I play Orks, so I don't have the Necron codex in front of me to refer to, but:

From what I've read the rules entry for the Monolith states that weapons with special rules like melta, lance, and "augmented strength" do not work against it. Then it makes a sweeping statement to the effect that "on a practical level, this means that weapons must use their base strength plus the roll of a single die."

This came up when I charged his Monolith with a PK nob. Normally a charging PK nob is Str9 (Str4, x2 for the PK, then +1 for furious Charge), but he argued that both the x2 and the +1 represented an "augmented strength" that would not work. Obviously this is pretty devastating to the Ork army, since PKs are our best anti-tank weapons.

As it was, we decided to count the x2 for the PK but not the +1 for charging. Even this was a blow, because it means that only a PK warboss could ever pen a monolith.

So - what is "augmented strength"? Thanks!

"Attacks which count the target's AV as being less than it is do not do so against the Monolith. Similarly weapons that get additional AP dice (such as chainfists, monstrous creatures or melta weapons) do not get the extra dice"
I'd say you can use the power claws.

There is a discussion of this here:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/135009.page#135427

In the end the strength of the model is augmented, not the weapon by a PK or PF. You would get your S 9 (2x S + 1) but if you had a chain fist not the extra d6

C'mon, this is even answered in GWs own FAQs. Yes, power fists (and therefor power klaws) get are double the users strength against the Monolith. It's unaugmented strength of the weapon, and the PF/PK unaugmented strength is 2xST of the user. You do not get the +1 tho.

So the doubling issue was addressed. Thank you. Regarding the +1, and going back to the argument used in the linked thread (the difference between the weapon's strength and the model's strength) it appears that the Furious Charge bonus should still apply. The Furious Charge rule states that "models with this skill...add +1 to their Initiative and Strength..." Furious Charge has no effect on the Str of the model's weapon. Am I missing something?

That was my interpretation as well, although I can certainly see an argument being made the other way as well. When (someday) Necrons get a new dex maybe they will word the rule a bit more clearly...

It is very clear to me. The strength of your nob is 4. The unaugmented strength of a power klaw is 8.

Fearspect wrote:It is very clear to me. The strength of your nob is 4. The unaugmented strength of a power klaw is 8.

Well again, the PF/PK does not have a strength. It "doubles the user's Strength." (page 42, little book) The model's Strength goes (in this case) from 4 to 8, and then from 8 to 9 for Furious Charge. I could see how you might call the FC bonus an "augmentation" (although that term is not really defined), but I don't see how you call it an augmentation "to a weapon." The PF/PK is not being augmented in any way.

Doesn't matter what you consider the +1 for Furious Charge. You don't get it. The current (stealth reprint) of the Necron codex says all you get is unaugmented strength of the weapon + 1d6. So taht's all you get. Add +1 in there for Furious Charge, it's no longer UA st + 1d6, is it?

Don is clearly a man of great conviction, and I won't try to change his mind here. He (and Iron Fist) can play however they like.

Having said that, the manager of GW Fairfax agrees with some of the other posters here - the Furious Charge bonus is inherent to the Ork model, and does not pertain to the weapon. Because Living Metal applies only to weapons, the armor pen of a PK nob is unchanged: 9+D6 on an assault; 8+D6 thereafter. Based on this reading of the rules and the opinion of local GW, that's how my group will play it.

don_mondo wrote:Doesn't matter what you consider the +1 for Furious Charge. You don't get it. The current (stealth reprint) of the Necron codex says all you get is unaugmented strength of the weapon + 1d6. So taht's all you get. Add +1 in there for Furious Charge, it's no longer UA st + 1d6, is it?

Furious charge specifically augments the Strength characteristic of the model it does nothing to the strength of the weapon weiklded by the model.

USR Pg 75

As Furious Charge augments the strength of the model and not the weapon models with furious charge will most definitely get the +1S on the charge. Relate it back to if this were to actually happen; How would the fact that Monolith has living metal in any way shape or form affect the Ork from flipping out and gaining the +1S?

Now RAW, the Powerklaw/fist SHOULD NOT be getting the double strength value as per: "Any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single D6 no matter what"

But then the Necron FAQ comes in to play and decides to give Ork armies a fighting chance against the Monolith and rules that Powerfists/klaws do still double their S.

TL;DR PK nob = S10 when assaulting Monolith

Firstly, S9 as additions are *after* multipliers.

Secondly, S8 is the unaugmented strength of the PK. Now, when you try to use S9 is this a different, nay an *augmented* strength? Why it is!

Meaning you dont get it.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Secondly, S8 is the unaugmented strength of the PK. .

Why do people keep saying this? Can someone cite a page in the rulebook that says "A Powerfist or Powerklaw is Strength 8."? Instead the rules say that it "doubles the strength of the user." (emphasis mine). This difference is not trivial.

edit: Nevermind - Kadros makes the point I should have posted. It's a weapon vs model thing. People are getting hung up on the "unaugmented" thing - as I did before I understood the nuances of the Living Metal rule.

Furious Charge augments the strength of the model as it is related to the model assaulting regardless of what is being assaulted.

Living metal only affects weapons that would augment the users strenght/AP/whatever. As Furious Charge is not a weapon but a skill that augments the strength of the model and not the weapon, I honestly do not see how it could be more clear? The Living metal entry even goes out of its way to specify weapon (as opposed to model) numerous times.

Yes, and the Strength of the User is S4 at this point.

Now, when you try to add furious charge, which remember comes in *after* multiplication, you get a different value to S8.

Also, nosferatu, I'm sure this is correct but where is it stated that additions from USRs come in after multiplications? I've got a couple of games coming up against Orks and it might come in handy.

Edit: nevermind "Multiple Modifiers" in the BRB

And the rules of mathematics

Kadros wrote:Furious Charge augments the strength of the model as it is related to the model assaulting regardless of what is being assaulted.

Living metal only affects weapons that would augment the users strenght/AP/whatever. As Furious Charge is not a weapon but a skill that augments the strength of the model and not the weapon, I honestly do not see how it could be more clear? The Living metal entry even goes out of its way to specify weapon (as opposed to model) numerous times.

This sums up how I see it exactly, clearly the models strength is 9, the weapon has no str value at all. On top of that, a necron player fighting an ork player over the difference between str 8 and 9 on one nob wielding a PK (or any other similar situation) seems petty.

D'Ork wrote:Don is clearly a man of great conviction, and I won't try to change his mind here. He (and Iron Fist) can play however they like.

Having said that, the manager of GW Fairfax agrees with some of the other posters here - the Furious Charge bonus is inherent to the Ork model, and does not pertain to the weapon. Because Living Metal applies only to weapons, the armor pen of a PK nob is unchanged: 9+D6 on an assault; 8+D6 thereafter. Based on this reading of the rules and the opinion of local GW, that's how my group will play it.

Yep, and at one time the GW staff at Springfield Mall thought that power weapons only worked on the models in btb with the wielder and that all other models that took wounds from it got their regular saves. If I had a dollar for every time I have corrected a GW staff member, retail or otherwise, I'd own half the company. Point being, GW staff, especially the retail guys, can be (and quite often are) wrong.

Bone of contention, Furious charge. It adds +1 to the wielders strength. Great. The Monolith rules state that you get the unaugmented strength of the weapon plus 1d6, nothing more. If you add a +1 to the wielders strength, you're adding something more, aren't you? That's the bottom line, the Necron Codex rules specify what you get, and that's all you get.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Viper217 wrote:

Kadros wrote:Furious Charge augments the strength of the model as it is related to the model assaulting regardless of what is being assaulted.

Living metal only affects weapons that would augment the users strenght/AP/whatever. As Furious Charge is not a weapon but a skill that augments the strength of the model and not the weapon, I honestly do not see how it could be more clear? The Living metal entry even goes out of its way to specify weapon (as opposed to model) numerous times.

This sums up how I see it exactly, clearly the models strength is 9, the weapon has no str value at all. On top of that, a necron player fighting an ork player over the difference between str 8 and 9 on one nob wielding a PK (or any other similar situation) seems petty.

And if it's a Nob squad with 5 or 6 or more of those Power Klaws?

Bone of contention, Furious charge. It adds +1 to the wielders strength. Great. The Monolith rules state that you get the unaugmented strength of the weapon plus 1d6, nothing more. If you add a +1 to the wielders strength, you're adding something more, aren't you? That's the bottom line, the Necron Codex rules specify what you get, and that's all you get.

Why would you post something that disagrees with the point youre trying to make?

Furious charge modifys the MODELS strength, NOT the power fists/whatever weapon hes wielding, weapon =/= model.

Bone of contention, Furious charge. It adds +1 to the wielders strength. Great. The Monolith rules state that you get the unaugmented strength of the weapon plus 1d6, nothing more. If you add a +1 to the wielders strength, you're adding something more, aren't you? That's the bottom line, the Necron Codex rules specify what you get, and that's all you get.

Can you point out where it says the unaugmented strength of the USER in the living metal rules? Furious Charge has nothing to do with what weapon is being used, living metal ONLY applies to weapons (as specified multiple times in its entry)

In conclusion; Nob with PK = S9 against monolith in Close because the +1S is conferred by a USR and not a weapon, and because of that fact the living metal rule has nothing to do with it.

don_mondo wrote:
Bone of contention, Furious charge. It adds +1 to the wielders strength. Great. The Monolith rules state that you get the unaugmented strength of the weapon plus 1d6, nothing more. If you add a +1 to the wielders strength, you're adding something more, aren't you? That's the bottom line, the Necron Codex rules specify what you get, and that's all you get.

Yes, I'm adding something more - to the model. Nothing in the description of the Living Metal rule has any effect on the armor penetration calculations based on a model's strength. Models and weapons are not the same thing.






Automatically Appended Next Post:
I agree that the difference is significant, BTW. Str 9 can pen the monolith - Str 8 only glances.

As a Necron player, I agree, the difference is significant. but just because it gives them a greater chance to junk my monolith doesnt mean I can ignore RAW

You're adding something more to the penetration roll. Per living metal, you can't have it. Doesn't matter where the additional bonuses to penetration come from. All you're allowed is the unaugmented strength of the weapon, in this case we know that the weapon strength is 2 x users strength, and 1d6. If you add anything to this from anywhere, you've changed the math formula and it no longer falls within the Living Metal rules. It's really that simple.
And for the record, I do not play Necrons, used to play Orks. So I'm not arguing for my own benefit.

Sigh...

D'Ork wrote:Sigh...

Hehehehhee, my feelings exactly.........

If you add anything to this from anywhere, you've changed the math formula and it no longer falls within the Living Metal rules

sorry don mondo but youre wrong, if living metal rule said the unmodified strength of the model yes, furious charge, while adding strength to the model isnt effecting the weapon.

A powerfists strength is NOT 2x the users, a pwoerfist HAS no base strength, it MODIFIES the users strength.

Also, increased str is not a bonus to penetration, an extra dice to add to your str is.

Yeah, keeping a sense of humor about things helps immensely.

KDS - I suggest you read the rules for a powerfist, which is defined as havbing a Strength double the users.

Have you arrived at a strength other than double the users strength? Then living metal tells you to feth off. Oh, and its why tank hunters doesnt work either - that isnt an extra D6 either.

Mabye you need to reread the rules on powerfists nos?

pg 42 brb, heading : pwoer fists
"a power fist (or power "klaw")is an armored gauntlet surrounded by a disruptive energy field. A power fist is a power weapon, and also doubles the users strength (up to a maximum of 10) Powerfists however, are difficult and cumbersome to use, so attacks with a powerfist are always delivered at Init 1..."


That doesnt say a powerfists strength is 2x the wielders, it says that by having a powerfist/klaw equipped the models strength statistic is modified by 2x, the pwoerfist never has a strength statistic ever. The only way to augment the "strength" of the ccw is to add another dice for armor penetration.

Furious charge modifies the models strength and init, not the weapons, also not an augmented strength of the WEAPON.

People need to stop getting hung up on the "unaugmented" part. This only refers to the weapon, not the Strenght. The living metal rule ONLY affects the following:

Lance, Melta, Blaster, Monstrous Creatures and Chainfists.

By the same token, Tank hunters also works against the monolith. As you're still rolling for penetration with S + single D6 while the +1 gets added after the roll.

Except you are no longer rolling S+D6, are you? You're rolling S+D6+1

Incorrect, you're rolling S+D6 and adding +1. Nowhere in the entry says that "You roll S+D6 and thats the final result"
It just specifies that you can't generate more dice on the initial roll through melta's chainfists etc

I feel like we're arguing with a radio.

So why is this thread even continuing when there has been an official FAQ from GW regarding this?

What part of "no matter what" are you struggling with?

Are you rolling for armour penetration? Then you get unaugmented strength and a single D6 no matter what

You are trying to say S+D6+1 == S+D6. which is so incorrect it is silly....

The unaugmented strength of what, nos? Of the weapon, or of the model?

Let's say i'm struggling with it just as much as you guys are with the whole Model vs weapon thing (Living metal doesn't care about the stats on the model, models dont have melta, blaster, lance or chainfist attacks, weapons do).

Honestly I've dissected the living metal entry as much as anyone could have. In my games Nobs with PK's and Furious Charge will be S9 when attacking the lith, and Tank hunters will also work. Luckily I don't think this'll be too much of a problem seeing as we're across the world from eachother and the chances of us ever playing a game of 40k are pretty much nil.

Weapon.

So S (of the weapon) + D6 is all you ever get. Trying to add +1 for Tank Hunters? Not allowed, as you are then rolling S+D6+1.

Nos, whaty you dont get is that it works a little differentlyly.

Yes it is strength of tthe model + d6 only ever for pen, however the strength of an ork nob on the charge is 9, to find the str value you add d6 to you look at the final stat of his str, then add d6 to that and you have sucessfully done str + d6 only.

Tank hunters however, wouldnt apply, and would be negated by living metal, as they " add +1 to their penetration roll" which is not the same as an ork nob becoming str 9 for the duration of that assault phase via furious charge and a power klaw.

I'm leaving this, because the point nos is trying to make has been refuted 13 times (I counted!) in this thread.

D'Ork - the point about S+D6 is all you ever get? Or another point?

Given that it is from the codex (stealth second printing) deos meaqn it is a tricky one to refute.

Wait, so tank hunter doesn't count against a lith?

No Tank Hunter won't affect a Monolith. It adds +1 to the penetration roll.

D'Ork wrote:

Heah, its a pic of GWAR!

Infreak wrote:No Tank Hunter won't affect a Monolith. It adds +1 to the penetration roll.

Hm, so I gave my buddy an advantage over the weekend and he still couldn't bust my liths. Hah.

Just to put it another way from an outside source to help make sense for nos -

instead of thinking: str*2+d6+1=result

think: (str*2+1)+d6=result

You aren't adjusting the bonus to the attack by +1... the +1 is inherent to the strength of the furious charge attack. Hope I might have put it another way to make sense.

...and the strength has still be augmented by Furious Charge.

That is the "unaugmented strength" part. Unless you claim the weapon has no strength, in which case it doesnt work.

Well, that would be the result based on what they're saying.
1. The only penetration you can use against a monolith is the unaugmented strength of the weapon and 1d6
2. Powerfist isn;t a weapon, or has no strength or whatever they're claiming.
3. Result, a model with a powerfist gets ST 0 + 1d6 armor pen against a monolith.

Now that's obviously quite silly, but that is what the "I get +1 for Furious Charge because it's the users strength not the weapons strength" argument results in..............

