So I just read the new FAQs that were posted up today...

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570039a_Chaos_Space_Marines_v1.1.pdf

And I'm a bit confused by the changes .. or perhaps incompetence of contradictions or miscommunication, whatever the case may be ;P

1) Typhus' Manreaper is apparently no longer a "Force Axe" and thus making him strike at S4 (user) while still being Unwieldy? So he's S4 I1? really? =/

2) I don't suppose it follows the rules of "Daemon Weapons" being AP2 and +1 S, as I'm guessing that is 'only' for Lord with no Mark (kinda bad wording there)

3) A couple people mentioned in other thread's that Typhus' ability to use his 1 psychic ability per turn AND force weapon was removed, however .. for whatever reason I cannot find this in the FAQ, and it still states (from the old parts of the FAQ) that he can, which some pointed out as a contradiction. Can anyone confirm either way?

4) Abaddon is finally AP2 now? (also, is it +1 str or what? ie daemon weapon on an undivided lord)

5) Warptime is really reroll 'only' ALL dice or none at all? Was it always intended to be this way, or is this brand new? =(

6) I thought Daemon Princes were aloud to use more than one psychic shooting ability, simply for the fact that they can shoot more than once each turn, being MCs? But apparently that's (now) not the case..

7) So familiars dont add +1 PML .. but does Mark of Tzeentch? Is there anything else that does?

New FAQs just = more confusion lol, Any other big changes I'm missing?

I'm sure there's more I need to ask anyway .. Would appreciate any answers though, thanks in advance

1/2) Manreaper is an unweildy daemon weapon with the force rule. Nothing in those statements removes the fact that he has Mark of Nurgle and a Daemon Weapon. So he is S4 (4+ poison) +D6 attacks at AP2, at I1

7) MoT does not say that you gain +1PML, the sorcerer/DP entry just lets you buy another power if you have it.

 Beerfiend wrote:
2) I don't suppose it follows the rules of "Daemon Weapons" being AP2 and +1 S, as I'm guessing that is 'only' for Lord with no Mark (kinda bad wording there)

What bad wording? It specifically says Lord with no Mark.

5) Warptime is really reroll 'only' ALL dice or none at all? Was it always intended to be this way, or is this brand new? =(

6) I thought Daemon Princes were aloud to use more than one psychic shooting ability, simply for the fact that they can shoot more than once each turn, being MCs? But apparently that's (now) not the case..

Both old rulings. Only the stuff in magenta is new.

Abaddon HAS a mark, of CA, so no +1S AP2 for him. He is AP3

Familiars let you buy another power, they dont let you USE another power per turn, which is why they dont alter you PML. MoT DOES increase you PML because it alters how many powers you can use per turn.

If you have 5 powers but only can cqast one per turn you are PML. If you have 1 power but could cast 5 a turn you would be PML 5.

I just noticed one thing im guessing tzeentch daemon weapons are still ap3 as well since they were not mentioned.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Abaddon HAS a mark, of CA, so no +1S AP2 for him. He is AP3.

I think from the wording in Abbadon's rules it's pretty clear that he counts as not having a mark of chaos as far as his daemon weapon goes:
"...Abbadon counts as equipped with a Daemon Weapon that doubles his Strength (to Strength 8, as shown in his profile) instead of the normal +1..."

Furthermore the Daemon weapon rules refer to Lords with no "Mark of Chaos" which are defined on the table on page 25 as being MoK, MoN, MoT, MoS (with no mention of MoCA).

So there's a pretty good argument from both RAI and RAW for him being AP2.

Bugs_N_Orks wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Abaddon HAS a mark, of CA, so no +1S AP2 for him. He is AP3.

I think from the wording in Abbadon's rules it's pretty clear that he counts as not having a mark of chaos as far as his daemon weapon goes:
"...Abbadon counts as equipped with a Daemon Weapon that doubles his Strength (to Strength 8, as shown in his profile) instead of the normal +1..."

Furthermore the Daemon weapon rules refer to Lords with no "Mark of Chaos" which are defined on the table on page 25 as being MoK, MoN, MoT, MoS (with no mention of MoCA).

So there's a pretty good argument from both RAI and RAW for him being AP2.

some people will make the argument he's only ap3 still, i see it. but it wont be much longer untill all this changes again.

Is anyone going to comment on the Combi-bolter giving you a Twin-linked Bolter on your Infantry? Holy crap that sounds awesome.

 Captain Antivas wrote:
Is anyone going to comment on the Combi-bolter giving you a Twin-linked Bolter on your Infantry? Holy crap that sounds awesome.

which we already had as twinlinked bolters.

 Captain Antivas wrote:
Is anyone going to comment on the Combi-bolter giving you a Twin-linked Bolter on your Infantry? Holy crap that sounds awesome.

Sarcasm? I'm having trouble finding anything that can buy a combi-weapon, that can't also buy a twin-linked bolter for 5 points cheaper. You don't get the twin-linked when you take a useful combi-weapon, like a combi-melta. You take either a Combi-melta, combi-flamer, combi-plasma, or a combi-bolter (which is the same as taking a cheaper twin-linked bolter)

I don't see in the FAQ where it makes typhus i1, his weapon is not unwieldy so he's ap2 striking at i4 along with the rest of his rules

As well abaddon is ap 2 it says: daemon weapons, daemon weapons(lord without mark of chaos)

So daemon weapons are ap 2 in general because of the ,

Sorry I didn't realize unwieldy was on the top of the page for typhus

Ub3rb3n wrote:
I don't see in the FAQ where it makes typhus i1, his weapon is not unwieldy so he's ap2 striking at i4 along with the rest of his rules

As well abaddon is ap 2 it says: daemon weapons, daemon weapons(lord without mark of chaos)

So daemon weapons are ap 2 in general because of the ,

top of the sceond colum.

Cyvash wrote:

Ub3rb3n wrote:
I don't see in the FAQ where it makes typhus i1, his weapon is not unwieldy so he's ap2 striking at i4 along with the rest of his rules

As well abaddon is ap 2 it says: daemon weapons, daemon weapons(lord without mark of chaos)

So daemon weapons are ap 2 in general because of the ,

top of the sceond colum.

I see it now, sorry

Bugs_N_Orks wrote:

 Captain Antivas wrote:
Is anyone going to comment on the Combi-bolter giving you a Twin-linked Bolter on your Infantry? Holy crap that sounds awesome.

Sarcasm? I'm having trouble finding anything that can buy a combi-weapon, that can't also buy a twin-linked bolter for 5 points cheaper. You don't get the twin-linked when you take a useful combi-weapon, like a combi-melta. You take either a Combi-melta, combi-flamer, combi-plasma, or a combi-bolter (which is the same as taking a cheaper twin-linked bolter)

Yes, very sarcastic for the reasons you posted. Most useless addition ever.

Ub3rb3n wrote:

Cyvash wrote:

Ub3rb3n wrote:
I don't see in the FAQ where it makes typhus i1, his weapon is not unwieldy so he's ap2 striking at i4 along with the rest of his rules

As well abaddon is ap 2 it says: daemon weapons, daemon weapons(lord without mark of chaos)

So daemon weapons are ap 2 in general because of the ,

top of the sceond colum.

I see it now, sorry

its all good, though its redundant to be a force axe, since its a daemon weapon, that wounds on a 4+ always so you could never claim the strength bonus of the axe.

Cyvash wrote:

its all good, though its redundant to be a force axe, since its a daemon weapon, that wounds on a 4+ always so you could never claim the strength bonus of the axe.

Being STR 5 with poison is actually really nice in 6th. Poison wounds on the fixed roll, unless a lower roll would be required by just comparing STR and T. It also gives a reroll for failed to wound rolls if the attacker's STR is equal or higher than the victim's T.

 metalboxes wrote:

Cyvash wrote:

its all good, though its redundant to be a force axe, since its a daemon weapon, that wounds on a 4+ always so you could never claim the strength bonus of the axe.

Being STR 5 with poison is actually really nice in 6th. Poison wounds on the fixed roll, unless a lower roll would be required by just comparing STR and T. It also gives a reroll for failed to wound rolls if the attacker's STR is equal or higher than the victim's T.

i didnt know that, i never looked at poisoned weapons until now.

You can also use S5 aginst vehicles.

Abaddon - he still has an unusual weapon, not a usual daemon weapon.

 Lightcavalier wrote:
1/2) Manreaper is an unweildy daemon weapon with the force rule. Nothing in those statements removes the fact that he has Mark of Nurgle and a Daemon Weapon. So he is S4 (4+ poison) +D6 attacks at AP2, at I1

7) MoT does not say that you gain +1PML, the sorcerer/DP entry just lets you buy another power if you have it.

Nah, I meant that no longer being a Force Axe mean's he doesn't attack at S5 anymore, whilst still being changed to I1 (from 5th), in other words .. the Manreaper has actually been nerfed from previous edition, whereas before this newest FAQ it was pretty damn nice.. My apologies, I should have clarified ;P

Being able to hit and wound on a 3+ vs MEQs, due to S5 was extremely nice .. now it's just a poison wound again. And yeah, could also do some damage to tank back armor before .. now you have to hope for 3 glances to remove hull points. Made sense for the lore of the Manreaper, and certainly was far from unbalanced (especially for something that rebels) on a 225 pt model..

