covered by the SW FAQ whenever it comes out.

Oh, Hai -Waves-


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Eidolon wrote:This debate is just space wolf players digging around for an easy button.

Excuse me, I am a 10 year SW player, and I am saying it doesn't.

Don't generalize please.

Yus, it was a broad sweeping generalization, I apologize.

Demogerg wrote:
I am not reading into fluff, the rules are that they have special issue ammunition, the weapon profiles listed on page 63 are not actually noted as being special issue ammunition, they are merely implied to be related to the special rules associated with "Special Issue Ammunition" special rules.

Special Rules not listed on the weapon profile, but apply to the weapon. That is what this entire arguement is about, and no one has yet to disprove that there is a precedent for its existance. To crack jokes as an aside is to distract from the rules discussion at hand.

You are mixing in the fluff because you continue to conflate the bolter with the special ammunition rules. They are two completely separate things. Only in the fluff description do the bolter and the special ammo have a connection. The rules have no relationship. Special Issue Ammuntion is not a special rule that modifies the bolter profile. It is wargear that the sternguard carry in addition to their bolters. This is shown in the codex entry that I posted and by the SM codex summary page which has a separate profile for each special ammunition type: hellfire, kraken, vengeance etc.

Perhaps it would have been better if they had created a new Sternguard Bolter that listed all the firing profiles with it like they do for missile launchers and whirlwind launchers. But they didn't. The naming of the rule Special Issue Ammunition is unfortunate, but it has no bearing on how the rule plays. A unit does not need a bolter in their wargear list to use the Special Issue Ammunition rule. They only need SIA.

@ Gwar - 5\6? nah, its way less than that.

I will allow it in games against me. I don't play space wolves or plan on doing so. I think this ability would add an interesting twist to games and I have to say again that it really is not a game breaking ability.

Carni's are already hosed by JAWS and DPs, Greater Demons, and maybe the occasional tomb spider are the only things that really can be affected by this and even then it takes a lot of points, a lot of setup, and some luck.

I can certainly understand you would feel that way.

G

When is Foehammer not a thunder hammer? When used as a ranged weapon with the following profile:

<INSERT FOEHAMMER RANGED PROFILE HERE>

Permissive ruleset folks. Same argument that was used for 12" bike assaults is trying to be used here. If it doesn't have it in the ranged weapon profile it does not exist.

Brother Ramses wrote:When is Foehammer not a thunder hammer? When used as a ranged weapon with the following profile:

<INSERT FOEHAMMER RANGED PROFILE HERE>

Permissive ruleset folks. Same argument that was used for 12" bike assaults is trying to be used here. If it doesn't have it in the ranged weapon profile it does not exist.

Except that the rules for the Foehammer explicitly state that it IS a thunderhammer that can be used at range, and being a thunderhammer you must follow thunderhammer special rules, which include reducing initiative to 1 if a model suffers a wound.

so a Foehammer is Always a thunderhammer untill the rules tell you it is NOT a thunderhammer.

There is a precedent for rules being listed for weapons but not being listed under the weapon profile, and I have presented the Sternguard example above.

So here on my side of the arguement I have:
RAW text
Precedent based on previous assumptions taken as rules.

on that side of the arguement you have:
the assumption that the special rules for a shooting attack start and end with the weapon profile.

Please point out where it says this exact sentance:

Foehammer uses the Thunder Hammer Special Rules in the Shooting Phase.

Oh look, it doesn't!

Demogerg wrote:

Brother Ramses wrote:When is Foehammer not a thunder hammer? When used as a ranged weapon with the following profile:

<INSERT FOEHAMMER RANGED PROFILE HERE>

Permissive ruleset folks. Same argument that was used for 12" bike assaults is trying to be used here. If it doesn't have it in the ranged weapon profile it does not exist.

Except that the rules for the Foehammer explicitly state that it IS a thunderhammer that can be used at range, and being a thunderhammer you must follow thunderhammer special rules, which include reducing initiative to 1 if a model suffers a wound.

so a Foehammer is Always a thunderhammer untill the rules tell you it is NOT a thunderhammer.

There is a precedent for rules being listed for weapons but not being listed under the weapon profile, and I have presented the Sternguard example above.

So here on my side of the arguement I have:
RAW text
Precedent based on previous assumptions taken as rules.

on that side of the arguement you have:
the assumption that the special rules for a shooting attack start and end with the weapon profile.

The fluff description states that it is a thunder hammer however it gives a very specific and concise weapon profile to follow when used as a ranged weapon. I am not arguing that it is or isn't a thunder hammer in the fluff description. I am pointing out that when used as a ranged weapon, a specific weapon profile is given for Foehammer and it does not include the special rules for a thunder hammer. That is RAW.

The fluff description all says that it is a rune etched weapon. So does it wound demons on 2+ like a rune priest's rune weapon? Or does it add +1str like a BT runic weapon?

Brother Ramses wrote:The fluff description all says that it is a rune etched weapon. So does it wound demons on 2+ like a rune priest's rune weapon? Or does it add +1str like a BT runic weapon?

Does it Blend?

Gwar! wrote:

Brother Ramses wrote:The fluff description all says that it is a rune etched weapon. So does it wound demons on 2+ like a rune priest's rune weapon? Or does it add +1str like a BT runic weapon?

Does it Blend?

I was joking since the other "camp" wants to use fluff description as a basis for rules debate.

I am calling upon the powers of the MODS to lock this thread. In the words of the immortal Yakface...

Locking now.

Demogerg wrote:
There is a precedent for rules being listed for weapons but not being listed under the weapon profile, and I have presented the Sternguard example above.

Your example is demonstrably wrong, yet for some reason you cling to it. Special Issue Ammunition is wargear that does not need a bolter to work.

So here on my side of the arguement I have:
RAW text
Precedent based on previous assumptions taken as rules.

on that side of the arguement you have:
the assumption that the special rules for a shooting attack start and end with the weapon profile.

No, what you have is wishful thinking and a desire to use a cool combination. The RAW clearly indicates what the foehammer does as a shooting attack. You're making the assumption that effects thunder hammers produce in close combat must also apply to a ranged shooting profile.

Green Blow Fly wrote:I am calling upon the powers of the MODS to lock this thread. In the words of the immortal Yakface...

Locking now.

The Cranky Djinni has been summoned!

Your wish is granted.