Meltagombs also roll 0+D6

1. The only penetration you can use against a monolith is the unaugmented strength of the weapon and 1d6
2. Powerfist isn;t a weapon, or has no strength or whatever they're claiming.
3. Result, a model with a powerfist gets ST 0 + 1d6 armor pen against a monolith.


1. the unaugmented strength of the WEAPON, furious charge does NOT modify the pwoerfists NONEXISTENT strength.

2. you are correct. it is a special ccw with no str value, that merely doubles its users strength by being equipped, and acts as a power weapon in close combat.

3. incorrect a model with powerfist gets (str*2) + d6, or [(str*2)+1] + d6 with furious charge.

And as you point out - the WEAPON HAS NO STRENGTH.

Which means you get 0+D6 against monoliths.

Or, you realise that the user is still hitting and as such their unaugmented powerfist strength is 2S, and that therefore 2S+1 has been augmented.

No, the powerfist having no str does not mean 0+d6, you are using the models strength for armor pen purposes, but thats still not the strength of the "weapon" being modified, but the wielder.

The models strength can be augmented all you want, the restriction is on weapons, which only really applys against shooting attacks and meltabomb type things.

in the end it will equate into strength + d6, as you need to find the nobs current strength for that assault phase you would see he has a power klaw and assaulted { [(4*2)+1] }, so his strength is 9, the power klaw still has no strength and youre using the nobs strength, not the nonexistent str of the pwoer fist/klaw for pen rolls.

these two points are not mutually exclusive....

see page 63 BRB assaulting vehicles section; subheading armor pen in close combat

armor penetration is worked out the same way as in shooting (d6+ THE STRENGTH OF THE ATTACKER) ..." note it does NOT say d6+ the strength of the weapon.

The arguement is being made that a power fist doubles a model's strength, and furious charge adds +1 to a model's strength.

Neither is modifying a weapon.

So when a model hits a monolith, we use the model's str to compute the chances of a pen or glance. Any time a model strikes in cc we use the model's strength, so any effect that changes a model's strength is not affected by living metal. In cc weapons do not generally have a strength, its always the model that has a strength. (always keeping in mind that weird things such as a wreckin ball may perhaps be different)

Now tank hunters adds to the pen roll, so that effect is exactly what living metal prevents.


So since a power fist/ klaw and furious charge both modify a model's strength and not a weapon's strength...living metal doesnt apply, is the idea in this arguement.


Sliggoth

However the issue is you are using a weapon - the powerfist. You are told you *have* to use the weapon when making your close combat attacks.

yes, and when you looka t how you conduct an attack against a vehicle in close combat, it specifically says to use the strength of the "ATTACKER" the models strength is not inherently his weapons, especially as ccws dont have str values.

So you have an issue that the weapon you are forced to use doesnt have a strength value...meaning you get no value for armour penetration.

No, as when rolling for armor penetration in close combat against a vehicle, you're told to roll with the models strength, it never states weapon a single time in the armor penetration rolls in close combat section under assaulting vehicles heading..

Except it does when you are told how to resolve close combat attacks to begin with. You are told you MUST use your special close combat weapon if you have one. So you are using a weapon that you have agreed has no strength.

OR, you agree that the attacker is taking the place of the "weapon" in Living Metal, but this means FC does not work as you are augmenting the stgrength of the weapon.

Essentially you either get 0+D6 or 8+D6. Your choice.

kill dem stunties wrote:yes, and when you looka t how you conduct an attack against a vehicle in close combat, it specifically says to use the strength of the "ATTACKER" the models strength is not inherently his weapons, especially as ccws dont have str values.

kill dem stunties wrote:No, as when rolling for armor penetration in close combat against a vehicle, you're told to roll with the models strength, it never states weapon a single time in the armor penetration rolls in close combat section under assaulting vehicles heading..

And those general rules are superceded by the Monolith special Living Metal rules which say to use the strength of the weapon................

no, it says the str of the weapopn can never be augmented, which in effect means against ccws it doesnt do very much at all, against shooting weapons with an actual statline thathave a defined str value however, you will get no bonuses of any kind.

What shooting weapons ever have an "augmented strength"?

Close combat weapons *must* be used in close combat.

I was actually just about to ask that, what ranged attacks ever get augmented strength?

Honestly, I have to agree with a buddy of mine in that this is a just a clear cut case of 4th and 5th clashing in the worst way.

Actually 3rd ed - Living metal is *old*

All cc attacks use the str of the attacker. In a cc attack, the str of the weapon (if any) is entirely irrelevant to the str of the model.

A model armed with a bolter and a model armed with a melta gun both attack at the str of the models, not the weapons.

So yes, it is quite important what the str of the model may be, and no it doesnt matter if the weapon (if any) has any str at all. So the fact that a power fist/ klaw doubles the str of the model is quite important, because it is the str of the MODEL that we are concerned with here. The living metal rule is concerned with str of weapons, not models.

So a power fist or any other rule that adds to the str of a model is not affected by the living metal rule.

Any rule that adds to the str of a weapon, or adds to armor penetration IS affected of course, but living metal doesnt care about anything that affects a model's str.....


Sliggoth

nosferatu: I think maybe Rending weapons like Assault Cannons is what they were trying to referring to (yes, not strength, but more damage which kind of comes out to the same thing).

Well, not really - plus it falls foul of the "never more than S+D6" clause...

Out of curiosity Nos, would you count an orks big choppa for the str of an attack made against a monolith? Or any other CC weapon which would modify the users str in CC?

2. you are correct. it is a special ccw with no str value, that merely doubles its users strength by being equipped, and acts as a power weapon in close combat.

This is were the argument breaks down. Sorry for coming in late but you don't get 2xs for being equiped with a powerfist. For instance a striking scorpion Exarch with scorpions claw and scorpion chainsword doesn't have S7, he can choose S4 or S6. The reason being you only get the bonus for attacking with that weapon, i.e. you strike at Sx2 for hiting with a powerfist, or that the strength of the powerfist weapon is 2xS.

If you claim that you strike with the models S then which can be "augmented all you want" then you are striking at S5 (models S augmented by the FC bonus), not S9 as again that mean you are using the weilders strength not the weapons strength and as pointed out if you are using the weapons strength you can augment it.

TBH i was kinda surprised to see this entire discussion come up and have enjoyed reading the comments, however I decide to chip in

Decided to have a look through verious rules sections of the rules book blah blah blah and then decided to take a gander at the codex, joys of living with an ex staffer have the 'dex for most armies, anyway i digress(sp?)...

Now the version I am looking at says the following:

Necron 'dex pg 21

Living Metal: The monolith is made of living necron metal which is not only self-repairing but is capable of adapting its structure to resist incoming attacks. Attacks which count the target's armour value as being less then it really is (such as bright lances and blasters) do not do so against the monolith. Similarly, weapons that get additional armour penetration dice (such as chainfists, monstrous creatures or melta weapons) do not get the extra dice against the monolith. Ordance weapons still roll 2D6 for armour penetration and select the highest score.

Anyone notice the complete lack of reference to the words "augmented strength"...

Is it possible that there was more then one stealth print of this book? The ISBN for this book is 1-84151-190-7 with a publish date of 01/01/02 can be checked here (if you dont trust links of forums google bookfinder4u)

Anyway enjoy and good luck deciding on a resolution for this one

Yes, you have the older version.

the one with the added line "in practice...." has a similar ISBN - instead it is 84154

ah right oh, at this point i shall STFU

It's amazing that this is still a topic of debate given the fact that Monoliths and the Living Metal rule have been around for almost a decade now.

I'm not even going to back up my statement with any sort of research because it's all been clearly pointed out. Some people refuse to accept it though. An Ork with a Power Claw and Furious Charge assaulting a Monolith is S9.

@nos, an example of augmented strength for a shooting weapon would be a meltagun at half range, which is augmenting the end strength of the meltaguns penetration.


Next.

pg 42 brb, heading : pwoer fists
"a power fist (or power "klaw")is an armored gauntlet surrounded by a disruptive energy field. A power fist is a power weapon, and also doubles the users strength (up to a maximum of 10) Powerfists however, are difficult and cumbersome to use, so attacks with a powerfist are always delivered at Init 1..."


That says a powerfist doubles your strength if equipped, not if swinging with it.

The strength of the Power Klaw is based on the strength of the model. How can furious charge not be augmenting it?

And GWAR, that's what I tell people about meltabombs if they try to claim it's still 8+2d6.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except it does when you are told how to resolve close combat attacks to begin with. You are told you MUST use your special close combat weapon if you have one. So you are using a weapon that you have agreed has no strength.

OR, you agree that the attacker is taking the place of the "weapon" in Living Metal, but this means FC does not work as you are augmenting the stgrength of the weapon.

Nos, I hope you realize that the argument you are making logically leads to the conclusion that NO close-combat attacks EVER get a strength value against Monoliths, unless the attacker has no CCW whatsoever? Because if they have a CCW, they have to use it, and since it's a CCW it has no strength. . .

The problem with you argument is that you are becoming confused about how one "uses" a CCW.

When you "use" a CCW, you DO NOT EVER reference the Strength of the CCW. Instead, you reference the CCW rules, which tell you to use THE USER'S Strength, with any modifications the weapon may grant.

As a result, the argument "the weapon has no strength therefore it gets 0+d6" is flawed in a second way; The Living Metal rules only applies to attacks BY WEAPONS, and close-combat attacks are made by MODELS, with the weapons merely modifying the effects of their (own, inherent) attacks. Therefore, Living Metal, by the strictest interpretation, has no effect in close-combat whatsoever.

I suspect that if the models benefit in any way from the weapons, they are attacking with their weapons in CC.

RobPro wrote:I suspect that if the models benefit in any way from the weapons, they are attacking with their weapons in CC.

Certainly. But "attacking with their weapons" does not equate to "using the weapon's Strength value", which is what is necessary for Living Metal to activate.

Now, when using grenades or meltabombs, Living Metal DOES activate, because those weapons use their own, separate Strength value.

BeRzErKeR wrote:

RobPro wrote:I suspect that if the models benefit in any way from the weapons, they are attacking with their weapons in CC.

Certainly. But "attacking with their weapons" does not equate to "using the weapon's Strength value", which is what is necessary for Living Metal to activate.

Now, when using grenades or meltabombs, Living Metal DOES activate, because those weapons use their own, separate Strength value.

Wrong. Grenades do not have any strength value. They simply have an armour penetration value of a number + a certain amount of dice.

Gwar! wrote:

BeRzErKeR wrote:

RobPro wrote:I suspect that if the models benefit in any way from the weapons, they are attacking with their weapons in CC.

Certainly. But "attacking with their weapons" does not equate to "using the weapon's Strength value", which is what is necessary for Living Metal to activate.

Now, when using grenades or meltabombs, Living Metal DOES activate, because those weapons use their own, separate Strength value.

Wrong. Grenades do not have any strength value. They simply have an armour penetration value of a number + a certain amount of dice.

Granted. In that case, the 0+1d6 argument makes sense for grenades, since you're supposed to treat nonexistent stats as 0.

Nos' ability to troll this entire forum is astounding, he must be some kind of geni-CREEEEEEEEEEEEEED!

Ok, seriously. A monolith only negates meltas, lances and stuff. It doesn't affect powerfists or furious charge. GW has it FAQed that PFs get their double strength. FC just happens to the unit itself as a result of charging.

The part about CCWs having no strength and not doing anything is debatable, but that is the direction most sides of the argument seems to be heading. I agree with Nos that Furious Charge, Tank Hunter, etc. do not work against the Monolith. None of his earlier arguments have been offered any real counterargument, and I believe what he posted in the first 2 pages is pretty much correct.

The FAQ has nothing to do with Furious Charge, it only states that powerfists/klaws work against a Monolith.

kill dem stunties wrote:@nos, an example of augmented strength for a shooting weapon would be a meltagun at half range, which is augmenting the end strength of the meltaguns penetration.

Wrong, they get an extra D6 for penetration, this is NOTHING like altering the strength of the weapon - the armour penetration roll is S+2D6.

kill dem stunties wrote:Next.

pg 42 brb, heading : pwoer fists
"a power fist (or power "klaw")is an armored gauntlet surrounded by a disruptive energy field. A power fist is a power weapon, and also doubles the users strength (up to a maximum of 10) Powerfists however, are difficult and cumbersome to use, so attacks with a powerfist are always delivered at Init 1..."


That says a powerfist doubles your strength if equipped, not if swinging with it.

So if i have a powerfist and a lightning claw, I can reroll wounds with a pwoer weapon at normal Initiative AND at double strength?

No, you must USE the weapon as the rules for CCW tell you. Simoplky having it is not enough.

Surtur - id suggest avoiding the "troll" name calling.

Ok, post the Living Metal rule exactly as it is read in the codex. Get back down to the basics and work up from there.

Surtur wrote:Ok, post the Living Metal rule exactly as it is read in the codex. Get back down to the basics and work up from there.

The problem is, there are 2 versions, one from the original, and one from a stealth 2nd printing.

Surtur - it has been 90% posted, only avoiding the "in practice...." line which deals with unaugmented strength of the weapon.

And in close combat you make ALL attacks with a weapon, oddly enough called a close combat weapon.

OK

"In practice, any weapon attacking the Monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single D6 no matter what. "

FAQ:
Q. Does a model with a powerfist/claw that attacks a Monolith get to double its Strength for armour penetration rolls?
A. Yes, powerfists/claws, thunder hammers, and so on still double their user’s Strength when attacking a Monolith.

So, is a powerfist (or any ccw-Close Combat Weapon) a weapon? Well, their rules are on page 42, which is titled. wait for it, Close Combat Weapons. Power fists/klaws are in the section labelled SPECIAL CLOSE COMBAT WEAPONS. So far so good, sure looks like they are a weapon to me. In fact, any time you attack in hth you are using a weapon, even if it's just your rifle butt.

Weapon Strength, true, PF/PK do not have set strength. They double the user's strength, but as has been pointed out, you have to be attacking with what? Oh yeah, the weapon, to get that. So in effect, the weapon strength is indeed 2xusers strength. Cause just try to get the doubled strength without using the PF.......................

Bottom line, unaugmented strength of the weapon + 1d6, no matter what. PF/PK strength is 2 x users strength, +1 for FC is an augmentation to that strength value.

The unaugmented str of the weapon, eh? A model uses the str of the weapon and not their own str??

So you are suggesting that when my eldar attack in cc while armed with shuriken pistols they attack at str4? Or when armed with fusion pistols they attack at str 8? WOW!

And a BA in cc using a hand flamer attacks at str3...who knew?



Except thats not how cc works.

A model attacks with their own str, no matter what weapons they are equipped with. Yes, weapons can change that str, it is still the MODEL'S str, not the weapon's. Otherwise it would always be the weapon that we would look at, and we would ignore the part of the statline where the model str is listed. The rules tell us however that any str associated with the weapon is ignored, and we use the str of the model itself. We use the attacker's str characteristic...not the weapon's str.

Plus, remember that a MC with no cc weapons can still attack in cc, or at least thats the way that they certainly have been played for years. (at last ever since they stripped the dreadnought cc weapons from the wraithlord)


And please note that furious charge changes the model's str characteristic. There is no mention of adding anything to the weapon, because thats not how cc works. So living metal ignores furious charge, there is nothing about furious charge that affects any weapon str and furious charge doesnt add to the armor pen roll either.


The living metal rule works fine on the str of weapon attacks, its just that in cc the weapon strength doesnt matter. Now tank hunter doesnt work because it crosses another line with its adding +1 to the pen roll. But any rule that adds to a model's str is fine.