There is of course, still the silly contradiction of his Destroyer Hive amendment stating that he counts as never suffering penalties from charging through cover, thus always fighting at Initiative .. However, being unwieldy, I don't see the purpose of that statement.

 insaniak wrote:

 Beerfiend wrote:
2) I don't suppose it follows the rules of "Daemon Weapons" being AP2 and +1 S, as I'm guessing that is 'only' for Lord with no Mark (kinda bad wording there)

What bad wording? It specifically says Lord with no Mark.

5) Warptime is really reroll 'only' ALL dice or none at all? Was it always intended to be this way, or is this brand new? =(

6) I thought Daemon Princes were aloud to use more than one psychic shooting ability, simply for the fact that they can shoot more than once each turn, being MCs? But apparently that's (now) not the case..

Both old rulings. Only the stuff in magenta is new.

Only that it says "Daemon weapons, Daemon weapon (lords with no mark)" But after rereading the rest I see they're all formatted like that as well, my mistake.

And that really blows about Warptime .. almost makes it not worth the points cost. Not sure how I missed that in past FAQs =/

Cyvash wrote:
I just noticed one thing im guessing tzeentch daemon weapons are still ap3 as well since they were not mentioned.

It would seem that way, yet another lame oversight perhaps? lol

Cyvash wrote:

Bugs_N_Orks wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Abaddon HAS a mark, of CA, so no +1S AP2 for him. He is AP3.

I think from the wording in Abbadon's rules it's pretty clear that he counts as not having a mark of chaos as far as his daemon weapon goes:
"...Abbadon counts as equipped with a Daemon Weapon that doubles his Strength (to Strength 8, as shown in his profile) instead of the normal +1..."

Furthermore the Daemon weapon rules refer to Lords with no "Mark of Chaos" which are defined on the table on page 25 as being MoK, MoN, MoT, MoS (with no mention of MoCA).

So there's a pretty good argument from both RAI and RAW for him being AP2.

some people will make the argument he's only ap3 still, i see it. but it wont be much longer untill all this changes again.

I actually found the QnA shortly after where it states that he uses a "power weapon that rolls +D6 attacks, and rebels as described on DWs" which, even though it completely contradicts the statement at the top of the FAQ that says it's a DW (not a PW), would in fact mean it's an unusual power weapon.. Pretty ridiculous if they're planning on making him AP2 in the new Dex, and even that aside .. why wouldn't they just make him AP2 for now anyway? He's Abaddon FFS!



I'm not usually one to complain about Balance .. I was one of the few (it would seem) who trudged through the 4th edition codex and stuck to it hoping that the new one would be good, but man some of this is really just .. brainless nonsense, to say the least. I know it's a FAQ, but it's become quite obvious it's a matter of the left hand absolutely never speaking to the right hand. Rumours from the new codex sounds great and I couldn't be happier, but it just sucks that we have to put up with this in the meantime..

Typhus' character, model, and lore was, in fact one of the main reasons I started as CSM to begin wtih, and he was nigh (or maybe utterly) useless in 4th .. with the last FAQ he finally gets to be worth his points cost, and it didn't last a few weeks, ugh. I know the new Dex is otw, but really? All the more reason, in fact, to just let us have the well deserved, and justified buffs to our crappy Dex for now and stop nerfing, and contradicting further stuff.. It's bad enough that the edition was so bad, and it's taken this long for a new one for such a supposedly popular army..

Well that's enough of my venting, I'm quite sure there are other armies out there that suffer the wrath of GW neglect and daftness, as well.

Although, I guess no one has an answer to the Typhus psychic attack + force weapon question? I'll just assume the other guys who posted were nuts, and he can still use both as it says in the bottom of the FAQ ;P

Thanks again for the responses.

Mot increases the models mastery level by 1, this has always been the case. Familiars simply allow you to buy another power.

 Beerfiend wrote:

I actually found the QnA shortly after where it states that he uses a "power weapon that rolls +D6 attacks, and rebels as described on DWs" which, even though it completely contradicts the statement at the top of the FAQ that says it's a DW (not a PW), would in fact mean it's an unusual power weapon.. Pretty ridiculous if they're planning on making him AP2 in the new Dex, and even that aside .. why wouldn't they just make him AP2 for now anyway? He's Abaddon FFS!

That is just clarifying that it follows all the rules for "Daemon Weapons". If you look on page 93 in C:CSM it lists all Daemon Weapons as Power Weapons.

Abaddon's Daemon Sword is "a Daemon Weapon which doubles his strength instead of the normal +1". That is his rule verbatim. The FAQ changes the standard Daemon Weapon to AP2. Abaddon is AP2.

That is just clarifying that it follows all the rules for "Daemon Weapons". If you look on page 93 in C:CSM it lists all Daemon Weapons as Power Weapons.Abaddon's Daemon Sword is "a Daemon Weapon which doubles his strength instead of the normal +1". That is his rule verbatim. The FAQ changes the standard Daemon Weapon to AP2. Abaddon is AP2.

You are wrong, it clearly says in the FaQ that Abbys sword is a power weapon. The only Deamon weapons that were changed are the ones in pink.

If you go by your assumption then that means lords with MoT are better at killing terminators than anyone else. Firstly they would shoot with ap2 and then assault with ap2. I dont think so.

As it stands only Mark of Khorne, Slaneesh, Nurgle or no mark at all have ap2. All others are still restricted to the normal power weapon rules. None of this is going to matter in a few weeks anyway, when the new dex hits.

 GimlisonofGloin wrote:

That is just clarifying that it follows all the rules for "Daemon Weapons". If you look on page 93 in C:CSM it lists all Daemon Weapons as Power Weapons.Abaddon's Daemon Sword is "a Daemon Weapon which doubles his strength instead of the normal +1". That is his rule verbatim. The FAQ changes the standard Daemon Weapon to AP2. Abaddon is AP2.

You are wrong, it clearly says in the FaQ that Abbys sword is a power weapon. The only Deamon weapons that were changed are the ones in pink.

If you go by your assumption then that means lords with MoT are better at killing terminators than anyone else. Firstly they would shoot with ap2 and then assault with ap2. I dont think so.

As it stands only Mark of Khorne, Slaneesh, Nurgle or no mark at all have ap2. All others are still restricted to the normal power weapon rules. None of this is going to matter in a few weeks anyway, when the new dex hits.

You are wrong.

All daemon weapons are power weapons.

Abaddon has the unmarked version which is clearly stated in his profile.

Read the book, if you have it.

Not all Daemon weapons were changed to AP2. The only Daemon weapon not AP2 is the MoT one. But, since the only Daemon Weapon to give a bonus to Str is the one with no mark then it is clear that is the one Abbadon has. Which makes him AP2.

Abbadon does have a mark. It's a special mark which combines all four marks into one. This does not mean he has ap2 weapon.

If they intended for abby to have ap2 they would of updated his weapon in the Faq, just like they did with Typhus.

His special mark is not one of the specified Marks of Chaos. He's got a daemon weapon, and he doesn't have one of the four marks of chaos which modify your daemon weapon into a blissgiver, bloodfeeder, (etc.), so it's AP2. Typhus got his own FAQ ruling because his has additional rules above and beyond being a Plaguebringer.

 Captain Antivas wrote:
Not all Daemon weapons were changed to AP2. The only Daemon weapon not AP2 is the MoT one. But, since the only Daemon Weapon to give a bonus to Str is the one with no mark then it is clear that is the one Abbadon has. Which makes him AP2.

No, the only specific DW that they have named that isnt AP2 is the MoT one. A "daemon weapon" is simply a power weapon unless it matches one f the specified types.

The unmarked one gives +1S. It is a bit of a leap to say tha Abbys Sx2 is the same as this.

AP3, as it is a unique power weapon

No, the only specific DW that they have named that isnt AP2 is the MoT one. A "daemon weapon" is simply a power weapon unless it matches one f the specified types.

The unmarked one gives +1S. It is a bit of a leap to say tha Abbys Sx2 is the same as this.

AP3, as it is a unique power weapon

This ^

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 Captain Antivas wrote:
Not all Daemon weapons were changed to AP2. The only Daemon weapon not AP2 is the MoT one. But, since the only Daemon Weapon to give a bonus to Str is the one with no mark then it is clear that is the one Abbadon has. Which makes him AP2.

No, the only specific DW that they have named that isnt AP2 is the MoT one. A "daemon weapon" is simply a power weapon unless it matches one f the specified types.

The unmarked one gives +1S. It is a bit of a leap to say tha Abbys Sx2 is the same as this.

AP3, as it is a unique power weapon

Have you even read Abaddon's entry? Apparently not because if you had you would know the combination of his weapons give him the benefits.

"Abaddon has been gifted...Drach'nyen...and wears the Talon of Horus...The effect of these two powerful artefacts means that Abbadon counts as equipped with a Daemon Weapon that doubles his Strength (to Strength 8, as shown in his profile) instead of the normal +1, and he may re-roll any failed roll to wound in close combat."

As the ACTUAL rule says, not the rule you are making up, he would normally get the +1 strength from where? What rule in the Chaos codex gives someone a +1 to their strength in close combat? Oh, that's right. The unnamed Daemon Weapon.