The living metal rule allows the formula: str + d6. Str = model str....and how we arrive at the model's str the living metal rule has no concern at all. If there are 5 diff rules that all add +1 each to the model, living metal is fine with all of that. Simply because we dont use the weapon str, we use the model's str.



Sliggoth

And yet while in combat you attack usnig the weapon.

Fusions are not CCW so cannot be used, oddly enough, ic CCW. Invalid example - i know you were being facetious, but at least get it even vaguely correct.

Relic Blades are strength 6 always, and does not alter the models Strength characteristic. Your statement is proven false.

Sliggoth wrote:The unaugmented str of the weapon, eh? A model uses the str of the weapon and not their own str??

So you are suggesting that when my eldar attack in cc while armed with shuriken pistols they attack at str4? Or when armed with fusion pistols they attack at str 8? WOW!

And a BA in cc using a hand flamer attacks at str3...who knew?

Used to. Course, now the rules on page 42 tell us that those pistols are treated as standard ccw, using the wielders strength. And yes, it's the users strength, applied through whatever weapon they are wielding, even if that 'weapon' is their fist. Page 42 lays it all out for you, read it.

This is the point the two sides just are not going to agree on, I think.

And....pistols are indeed ccw, so a fusion pistol (such as harlies use) are indeed ccws......oddly enough. So oddly enough, the example isnt just vaguely correct but is perfectly correct.

And Im afraid that your example of a relic blade doesnt say that the blade itself is str 6, it says that a "relic blade counts as a power weapon whose hits are resolved at Strength 6." Which is very fortunate for a SM with a relic blade, because if it DID say that the strength of the weapon itself was 6, then we would have the interesting problem of a marine armed with a str 6 weapon who the rules tell us has to use his own str to resolve his hits.

The blade isnt str 6, we are instead told that hits when using a relic blade are at str 6.

Which is the key, since hits are normally based upon the model's str characteristic and not anything else. Of course, the relic blade rules being more specific than the general cc rules, we replace the general rules with the specific.


If models always were required to use weapon, then wraithlords wouldnt be able to attack at all in cc since they dont seem to have ccw under this interpretation. Would also be a problem for a few other models, including from the necron codex the deceiver. We are specifically told that the deceiver has NO weapons, yet still has 4 attacks in cc.

Weapons are nice. They may give a variety of bonuses to models who use them. But we most certainly arent concerned about what str a weapon has for cc purposes, if any.


Sliggoth

And the only way to get those "hits" is to be using a "weapon", per page 42. And in close combat the weapon has either the users strength or the strength gained by it's special rules.

Sigh....... And round and round we go.

So you ignored the rules on CCW which state that pistols use the strength of the wielder when sed as normal CCW in close combat?

Interesting.

Oh, and you missed that "whose hits" refers to the Relic Blade? Meaning the relic blade hits at S6.

We were also talking about Special CCW - where you are specifically required to use any Special CCW when making attacks. Just to you know, keep iton topic...

Thnks for pointing out that the rules do tell us to use the str of the user....which was the point of my tongue in cheek post about the str of the various cc weapons.

The rules on pg 42 do indeed tell us to ignore the str of pistols and use the str of the user. Perhaps this rule was put in there since the rest of the weapons do not actually HAVE a str? Which is what I have been trying to explain here.

The rules tell us to use the str of the model. That str can indeed be modified in various ways. And yes, many (but no means all) models do use weapons. But those weapons do not themselves have a str.

Even the relic blade that was brought up as an example doesnt have a str, it instead tells us how to resolve hits inflicted while using the relic blade. Does the blade boost the models str? We dont know-- and we dont care since there are special rules for that one item that are outside the normal cc rules.



It basically comes down to the simple fact that by RAW we use the model's str characteristic. We do NOT use the str of any weapon being used. In the one occasion that the RAW mentions a weapon's str (pistols) we are firmly told to NOT use that str.

Btw, models do not have to have weapons to engage in cc. So yes some models may be using weapons, but it is not a requirement to engage in cc. There is nothing in the rules suggesting that a weapon takes on the str of its user, because the rules simply dont use any str a weapon might have.


Sliggoth

...and back round we go.

The Relic blade does have a strength, otherwise what is "whose hits..." aimed at? Something mythical?

The end result to me, is that if you look at the page that tells you exactly what to do when you are rolling to penetrate a vehicle in close combat.

It specifically states to use the models strength, it doesn't matter if you're "using" a weapon, that's great, you're using that weapon until you get to the point where you look what to do and it says to use the strength of the attacker + 1d6.

It says to use models strength, use a special ccw all you want when it comes time to roll for pen you have to use str of the model +d6.

And i'm done with this thread now, reiterated the same point about 10 times now, you don't want to see seemingly to me anyways, plain as day raw that's ok whatever. If i could find a picture of someone arguing with a brick wall i would.

Will someone please post the full entry, not just the tidbit that's being argued over? As is, it is being interpreted 2 ways.

unaugmented (strength and a single D6)

or

(unaugmented strength) and a single D6

Neither of those is the contention - you are not allowed extra penetration dice or other bonuses to it such as Tank Hunter.

the contention comes frmo the fact that you MUST use any special CCW when fighting, and it is the strength of the weapon that cant be altered.

OK, lets go back to basics here, what do we actually do in a cc?

According to the rules:

Pg 38 "once you have scored a hit with an attack you must roll again to see if you score a wound"

"cross reference the attacker's Strength characteristic (S) with the defenders Toughness"

"In most cases, you use the Strength on the attacker's profile regardless of what weapon they are using."


Then to reinforce that idea on pg 42 we find:

"in close combat , pistols count as normal close combat weapons and so the Strength and AP of the pistol are ignored."



Then for vehicles and assault on pg 63 we find:

"Armor Penetration is worked out in the same way as for shooting (D6 + the strength of the attacker)




So can we agree that it is the attacking model's strength that is being used here to determine the outcome of the cc? We are told specifically to ignore any strength on the one type of ccw that normally has a strength (pistols).




Sliggoth

OR, you agree that the attacker is taking the place of the "weapon" in Living Metal, but this means FC does not work as you are augmenting the strength of the weapon.

But when does the "unaugmented" part come into play? The +1 strength happens before the attacker even starts to swing. Going by that logic, your unaugmented strength would be 9 anyway, because it modified the model, and then, LATER, the weapon uses the strength of the model, which is now 9.

I always read that as some thing that raises the model's strength when fighting a vehicle or something like that then it simply doesn't apply. And again the whole "melta/rending" thing.

Look at this way, a close combat has no str, sure. If you pick up a sword in real life that sword will be more destructive in the hands of a stronger person, but the sword itself isn't any stronger. So a power sword increases the str of the wielder, which living metal will not stop, the only bonuses conferred from wielding a CCW is, for instance, the ability to ignore armor saves in CC. But the weapon itself has no str but that doesn't mean you roll 0+d6 because the guy swinging it still has a str attribute. And if a weapon makes the wielder stronger, it doesn't meant the weapon is only the guy swinging it is doing so with more force, which again living metal won't stop. And yes, this also means that furious charge would count.

Surtur wrote:Will someone please post the full entry, not just the tidbit that's being argued over? As is, it is being interpreted 2 ways.

I did, it's on page 3.................

That one sentence is the whole entry?

The monolith is made of living necron metal which is not only self-repairing but is capable of adapting its structure to resist incoming attacks. Attacks which count the targets armour value as being less than it really is (such as bright lances and blasters) do not do so against the monolith. Similarily, weaapons that get additional armour penetration dice (such as chainfists, monstrous creatures or melta weapons) do not get the extra dice against the monolith. Ordnance weapons still roll 2d6 for armour penetration and select the highest score. In practice, any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what.

There you go, the whole living metal entry verbatim.

the rule specifically tells you what is not allowed ( Similarily, weaapons that get additional armour penetration dice (such as chainfists, monstrous creatures or melta weapons) do not get the extra dice against the monolith) furious charge tank hunters you would get since one is an addition to the model not the weapons str the other is a modification to the result after str and d6 has been calculated. so a melta gun in 6" of a monolith would get 8+d6 if the model had tankhunter or if this was a model with furious charge using a powerfist/powerklaw it would be 8+d6+1 the living metal rule imho only affects 'weapons' that have there own str i.e. grenades, ranged weapons, shooting psychic powers etc.

Kevin949 wrote: Ordnance weapons still roll 2d6 for armour penetration and select the highest score. In practice, any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what.

There you go, the whole living metal entry verbatim.

Brilliant rules writing there, roll 2d6 rapidly followed by single d6 no matter what.

ChrisCP wrote:

Kevin949 wrote: Ordnance weapons still roll 2d6 for armour penetration and select the highest score. In practice, any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what.

There you go, the whole living metal entry verbatim.

Brilliant rules writing there, roll 2d6 rapidly followed by single d6 no matter what.

Maybe you should read how ordinance works.

Kevin949 wrote:The monolith is made of living necron metal which is not only self-repairing but is capable of adapting its structure to resist incoming attacks. Attacks which count the targets armour value as being less than it really is (such as bright lances and blasters) do not do so against the monolith. Similarily, weaapons that get additional armour penetration dice (such as chainfists, monstrous creatures or melta weapons) do not get the extra dice against the monolith. Ordnance weapons still roll 2d6 for armour penetration and select the highest score. In practice, any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what.

There you go, the whole living metal entry verbatim.

Thank you very much! Strength is not mentioned anywhere until the very last sentence. I see the last sentence as an attempt to clarify it's purpose as a just-in-case of future unseen rules happening. I don't think the rule is attempting to nullify strength bonuses, but things like meltas, lances and possibly tank hunter. Instead of focusing all of the attention at the last sentence I think you should look at the whole and attempt to understand the rule in it's entirety. No rule that I can think of is one sentence, most take 2-3 at least to explain themselves.

The last sentence is also what stops Tank Hunters - as you are getting more than S+D6

RobPro wrote:

ChrisCP wrote:

Kevin949 wrote: Ordnance weapons still roll 2d6 for armour penetration and select the highest score. In practice, any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what.

There you go, the whole living metal entry verbatim.

Brilliant rules writing there, roll 2d6 rapidly followed by single d6 no matter what.

Maybe you should read how ordinance works.

Siiiigh.... "any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what."
Not matter what roll a single d6. No matter what including the previous scentence that lets us know that ordnance still roll two and pick.

Maybe just maybe GW should learn how to write rules that are, clear, concise, don't conflict with other rules, explain interactions with other rules in detail and naturally do not conflict with themself.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Surtur wrote: No rule that I can think of is one sentence, most take 2-3 at least to explain themselves.

Any weapon attacking the monolith neither lowers it's AV or uses more than it's base strength value (no +/- modifiers) & one d6, in cases where one rolls two dice & selects the highest do this as normal.

I dunno I think I did a fairly good job there, anyone think of anything that'd need fixing?

Yes you are rolling 2d6 but you are not adding them, therefore it is still TECHNICALLY a single d6 hitting the lith, you just get to choose from 2 dice instead of 1.

Yeah but. Follow the rule as written and "roll for ap using... and a single d6 no matter what" it says roll with a single die no matter what - doesn't matter that it's "TECHNICALLY" a single die you've used two when you rolled, you haven't followed what the last scentence of Living Metals rule.

But I shouldn't be surprised that to play a 'smooth' game of war hammer it's expected that one will break rules.

I've never seen anyone argue that you don't get Furious Charge, Tank Hunter, or even any bonus from a power fist vs. the Monolith. This is a case of ridiculous rules-lawyering.

EDIT:

It says right in the necron faq that powerfists/klaws double your strength vs. a monolith. For christs sake people...

Kevin949 wrote:Yes you are rolling 2d6 but you are not adding them, therefore it is still TECHNICALLY a single d6 hitting the lith, you just get to choose from 2 dice instead of 1.

No, it's 2D6 Pick the Highest.

2D6 Pick the highest is not D6

Noisy_Marine wrote:I've never seen anyone argue that you don't get Furious Charge, Tank Hunter, or even any bonus from a power fist vs. the Monolith. This is a case of ridiculous rules-lawyering.

You do not recive the bonus from furious charge because it's an augmentation of the original str value.... seriously how hard is this?

Gwar! wrote:

Kevin949 wrote:Yes you are rolling 2d6 but you are not adding them, therefore it is still TECHNICALLY a single d6 hitting the lith, you just get to choose from 2 dice instead of 1.

No, it's 2D6 Pick the Highest.

2D6 Pick the highest is not D6

I understand that gwar. What I'm saying is that even though one would roll two dice, it's not two dice affecting the monolith which is why living metal doesn't affect ordnance. You're simply getting more chances in one hit, not a higher penetration beyond the maximum of 6. So even though it's two dice, there is only one die affecting the outcome.

Plus I don't see how what you said is different than what I said except for me leaving out the "pick the highest" statement as that is assumed when rolling two dice and picking one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ChrisCP wrote:

Noisy_Marine wrote:I've never seen anyone argue that you don't get Furious Charge, Tank Hunter, or even any bonus from a power fist vs. the Monolith. This is a case of ridiculous rules-lawyering.

You do not recive the bonus from furious charge because it's an augmentation of the original str value.... seriously how hard is this?

obviously pretty hard since people still don't get that the bonus is applied to the models strength (I.E. those bulging things in his arms) and not the sword/fist/claw it is wielding. The model is simply swinging with more force on that first hit but the sword/weapon itself is not any stronger, the model is swinging it harder.

He singled it out because the rule says roll "a single d6" Living metal doesn't actually care if you only pick one the fact that two are used is bad. Also how could you possibly claim that only one die affects the outcome if you're rolling two? This is quite a different activity to rolling one die.

ChrisCP wrote:"roll for ap using... and a single d6 no matter what"

All that matters is your rolling two die, which you're not allow to do no matter what.

nosferatu1001 wrote:...and the strength has still be augmented by Furious Charge.

That is the "unaugmented strength" part. Unless you claim the weapon has no strength, in which case it doesnt work.

This is, in fact, the case. A Power Fist or Power Klaw has no Strength. It simply doubles the user's Strength value. Furious Charge also increases the model's Strength value. Since the 'Strength must be unaugmented' part of the Living Metal rule only goes for weapon Strength values, and NOT for model Strength values, Nobs with a Power Klaw count as S9 on the charge against a Monolith.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:And as you point out - the WEAPON HAS NO STRENGTH.

Which means you get 0+D6 against monoliths.

Or, you realise that the user is still hitting and as such their unaugmented powerfist strength is 2S, and that therefore 2S+1 has been augmented.

In close combat, model's strike with their own Strength Characteristic, not with the Strength Characteristic of their weapons. If you try to argue otherwise, my Railgun carrying Broadsides have all of the sudden become S10 in close combat!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except it does when you are told how to resolve close combat attacks to begin with. You are told you MUST use your special close combat weapon if you have one. So you are using a weapon that you have agreed has no strength.

It is never stated that you have to use the Strength of the weapon in your close combat attacks, only that you must use the weapon. Since the Power Klaw is being used to double the user's Strength value, I don't see the problem. The Power Klaw is being used, and the model's Strength is used for the attacks. Arguing otherwise would result in Power Fists, Power Klaws, Thunder Hammers, Power Weapons and Lightning Claws all making you strike with S0, in any situation, not just against the Monolith.

ChrisCP wrote:He singled it out because the rule says roll "a single d6" Living metal doesn't actually care if you only pick one the fact that two are used is bad. Also how could you possibly claim that only one die affects the outcome if you're rolling two? This is quite a different activity to rolling one die.

ChrisCP wrote:"roll for ap using... and a single d6 no matter what"

All that matters is your rolling two die, which you're not allow to do no matter what.

Ok, so you roll two and you pick the highest....does the lower numbered die mean anything now? No. Therefore only one die is actually affecting the outcome. You're not adding the dice. I don't see why this is hard to understand, an ordnance weapon still gets the outcome of str + d6 BUT it gets to choose from 2d6 at a time. I know what you're saying and that it seems the sentences contradict one another but if you really really think about it, it makes sense. It is to signify that ordnance weapons are hitting multiple areas at the same time, but it's not counting as multiple hits as only ONE str+d6 outcome is resolved ultimately.

Airmaniac wrote:Furious Charge also increases the model's Strength value. Since the 'Strength must be unaugmented' part of the Living Metal rule only goes for weapon Strength values, and NOT for model Strength values, Nobs with a Power Klaw count as S9 on the charge against a Monolith.

Yes furious charge being a modifier causes the users strength in close combat which is double their profiles strength, to be modfied by a +1 - this modification is dissallowed by the monolith.


@Kevin: So your saying rolling two die is the same as rolling one? I don't think you are and that's the point I'm making - rolling two die is not the same as rolling one, for starters you need two die interecting with each other in your palm/cup/thrower, not just a lonely die. That second lower valued die that you pay no reguard has had a profound effect on the value on the die you selected.

Noisy_Marine wrote:I've never seen anyone argue that you don't get Furious Charge, Tank Hunter, or even any bonus from a power fist vs. the Monolith. This is a case of ridiculous rules-lawyering.

EDIT:

It says right in the necron faq that powerfists/klaws double your strength vs. a monolith. For christs sake people...

And the previous GW FAQ specifically disallowed Tank Hunter, so you must not have been playing very long........................ Then they rewrote the Monolith entry and thought they didn't need to spell out that you don't get Tank Hunter, or the bonus for multiple Talos attacks or, wait for it, Furious Charge. Somehow GW thought that saying, hey, all you get is unagmented ST plus 1d6, no matter what, would be sufficient. Silly GW....................

Hmmmm, wow, ya know what, the Talos being included in that list kinda pokes a hole in the "It's the model's strength" argument, doesn't it.................? Given that GW specifically disallowed a strength modification?

Except that we know that it is indeed tha model's str now used in cc. At some day in the past the weapon str may have been used in days of yore, its possible that in some future edition of the rules weapon str will be used. But in the current rules, right now, its the model str that is used in cc. And living metal is only concerned with weapon str, it simply doesnt address anything that modifies the model's str.

So yes, furious chrage works fine against living metal, because furious charge is a bonus to the model.

But tank hunter attempts to add +1 to the ap roll, which living metal DOES address. So no, tank hunter doesnt work.


The rules change, the interaction with various codex rules changes...we have to live with how the rules work now however.

And if anyone still has any qualms about a model's str being modified in attacks against living metal, just read the faq. There were enough people asking about power fists that they addressed this; yes a model's str can be doubled against living metal. So yes, it is clear that a model's str can be modified since living metal doesnt address this.


Rules change. Many old models used to be equipped with two (or more) special close combat weapons. Those models cant use both special weapons in the current edition of the rules, in fact they cant even use the second weapon to get +1 attack. Living metal doesnt affect the model's own str or any adjustment to this str.

Maybe one day when 9th edition is released weapon str will be used and living metal will be all ready to go! (probably one month later the a necron codex will finally be released and remove living metal from the rules~)


Sliggoth

And what is your response to the Talos?

don_mondo wrote:And what is your response to the Talos?

It's not an issue as no-one uses it.

True, haven't seen one on the table since forever, it seems. But GW telling us that the boost to it's strength (ie augmentation of users strngth) for multiple hits (IIRC) is disallowed is an indication that Furious Charge doesn't work either.

ChrisCP wrote:
@Kevin: So your saying rolling two die is the same as rolling one? I don't think you are and that's the point I'm making - rolling two die is not the same as rolling one, for starters you need two die interecting with each other in your palm/cup/thrower, not just a lonely die. That second lower valued die that you pay no reguard has had a profound effect on the value on the die you selected.

*Sigh* No, I'm not saying that rolling two dice is the same as rolling one. But I've spelled it out multiple times, I guess I just see it differently from you and it makes sense to me. *Shrug*

I can see liiving armour moving around to better protect against an ordinance weapon, that makes sence to me. So I would give that one to the lith. I can also see it bypassing the tankbusta's rule by doing the same. But I cant se how it compensates for the Nob's muscles bulging out.

Just my 2.

Ork Cyborg wrote:I can see liiving armour moving around to better protect against an ordinance weapon, that makes sence to me. So I would give that one to the lith. I can also see it bypassing the tankbusta's rule by doing the same. But I cant se how it compensates for the Nob's muscles bulging out.

Just my 2.

Quite easily. It's a game mechanic................. Doesn't need to be a 'fluff' reason.

But its clarified in an FAQ. Not sure why there is still debate about the power * doubling strength.

Kevin949 wrote:But its clarified in an FAQ. Not sure why there is still debate about the power * doubling strength.

Ummm, might want to read the whole thread. The PF/PK 2xST is not under discussion, I think we all agree to that. The current discussion is whether or not they also get +1 due to Furious Charge. Or +1 for Tank Hunter. Or bonuses for a Talos. Or etc etc etc...............

I've read the whole thread, and honestly it doesn't seem like anything has been resolved, everyone is just focusing on FC and TH currently. Which currently my stance is that FC would work and TH would not.

I know I'm late to the party, but Don Mondo is incorrect. It is 9+D6 if you play by the rules. If you want to house rule it to not work that way, fine.

Weapon Augmentation:

Melta (S+ 2d6 for armor pen)
Ordnance (S+2d6 choose highest for armor pen)
Stuff like the LR that rolls 2d6 + S for armor pen


Not weapon augmentation, model str augmentation:

DCCW
Power Klaw/Power Fist
Furious charge

These augment the strength of the MODEL, having NOTHING to do with the weapon.

Guess Im just not looking in the right places, where do they list the interaction for the talos?


Sliggoth

If i had to try to judge whether the model got +1 from furious charge i would say yes.

Why?

I think of it this way. I'm playing baseball, im not allowed to bring a bat that can hit the ball further than another bat, so we rule out an aluminum bat. (like the monolith rules out melta)

However, i am allowed to swing the bat harder than the next guy, by being stronger, quicker what have you. So lets say im pissed off at the pitcher and take a real good cut at the ball. (+1 S)

Am i breaking the rule about not being aloud to have a bat that hits harder? no. Am i altering myself to hit it further, yes. therefore allowed.

At least thats how i read the rule.

edited because my space bar doesnt like to work

You can't use real-life examples for any of this because none of it has anything to do with real life. You can only go by the rulebook, codex, and applicable FAQs.

I don't really see how you can say Furious Charge isn't a bonus to strength.

So let me get this clear; you think that I don't get +1 strength for furious charge but I get double strength on a power fist because that was FAQ.

I guess asking for unambiguous rules in the books is too much to ask.

Yes, FAQ says certain things are exceptions. If it were to list FC, you'd get that too.

RobPro wrote:Yes, FAQ says certain things are exceptions. If it were to list FC, you'd get that too.

its probably not listed because gw assumes the people who play have some common sense. the monolith says the weapons strength cant be modified what weapons have a str value? bolters,pistols,plasma guns/cannons etc etc. close combat weapons lightning claws pf/pc dont. they either modifer the models str or allow the model to bypass armor.
ect
furious charge gives the model +1str a powerfist doubles a models str

If that is how you want to interpret the rules, then that's your choice. It just means those -models- swing at the Monolith with 0 + d6.

RobPro wrote:If that is how you want to interpret the rules, then that's your choice. It just means those -models- swing at the Monolith with 0 + d6.

Sure, weapon str 0 + model str 4(x2 for PF/PK) + 1 model str for FC + d6. There, weapon str 0 and it is unmodified.

Now you're just making stuff up.

I wil say it again: what WEAPONS modify their strength?

Melta weapons dont - they add dice for armour penetration, which is NOT changing their Strength.

You could argue that a linked Fireprism would be a modification, possibly?

Vibrocannons hitting from a batch?

So maybe when they meant "weapon" they really did mean weapons, and altering the strength of the pwoerfist from double S to double S+1 is an augmentation...

RobPro wrote:Now you're just making stuff up.

What part of that is actually made up? And please, tell me how a unit would not be able to use their strength stat when swinging a weapon.

Except that furious charge does NOT affect/ augment/ add to weapon strength. Furious charge adds +1 to a model's initiative and +1 to a model's strength characteristic. Please note that it does absolutely nothing to any weapon....

So yes, furious charge works fine since living metal is only concerned with a weapon's strength. Living metal doesnt mention a model's strength, so that means that under current rules living metal is going to be interacting only with shooting attacks. Now, if at some point in the future the rules change and weapon strengths are involved in cc then the living metal rule will then interact with cc.

But as it stands, furious charge isnt affected by living metal.


Sliggoth

Relic Blades and Frost Blades come to mind as CC weapons that modify strength, and they have already been mentioned in this thread.

The Living Metal entry states weapon's unmodified strength plus d6 "no matter what." If your model is attacking the Monolith and not using a weapon, it would get 0+d6 as it is apparently not using a weapon and "no matter what" that is all that affects a Monolith. This is how -you- are interpreting that rule, most people would logically conclude S8 + d6.

@RobPro Yes, frost blades modify the model's strength....and that is fine. Please reread the living metal rule. Living metal doesnt deal AT ALL with anything that modifies a model's strength. The pen roll, yes living metal talks about that. Weapons that treat av as lower than it really is, yes living metal talks about that. About restricting modifiers to the model's strength? No, living metal doesnt consider that.

Now if the rules for cc ever get changed so that weapon strengths are used in cc, then yes living metal would affect cc. As it stands now, cc only uses the model's strength. And the rules specifically tell us to use the strength of the model regardless of the strength of the weapon that is being used. Weapons can modify many things about cc, the number of attacks, the model's strength, affect the saves, confer rending (which does concern living metal since rending affects the pen roll) etc.

But we do not use the weapon's own strength in thos few cases that a weapon even has a strength.


And no, a model with no weapons doesnt use 0. We use the model's strength characteristic. Or else the deceiver would be pretty silly in cc since we are told that he has no weapons at all..........



Sliggoth

Same with the nightbringer, it states his scythe is "just for show" or whatever but has no bearing on CC.

But, also in the Monolith's entry, we see that -only- weapons are allowed to hurt the Monolith. The all-inclusive "no matter what" means that unless a model is making an attack with a weapon, it will roll 0 + d6.

@ RobPro That would be an interesting idea....what is the wording that leads you to believe that only weapons can hurt the monolith? Because even back in third edition (when the necron codex was qwritten) the nightbringer and the deceiver didnt use weapons...so you are suggesting they wrote the codex such that necron c'tan cant harm monoliths?
5th edition doesnt use any weapon strengths in cc, so are you suggesting that monoliths cant be harmed at all in cc?

The living metal entry gives us various restrictions on how weapons can hurt the monolith, but Im truly not seeing any wording that means ONLY weapons can huirt the monolith.


Sliggoth

You're the one insisting models don't use weapons when they use weapons in CC, not me. But based on this wording and the ridiculously strict RAW interpretation you are pushing for, it does seem likely that MCs without weapons wouldn't be able to hurt a Monolith.

Except that the FAQ already says we get the double strength effect. That's an augmentation, that's a weapon that has no strength characteristic of it's own but uses the Model's strength, and the FAQ says we get it.

As far as I'm concerned you either get both the +1 and the x2 or you don't get either. Obviously we get one of them, so we get both. They're both augmentations to a CC weapon, so for whatever reason we get one of them (strengthening the model is just the better argument so far) we get both of them.

And if anyone actually put that 0 +D6 argument on the table I'd pick up my models and do something more interesting than talking to them. A Necron player who argues for the +1, I wouldn't mind so much. I'd strongly disagree with him and think him a rule lawyer but still.

But what do I know?

Kevin949 wrote:

RobPro wrote:Now you're just making stuff up.

What part of that is actually made up? And please, tell me how a unit would not be able to use their strength stat when swinging a weapon.

When the special rules for what they are swinging at says that you can only use the unmodified strength of the WEAPON plus 1d6. Not using a weapon, then all you get is the 1d6...............

Using the model's strength is a general rule from the main rulebook. It is bumped by the Monolith special rule for Living Metal. Soooooooo........... See the problem with the "I'm not using a weapon" stance? No weapon, no unagmented strength of the weapon to apply to the hit. And the Necron Monolith Living Metal rule is very specific, all you can ever get for penetration is the unagmented strength of the weapon plus 1d6, NO MATTER WHAT.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ork Cyborg wrote:Except that the FAQ already says we get the double strength effect. That's an augmentation, that's a weapon that has no strength characteristic of it's own but uses the Model's strength, and the FAQ says we get it.

As far as I'm concerned you either get both the +1 and the x2 or you don't get either. Obviously we get one of them, so we get both. They're both augmentations to a CC weapon, so for whatever reason we get one of them (strengthening the model is just the better argument so far) we get both of them.

And if anyone actually put that 0 +D6 argument on the table I'd pick up my models and do something more interesting than talking to them. A Necron player who argues for the +1, I wouldn't mind so much. I'd strongly disagree with him and think him a rule lawyer but still.

But what do I know?

See, that's just it, it's not an aumentation. The FAQ is a statement that the unaugmented strength of a Power Fist is 2 x users strength. In other words, they're sayinbg, hey, this is a weapon and this is it's strength value. Adding +1 for Furious Charge is augmenting that weapon's strength. Just like adding Tank Hunter to a lascannnon's penetration would be augmenting that weapons strength.

For the record, I have an Ork army myself and do NOT play Necrons. So go ahead, call me a rules lawyer.

Except with Powerfists and powerklaws apparently.

don_mondo wrote:
See, that's just it, it's not an aumentation. The FAQ is a statement that the unaugmented strength of a Power Fist is 2 x users strength. In other words, they're sayinbg, hey, this is a weapon and this is it's strength value.

No, it says the exact opposite of that. It says that:

'a model with a powerfist/claw that
attacks a Monolith get[s] to double its Strength for
armour penetration rolls'
or
'powerfists... still double their user’s Strength when
attacking a Monolith'

The model is doing the attacking, and it is with the user's strength (albiet augmented).
It does not say that the power fist has a strength value of 2x the models strength, it says that the models strength is doubled when attacking with one.

Either you follow the faq, and CC model strength is obviously augmentable in some fashions... or you follow strict raw and CC attacks don't work at all because they are not with str value weapons.
One seems much more reasonable to me.

Ork Cyborg wrote:

And if anyone actually put that 0 +D6 argument on the table I'd pick up my models and do something more interesting than talking to them. A Necron player who argues for the +1, I wouldn't mind so much. I'd strongly disagree with him and think him a rule lawyer but still.

This all stems from saying the +1 doesn't apply. I don't believe it applies, and certain elements are bringing the argument down this road.

This all stems from saying the +1 doesn't apply. I don't believe it applies, and certain elements are bringing the argument down this road.