In fact let's look at the actual rules for Daemon Weapons, since your claim that it is simply a power weapon unless it matches your criteria.

"A Daemon Weapon:
Requires two hands to use.
Is a power weapon,
Adds an extra d6 attacks...
[b]Has an additional ability that varies depending on the Mark given to the bearer, as described below."

And what is the first listing? Lords with no Mark of Chaos. So, if you have one of the 4 you get that version, if you have no Mark you get the other one. The AP2 +1 Str version. You are wrong.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 GimlisonofGloin wrote:
Abbadon does have a mark. It's a special mark which combines all four marks into one. This does not mean he has ap2 weapon.

If they intended for abby to have ap2 they would of updated his weapon in the Faq, just like they did with Typhus.

They didn't need to update Abaddon's weapon. It is clear when you actually read the codex entry.

I see you havent read the Errata then, as they have changed what "Daemon Weapon" is defined as.

You are making an implicit leap that the "instead of +1" has any meaning rules wise anymore. It doesnt.

Stop with the insults, as they make responding tedious.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
I see you havent read the Errata then, as they have changed what "Daemon Weapon" is defined as.

You are making an implicit leap that the "instead of +1" has any meaning rules wise anymore. It doesnt.

Stop with the insults, as they make responding tedious.

No insults were given. Please don't create strawmen to distract from the fact that you are wrong.

FAQ says:
Page 93 – Daemon Weapons, Daemon Weapon (Lords with no
Mark of Chaos).
Replace the last sentence with the following profile:
Range S AP Type
- +1 2 Melee, Daemon
Weapon,Two-handed

Your "changes" don't exist. Unless you want to actually quote the changes that makes your point. Unless you can't because, as I said, they don't exist.

It saying instead can also be an argument in favor of him being ap3 as it means that the weapon is explicitly different. There is no reason typhus would have his own entry about his force weapon while abby would not if things change.

Manreaper is a unique weapon. It has special rules. They needed to specify that it got its Mark of Nurgle AND the other special rules.

Drach'nyen is nothing but a Daemon weapon, Talon of Horus is nothing but a Lightning Claw. BUT, the combination of the two give him his benefits. There is nothing to change since his weapons are still what they are.

 Captain Antivas wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
I see you havent read the Errata then, as they have changed what "Daemon Weapon" is defined as.

You are making an implicit leap that the "instead of +1" has any meaning rules wise anymore. It doesnt.

Stop with the insults, as they make responding tedious.

No insults were given. Please don't create strawmen to distract from the fact that you are wrong.

FAQ says:
Page 93 – Daemon Weapons, Daemon Weapon (Lords with no
Mark of Chaos).
Replace the last sentence with the following profile:
Range S AP Type
- +1 2 Melee, Daemon
Weapon,Two-handed

Your "changes" don't exist. Unless you want to actually quote the changes that makes your point. Unless you can't because, as I said, they don't exist.

I didnt create a strawman, as i did not create an easily defeated argument and then defeat it> Id avoid using terms you dont understand, it doesnt help your argument.

You avoided quoting the new Daemon Weapon rule, didnt you. Abaddon is not defined as a Lord, so guess what - he doesnt follow the rules for a Lord. Care to present some rules saying the contrary, or will you just concede now?

 Captain Antivas wrote:
Manreaper is a unique weapon. It has special rules. They needed to specify that it got its Mark of Nurgle AND the other special rules.

Drach'nyen is nothing but a Daemon weapon, Talon of Horus is nothing but a Lightning Claw. BUT, the combination of the two give him his benefits. There is nothing to change since his weapons are still what they are.

Are you saying that Drach and the Talon arent unique weapons? They have rules beyond the normal daemon wepaon rules in conjunction. That means they need their own ruleset. This is a permissive rules game. That means that since Drach and the Talon have different rules form the normal daemon weapon, they need explicit permission to be Ap2. Do they have it? No. Therefor you dont get to be AP2.

 Captain Antivas wrote:
Manreaper is a unique weapon. It has special rules. They needed to specify that it got its Mark of Nurgle AND the other special rules.

Drach'nyen is nothing but a Daemon weapon, Talon of Horus is nothing but a Lightning Claw. BUT, the combination of the two give him his benefits. There is nothing to change since his weapons are still what they are.

Please find rules stating that the Talon is a LC. Oh wait, you are still making rules up.

It is a unique power weapon, as Abaddon is NOT a Chaos Lord without a mark of chaos; he is NOT a Chaos Lord at all, rules wise.
Try again

Does this mean you are implying that the death screamer is also ap2? If so why was this not mentioned in the Faq.

Abbadons weapon is still a power weapon, which still has to follow all the rules for power weapons in the BrB.

It has its own unique rules that are in the codex, yes granted, but these rules still have to follow the unusual power weapon rule in the BrB. Due to deamon weapons being power weapons unless otherwise stated in the Faq, which abbadons deamon weapon is not. It is stated to be a power weapon.

Just to add from the english Faq:

Q:Is abbadons Deamon sword Drach'nyen a power weapon and, if
the d6 roll for his extra attacks is a 1, does the weapon rebel
as described on page 93?
A: Yes to both questions

So there you have it, its a power weapon which means ap3 for Mr Abbadon.

Abby's rules specify that he has a DW, and that the DW gives double strength instead of the normal +1. The normal +1 is due to it being an unmarked daemon weapon. Unmarked daemon weapons are AP2.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
I didnt create a strawman, as i did not create an easily defeated argument and then defeat it> Id avoid using terms you dont understand, it doesnt help your argument.

How does it feel to be accused of something you didn't do? Yeah, so please don't do it to me.

You avoided quoting the new Daemon Weapon rule, didnt you. Abaddon is not defined as a Lord, so guess what - he doesnt follow the rules for a Lord. Care to present some rules saying the contrary, or will you just concede now?

There is no new Daemon Weapon rule. Or are you referring to:
Daemon Weapon: This weapon gives its wielder +D6 Attacks in
close combat. Roll the dice at the beginning of each Fight subphase
the wielder is in close combat. If the result is a 1, the
model may not make any Attacks in this sub-phase and suffers
one Wound with no armour saves allowed.

This changes nothing because Abaddon is a Chaos Lord. Only Chaos Lords have Marks, and he has all of them. How exactly is he not a Lord? Not to mention, I ask again. Where does he get his +1 str from then?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:
Are you saying that Drach and the Talon arent unique weapons? They have rules beyond the normal daemon wepaon rules in conjunction. That means they need their own ruleset. This is a permissive rules game. That means that since Drach and the Talon have different rules form the normal daemon weapon, they need explicit permission to be Ap2. Do they have it? No. Therefor you dont get to be AP2.

The weapons are what they are. He has a special rule that says he gets extra stuff. The weapons remain unchanged.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 Captain Antivas wrote:
Manreaper is a unique weapon. It has special rules. They needed to specify that it got its Mark of Nurgle AND the other special rules.

Drach'nyen is nothing but a Daemon weapon, Talon of Horus is nothing but a Lightning Claw. BUT, the combination of the two give him his benefits. There is nothing to change since his weapons are still what they are.

Please find rules stating that the Talon is a LC. Oh wait, you are still making rules up.

It is a unique power weapon, as Abaddon is NOT a Chaos Lord without a mark of chaos; he is NOT a Chaos Lord at all, rules wise.
Try again

The fact that he gets to re-roll failed wounds, and it looks like a lightning claw. Its called reading between the lines. You should try it sometime. Like I said, basic English comprehension. And, he is a Chaos Lord. You have no rules quote that he is not. Unless you are claiming he is a Sorcerer or a Daemon Prince?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 GimlisonofGloin wrote:
Does this mean you are implying that the death screamer is also ap2?

No I am not. Why would I be? Where did you get that? Or did you miss the part where I specifically said it, being the weapon for the Lords with the MoT, is the only Daemon Weapon that is NOT AP2?

This changes nothing because Abaddon is a Chaos Lord. Only Chaos Lords have Marks, and he has all of them. How exactly is he not a Lord? Not to mention, I ask again. Where does he get his +1 str from then?

If we use this logic and combine all the marks he has, then it must mean that Abbadon also has poison, 2d6 extra attacks and instant death rules. Why not just say that he shoot with it aswell so he can benefit from the Tzeentch mark.

Because the rule specifically says he gets +1 str from his weapon, which is an ability given from the Unmarked Daemon Weapon. Only Lords can get Daemon Weapons, so he must be a Lord. Your way would be breaking the rules. He combined the Marks, but his rule says he counts as having no Mark in terms of his Daemon Weapon.

Just to point out the Faq question once again.

Q:Is abbadons Deamon SWORD Drach'nyen a POWER WEAPON and, if
the d6 roll for his extra attacks is a 1, does the weapon rebel
as described on page 93?
A: Yes to both questions

I think this clears it up, its a Deamon weapon with the rules for a power sword, so ap3, not ap2.

It is a Daemon Weapon with rules for a power weapon? Are you serious? That makes no sense whatsoever. Daemon weapons have their own rules, one of which is that it IS A POWER WEAPON. Once again, where does Abaddon get his +1 str from?

Not to mention the only weapon that rebels is A DAEMON WEAPON. Your illogical and fallacious arguments defy your valiant attempt to be right.

Please make every effort to keep this polite if not friendly, folks.