Now that I've thoguht about it more, I can definetly see where some people would see that working. I sitlll don't think that's how it SHOULD be, if it is or not (which is still debatable, or else we wouldn't be here) but I can see where you're coming from with it. However we come to a few problems. The main one, to me, is WHY ARE POWERFISTS EXEMPT FROM THIS RULE! GW should have given either a mechanical or at least fluffy reason for it. Powerfists have so much force that they can just smash through the Living Armor? Ok, so Powerfists and Klaws only. The power weapon's field ignores the Living Armor's effect? Super, so powerweapons aren't affected. The strenght of the blow isn't affected, just special rules that make penetrating armor easier for the model? Ok that lets pretty much every CC weapon go through.

What is a "weapons strength"? Is a weapon's strength in CC, with a few exceptions (runeblade and the like) the currient strenght of the model? The original strneght of the model? Here's how I prefer to see it from a game mechanic's standpoint.

Weapon's strength is equal to the Model's current strength. Un-augmentned Weapon's Strength is equal to the current strength of the model. Augmented Weapon's Strength is equal to the current strength of the model +x where x is any number. This bonus can come from them attacking a vehicle (Tank Busters) or from having an ability that changes the strength amount to a specific number (Runeblades). If a power would add dice to the penetration role, or if it changes the weapon's strength from something different to the model's current strength, then Living Armor ignores it.

Furious Charge changes the model's strength before it even swings it's attacks (as the model assaults). As such the model's current strength is nine. The weapon's strength there fore is nine. No other modifiers are placed on it, so this is the model's unaugmented strength.

Now I don't expect you to agree with me, and I'll be honest, I'm not the most experienced in this. I do hope however you can see where my argument comes from, and can respect my wish to play the game as such. Now in a tournament, I'd go with whatever the TO says, obviously.

Not that it matters to me much. There's only one Necron player I know, and he's very laid back and more interested in modeling and fluff than he is in rules anyway.

As GWAR might say, "Current strength != base/unmodified strength."

don_mondo wrote:
When the special rules for what they are swinging at says that you can only use the unmodified strength of the WEAPON plus 1d6. Not using a weapon, then all you get is the 1d6...............

Using the model's strength is a general rule from the main rulebook. It is bumped by the Monolith special rule for Living Metal. Soooooooo........... See the problem with the "I'm not using a weapon" stance? No weapon, no unagmented strength of the weapon to apply to the hit. And the Necron Monolith Living Metal rule is very specific, all you can ever get for penetration is the unagmented strength of the weapon plus 1d6, NO MATTER WHAT.

I'm not on the side of people saying they get 0str so why are you trying to rationalize to me? Also, I don't know how many times I can say it no cc weapon will ever have a str attribute because there is no force acting upon the weapon until a unit wields it. It astounds me that people don't understand this. Guns have a str because there is a force separate from the models arms acting upon them.

Wych Blades are S9 against vehicles. If models don't use weapons to attack, then Wych blades never work.

Kevin - wrong, relic blades are S6, NOT the model.

Etc.

So a couple of exceptions to the rule, but those few special cases don't make it the norm and certainly don't mean every other CC weapon is like them. Plus, if memory serves aren't those vastly different CC weapons than a typical power weapon? In regards to a power weapon being a physical thing powered by something for the ability to ignore armor saves.

The relic blade is a 2 handed power weapon that strikes at S6. If you claim CC weapons can have no strength, then this is incorrect.

The "unaugmented" strength of a relic blade is 6, meaning you would roll 6+D6 against a monolith.
#
HEnce the issue - either you read the line as saying only weapons can hurt the monolith, in which case those without are out of luck BUT feel free to augment the strength of the wielder are out of luck or -and here is the easy solution - you simply determine that when they said S+D6 they really, really, REALLY meant ONLY S+D6, not strength-which-is-altered-when-you-want-it.

Well, unfortunately I don't know enough about all the previous versions of this game and all the little nuance things of every army to get into more detail about this, but this is really one of the most ridiculous rules arguments I've ever heard.

Living Metal is a complete pain, hence the "stealth" rprint whcih was suppsoed to clear it up - and I doubt they really meant for people to argue whetehr or not "you only get unaugmented S+D6, no matter what" could be avoided by arguing about the strength of the wielder.

Ork Cyborg wrote:

Furious Charge changes the model's strength before it even swings it's attacks (as the model assaults). As such the model's current strength is nine. The weapon's strength there fore is nine. No other modifiers are placed on it, so this is the model's unaugmented strength.

Except, of course, that the rules specify that the +1 is added after doubling, meaning it's not the users base strength at all. If it was, then it would be (ST+1)x2 instread of (STx2)+1

What does the living metal rule say? It says any WEAPON (yes any weapon) attacking gets str +d6.

Now, does it in any way, shape or form limit attacks to weapons? No it does not. It does say any weapon attack has limits, but it does not even address any attacks from a model's own strength.

So what does this mean? It simply means that living metal (under 5th edition rules) only affects shooting attacks. The way that cc attacks are resolved means that living metal doesnt interact with cc attacks at all.

It really is that simple. Living metal affects attacks from weapons. Close combat attacks fo not use weapons in their resolution. If a weapon even has a strength it is ignored in cc. It is always the model's own str that is used in cc.


Now if in 6th edition (or 7th, or however long it takes for a new necron codex to come out) it may be possible that cc attacks will be changed and weapons will be changed and we would at that time use weapon str in cc. Until that time however, living metal will not be affecting cc since weapon str doesnt matter in cc.



Sliggoth


PS please note the wording on the relic blade. The hits are resolved at str 6, so that means that the relic blade must set the model's str to 6. It is certainly POSSIBLE that the relic blade has a str itself of 6, but we arent told that. We are told that hits while using it are str 6 hits. Which in game terms means that the user has str 6.

Except if the user is called to make a Strength test, mere possession of the Relic blade will *not* cause the user to be S6 for the purpose of the test. So the bearer is *not* S6 when making cc attacks, the weapon is.

Which leaves a hole in your assumptions.

Sliggoth wrote:What does the living metal rule say? It says any WEAPON (yes any weapon) attacking gets str +d6.

Exactly! And any time you attack in hth, you are attacking with a weapon, even if that weapon is a claw or talon, teeth, fist, rifle butt, whatever. The strength of that weapon is determined by the wielder or by it's special rules.

@don Please show me a reference for the strength of a weapon in cc. Close combat uses a model's own strength characteristic as per pg 38. The only reference to a weapon's strength that I can find for cc is pg 42, where it tells us to ignore the strength of pistols in cc.

And please note, there is NO requirement to use a weapon in cc, remember that the deceiver rules specifically tell us that he has no weapons. The rules for cc use the model's str for its calculations, weapons are only used to give bonuses or penalties in the combat...weapons strength doesnt even exist for the majority of cc weapons.


Sliggoth

Pleae show me where you can attack in hth without USING a weapon. Page 42 says that anything you attack with in hth is a normal close combat weapon. It's the same paragraph you refernce re pistols, don't know how you managed to miss it.............

Who cares what it augments.

Use a deffrolla

aromasin wrote:Who cares what it augments.

Use a deffrolla

Yeah buddy! Never bothered with them before (I was in the cannot Ram camp), but I'm adding some BW w/DR to my Orkified Genestealer Cult.

cc weapons used the models str fc modifies the models str not the weapons so there by bypasses the living metal rule

@Don show you where we can attack without using a weapon in cc? So you are saying that the deceiver cannot attack in cc?

Please read the cc rules, pg 35 on who can attack is a good place to start. Its always the model attacks, the model can attack. There is nothing saying that a model has to use a wepon to attack. Yes, if a model has a weapon it will use it, but the weapon doesnt have a strength, and the weapon is NOT required.


Sliggoth

Nope, I'm saying taht per the rules on page 42, if he does attack, then whatever he's attacking with is considered a CCW with whatever special rules he has. I've read 35, now you read 42, which states that they attack with WEAPONS. And that weapons are required, even if taht 'weapon' is jsut their fist. That's what you're missing (ignoring?). It doesn't matter WHAT they actually use in the attack. power sword, rifle butt or teeth and claws. They're all classed as weapons, per page 42.

@ Don Yes...those are all weapons. (except the fist part, that doesnt seem to be a weapon actually. Pg 42 tells us that all those weapons do not confer any special bonuses to the model using them, and then goes on to examine various other special weapons that do confer bonuses. But, pg 42 really doesnt tell us that weapions are required for cc. And there is also most certainly nothing that suggests that weapons have a str in cc on that page.....quite the opposite actually there.

1) weapons arent required for cc.

2) the vast majority of weapons do not even have a strength for cc purposes.


Sliggoth

i dont know Necrons very well, however, I have read over the relevant rules and thought I should add my two cents onto the 6th page of this discussion. The point that I want to make, that may have been made, maybe not, is: Where exactly is the profile of a power fist? If the necron armor does not allow augmented str of a weapon, and you believe that entails that the power fist cannot be "Double str" where do the rules tell me the strength of the power fist? If I look at a Plasma Gun, I can see its Strength, but for the life of me, I just cannot find the strength of the weapon known as "Power fist".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except if the user is called to make a Strength test, mere possession of the Relic blade will *not* cause the user to be S6 for the purpose of the test. So the bearer is *not* S6 when making cc attacks, the weapon is.

Which leaves a hole in your assumptions.

Not sure if anyone else completely destroyed the point you just failed at making here, but no, there is no hole in what he just said and he didn't make any assumptions. He clearly stated the facts that for the terms of the game's resolution of an attack with a relic blade, the user of the relic blade has a str of 6 for that resolution only. This is what Sliggoth said, your bastardization is erroneous.

This is an example of how the game works like a program, the program queries the assault phase rules section where it states:

SPECIAL CLOSE COMBAT WEAPONS
These include more complex and powerful weapons
that enhance the wielder’s combat skills and confer
bonuses, and sometimes penalties, to the models using
them. The most widely used are listed below:

which clearly states that the special ccws confer bonuses on the model.... "The Most widely used are listed below" allows for more than those listed below and the Relic Blade is thus one of them. The relic blade section says that the hits are resolved at STR 6... whose str is 6? Well, the reality is that this question is irrelevant, but since the only guidance on the topic clearly states that CCWs confer bonuses on the models... then there is nothing which states that the weapon has any statistics to augment... the model, however, does. But yet again this is completely irrelevant, the game need only know that a hit from a model wielding a relic blade is resolved as if the model has STR 6 (since the weapon has no STR value). Finally, does a relic blade go flying around a battle field? No, it is wielded by a model. Thus it confers bonuses on the model wielding it...

QED

If you've read the thread, you'll see that nobody is arguing whether a power fist doubles the user's strength.

RobPro wrote:If you've read the thread, you'll see that nobody is arguing whether a power fist doubles the user's strength.

I've read a lot of the thread and it sure as hell sounds like people are still making the mistake that the power fist is somehow has a stat line and profile and the living metal some how forces the power fist to have only str 4. I'm trying to dig into that error and demonstrate that the pfist does not have a stat line and thus strikes against living metal from a term with a pfist are resolved at str 9.

Do people still disagree with this assertion? That a term with pfist and furious charge has str 9 against a monolith?

visavismeyou wrote:

RobPro wrote:If you've read the thread, you'll see that nobody is arguing whether a power fist doubles the user's strength.

I've read a lot of the thread and it sure as hell sounds like people are still making the mistake that the power fist is somehow has a stat line and profile and the living metal some how forces the power fist to have only str 4. I'm trying to dig into that error and demonstrate that the pfist does not have a stat line and thus strikes against living metal from a term with a pfist are resolved at str 9.

Do people still disagree with this assertion? That a term with pfist and furious charge has str 9 against a monolith?

Actually sir, the argument is for Furious Charge, not Powerfists. Powerfists and klaws were FAQed to working on the Monolith's Living Armor a while ago, the problem is GW didn't explain WHY that is, and as such, we have crazy confusion when Furious Charge ads a single strenght point on the charge.

Except, of course, that the rules specify that the +1 is added after doubling, meaning it's not the users base strength at all. If it was, then it would be (ST+1)x2 instread of (STx2)+1

I am aware. The +1 to Strenght happens between the two events. The Powerclaw doubles at the start of the game (or even before then) but before the actual attack.

Ork Cyborg wrote:Actually sir, the argument is for Furious Charge, not Powerfists. Powerfists and klaws were FAQed to working on the Monolith's Living Armor a while ago, the problem is GW didn't explain WHY that is, and as such, we have crazy confusion when Furious Charge ads a single strenght point on the charge.

Yea I know, I was trying to point out that it seems that people are still violating this. My MO was to get someone to admit what you just said then quote:

Furious Charge:
Models with this skill are known for the wild ferocity of
their assaults. In a turn in which they assaulted into
combat they add +1 to both their Initiative and Strength
characteristics when attacking in close combat (note
that this has no effect on the Initiative tests for
sweeping advances).

which quite clearly states that the model gets the plus 1; thus, I'm confused why there are 7 pages in this thread... GW's FaQ clearly reads exactly the same as the Furious Charge rule... model = user... I'm sure no one is going to try to make an erroneous distinction between model and "The user of a power fist".

How is Furious Charge not a bonus? You get no bonuses of any kind against a Monolith, aside from exceptions which are explicitly mentioned.

RobPro wrote:How is Furious Charge not a bonus? You get no bonuses of any kind against a Monolith, aside from exceptions which are explicitly mentioned.

I see this is where the errors lie, please stop using words such as "You", if you're more precise then you may start understanding how this works.

The statement of: "You get no bonuses of any kind against a monolith" is completely erroneous in multiple ways. First, "You" would be referring to a player, this is just obviously wrong. Second, the monolith only restricts bonuses to Weapons... not models, so a model may receive a bonus, however, a weapon may not. Thus, the model receives a plus 1 to STR from Furious charge even while charging a Monolith. Finally, from my recollection, you are COMPLETELY misrepresenting the codex entry. Perhaps that is the way you want to play your monolith, but it has no basis in reality (again according to my recollection which may be faulty).

Now, reality, I am not exceedingly and thoroughly familiar with Necrons, I do not own a Necron Codex so please, if you could provide the exact wording of the living metal entry that demonstrates that my understanding of how it works to be erred, then please provide me this exact wording. I am working on the knowledge gained while arguing this a few weeks ago. I read the codex entry then, but I do not have it in front of me now.

Page 42 requires that you use weapons to hit in close combat.

You have two types - normal and special. But either way you are still using weapons to hit, and you are told modifications do nothing to help you when using a weapon to hurt the monolith.

Sliggoth wrote:What does the living metal rule say? It says any WEAPON (yes any weapon) attacking gets str +d6.

Now, does it in any way, shape or form limit attacks to weapons? No it does not. It does say any weapon attack has limits, but it does not even address any attacks from a model's own strength.

So what does this mean? It simply means that living metal (under 5th edition rules) only affects shooting attacks. The way that cc attacks are resolved means that living metal doesnt interact with cc attacks at all.

It really is that simple. Living metal affects attacks from weapons. Close combat attacks fo not use weapons in their resolution. If a weapon even has a strength it is ignored in cc. It is always the model's own str that is used in cc.



PS please note the wording on the relic blade. The hits are resolved at str 6, so that means that the relic blade must set the model's str to 6. It is certainly POSSIBLE that the relic blade has a str itself of 6, but we arent told that. We are told that hits while using it are str 6 hits. Which in game terms means that the user has str 6.

Well, except that it does affect cc weapons.. specifically those that allow more than 1d6 for penetration. Chainswords I believe, mc attacks, etc...

Man, you people really need to stop reading rules word for word and trying to eek out every advantage you can from it.