Leave personal comments and criticisms out if you want to retain your ability to post.

 Captain Antivas wrote:
Daemon weapons have their own rules, one of which is that it IS A POWER WEAPON.

You said it your self, it is a power weapon. As a power weapon it must follow the rules from the BrB, unless stated in the Faq, which it is not.

Once again, where does Abaddon get his +1 str from?

He does not get +1str, he gets double str.

Your illogical and fallacious arguments defy your valiant attempt to be right.

If all you can do is insult people about a disagreement then maybe you should not be posting on a discussion forum. Please treat people with some respect and do not insult their intelligence,

Antivas, you dont read between the lines when you are debating RAW. That is how you create arguments that are just plain wrong. The talon is not a l-claw, and the sword has rules that are different from every other daemon weapon. This means that THEY ARE NOT THE SAME. DIFFERENT MEANS NOT THE SAME. Contrary to popular belief, things that are different are in fact, not the same. It means they need a whole new instruction manual. You cannot say a carrot is a carrot and a hemlock is a carrot because you will end up dead. Hemlock is not a carrot, it is poison. Just because Drach/Talon walk like a daemon weapon does not mean they talk like one. Find where it specifically says Drach/Talon is ap2 otherwise it isint.

 GimlisonofGloin wrote:
You said it your self, it is a power weapon. As a power weapon it must follow the rules from the BrB, unless stated in the Faq, which it is not.

It is a Daemon Weapon. You follow the rules for Daemon Weapons. Codex>BRB.

He does not get +1str, he gets double str.

"Daemon Weapon that doubles his Strength (to Strength 8, as shown in his profile) instead of the normal +1"

Where does the Normal +1 come from?

If all you can do is insult people about a disagreement then maybe you should not be posting on a discussion forum. Please treat people with some respect and do not insult their intelligence,

No one insulted your intelligence. I said that your arguments are fallacious and illogical. I never once said YOU were, but the arguments you are putting forth are. Contrary to popular belief there is a difference.

It says it by telling us that...

A) It's a daemon weapon
+
B) It gives him double strength instead of the usual +1.

There is only one kind of daemon weapon which gives +1 strength, so the implication there is clear. It otherwise follows the rules for that DW, except for the specified exception of the different strength modifier. This leaves in place the Two Handed property, the struggle for control rule, the d6 bonus attacks, and the AP2.

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:
Antivas, you dont read between the lines when you are debating RAW. That is how you create arguments that are just plain wrong. The talon is not a l-claw, and the sword has rules that are different from every other daemon weapon. This means that THEY ARE NOT THE SAME. DIFFERENT MEANS NOT THE SAME. Contrary to popular belief, things that are different are in fact, not the same. It means they need a whole new instruction manual. You cannot say a carrot is a carrot and a hemlock is a carrot because you will end up dead. Hemlock is not a carrot, it is poison. Just because Drach/Talon walk like a daemon weapon does not mean they talk like one. Find where it specifically says Drach/Talon is ap2 otherwise it isint.

You have to read between the lines to understand the meaning of the words. My arguments are not wrong, they are supported by rules that you refuse to accept. Like I said, the weapons are not the source of the special rules. Even if you want to argue that the Talon is not a l-claw it is still not the source of his special rule. His special rule comes from the two weapons together. The combination of these two artefacts gives him the power, not the artefacts themselves. There are 5 types of Daemon Weapons, not 6. 5. No Mark, MoT, MoK, MoS, MoN. Not a 6th magical one.

His special rule comes from the two weapons together.

This. Right here. It is no longer a normal daemon weapon. No daemon weapn is 2 weaopns put togeather. It has its own special stuff. If there is any crux in your argument (and there are lots, belive me), this is the biggest.

His daemon weapon does things other daemon weapons do not. Since there is no longer a "Daemon Weapon" blanket rule, you must individually define everything identified as a daemon weapon, otherwise they fall to other PW interpretations.

Typhus has his own "Special" daemon weapon. It has its own special rules and was specially defined. Abbadons needs to have the same for anthing special to apply other than whats black and white in the codex.

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:

His special rule comes from the two weapons together.

This. Right here. It is no longer a normal daemon weapon. No daemon weapn is 2 weaopns put togeather. It has its own special stuff. If there is any crux in your argument (and there are lots, belive me), this is the biggest.

His daemon weapon does things other daemon weapons do not. Since there is no longer a "Daemon Weapon" blanket rule, you must individually define everything identified as a daemon weapon, otherwise they fall to other PW interpretations.

Typhus has his own "Special" daemon weapon. It has its own special rules and was specially defined. Abbadons needs to have the same for anthing special to apply other than whats black and white in the codex.

No, just no. The two weapons do not combine to make a super awesome Daemon Weapon. They are wielded separately and when he wields them together, one in each hand, he gets a bonus. He has two weapons, not one. One is a Daemon Weapon, the other is not.

Again, where does the +1 str come from?

Antivas, the +1 stregnth is irrelivant because its rules are DIFFERENT!!!! When 1 thing changes, unless otherwise stated, everything changes. Why does every other daemon weapon other than the tzeench, (even character specific) have a new entry and abby does not? Because he is the same. He has a special weapon and just because his weapon has a rule that the normal one dosent, that dosent mean they are the same. It means they are....

Wait for it......

DIFFERENT!

And in refrence to your question about the +1, its because no one knew what mark to use because abby had them all.

 Mannahnin wrote:
It says it by telling us that...

A) It's a daemon weapon
+
B) It gives him double strength instead of the usual +1.

There is only one kind of daemon weapon which gives +1 strength, so the implication there is clear. It otherwise follows the rules for that DW, except for the specified exception of the different strength modifier. This leaves in place the Two Handed property, the struggle for control rule, the d6 bonus attacks, and the AP2.

But the unmarked Deamon weapon does not allow for a re-roll to wound, which would suggest it has unique rules, of its own, that have nothing to do with the normal Deamon weapon rules.


Besides if we were to read between the lines and look at the model, it would suggest that it is impossible for him to hold in two hands, as his LC (talon) would prevent him from doing so.

If we look in between the lines and look at his model his armor wouldnt allow him to move so he would be a useless stationary model too

 GimlisonofGloin wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
It says it by telling us that...
A) It's a daemon weapon
+
B) It gives him double strength instead of the usual +1.

There is only one kind of daemon weapon which gives +1 strength, so the implication there is clear. It otherwise follows the rules for that DW, except for the specified exception of the different strength modifier. This leaves in place the Two Handed property, the struggle for control rule, the d6 bonus attacks, and the AP2.

But the unmarked Deamon weapon does not allow for a re-roll to wound, which would suggest it has unique rules, of its own, that have nothing to do with the normal Deamon weapon rules.

Whence do you, then, derive that he has +1d6 attacks, and that on a roll of 1 he does not attack but insteaf suffers a wound?

 Captain Antivas wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
I didnt create a strawman, as i did not create an easily defeated argument and then defeat it> Id avoid using terms you dont understand, it doesnt help your argument.

How does it feel to be accused of something you didn't do? Yeah, so please don't do it to me.

Except you did level insults directed at me, by claiming i had never read the rules - which you then went on to partially quote.. I, on the other hand, did not create a strawman.

 Captain Antivas wrote:

There is no new Daemon Weapon rule. Or are you referring to:
Daemon Weapon: This weapon gives its wielder +D6 Attacks in
close combat. Roll the dice at the beginning of each Fight subphase
the wielder is in close combat. If the result is a 1, the
model may not make any Attacks in this sub-phase and suffers
one Wound with no armour saves allowed.

Yes, you see that special rule they have given to all Daemon Weapons? Under Type? Called Daemon Weapon? Not sure how you missed it.

 Captain Antivas wrote:
This changes nothing because Abaddon is a Chaos Lord

Please find a rule stating Abaddon is a Lord. He is not listed under Chaos Lord in the unit entry, and nowhere in the rules you claim I have never read is he stated to be a Chaos Lord, so by what RULE are you claiming he is a chaos Lord?

Page and paragraph, otherwise you have conceded.

 Captain Antivas wrote:
. Only Chaos Lords have Marks,

Apparently you cannot read the codex, as Daemon Princes and Sorcerors also have marks. If you disagree please give a page reference proving that the entries i can see in my codex, which i have owned since 2007 dont exist....

 Captain Antivas wrote:
and he has all of them.

No, he has the MoCA, which is not the 4 individual marks. Try again.

 Captain Antivas wrote:
How exactly is he not a Lord?

Because Chaos Lord is a specific Unit, and he is neither listed under the Chaos Lord entry nor do his rules state he is a Chaos Lord. If you disagree please provide a RULE page and para stating otherwise

Something you have singularly failed to do so far.

 Captain Antivas wrote:
Not to mention, I ask again. Where does he get his +1 str from then?

He doesnt, as he isnt a Chaos Lord without a Mark of Chaos. He isnt a chaos lord AT ALL.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 Captain Antivas wrote:
Manreaper is a unique weapon. It has special rules. They needed to specify that it got its Mark of Nurgle AND the other special rules.

Drach'nyen is nothing but a Daemon weapon, Talon of Horus is nothing but a Lightning Claw. BUT, the combination of the two give him his benefits. There is nothing to change since his weapons are still what they are.

Please find rules stating that the Talon is a LC. Oh wait, you are still making rules up.

It is a unique power weapon, as Abaddon is NOT a Chaos Lord without a mark of chaos; he is NOT a Chaos Lord at all, rules wise.
Try again

The fact that he gets to re-roll failed wounds, and it looks like a lightning claw. Its called reading between the lines.

Because that is part of the classification of a daemon weapon whereas AP2 is not. The classification of a daemon wepon is unique power weapon. Markless daemon weapon V abbadon daemon weapon is the argument, not abbadon daemon weapon V daemon weapon in general.

(In response to mann)

As a reminder, personal criticisms leveled at other people's reading comprehension or the like are not permitted, and if you make them, you will not like the consequences.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:
Because that is part of the classification of a daemon weapon whereas AP2 is not. The classification of a daemon wepon is unique power weapon. Markless daemon weapon V abbadon daemon weapon is the argument, not abbadon daemon weapon V daemon weapon in general.

(In response to mann)

I still think the "instead of the usual +1 strength" clearly implies that Drach'Nyen follows the rules for the unmarked DW except where otherwise specified.

Whence do you, then, derive that he has +1d6 attacks,

This is in his entry in the codex

and that on a roll of 1 he does not attack but insteaf suffers a wound?

This is in the Faq


Therefore it suggests that it is a deamon weapon with its own unique abilities that are not part of the unmarked deamon weapons rules. It just follows all the normal rules for deamon weapons which are power weapons.

What are unique power weapons ap? 3, yes 3. So the Big A has ap3.

Codex: CSM:
"Abaddon counts as equiped with a Daemon Weapon that doubles his Strength (to Strength 8, as shown in his profile) instead of the normal +1."

Errata: CSM:
"Page 93 – Daemon Weapons, Daemon Weapon (Lords with no
Mark of Chaos).
Replace the last sentence with the following profile:"

I don't know why you are debating this, it is obvious he counts as AP 2. All this talk of Marks, Chaos Lords and unique power weapons has absolutely nothing to do with this.

Besides its the deadliest weapon in the galaxy, certainly more potent than a Daemon Weapon that some nobody Chaos Lord has.

 Mannahnin wrote:
As a reminder, personal criticisms leveled at other people's reading comprehension or the like are not permitted, and if you make them, you will not like the consequences.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:
Because that is part of the classification of a daemon weapon whereas AP2 is not. The classification of a daemon wepon is unique power weapon. Markless daemon weapon V abbadon daemon weapon is the argument, not abbadon daemon weapon V daemon weapon in general.

(In response to mann)

I still think the "instead of the usual +1 strength" clearly implies that Drach'Nyen follows the rules for the unmarked DW except where otherwise specified.

I agree, however, from a RAW standpoint, implications mean nothing. My brother currently lords over my chaos (and has been watchign over my shoulder as I argued this out) and he belives the only reason that the +1 is in his profile is becase abby has "multiple marks" of a sort. You could see where it would get confusing about what rules his daemon weapon followed.

It is implied that nemesis weapons always kill daemons no matter what but actuallity is far from it. It is implied that Gauss weapons should all be AP2 but again, the actuallity is far from it. Is the ruling convoluted and nonsensical? yes. Do I pray they will adjust the errata soon to account? yes. But how will I play it until then? Abby ap3.

I really think this one is pretty clear. Even in the RAW tenets of YMDC, we are called to look at similar and related rulings to inform the gray areas. All FAQ judgements point to Abby's sword being a Daemon weapon (since one actually says so) and another refers to "normal" usage of the rules for an unmarked DW. So it's an unmarked DW.

This isnt wishing or wanting, its reading what's written outside a vacuum. RAW =/= ignoring all context and connected rules. Those that have argued such for the last 2 months just found themselves on the wrong side of the new FAQs. No need to make the same mistakes x2.

Edited by AgeOfEgos

Just a few friendly reminders

 Lorek wrote:
Tenets of You Make Da Call (YMDC):

1. Don't make a statement without backing it up.
- You have to give premises for a conclusive statement; without this, there can be no debate.

1a. Don't say that someone is wrong, instead you explain why you think their opinion is wrong. Criticize the opinion, not the person.

4. Rules as Written are not How You Would Play It. Please clearly state which one you are talking about during a rules debate, and do not argue a RAW point against a HYWPI point (or vice-versa).
- Many arguments can be avoided if this is made clear. Don't assume you know the point your opponent is arguing about.

5. Stick to discussing the rules, not the poster. Phrases like "Rules Lawyer", "Cheater" and "TFG" have no place in rules discussions. Don't depart from rules discussions by attaching value judgments to different interpretations.

As Happyjew pointed out---stating "You are wrong" and other sarcastic remarks does not advance the conversation and is against the tenets of YMDC.

This is the second warning within this thread and the last warning was only one page prior--future violations will be viewed with that in mind. Please stick to objectively discussing the rules and not attacking a poster. Thanks.

I would sadly have to agree that Abby is ap3, since the only characteristic that Daemonweapons share according to the FAQ is that they count as power weapons, are 2h weapons, grant d6 attacks and wound yourself on a 1.

After that they are divided by type/mark. The only daemon weapons that are ap2 ATM are no-mark, MoK, MoN and MoS because they had their entry altered to show this. MoT is only ap2 if it adopts the shape of a power axe (yay, i1).

Abby's weapon is a Daemonweapon, which means it follows the rules of the first entry only, meaning it follows the rules of an unusual power weapon, which means it ap3 with d6 attacks and double strength only.

If all Daemonweapons no matter mark were suppose to be ap2, then why didn't they mention it in the common description? I would love MoT weapons to be ap2 in melee, but as it stands now it's ap3.

Abby is ap3 and so is MoT

As I stated on the first page I'm of the opinion that it should be AP 2 for this reason:

 Mannahnin wrote:
Abby's rules specify that he has a DW, and that the DW gives double strength instead of the normal +1. The normal +1 is due to it being an unmarked daemon weapon. Unmarked daemon weapons are AP2.

Something a lot of people are overlooking is the last sentence of the Daemon Weapons general rules:

A Daemon Weapon:
-Has an additional ability that varies depending on the mark given to the bearer

It doesn't say that it may have or might have, a daemon weapon absolutely HAS one of those five abilities. Given that Abby's rules make reference to the unmarked weapon (and that MoCA isn't technically a Mark of Chaos as listed on page 25), it seems pretty clear that his weapon follows those rules.

You cannot infer with a permissive ruleset is the problem. I'm getting tired of giving the same argument that no one seems to be able to get around. His weapon is DIFFERENT than the unmarked weapon. I dont know how many times I've said this. Wether they wanted it to be unmarked light or not, it is a different weapon. That means it has different rules. I dont care if his rules come from being 1 weapon, or 2 weapons, or 6 weapons. If the rules have changed you dont get to apply any rule you want. If they wanted him to be AP2 they would've made him AP2 along with allof the other characters.

The rules make a clear implication that it an unmarked daemon weapon, with two additional rules- re-rolling to wound and double strength in place of +1S. There's no other purpose to the "instead of" language in his entry.

Just because it says it has something in place of something it could have does not mean it gets all of those other wounderful bonuses.

Ok, so I just started reading this thread and from what I've read I believe that the weapon is AP 2.

To start, in order to count the Daemon Weapon as AP2 it would need to be considered a "Daemon Weapons, Daemon Weapon (Lords with no Mark of Chaos)." That is the end goal of my argument, and one that I will have to prove.

So, we know that according to pg 46 that he "counts as equipped with a Daemon Weapon that doubles his Strength (to Strength 8, as shown in his profile) instead of the normal +1, and he may re-roll any failed roll to wound in close combat." I don't think anyone will argue that he is equipped with a Daemon Weapon.

The rules for a Daemon Weapon are (pg 93):

A Daemon Weapon:
* Requires two hands to use.
* Is a power weapon
* Adds an extra D6 Attacks in close combat. Roll the dice every time the model is about to attack. if the result is a 1, the bound Daemon within the weapon rebels - the model may not make any attacks in this round and suffers one wound with no armour saves allowed.
* Has an additional ability that varies depend on the Mark given to the bearer, as described below.

Now there are 5 different options. Lords with No Mark of Chaos, Lords with Mark of Khorne, Lords with Mark of Nurgle, Lords with Mark of Tzeentch, and Lords with Mark of Slaanesh.

In order to prove that he is a Lord with no Mark of Chaos, we need to ask the question, what is a Mark of Chaos? On pg 25, we have the definitions of what is a Mark of Chaos. Under there you see, there are four types of Mark of Chaos. Mark of Khorne, Mark of Tzeentch, Mark of Nurgle, and Mark of Slaanesh. So now we have that definition.

So, when we look at Abbadon's rules we ask, Does he have a Mark of Khorne, Tzeentch, Nurgle, or Slaanesh. The answer is no. He does not. He has his own special Mark that has it's own special rules, but does not count by the RAW as a Mark of Chaos. It specifically says it's a Unique Mark, and does NOT say that it counts as a Mark of Chaos. Yes, I realize the name of it contains Mark of Chaos in it, but the name does not denote it as a Mark of Chaos as described on pg 25.