The spirit of the rule is, in my opinion rather obviously, that any weapon that gets a bonus versus vehicles, does not get that bonus. If you look at the examples listed, it is "lance, melta, chainfists, and monstrous creatures" all things that get a specific bonus when hitting a vehicle. Powerfists and furious charge have no specific anti-vehicle parts to their abilities.

The difference is this for an ork:
S = Base strength + weapon modification (in the OP's example, base strength again) + 1 when charging
Armor penetration = S + 1d6 (base)

Versus a SM with a chainfist and furious charge:
S = Base strength + weapon modification (in this case, base strength again) + 1 when charging
Armor penetration = S + 1d6 (base) + 1d6 (anti-vehicle addition to a chanfist)

Or something with tankhunter
S = Base strength + weapon modification
Armor penetration = S + 1d6 (base) + 1 (anti-vehicle addition due to tankhunter)

Living Metal applies SPECIFICALLY to modifications to vehicle damage and penetration rolls, that's IT. A line that says "in practice..." has to be ignored the moment the base rules system changes, because the practice has changed. There's nothing that can be done about it.

@nos Pg 42 does NOT require that you use weapons to hit in close combat. Yhere is no such requirement on that page. (which is a very good thing for the deceiver, otherwise he could never hit in cc) Models that have weapons in cc will use them, yes. But there is no strength associated with those weapons, so the bulk of the living metal rules do not apply to cc weapons. If a cc weapon adds to armor pen (say a rending cc weapon) then yes that part of the rules will apply. Its the idea that models use weapons that means that tank hunter probably doesnt work...a weapon is being used and there is an add to the armor pen roll.

But furious charge adds to the model's own stength, which living metal doesnt affect in any way.



Sliggoth

The deceiver does have a weapon - a normal CCW in so much as anything that does not confer a bonus to CC is called a "normal" CCW.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Page 42 requires that you use weapons to hit in close combat.

You have two types - normal and special. But either way you are still using weapons to hit, and you are told modifications do nothing to help you when using a weapon to hurt the monolith.

Yet still, no one has quoted Living Metal verbatim where it says: "You may not use any modifications". Furthermore, where is the stat line for the power fist? You have yet to provide this either.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sliggoth wrote:@nos Pg 42 does NOT require that you use weapons to hit in close combat. Yhere is no such requirement on that page. (which is a very good thing for the deceiver, otherwise he could never hit in cc) Models that have weapons in cc will use them, yes. But there is no strength associated with those weapons, so the bulk of the living metal rules do not apply to cc weapons. If a cc weapon adds to armor pen (say a rending cc weapon) then yes that part of the rules will apply. Its the idea that models use weapons that means that tank hunter probably doesnt work...a weapon is being used and there is an add to the armor pen roll.

But furious charge adds to the model's own stength, which living metal doesnt affect in any way.



Sliggoth

Sliggoth, I suggest you do not even approach those people who advance this nonsense about whether or not you use a weapon to hit in CC since it is completely irrelevant, they are wrong either way.

visavismeyou wrote:
Yet still, no one has quoted Living Metal verbatim where it says: "You may not use any modifications". Furthermore, where is the stat line for the power fist? You have yet to provide this either.

I provided it about 3 pages back.

Kevin949 wrote:The monolith is made of living necron metal which is not only self-repairing but is capable of adapting its structure to resist incoming attacks. Attacks which count the targets armour value as being less than it really is (such as bright lances and blasters) do not do so against the monolith. Similarily, weaapons that get additional armour penetration dice (such as chainfists, monstrous creatures or melta weapons) do not get the extra dice against the monolith. Ordnance weapons still roll 2d6 for armour penetration and select the highest score. In practice, any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what.

There you go, the whole living metal entry verbatim.

Sliggoth - all page 63 states is "strength of the attacker" - which is not necessarily their Strength statistic. For example Relic blades do not confer strength 6 to the wielder, but their hits are at S6 - which implies the weapon is what is performing the hits.

Page 42 tells us weapons are used in close combat, and does not give you any alternative as to what to use, so you must use the weapon - nothing else has permission.

Kevin949 wrote:

visavismeyou wrote:
Yet still, no one has quoted Living Metal verbatim where it says: "You may not use any modifications". Furthermore, where is the stat line for the power fist? You have yet to provide this either.

I provided it about 3 pages back.

Kevin949 wrote:The monolith is made of living necron metal which is not only self-repairing but is capable of adapting its structure to resist incoming attacks. Attacks which count the targets armour value as being less than it really is (such as bright lances and blasters) do not do so against the monolith. Similarily, weaapons that get additional armour penetration dice (such as chainfists, monstrous creatures or melta weapons) do not get the extra dice against the monolith. Ordnance weapons still roll 2d6 for armour penetration and select the highest score. In practice, any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what.

There you go, the whole living metal entry verbatim.

Excellent, thank you, what this is quite clearly saying, as I remembered, is that weapons that have a profile can have augmented strength, weapons that dont have a profile and instead confer bonuses onto a model still confer those bonuses onto the model; models that gain bonuses from abilities still gain those abilities.

Please point out how I am misunderstanding the line, "Any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what" interferes with furious charge in anyway? Is furious charge a weapon? No... is a model a weapon? No... Does furious charge augment the strength of a weapon? No... Do powerfists augment the strength of a weapon? No... So why is there an argument?

Please, I'm being completely serious and honest when I beg someone to point out how I'm misunderstanding this. I even contacted a friend of mine earlier today who plays necrons to ask him if I was missing something, originally he said what so many in this thread have said that "You may not use any modifications" and then I asked him to pull out his necron book and point out to me where the necron book says this and he couldn't find it. Eventually after looking at the book and FAQ's and talking to other people he agreed with me. People, such as Nosferatu1001 and my friend before he read the codex verbatim, are reading this how they wish it to be, not how it actually is... The necron book does not say anything about "no modifications at all".




Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Sliggoth - all page 63 states is "strength of the attacker" - which is not necessarily their Strength statistic. For example Relic blades do not confer strength 6 to the wielder, but their hits are at S6 - which implies the weapon is what is performing the hits.

Page 42 tells us weapons are used in close combat, and does not give you any alternative as to what to use, so you must use the weapon - nothing else has permission.

But if the relic blade is a special weapon... then it must fall under the category I quoted earlier... You are stepping outside of the rules to have this be the way you wish it to be, the rules state that SCCWs confer their abilities to the wielder and the rules are completely tacit on everything else you're trying to conjure up.

I, however, am a fan of stepping outside of either camp about the relic blade, that is, camp 1, "It confer's its strength 6 to the wielder" and camp 2, "The relic blade is able to magically create its own profile for just this one hit which magically disappears afterwards". I am actually against both camps because I understand what it means to say "Resolves as if". Neither camp is needed to make the game mechanic work properly, thus, the argument is irrelevant. When the game mechanic attempts to find out what the STR of the hit is, the relic blade rules comeback and respond with "Str 6". The game doesn't ask any other questions, the game does not care if it is the stat line of the model or the stat line of the weapon.

@Nos Actually, Pg 38 under rolling to wound explains precicly what is used in cc, and its the model's strength charactersitic. Also, pg 37 explains exactly how we use the model's WS to determine hits. Please notice that weapons arent involved in either stage here of cc. Neither in rolling to hit or rolling to wound is a weapon used.
Also, please actually read the deceiver's listing, we are told that he does not carry any weapons. Nothing, nada, zip...no weapons are involved and yet people have used him in cc for years.

The relic blade tells us that hits are done at str 6 yes...but its still the model doing the hits, unless somehow the relic blade has a WS? So it is the model that is performing the hits. Even if the relic blade were taken to have a str of 6....that would mean that only models arned with a relic balde would be affected by the living metal rule? Since there has been no hint that any other weapon has a strength for cc? There really is nothing in the relic blade rule that tells us anything beyond that the hits themselves are str 6, neither the model nor the weapon.

The rules tell us that weapons can provide all sorts of bonus effects. There is nothing in the rules that suggests weapons are required for cc.


Sliggoth

Except the BRB defines anything which does not provide a bonus in CC as a "normal" CCW, whatever they actually are.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except the BRB defines anything which does not provide a bonus in CC as a "normal" CCW, whatever they actually are.

oh god, wrong again, so very very very wrong...

"Normal Close combat weapons do not provide a bonus in CC" IS NOT THE SAME AS "Whatever does not provide a bonus in CC is "normal". You are committing the fallacy of confusing necessary with sufficient conditions, please, for the love of god, Nos, back out of this conversation, you have been wrong about everything.

NORMAL CLOSE COMBAT WEAPONS
Weapons like chainswords, rifle butts, combat blades,
bayonets, etc., do not confer any particular bonus to
the model using them. Remember that, in close
combat, pistols count as normal close combat weapons
and so the Strength and AP of the pistol are ignored

So you are stating that ther eis a 3rd type of weapon, not defined in the BRB?

There are two types of weapon: normal and special. If what you use as a weapon (as you are told you MUST use weapons) is not a special weapon, it is a normal weapon.

Please vis, just back out.

nosferatu1001 wrote:So you are stating that ther eis a 3rd type of weapon, not defined in the BRB?

Nope



Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except the BRB defines anything which does not provide a bonus in CC as a "normal" CCW, whatever they actually are.

Rulebook:
IF "A" is a weapon and it is normal, THEN it does not confer any bonus to the model using them.

Nosferatu1001:
IF "A" is a weapon and it does not provide a bonus in CC, THEN it is a "Normal CCW".

You are mixing the rulebook's sufficient condition with its necessary condition. This is a proof, you cannot disagree with it.

It is an invalid proof, like most of yours.

You ignore that, if there are only two types of weapon and you are NOT one type, then you MUST be the other type.

nosferatu1001 wrote:It is an invalid proof, like most of yours.

You ignore that, if there are only two types of weapon and you are NOT one type, then you MUST be the other type.

You assert without providing any justification that its invalid... Why?

Furthermore, I'm not talking about the types of weapons, I'm pointing out that your attempt at analysis is wrong, you mixed the necessary and sufficient conditions. I already pointed out that your whole pursuit is irrelevant. You have not addressed the reality I pointed out earlier:

"Any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what" does not interfere with furious charge in anyway. Is furious charge a weapon? No... is a model a weapon? No... Does furious charge augment the strength of a weapon? No... Do powerfists augment the strength of a weapon? No...

This reality shows that living metal does not talk about Powerfists nor Furious charge since they confer bonuses onto models and not to weapons. Since living armor is tacit, and the rules explicitly permit the strength augmentation to the model... a term with furious charge charging a monolith will start with Str9 and add d6. Everything else you have to say about anything else is irrelevant. Relic blade is not relevant because the hit is resolved as if it is S6, this has nothing to do with Living Metal and Living Metal has nothing to do with Relic Blades.

The justification is on the next line. I assumed you could read that far. Sorry for overestimating you!

So, since you agree there are only two types of weapon, and we know that the type of weapon is not special, you surely agree that the weapon is Normal?

Can you at least admit your error in your "proof"?

While normally you would be correct, you ignore the restriction the turns the necesary into necessary and sufficient condition. Unless you pretend there is a 3rd type not defined, but you have already admitted you dont so.....

Edit: and relic blades do not hit "as if", their hits ARE S6. Big difference.

I have no intention of addressing your other point as yet, until you admit your error.

nosferatu1001 wrote:The justification is on the next line. I assumed you could read that far. Sorry for overestimating you!

So, since you agree there are only two types of weapon, and we know that the type of weapon is not special, you surely agree that the weapon is Normal?

Can you at least admit your error in your "proof"?

While normally you would be correct, you ignore the restriction the turns the necesary into necessary and sufficient condition. Unless you pretend there is a 3rd type not defined, but you have already admitted you dont so.....

Edit: and relic blades do not hit "as if", their hits ARE S6. Big difference.

I have no intention of addressing your other point as yet, until you admit your error.

Sure I'll admit that I was wrong about something that is completely irrelevant. Now, as you promised, address the relevant point and only the relevant point do not vacillate and ignore the relevant and only point that matters in this discussion:

visavismeyou wrote:"Any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what" does not interfere with furious charge in anyway. Is furious charge a weapon? No... is a model a weapon? No... Does furious charge augment the strength of a weapon? No... Do powerfists augment the strength of a weapon? No...

This reality shows that living metal does not talk about Powerfists nor Furious charge since they confer bonuses onto models and not to weapons. Since living armor is tacit, and the rules explicitly permit the strength augmentation to the model... a term with furious charge charging a monolith will start with Str9 and add d6.

Finally! So any chance you can retract your inaccurate statement "this is a proof, you cannot disagree with it" as I did disagree with it (showing you were wrong) and proved that I was correct.

The point is that you *must* use weapons in close combat. So the line about unaugmented strength of the weapon *does* apply.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Finally! So any chance you can retract your inaccurate statement "this is a proof, you cannot disagree with it" as I did disagree with it (showing you were wrong) and proved that I was correct.

The point is that you *must* use weapons in close combat. So the line about unaugmented strength of the weapon *does* apply.

So you completely ignored:

"Any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what" does not interfere with furious charge in anyway. Is furious charge a weapon? No... is a model a weapon? No... Does furious charge augment the strength of a weapon? No... Do powerfists augment the strength of a weapon? No...

Furious charge does not augment the strength of a weapon... the model is not a weapon... FC augments the models strength and the Living Metal text that was cited earlier does not talk about the model's strength. Please respond to this point.

Furthermore, the following is the text that I have in front of me (Friend's Necron Codex), please tell me why my wording is different from the one that was quoted earlier.

Living Metal:
The Monolith is made of living necron metal which is not only self-repairing but is capable of adapting its structure to resist incoming attacks. Attacks which count the target's Armour Value as being less than it really is (such as bright lances and blasters) do not do so against the Monolith. Similarly, weapons that get additional Armour Penetration dice (such as chainfists, monstrous creatures or melta weapons) do not get the extra dice against the Monolith. Ordanence weapons still roll 2d6 for Armour Penetration and select the highest score.

If this is not the latest text, please tell me why my friends is old or wrong, where is the most recent? Is there an errata I cannot find? If this is the proper text then there is nothing about strength and much of this debate is completely irrelevant.

This is not the current text, if you compare the ISBN number yours has a "1" at the end of the 5 digit segment, the current has a "4", from memory - if you check back earlier in the thread the full ISBNs were quoted.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Yes, you have the older version.

the one with the added line "in practice...." has a similar ISBN - instead it is 84154

My ISBN is 1-84154-190-7

It says nothing about strength. Not to mention, you have still not responded to my point, the model's strength is being augmented not the weapon, thus, Living Metal (in any edition) does not speak about the model's strength, thus, a Term with power fists furiously charging will attack with str 9 and a hit from a runic blade is str 6 under any edition of the codex.

The codex does say "second printing" on the very very first page in the middle towards the bottom.

So yea, I still dont see anyone throughout this thread or the people I've been talking to about this address the point:

Furious charge does not augment the strength of a weapon... the model is not a weapon... FC augments the model's strength and the Living Metal text does not talk about the model's strength. Since weapons without profiles use the profile of the model, Living Metal does not interfere with any augmentation of the model's strength.

The point is that you *must* use weapons in close combat. So the line about unaugmented strength of the weapon *does* apply

Except....weapons do not have a strength in cc (lets just say atm that the relic blade may have a strength, so all other weapons do not have a strength). So living metal can only possibly apply to a model using a relic blade.

And please not, there is still nothing suggesting that a model has to have a weapon to attack in cc. This point has been raised several times and not addressed either.