The next part that we need to prove is that he is a Lord so that he qualifies for the "Lords with No Mark of Chaos". On pg 66, the book does state that "Abaddon is the heir to Horus' legacy and as Warmaster of the Black Legion is the most powerful of all Chaos Lords." In fact, the entire section is called Lords of Chaos. Seeing that you can clearly see that he is indeed a Lord. Now, I realize that this is not exactly a 'rules' page and I could understand an argument here. I will give you that, but unless we use RAI I believe that no one is a Lord considering the unit is called 'Chaos Lord', not 'Lord', but that's digressing a little.

So since he does NOT have a Mark of Chaos as described on Pg 25, and is a Lord according to pg 66. He is counted as a 'Lords with No Mark of Chaos', and therefore by the FAQ counts has getting +1S AP2 with the special rules of "Melee, Daemon Weapon, Two-Handed".

Please feel free to dissect my personal findings and how I plan to interpret them.

I use a CSM Lord with the Mark of Tzeentch and I use my Daemon Weapon as AP3.

I cannot find a reason to try to play it as AP2, and don't really mind anyways. It's for squishin' MEQs in 3+.

He is not a lord. He may be a lord in fluff but fluff has no bearing here. Unless it says in his rules entry that he is a lord, he is not for game purposes. It also says in his mark description in the rules section that he gets +1 to his invol from the MARK OF TZEENCH as well as describing what the other marks do, even if they are not listed as wargear. He is AP3 simple as that. Daemon Weapon blanket rule is AP3 unless otherwise stated and it is nto stated that he wields an AP2 weapon. It is not even stated that his weapon is that of the unmarked lord. There are similarities of course, but no Black and White print saying that it is. You cannot read in between the lines b/c thats how C'tan becom eternal warrior, necrons always pass reanimation protocols, and space marines never fail an armor save. You must read the black and white text on the rules page.

I will have to agree with Vindicare, it has been pointed out to me many times in the forum, "..permissive ruleset..." or "...if its not in the rules you can do it..." or some other type of "..no you can't do that..." because it is not in the BRB.

Reading over Abby's entry in the Codex and the FAQ and no where does it specify what kind of daemon weapon he is using aside from that it is a daemon weapon and would get the +d6 attacks and wounds himself on a roll of 1.

He is not a Chaos Lord as the Codex does not define him as one, He does however have all the Marks and as stated in the Codex, the benefits of those Marks are included in His profile.

With all that in mind, the FAQ states that a Chaos Lord with a Daemon Weapon (with No Marks of Chaos) get +1 AP2 .....

This can not apply to Abby for two reasons, 1. Abby is not a Chaos Lord as defined by his Codex and 2. He definitely has Marks of Chaos as his Codex says so.

Reading over Abby's entry in the Codex and the FAQ and no where does it specify what kind of daemon weapon he is using aside from that it is a daemon weapon and would get the +d6 attacks and wounds himself on a roll of 1.

I didn't include this in my above post, but has been mentioned before. While it does not specifically say what kind of Daemon Weapon he has, it does make references that you can infer he has the Daemon Weapon for the 'Lords with No Marks of Chaos'. It states that he gets double Strength instead of the normal +1. The only Daemon Weapon that gives +1 Strength is the one that is for 'Lords with No Marks of Chaos'. Now, as you said it's a 'permissive ruleset' and it does not specifically say that he has the the Daemon Weapon for 'Lords with No Mark of Chaos' but it's not a leap to come to that conclusion with the wording noted.

He is not a Chaos Lord as the Codex does not define him as one

I've stated before, my view on this. By RAW he is not. By RAI I believe he was meant to be.

He does however have all the Marks and as stated in the Codex, the benefits of those Marks are included in His profile.

I disagree with this part as he does not have any of the Marks. As you've stated, it does not define him as a Chaos Lord, but it also does not define him as having a Mark of Chaos. It says that he has a unique Mark that combines the gifts provided from the other Marks (which are present in his statline). So while he gets the benefits of those Marks, he does not actually have them as he has a Mark of Chaos Ascendent, not a Mark of Chaos as defined on pg 25.

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:
There are similarities of course, but no Black and White print saying that it is. You cannot read in between the lines b/c thats how C'tan becom eternal warrior, necrons always pass reanimation protocols, and space marines never fail an armor save. You must read the black and white text on the rules page.

Those aren't relevant comparisons. There are, what, seven possible Daemon Weapons? 5 of which are AP2, and the other 2 are conspicuously absent in the update. It looks like an error. Do you think GW doesn't make errors and oversights? For example, are you playing that you can only snapshot at even just Gliding Monstrous Creatures due to the screwup in the first entry of page 3 of the main rulebook FAQ?

 MajinMalak wrote:

Reading over Abby's entry in the Codex and the FAQ and no where does it specify what kind of daemon weapon he is using aside from that it is a daemon weapon and would get the +d6 attacks and wounds himself on a roll of 1.

I didn't include this in my above post, but has been mentioned before. While it does not specifically say what kind of Daemon Weapon he has, it does make references that you can infer he has the Daemon Weapon for the 'Lords with No Marks of Chaos'. It states that he gets double Strength instead of the normal +1. The only Daemon Weapon that gives +1 Strength is the one that is for 'Lords with No Marks of Chaos'. Now, as you said it's a 'permissive ruleset' and it does not specifically say that he has the the Daemon Weapon for 'Lords with No Mark of Chaos' but it's not a leap to come to that conclusion with the wording noted.

He is not a Chaos Lord as the Codex does not define him as one

I've stated before, my view on this. By RAW he is not. By RAI I believe he was meant to be.

He does however have all the Marks and as stated in the Codex, the benefits of those Marks are included in His profile.

I disagree with this part as he does not have any of the Marks. As you've stated, it does not define him as a Chaos Lord, but it also does not define him as having a Mark of Chaos. It says that he has a unique Mark that combines the gifts provided from the other Marks (which are present in his statline). So while he gets the benefits of those Marks, he does not actually have them as he has a Mark of Chaos Ascendent, not a Mark of Chaos as defined on pg 25.

So you can infer that he has a 'Lords with No Marks of Chaos' weapon cuz it stated the instead of +1 str, but you dont infer he has one fo the Mark of Chaos, though he has the benefits cuz he has a Mark of Chaos Ascendent. Could you not also read that meaning his weapon that EVEN though has a benefit of the 'Lords with No Marks of Chaos' could be something else that just also has that benefit with other stuff kinda like his Mark of Chaos Ascendent???

Since you can make that assumption, and you have to real rules stating it IS a 'Lords with No Marks of Chaos' you have to go with AP3.

At least thats my thoughts on it...

 MajinMalak wrote:

Reading over Abby's entry in the Codex and the FAQ and no where does it specify what kind of daemon weapon he is using aside from that it is a daemon weapon and would get the +d6 attacks and wounds himself on a roll of 1.

I didn't include this in my above post, but has been mentioned before. While it does not specifically say what kind of Daemon Weapon he has, it does make references that you can infer he has the Daemon Weapon for the 'Lords with No Marks of Chaos'. It states that he gets double Strength instead of the normal +1. The only Daemon Weapon that gives +1 Strength is the one that is for 'Lords with No Marks of Chaos'. Now, as you said it's a 'permissive ruleset' and it does not specifically say that he has the the Daemon Weapon for 'Lords with No Mark of Chaos' but it's not a leap to come to that conclusion with the wording noted.

He is not a Chaos Lord as the Codex does not define him as one

I've stated before, my view on this. By RAW he is not. By RAI I believe he was meant to be.

He does however have all the Marks and as stated in the Codex, the benefits of those Marks are included in His profile.

I disagree with this part as he does not have any of the Marks. As you've stated, it does not define him as a Chaos Lord, but it also does not define him as having a Mark of Chaos. It says that he has a unique Mark that combines the gifts provided from the other Marks (which are present in his statline). So while he gets the benefits of those Marks, he does not actually have them as he has a Mark of Chaos Ascendent, not a Mark of Chaos as defined on pg 25.

It says he has all the Mark of chaos in his Codex Entry. Under Mark of Chaos Accendant:
Abby has attained the favour of each of the Chaos powers in turn....... Over the millennia Abby has melded all of the MARKS OF CHAOS granted to him, and now bears a unqique Mark that combines all of the gifts. Because of the Mark of Tzeentch, the invul save is increased to 4+

He has all of the Marks but if you want to be specific, he at the very least has the Mark of Tzeentch as is described in his entry and has a 4+ invul because of it.

GimlisonofGloin already posted this snippet from the newest faq twice, but nobody seems to be referring to it:

Q: Is Abaddon’s Daemon Sword Drach’nyen a power weapon and, if
the D6 roll for his extra Attacks is a 1, does the weapon rebel as
described on page 93? (p46)
A: Yes to both questions.

This is on the third page in the right column and just below the blissgiver entry in the left column in black text so it doesn't really stand out.

Can somebody please tell me why this doesn't answer the questions being asked in this thread? I'm afraid I'm getting confused (not an unusual state, but...).

Thanks in advance.

The crux of this discussion is:
Is Abaddon's Daemon Weapon AP3 (as normal for an unusual Power Weapon, which it most certainly is (unusual I mean)), or is it AP2 due to him having a non-associated Dameon Weapon?

bginer wrote:
GimlisonofGloin already posted this snippet from the newest faq twice, but nobody seems to be referring to it:

Q: Is Abaddon’s Daemon Sword Drach’nyen a power weapon and, if
the D6 roll for his extra Attacks is a 1, does the weapon rebel as
described on page 93? (p46)
A: Yes to both questions.