1) Weapons do not have a strength in cc (possibly excepting the relic blade, that being the only example that has been subnitted as possinly having a str).

2) There is no requirement that a model actually have a weapon to fight in cc.


Sliggoth

Except by fighting in CC you are either using a normal or special CCW - by the definition of such. In addition the rules for close combat require that you attack using weapons. While the rules for penetrating vehicles make no mention, they dont need to - the initial rules cover this.

So, you need to use a weapon, whether normal or special (and if you dont have a special weapon you DO hava normal, b y definition) and this weapon cannot be augmented in any way.

Vis - I didnt reply uintil you seemed to have the right version of the book. Did you not include the "in practice" line from the very end deliberately, or do you not have the current, correct version of the codex?

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except by fighting in CC you are either using a normal or special CCW - by the definition of such. In addition the rules for close combat require that you attack using weapons. While the rules for penetrating vehicles make no mention, they dont need to - the initial rules cover this.

So, you need to use a weapon, whether normal or special (and if you dont have a special weapon you DO hava normal, b y definition) and this weapon cannot be augmented in any way.

Can you quote the relevant pages/rules? My cursory glance through the assault rules leads me to believe that these claims aren't supported. A 'rifle butt' isn't a weapon or piece of wargear on any model I know of, and I know of plenty who don't have CC weapons but fight in CC just fine (No, they don't have a normal CC weapon. You haven't provided any evidence that they actually do.).

The attack rules on 37 say 'Each engaged model strikes with the number of attacks on its characteristics profile' and makes no mention of a weapon requirement. The to-hit rules don't mention weapons being required. The to-wound rules say 'cross reference the attacker's strength characteristic with the defender's toughness', and later says only 'in most cases... you use the strength on the attackers profile regardless of what weapon they are using. Some close combat weapons give the attacker a strength bonus...' which is nothing close to actually requiring a weapon.

Whatever...

Even if it was, it doesn't change how the rules work regarding living metal.
Furious charge alters the MODELS actual strength characteristic, and does so noticably before it takes its swings at the monolith. A power fist "doubles the user's strength", an obvious model strength augmentation, never has a defined strength value itself, and clearly functions normally anyway under the FAQ. Unless we're throwing out the FAQ ruling because it allows a model strength CC augmentation to work just fine, then FC works just fine.

There are two types of weapon, normal and close combat. Anything used to attack whcih does not provide a bonus is a normal weapon.

So claws, rifle butts, bolters etc would all be normal ccw - not singlehanded, just "normal".

They don't do anything in-game so it's kind of pointless to bother defining them.

Except the rules do, in order to differentiate them from "special" CCW.

Also, normal *singlehanded* close combat weapons DO do something in game - they can confer an extra attack. So again, it is important that their is a distinction between the two.

Normal CCWS give an extra attack. "Hand Weapons" like claws, rifle butts, whatever, do not give extra attacks - those are pointless to define. This is why a Space Marine with armed with only a Bolter and a Bolt Pistol does not get a bonus attack.

No, normal *single handed* CCW give an extra attack. You have made up "hand weapons" as a class - they are Normal CCW as the BRB defines. THIS is why a tac marine only has A1, as it lacks 2 *singlehanded* CCW [that dont exclude for other reasons, eg. pwoerfists.]

While you may say they are "pointless" to define, never the less the BRB DOES define them. I also pointed out why there was a, er, point to define them - because of the extra attack bonus. If you have 2 single handed normal CCW you have an extra attack, you dont need to concern yourself as to whether they are the *right* two CCW, which you do have to be concerned with when you have special CCW.

Bolters, rifle butts, whatever are not normal close combat weapons, despite what the first line under "Normal Close Combat Weapons" implies - otherwise having just a Bolter and a Bolt Pistol would qualify you as having two close combat weapons and give a bonus attack. Only wargear defined as normal Close Combat Weapons (including all pistols) are CCW.

For the last time - No. Plus, it does not imply, it strictly defines them.

Only 2 *single handed" normal close combat weapons give you a bonus attack. Is the bolter singlehanded? No? Then it does not give you a bonus attack.

Ok, are we still arguing that you think CC attacks are resolved at 0 + 1d6?

nosferatu1001 wrote:For the last time - No. Plus, it does not imply, it strictly defines them.

Only 2 *single handed" normal close combat weapons give you a bonus attack. Is the bolter singlehanded? No? Then it does not give you a bonus attack.

A bolter is never strictly defined as a close combat weapon at all. You're making this all up by reading too far into the normal CCW section.
The rules don't actually say that a bolter is or counts as a normal CCW, or that it has a rifle butt/bayonet that can be used as a normal CCW, or anything of the sort. Or that you need a weapon to fight in CC.

Not that it matters, since it has nothing to do with how living metal works, no matter how far down this random tangent we go while you ignore major points against you and only pick out minor arguments.

You consider it a random tangent, I consider it important to define what weapons are as that leads into the "unaugmented strength of the weapon" side.

Sometimes not every point can be attacked immediately, you have to build a basis.

@Nos And part of your basis is being built on sand. Can you provide somthing to contradict either of the following?

1) There is no requirement that a model has to have a weapon in order to attack in cc.

2) Most weapons do not have a strength for cc. (Pg 42 is especially helpful on this part ""in close combat, pistols count as normal close combat weapons and so the Strength and AP of the pistol are ignored")

You have stated that you need to use a weapon, and this part of your basis is fundamentally flawed. Some models do not have cc weapons.


Sliggoth

Except, as has been pointed out, they do have "normal close combat weapons", as defined on page 42.

@ Nos nice way to avoid answering the other two points And no, pg 42 does give a list of things that are cc weapons, but that doesnt help for some models. No matter how that list is stretched and expanded, it cant give a weapon to the deceiver (conveniently in the necron codex) because the deceiver's own listing says that he has no weapons. And then flip over the page to the nightbringer to find that he also has a rule telling us that while he has a scythe it is purely for show....


And that still fails to answer the two points.



Sliggoth

This will wait unti lI am by a rulebook again....

However page 42 does define anything you use in close combat to attack that has no special bonuses to be a normal CCW. So even if the codex states they have no weapons they do when attacking in close combat.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except by fighting in CC you are either using a normal or special CCW - by the definition of such. In addition the rules for close combat require that you attack using weapons. While the rules for penetrating vehicles make no mention, they dont need to - the initial rules cover this.

So, you need to use a weapon, whether normal or special (and if you dont have a special weapon you DO hava normal, b y definition) and this weapon cannot be augmented in any way.

Vis - I didnt reply uintil you seemed to have the right version of the book. Did you not include the "in practice" line from the very end deliberately, or do you not have the current, correct version of the codex?

As I clearly said: "Any version" that means I've read the version quoted in this thread. Yet again you sidestep my point for fake reasons. I quoted what I had in the book in front of me to try to see if there were two versions, as there are. So I went back to the one that was quoted which includes "In practice" because it doesn't matter, you're still wrong.

]Furious charge does not augment the strength of a weapon... the model is not a weapon... FC augments the model's strength and the Living Metal text does not talk about the model's strength. Since weapons without profiles use the profile of the model, Living Metal does not interfere with any augmentation of the model's strength.

I question if you have the correct version of the codex because I am now looking at the correct version and nowhere in there does it agree with you:

nosferatu1001 wrote:But either way you are still using weapons to hit, and you are told modifications do nothing to help you when using a weapon to hurt the monolith.

No where in the Necron codex does it say "Not allowed to use any modifications", so what is the ISBN of the book you're using that states: "You are not allowed to use any modifications when attacking a monolith" ??? The version I see now says what Kevin949 quoted:

Kevin949 wrote:The monolith is made of living necron metal which is not only self-repairing but is capable of adapting its structure to resist incoming attacks. Attacks which count the targets armour value as being less than it really is (such as bright lances and blasters) do not do so against the monolith. Similarily, weaapons that get additional armour penetration dice (such as chainfists, monstrous creatures or melta weapons) do not get the extra dice against the monolith. Ordnance weapons still roll 2d6 for armour penetration and select the highest score. In practice, any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what.

There you go, the whole living metal entry verbatim.

Modquisition on.

Lets ratchet it down people.

Sigh, back to the insults.

No, I did not "sidestep" due to "fake reasons" - you quoted PART of the rule so I was checking that, indeed, you were reading the correct & entire rule - as you claimed there was no mention of the word "strength", which is complete baloney.

BTW - unaugmented == un modified. Unless you have a different definition? So saying no modifers allowed (and FC IS a modifier, BRB defines this nicely) is equivalent to saying no augments.

Powerfists are FAQd to work in terms of doubling strength, but that does not mean furious charge works - your premise (FAQ lets PK/PF work) does not agree with your conclusion (furious charge works)

Vis - I will make this clear. I have *no intention* of engaging in further "debate" with you, as I am tired of your constant sniping and insults. No doubt this will lead you to calling me an intellectual coward , however I have no time for your style of "debate".

nosferatu1001 wrote:Sigh, back to the insults.

No, I did not "sidestep" due to fake reasons - you quoted PART of the rule so I was checking that, indeed, you were reading the correct & entire rule - as you claimed there was no mention of the word "strength", which is complete baloney.

BTW - unaugmented == un modified. Unless you have a different definition? So saying no modifers allowed (and FC IS a modifier, BRB defines this nicely) is equivalent to saying no augments.

Powerfists are FAQd to work in terms of doubling strength, but that does not mean furious charge works - your premise (FAQ lets PK/PF work) does not agree with your conclusion (furious charge works)

Nope no insults, you're still sidestepping the point, nowhere in the text does it talk about furious charge, you misunderstood my argument. I did not say the FAQ means that furious charge works. The FACT that living metal does not talk about models means that furious charge works. Again, you're wrong and I did not insult you.

Yes, unmodified WEAPONS not MODELS


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Vis - I will make this clear. I have *no intention* of engaging in further "debate" with you, as I am tired of your constant sniping and insults. No doubt this will lead you to calling me an intellectual coward , however I have no time for your style of "debate".

You mean you have no time to be wrong. The rules still do not say "Models may not receive any modifications to their stats". Ye I will snipe your false accusations, I did not insult you, you are lying and slandering me I demand you retract it or that a mod warn you.

You are still refusing to admit that the text states: "Weapons" may not be modified, but you are still completely ignoring that Furious Charge does not augment the strength of a WEAPON, if it did then the text would say something about furious charge, FC Augments the STR of a MODEL; this is never talked about in the necron codex. Since you sidestepped that point, yet again, you have admitted you're wrong.

Vis - then your premise was badly worded. You talk about the change by fiat, then say "thus you are completely wrong" - and as the only debate is over furious charge, you are drawing the conclusion that furious charge works from the premise that powerfists work. That is flawed.

Maybe just yet more inaccuracies, as I did not sidestep the point - I had a valid concern that you a) did not have the correct rule (as you only quoted part of it) or that b) you deliberately did not quote all of it, as you were claiming the rules said nothing about strength - which they do.

Anyway, last attempt at "debate" with you. as I said earlier (and you doubtless ignored) until I can get back in front of rulebooks to debate with other posters I will avoid this particular argument.

EDIT: jsut to make it clear - not sidestepping as I dont have any intention of debating *you* on this.

EDIT2: sigh. nope, not lying - you have insulted me, that is provably true as an insult is opinion based. And for a self professed member of the legal profession please get it right (you got it wrong in your previous insulting PMs as well) - when it is written the charge is "libel", not slander.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Vis - then your premise was badly worded. You talk about the change by fiat, then say "thus you are completely wrong" - and as the only debate is over furious charge, you are drawing the conclusion that furious charge works from the premise that powerfists work. That is flawed.

Maybe just yet more inaccuracies, as I did not sidestep the point - I had a valid concern that you a) did not have the correct rule (as you only quoted part of it) or that b) you deliberately did not quote all of it, as you were claiming the rules said nothing about strength - which they do.

Anyway, last attempt at "debate" with you. as I said earlier (and you doubtless ignored) until I can get back in front of rulebooks to debate with other posters I will avoid this particular argument.

That was a conjunction.... not a premise... My premise is the thing you keep ignoring (and now a 6th time you ignored it) that Living Metal does not talk about the type of thing that Furious Charge augments, FC augments a model, not a weapon. This is a fact.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:EDIT: jsut to make it clear - not sidestepping as I dont have any intention of debating *you* on this.

Irrelevant, you're still sidestepping that FC augments a MODEL. You've side stepped this from other people too so you're lying.

Nos, please get to a rule book before you answer any more, that may be part of the problem. Memory can be a fickle thing at times, especially for the fine points that you are trying to make.


Pg 42 doesnt say what you appear to think it says. The rule telling us about how the weapons are grouped into two categories is specfically talking about the knives, frag grenades, swords, power weapons and pistols that troops are carrying. To parphrase: troops often bear these weapons and in terms of rules these weapons are grouped into two categories, normal and special. Nothing suggesting that weapons are required for cc.


Sliggoth

Which is what I am trying to do, but that isnt good enough for one particular poster.....

Thanks for staying rational and level headed in this

nosferatu1001 wrote:Which is what I am trying to do, but that isnt good enough for one particular poster.....

Thanks for staying rational and level headed in this

Nothing untoward about requiring that you read:

Kevin949 wrote:The monolith is made of living necron metal which is not only self-repairing but is capable of adapting its structure to resist incoming attacks. Attacks which count the targets armour value as being less than it really is (such as bright lances and blasters) do not do so against the monolith. Similarily, weaapons that get additional armour penetration dice (such as chainfists, monstrous creatures or melta weapons) do not get the extra dice against the monolith. Ordnance weapons still roll 2d6 for armour penetration and select the highest score. In practice, any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what.

There you go, the whole living metal entry verbatim.

correctly, it says "Weapon" not "Model", FC augments a model, not a weapon. Also, you dont need to be in front of a rulebook for you to read the above.

Except I have a different contention to you, one that requires other rules. As I have attempted to explain, and you either ignore or discount as being relevant.

So feel free to continue with your false claims, it wont get you anywhere.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except I have a different contention to you, one that requires other rules. As I have attempted to explain, and you either ignore or discount as being relevant.

So feel free to continue with your false claims, it wont get you anywhere.

Correction, I discount them as being irrelevant*

The fact that you, and others, have been saying things like:

nosferatu1001 wrote:BTW - unaugmented == un modified. Unless you have a different definition? So saying no modifers allowed (and FC IS a modifier, BRB defines this nicely) is equivalent to saying no augments.

nosferatu1001 wrote:But either way you are still using weapons to hit, and you are told modifications do nothing to help you when using a weapon to hurt the monolith.

RobPro wrote:How is Furious Charge not a bonus? You get no bonuses of any kind against a Monolith, aside from exceptions which are explicitly mentioned.

clearly demonstrates that you do not understand the living metal rule. To refresh our memory:

Kevin949 wrote:The monolith is made of living necron metal which is not only self-repairing but is capable of adapting its structure to resist incoming attacks. Attacks which count the targets armour value as being less than it really is (such as bright lances and blasters) do not do so against the monolith. Similarily, weaapons that get additional armour penetration dice (such as chainfists, monstrous creatures or melta weapons) do not get the extra dice against the monolith. Ordnance weapons still roll 2d6 for armour penetration and select the highest score. In practice, any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what.

What is in question is

In practice, any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what.

Hence forth I will refer to this as the "strength clause"

The words and phrases you are misunderstanding are:

"any weapon"
"its"
"no matter what"

First, in order to find out if living metal interacts with some other rule, we must find out if the other rule fits the scope or context of the living weapon rules. Thus, we look at the context of the strength clause of the living metal rule. The strength clause starts out by narrowing down to "any weapon", thus the context is that this rule will interact with the rules for weapons somehow. This leaves out models, abilities, terrain, deployment and anything else in the game that you can talk about, the context is weapons and weapons alone; [Note: I will not attempt to delve into any speculation of what the writers were intending at this time, I will simply speak about the words on the page, with that said, I have a very cogent speculative argument in addition to this flawless logical analysis argument.] Then the strength clause moves on to make a distinction about how it interacts with the relevant weapon rules; specifically, the strength clause states, "[weapons used against the monolith] ...will roll for armour penetration using >its< unaugmented strength and a single d6". In this segment the strength clause clearly use the possessive pronoun, "its" to refer back to "weapon". Thus we can decipher this sentence to mean, "Weapons used against the monolith will roll d6+ the weapon's unaugmented strength".

Thus, weapons that do not have a strength value are not within the context; furthermore since the words, "weapon" and "model" are not synonymous, the living metal rules do not talk about how furious charge augments the strength of a model and as such the living metal rule does not interfere with the furious charge rules; it is all about context, if a rule is outside the context of living metal, then it is not affected by it.

My argument, tersely stated, is: Since a model's strength is outside the context of the living metal rule, the living metal rule does not interfere with any method of augmenting a model's strength.

I color coded my argument, Cyan is my evidence, Green is my conclusion.

Edit: A further clarification is needed to direct my argument to the discussion between Nos and Sliggoth. Is it true, as Nos asserts, that we use weapons to attack the monolith even in CC, even when we are using normal CC weapons? Yes, however, there is one fatal flaw in Nos' argument. I agree we use weapons to attack a monolith (sometimes), however, do we use the strength of the weapon in the case of power fists? This is an unequivocal no, we do not use power fists's stat line (which does not exist) to attack in CC. Thus, when the furious charge rules are in play, does furious charge augment the strength of the weapon? No, the furious charge rules clearly state that the model is being augmented. Finally (in this edit) does the monolith rules encompass every attack in which a model uses a weapon? No. This is the death knell for Nos' argument. The monolith rules clearly have a context, and that context only extends to the point in which the weapon has a strength (like a Storm Bolter) in cases where a weapon does not have a strength, the monolith rules are completely silent because as the rules clearly state, attacks which are made using weapons that do not have a stat line (or where the rules remove the stat line) use the state line of the model, since furious charge augments the model's stat line and not the weapons, the monolith rules are completely silent.

In order for Nos to be correct the rules must be changed to state: "Whenever a weapon is used against the monolith, the user's strength may not be augmented". Until the rules are changed in this fashion, Nos cannot be correct as he violates the context of the rules as written.



Finally, people are running too far with "no matter what"; this broad phrase must be, as all things must be, in a context, since the scope (the context) of this sentence is limited to "Weapons" one must always look at "no matter what" within the realm of "Weapons"; anything outside of the realm of weapons (as in models getting a bonus) is not covered in the living metal rule, since the rules are permissive, you are not permitted to apply the living metal rule to furious charge.

Quod Erat Demonstrandum

Eh, nevermind.

Your argument breaks down when we include Wych Blades and Relic Blades into the mix. You haven't addressed them at all.

OK, this was taken from this batrep -

"[Here came the game's only rules dispute, as Necronoob and D'Ork try to determine how the Monolith's Living Metal special rule (which limits the armor penetration and strength bonuses of attacks against the 'lith) interacts with the Power Klaw and the Furious Charge rule. We decide to give the Orks the doubled strength of the PK, but not the +1 Strength of the Furious Charge. For future reference, a careful reading of the rules, a review of the Necron FAQ's, and consultation with GW Fairfax indicates that the Orks should have received both the x2 str of the PK and the +1 of the Furious Charge.]"

http://wasted-knights.blogspot.com/2010/05/orks-vs-necrons-2000-points-april-30.html

Kevin949 wrote:For future reference, a careful reading of the rules, a review of the Necron FAQ's, and consultation with GW Fairfax indicates that the Orks should have received both the x2 str of the PK and the +1 of the Furious Charge.]"

GW stores have a history of being wrong.

For example, saying that you can use Hellfire Shells in any Bolt weapon. So that kinda falls flat.

Well I'm inclined to believe them over anyone saying you strike at 0 +d6 in CC against a monolith.

And just because GW stores have been wrong doesn't mean people on the internet aren't. *Shrug*

Agree to disagree then!

Anyways, on topic, I see this more as a "how you would play it" more than a direct ruling.

RobPro wrote:Your argument breaks down when we include Wych Blades and Relic Blades into the mix. You haven't addressed them at all.

Yes I have, because your point does not preclude the fact that Furious Charge still does not augment the strength of any weapon... EVER...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kevin949 wrote:OK, this was taken from this batrep -

"[Here came the game's only rules dispute, as Necronoob and D'Ork try to determine how the Monolith's Living Metal special rule (which limits the armor penetration and strength bonuses of attacks against the 'lith) interacts with the Power Klaw and the Furious Charge rule. We decide to give the Orks the doubled strength of the PK, but not the +1 Strength of the Furious Charge. For future reference, a careful reading of the rules, a review of the Necron FAQ's, and consultation with GW Fairfax indicates that the Orks should have received both the x2 str of the PK and the +1 of the Furious Charge.]"

http://wasted-knights.blogspot.com/2010/05/orks-vs-necrons-2000-points-april-30.html

Rather interesting.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Eternal Newb wrote:GW stores have a history of being wrong.

For example, saying that you can use Hellfire Shells in any Bolt weapon. So that kinda falls flat.

Association does not entail necessity, just because some GW stores have made bad calls does not necessitate that all GW store's calls are going to be bad.

Ok, but how do Wychblades get to strike at S9 against vehicles if you use the strength of the models instead? How do relic blades get to strike at S6? You haven't offered any explanations for any of those cases.

Eternal Newb wrote:Agree to disagree then!

Anyways, on topic, I see this more as a "how you would play it" more than a direct ruling.

Really? Irrespective of the fact that at no time does furious charge ever augment a weapon? And the Living Metal rule only talks about weapons?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

RobPro wrote:Ok, but how do Wychblades get to strike at S9 against vehicles if you use the strength of the models instead? How do relic blades get to strike at S6? You haven't offered any explanations for any of those cases.

I am not going to respond to either of those cases, want to know why? They are completely irrelevant to whether or not Furious Charge works against the Monolith... Furious charge augments the model, the model with power fists are assaulting a monolith, thus the model gets the +1 str.

I will talk about extraordinary cases after you admit that furious charge augments models. Neither of those cases are relevant to furious charge.

RobPro wrote:Ok, but how do Wychblades get to strike at S9 against vehicles if you use the strength of the models instead? How do relic blades get to strike at S6? You haven't offered any explanations for any of those cases.

wychblades and relic blades get to strike at those strengths because they have a special rule that say they do. exactly like a the wolf tooth necklace says the model always hits on a 3+ even though it has a ws. your mentioning oranges when the discussions about apples. the living metal rule is pretty specific in what it dosent allow i.e extra dice to penetrate armour .

visavismeyou wrote:
Really? Irrespective of the fact that at no time does furious charge ever augment a weapon? And the Living Metal rule only talks about weapons?

*shrug* Considering how this entire thread has gone literally no where, seeing it as "how would you play it" would be a much simpler then arguing in circles.

RobPro wrote:Ok, but how do Wychblades get to strike at S9 against vehicles if you use the strength of the models instead? How do relic blades get to strike at S6? You haven't offered any explanations for any of those cases.

While I am waiting on you to respond to me I will respond to your 2 points.

Witchblades

These psychically attuned weapons are often carried by
Eldar psykers. All hits scored in close combat by models
armed with a witchblade inflict wounds on a roll of 2+,
regardless of the target’s Toughness. Armour saves are
taken as normal. Against vehicles, the wielder of a
witchblade counts his Strength as 9.

"The wielder ... counts his strength as 9"
... quite obvious... The living metal rules do not talk about this case, thus, use the rules as written, thus a model with a witchblade attacking a monolith will penetrate with s9+d6.

Relic Blade
Since the Relic Blade does not have a profile, the living metal rule does not speak about it, as such follow the rules as they are written, the hits are resolved at s6... simple...

More questions?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Eternal Newb wrote:

visavismeyou wrote:
Really? Irrespective of the fact that at no time does furious charge ever augment a weapon? And the Living Metal rule only talks about weapons?

*shrug* Considering how this entire thread has gone literally no where, seeing it as "how would you play it" would be a much simpler then arguing in circles.

I've yet to argue in circles, I've pointed out facts... They're quite clear. I think it is important that the community understand the rules as written as opposed the rules as some people wish them to be (Such as Nos and Rob).

RobPro wrote:Ok, but how do Wychblades get to strike at S9 against vehicles if you use the strength of the models instead? How do relic blades get to strike at S6? You haven't offered any explanations for any of those cases.

Do Wychblades or Relic Blades affect the Monolith's AV? No. Do they get extra D6 in CC? No. Do they rend? No. Do they hit at a set strength in Close Combat? Yes. The Relic Blade can't hurt a Monolith, the Withcblade has a chance.

These weapons hit at a strength, regardless of who wields them, PF's/PK's are conditionally strong based on who holds them.

The argument about FC is over in my eyes. FC doesn't affect the AV and doesn't grant an additional armor penetration dice. I think the implication with the phrase "no matter what" was to prevent people from rolling 2D6 against the armor. Which having FC clearly does not do.

Also, wasn't that Codex stealth re-written in 3rd edition still? I've got a first Edition Codex and wonder what the patent date is on the back of the 2nd edition codex.

FC and TH weren't inversal rules at the time. (I think)

People, please read the rules.

For witchblades we find: "the wielder of a witchblade counts his Strength as 9."

The wielder is strength 9 when using a witchblade....nothing, not one single scrap of information, suggests anything here other than that the model's strength has been set to 9. A lot like the effect of a power fist, except that the witchblade dosnt double, it picks a specific number.

READ the rules. The model is striking at strength 9.


Sliggoth

why not just accept this is all jargon.

THEY FAQed THIS READ THE FAQ POWERFIST WORK!!!!!!!!!!

and stop being gits....

but no furious charge does not work....as mentioned in living metal....

deffdakka wrote:

why not just accept this is all jargon.

THEY FAQed THIS READ THE FAQ POWERFIST WORK!!!!!!!!!!

and stop being gits....

but no furious charge does not work....as mentioned in living metal....

No one is arguing about Power Fists. Furious Charge is the one in question.

It seems more that FC does work as it is for the model not the weapon.

deffdakka wrote:

why not just accept this is all jargon.

THEY FAQed THIS READ THE FAQ POWERFIST WORK!!!!!!!!!!

and stop being gits....

but no furious charge does not work....as mentioned in living metal....

it says no where in living metal that fc dosen't work, what it does mention is melta and lance weapons. btw all the faq says is that powerfists work but chainfists dont get the extra d6 armour pen

Everything that is specifically mentioned as not working on living metal has an effect that gets applied once the attack has actually hit. FC's affect is applied when the model assaults.

Add to this that FC doesn't buff a weapon, its buffs a model, and a model is not a weapon, and it seems pretty clear that FC does in fact work on a Monolith.

Angry guy is stronger than normal guy. What's the big deal?

Jimole wrote:Everything that is specifically mentioned as not working on living metal has an effect that gets applied once the attack has actually hit. FC's affect is applied when the model assaults.

Add to this that FC doesn't buff a weapon, its buffs a model, and a model is not a weapon, and it seems pretty clear that FC does in fact work on a Monolith.

Angry guy is stronger than normal guy. What's the big deal?

+1, right on the money.

deffdakka wrote:but no furious charge does not work....as mentioned in living metal....

what?! lol

so you apparently havn't read what i've said. Please, I quote both living metal and furious charge below, tell me how they interact in anyway.

Furious Charge augments the strength of a model.

visavismeyou wrote:First, in order to find out if living metal interacts with some other rule, we must find out if the other rule fits the scope or context of the living weapon rules. Thus, we look at the context of the strength clause of the living metal rule. The strength clause starts out by narrowing down to "any weapon", thus the context is that this rule will interact with the rules for weapons somehow. This leaves out models, abilities, terrain, deployment and anything else in the game that you can talk about, the context is weapons and weapons alone; [Note: I will not attempt to delve into any speculation of what the writers were intending at this time, I will simply speak about the words on the page, with that said, I have a very cogent speculative argument in addition to this flawless logical analysis argument.] Then the strength clause moves on to make a distinction about how it interacts with the relevant weapon rules; specifically, the strength clause states, "[weapons used against the monolith] ...will roll for armour penetration using >its< unaugmented strength and a single d6". In this segment the strength clause clearly use the possessive pronoun, "its" to refer back to "weapon". Thus we can decipher this sentence to mean, "Weapons used against the monolith will roll d6+ the weapon's unaugmented strength".

Thus, weapons that do not have a strength value are not within the context; furthermore since the words, "weapon" and "model" are not synonymous, the living metal rules do not talk about how furious charge augments the strength of a model and as such the living metal rule does not interfere with the furious charge rules; it is all about context, if a rule is outside the context of living metal, then it is not affected by it.

My argument, tersely stated, is: Since a model's strength is outside the context of the living metal rule, the living metal rule does not interfere with any method of augmenting a model's strength.

I color coded my argument, Cyan is my evidence, Green is my conclusion.

Text of Furious Charge:

Models with this skill are known for the wild ferocity of
their assaults. In a turn in which they assaulted into
combat they add +1 to both their Initiative and Strength
characteristics when attacking in close combat (note
that this has no effect on the Initiative tests for
sweeping advances).

Text of Living Metal

Kevin949 wrote:The monolith is made of living necron metal which is not only self-repairing but is capable of adapting its structure to resist incoming attacks. Attacks which count the targets armour value as being less than it really is (such as bright lances and blasters) do not do so against the monolith. Similarily, weaapons that get additional armour penetration dice (such as chainfists, monstrous creatures or melta weapons) do not get the extra dice against the monolith. Ordnance weapons still roll 2d6 for armour penetration and select the highest score. In practice, any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Jimole wrote:Angry guy is stronger than normal guy. What's the big deal?

LOL! A friend of mine blew up when I told him that people think FC does not work again Living Metal and he said, "How is living metal going to stop me from being angry?!?".

RobPro wrote:Ok, but how do Wychblades get to strike at S9 against vehicles if you use the strength of the models instead? How do relic blades get to strike at S6? You haven't offered any explanations for any of those cases.

I thought that was addressed because it said the hits were resolved at S6 or S9, which would be unaugmented weapon str at that point.

Honestly, I think the problem with the living metal rule is because they used the word Strength. If they had just gotten a little more granular with it stating "Close combat hits are resolved as normal but only ever get a single D6 for penetration" it might have been better.

Kevin949 wrote:

RobPro wrote:Ok, but how do Wychblades get to strike at S9 against vehicles if you use the strength of the models instead? How do relic blades get to strike at S6? You haven't offered any explanations for any of those cases.

I thought that was addressed because it said the hits were resolved at S6 or S9, which would be unaugmented weapon str at that point.

Honestly, I think the problem with the living metal rule is because they used the word Strength. If they had just gotten a little more granular with it stating "Close combat hits are resolved as normal but only ever get a single D6 for penetration" it might have been better.

Oh yea, I wont deny at all its terribly written, but it does have a function and as it is written now, its function is to deny all strength augmentation to weapons.