This is on the third page in the right column and just below the blissgiver entry in the left column in black text so it doesn't really stand out.

Can somebody please tell me why this doesn't answer the questions being asked in this thread? I'm afraid I'm getting confused (not an unusual state, but...).

Thanks in advance.

Because all daemon weapons are power weapons. It is basically supporting the rule that Abaddon's sword is the generic daemon weapon, which works in exactly the same way....


Automatically Appended Next Post:

40k-noob wrote:


It says he has all the Mark of chaos in his Codex Entry. Under Mark of Chaos Accendant:
Abby has attained the favour of each of the Chaos powers in turn....... Over the millennia Abby has melded all of the MARKS OF CHAOS granted to him, and now bears a unqique Mark that combines all of the gifts. Because of the Mark of Tzeentch, the invul save is increased to 4+

He has all of the Marks but if you want to be specific, he at the very least has the Mark of Tzeentch as is described in his entry and has a 4+ invul because of it.

He has all the marks but because of this he has the chaos undivided daemon weapon, which is the same one you get for having no marks. Abaddon is the chaos undivided special character.

@Happyjew and Kevlar - Then if it's a power weapon/sword, and unusual, then that makes it AP3 correct?

Or am I being dense?

Kevlar wrote:

bginer wrote:
GimlisonofGloin already posted this snippet from the newest faq twice, but nobody seems to be referring to it:

Q: Is Abaddon’s Daemon Sword Drach’nyen a power weapon and, if
the D6 roll for his extra Attacks is a 1, does the weapon rebel as
described on page 93? (p46)
A: Yes to both questions.

This is on the third page in the right column and just below the blissgiver entry in the left column in black text so it doesn't really stand out.

Can somebody please tell me why this doesn't answer the questions being asked in this thread? I'm afraid I'm getting confused (not an unusual state, but...).

Thanks in advance.

Because all daemon weapons are power weapons. It is basically supporting the rule that Abaddon's sword is the generic daemon weapon, which works in exactly the same way....


Automatically Appended Next Post:

40k-noob wrote:


It says he has all the Mark of chaos in his Codex Entry. Under Mark of Chaos Accendant:
Abby has attained the favour of each of the Chaos powers in turn....... Over the millennia Abby has melded all of the MARKS OF CHAOS granted to him, and now bears a unqique Mark that combines all of the gifts. Because of the Mark of Tzeentch, the invul save is increased to 4+

He has all of the Marks but if you want to be specific, he at the very least has the Mark of Tzeentch as is described in his entry and has a 4+ invul because of it.

He has all the marks but because of this he has the chaos undivided daemon weapon, which is the same one you get for having no marks. Abaddon is the chaos undivided special character.

Sorry but i am truly in disbelief. Are you saying that having ALL the Marks is the same as having NO Marks?!?

bginer wrote:
@Happyjew and Kevlar - Then if it's a power weapon/sword, and unusual, then that makes it AP3 correct?

Or am I being dense?

No clue. I have no part in this one, and, IMO, both sides have valid arguments. Personally I think it is something that needs an actual Errata and given an actual statline (like so many of these odd weapons).

Happyjew wrote:

bginer wrote:
@Happyjew and Kevlar - Then if it's a power weapon/sword, and unusual, then that makes it AP3 correct?

Or am I being dense?

No clue. I have no part in this one, and, IMO, both sides have valid arguments. Personally I think it is something that needs an actual Errata and given an actual statline (like so many of these odd weapons).

Heh, then I shall take my self to the sideline and watch with interest.

Thanks.

40k-noob wrote:

Sorry but i am truly in disbelief. Are you saying that having ALL the Marks is the same as having NO Marks?!?

When it comes to his daemon weapon that is exactly what it means.

Disbelieve all you want, the issue will be clearly resolved by the end of the month.

And until it has been said that having all the marks= having none of the marks, he has his own special daemon weapons that follow his daemon weapon rules and the blanket daemon weapon rules alone. You cannot infer a rule, especially with a permissive ruleset. Inference is not a valid argument.

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:
And until it has been said that having all the marks= having none of the marks, he has his own special daemon weapons that follow his daemon weapon rules and the blanket daemon weapon rules alone. You cannot infer a rule, especially with a permissive ruleset. Inference is not a valid argument.

Funny you say that because that is exactly what you are doing yourself.

It is clear from the Codex that Abaddon has a Daemon Weapon with additional rules. Instead of +1 STR it is double STR. Besides that it functions exactly as a Daemon Weapon, which is +D6 Attacks (hit yourself and don't attack if you roll a 1), and AP 2.

I have a permissive ruleset backing up my inference. I can infer something dosent happen if nothing says it happens because thats a rule.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
I see you havent read the Errata then, as they have changed what "Daemon Weapon" is defined as.

You are making an implicit leap that the "instead of +1" has any meaning rules wise anymore. It doesnt.

Stop with the insults, as they make responding tedious.

Which errata would that be? In the errata and FAQ section of the GW website there is only 1 document for CSM and that does not change what a daemon weapon is defined as.

 XT-1984 wrote:

Funny you say that because that is exactly what you are doing yourself.

Im going to ignore this

It is clear from the Codex that Abaddon has a Daemon Weapon with additional rules.

Im with you so far

Instead of +1 STR it is double STR.

True enough

Besides that it functions exactly as a Daemon Weapon

Yes.

which is +D6 Attacks (hit yourself and don't attack if you roll a 1),

Correct

and AP 2.

Wrong. The defenition of a Daemon weapon is a power weapon that adds d6 attacks, ect. ect.
This means it is an unusual power weapon and thus is AP3 by default.

The FAQ defines a Daemon Weapon as

Melee +1S AP2 Daemon Weapon, 2 Handed

No it does not. It defines an UNMARKED daemon weapon as AP2. Tzeench is still ap3. The blanket rule for a daemon weapon is not AP2, its an unusual power weapon and is AP3. If you cna find where it says that all daemon weapons are AP2 please post it. I would love to know what FAQ you are reading because its not the one we've been using.

It's also stated in the FAQ that abbadons weapon is a power weapon, which makes it an unusual power weapon with ap3, that grants d6 extra attacks.

 Lightcavalier wrote:
The FAQ defines a Daemon Weapon as

Melee +1S AP2 Daemon Weapon, 2 Handed

No you are reading that wrong.

The FAQ modifies the profile for all Daemon Weapons for Chaos Lords with NO Marks of Chaos to the profile you have there.

Daemon Weapon is now defined as the Errata states:
Daemon Weapon: This weapon gives its wielder +D6 Attacks in
close combat. Roll the dice at the beginning of each Fight subphase
the wielder is in close combat. If the result is a 1, the
model may not make any Attacks in this sub-phase and suffers
one Wound with no armour saves allowed.

A Daemon Weapon is no longer a two-handed weapon unless it also has the two-handed SR in its profile.

Abby in fact has two single handed weapons that "count as" a daemon weapon. He is therefor not using that profile for a "Lord with no Marks" but is only using the Daemon Weapon Special Rule, with the addition 2x Strength as define by his Codex entry.

7) So familiars dont add +1 PML .. but does Mark of Tzeentch? Is there anything else that does?

page 66 of brb

ESTABLISHING MASTERY Level
Psykers are assumed to be Mastery Level I unless it states
othennrise in their codex entryr. The Mastery Level is usually
shown in parentheses after the Psyker special rule. For example:
Psyker (Mastery Level2). In older codexes, Mastery level may
be written out longhand in the form of a special rule that allows
the Psyker to use more than one psychic power each rurn - the
number ofpowers that can be used per turn is their Mastery Level.

top of p 88 of csm dex
States that a model with mot may attempt to use two powers per turn.

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:
No it does not. It defines an UNMARKED daemon weapon as AP2. Tzeench is still ap3. The blanket rule for a daemon weapon is not AP2, its an unusual power weapon and is AP3. If you cna find where it says that all daemon weapons are AP2 please post it. I would love to know what FAQ you are reading because its not the one we've been using.

This. You have no rules stating he is a Chaos Lord, so cannot be a Chaos Lord with No Mark. Thus his rules follow the Daemon Weapon rules, which by definition are unusual.

Guess the new CSM codex, has/will settle this for good.:
http://bloodofkittens.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/csm-codex-212.jpg

I this is accurate, Abby "has all four Marks.."

40k-noob wrote:
Guess the new CSM codex, has/will settle this for good.:
http://bloodofkittens.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/csm-codex-212.jpg

I this is accurate, Abby "has all four Marks.."

... and also specifies that his CC attacks are AP3.

rigeld2 wrote:

40k-noob wrote:
Guess the new CSM codex, has/will settle this for good.:
http://bloodofkittens.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/csm-codex-212.jpg

I this is accurate, Abby "has all four Marks.."

... and also specifies that his CC attacks are AP3.

I see AP2 there, on the next codex he will have to choose between using his daemon weapon or the talon of horus. In any case in the current codex he strikes with dra'echyn (sp?) and the talon only give him the reroll which will be the AP3 one.

Not really worth arguing for 3 weeks

Cyvash wrote:
I just noticed one thing im guessing tzeentch daemon weapons are still ap3 as well since they were not mentioned.

Given its shooting profile is AP 3 one could assume its melee profile would also be AP3 as it follows the unusual power weapon rule because its not FAQ'd.

rigeld2 wrote:

40k-noob wrote:
Guess the new CSM codex, has/will settle this for good.:
http://bloodofkittens.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/csm-codex-212.jpg

I this is accurate, Abby "has all four Marks.."

... and also specifies that his CC attacks are AP3.

i think it will be more clarified when book comes out, he has two weapon profiles.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Abaddon HAS a mark, of CA, so no +1S AP2 for him. He is AP3

As the dex states Drach'nyen and the Talon of Horus count as a Daemon weapon he follows the rules for the Daemon weapon in the FAQ (AP2 two handed weapon +D6 Attacks) but doubles his strength instead of the +1 as per the dex. How is that difficult to grasp?

 Bausk wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Abaddon HAS a mark, of CA, so no +1S AP2 for him. He is AP3

As the dex states Drach'nyen and the Talon of Horus count as a Daemon weapon he follows the rules for the Daemon weapon in the FAQ (AP2 two handed weapon +D6 Attacks) but doubles his strength instead of the +1 as per the dex. How is that difficult to grasp?

The FAQ says that the AP2 is only for a Lord with no marks.
It'd be great if you'd read the entire thread.

Cyvash wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

40k-noob wrote:
Guess the new CSM codex, has/will settle this for good.:
http://bloodofkittens.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/csm-codex-212.jpg

I this is accurate, Abby "has all four Marks.."

... and also specifies that his CC attacks are AP3.

i think it will be more clarified when book comes out, he has two weapon profiles.

Right, so he will have to choose which to attack with.

One has +1 S - AP 2 is a Daemon Weapon etc.
The other is 2x S - AP3 but not a Daemon Weapon.

Should be interesting to read through when the 'dex come out.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Bausk wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Abaddon HAS a mark, of CA, so no +1S AP2 for him. He is AP3

As the dex states Drach'nyen and the Talon of Horus count as a Daemon weapon he follows the rules for the Daemon weapon in the FAQ (AP2 two handed weapon +D6 Attacks) but doubles his strength instead of the +1 as per the dex. How is that difficult to grasp?

The FAQ says that the AP2 is only for a Lord with no marks.
It'd be great if you'd read the entire thread.

Great how you presume I didn't. Given that the 'Daemon weapon' is the only +1 strength variation and The Don has fore mentioned weapons that 'Count as' a 'Daemon weapon' its not hard to gather that the daemon weapon it counts as is the 'Daemon weapon'. Seeing as there is no other entry with a stat line for 'Daemon weapon' than the +1 strength, AP2 +D6 Attacks two handed variation...I'm going to gather it counts as what it says it counts as in addition to the other rules stated (X2 S instead of +1, reroll to wound). Again, not difficult to grasp.

At this point I will clarify for you; when I say 'daemon weapon' I mean Daemon weapons; daemon weapon. not any of the other Daemon weapons; X. Yes?

 Bausk wrote:
Great how you presume I didn't.

You responded to the 4th post in a 4 page thread.

Given that the 'Daemon weapon' is the only +1 strength variation and The Don has fore mentioned weapons that 'Count as' a 'Daemon weapon' its not hard to gather that the daemon weapon it counts as is the 'Daemon weapon'. Seeing as there is no other entry with a stat line for 'Daemon weapon' than the +1 strength, AP2 +D6 Attacks two handed variation...I'm going to gather it counts as what it says it counts as in addition to the other rules stated (X2 S instead of +1, reroll to wound). Again, not difficult to grasp.

You can make whatever logical leaps you want, but please support them with rules.
It's a Daemon Weapon with unusual properties. It doesn't meet any of the requirements listedin the FAQ so it's an unusual power weapon.

At this point I will clarify for you; when I say 'daemon weapon' I mean Daemon weapons; daemon weapon. not any of the other Daemon weapons; X. Yes?

This clarified nothing. I'm assuming you mean this stat line from the FAQ:
Page 93 – Daemon Weapons, Daemon Weapon (Lords with no
Mark of Chaos).
Replace the last sentence with the following profile:
Range S AP Type
- +1 2 Melee, Daemon
Weapon,Two-handed

Note that it requires you to a) be a Lord and b) have no Marks. Abbadon isn't defined as a Chaos Lord and has a Mark of Chaos Ascendant therefore meets neither criteria.

As I said, please read the entire thread and respond to the arguments therein.

I responded to the 4th post as it was the most relevant, half the posts relating to The Dons status as a lord and if he was marked or not are irrelevant. As it outright states that the weapons he uses count as a Daemon weapon. The additional effects are to be taken after the fact. It further indicates the Daemon weapon by stating it gets X2 instead of +1 (only the Daemon weapons; Daemon weapon grants +1S). Just because you perceive the way I post as me not reading the thread does not mean I did not, I just chose to respond to the only relevant points.

Shw me where Abaddon is a Chaos LOrd with NO mark of chaos, then you would be right

There is no generic daemon weapon profile, it is now a special rule.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Shw me where Abaddon is a Chaos LOrd with NO mark of chaos, then you would be right

There is no generic daemon weapon profile, it is now a special rule.

Tell me why I have to. Seeing as by your logic Drach'nyen and The Talon of Horus count as a X2S rather than +1S (for no apparent reason) AP- weapon that +D6 Attacks and allow a reroll to wound. The special rule, as you put it, does not state that it is a power weapon of any sort. Nor does it explain the initial +1S the X2S is replacing. The point is these supposed requirements are irrelevant, Drach'nyen and The Talon of Horus count as a Daemon weapon (including any perceived "requirements") that alters one characteristic, that it's clearly stated to initially have, and adds a reroll to wound.

 Bausk wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Shw me where Abaddon is a Chaos LOrd with NO mark of chaos, then you would be right

There is no generic daemon weapon profile, it is now a special rule.

Tell me why I have to. .

Becayse Nos has shown Abaddon has a mark of chaos.

It is up to you to counter that with rules. If yo can not then the rules Nosferatu1001 gave must be true.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Bausk wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Shw me where Abaddon is a Chaos LOrd with NO mark of chaos, then you would be right

There is no generic daemon weapon profile, it is now a special rule.

Tell me why I have to. .

Becayse Nos has shown Abaddon has a mark of chaos.

It is up to you to counter that with rules. If yo can not then the rules Nosferatu1001 gave must be true.

Which would only be relevant if he was a bought generic chaos lord that bought a Daemon weapon. What do you think a Power Klaw counts as? The Bale Eye? These things count as what they say they do, no limitation there on. if a weapon counts as it follow as said rules for weapon. Better yet the Gauntlets of ultimar, what do they count as again? A matched pair of Power fists with a storm bolter that has special rules. Well I guess seeing as the generaic chaptermaster cant get two powerfists AND a storm bolter (let alone a special one) it must just mean a single powerfist and the storm bolter and not what it says it counts as. Guess the Daemon hammer is an unusual force weapon or a thunder hammer, even though it says it counts as a thunder hammer with the nemesis force weapon rule. I can continue with more examples if you like. The main point here is it counts as a daemone weapon, further implication as to which daemon weapon is stated in the rule as it recieves X2 INSTEAD of the +1S it would normally get (not if he has a particular mark but because it counts as an unmarked lords daemon weapon).

Counts as; simple, straightforward and highly used rule throughout 40k.

How about you post rules quotes with page numbers to back up what you have said.

 Bausk wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Shw me where Abaddon is a Chaos LOrd with NO mark of chaos, then you would be right

There is no generic daemon weapon profile, it is now a special rule.

Tell me why I have to. Seeing as by your logic Drach'nyen and The Talon of Horus count as a X2S rather than +1S (for no apparent reason) AP- weapon that +D6 Attacks and allow a reroll to wound. The special rule, as you put it, does not state that it is a power weapon of any sort. Nor does it explain the initial +1S the X2S is replacing. The point is these supposed requirements are irrelevant, Drach'nyen and The Talon of Horus count as a Daemon weapon (including any perceived "requirements") that alters one characteristic, that it's clearly stated to initially have, and adds a reroll to wound.

Because you are attempting to use the profile for a Chaos Lord witn No Mark of Chaos. What is allowing you to do that?


Abddon is NOT a Chaos Lord. If you disagree please give a page and para which defines him as a Chaos Lord. You cannot, but please actually follow the tenets of the forum and back up your assertion with rules
Abaddon *does* have a Mark of Chaos - he is treated as having all 4.

Please find a rule where he "counts as" a Chaos Lord with No Mark of Chaos.

 DeathReaper wrote:
How about you post rules quotes with page numbers to back up what you have said.

Specific uses of the term counts as can be found after a quick peruse though almost any code:.

C:SW
Page 35; Fang of Morkai; 'All models in the same squad as a wolf priest are counted as Fearless'.

Page 49; Living Relic; 'Bjorns remains are counted as an additional objective'

C:GK
Page 28; Personal Teleporter; 'The unit counts as having moved'

Page 31; Cleansing flame; 'Unsaved wound caused by cleansing flame are counted as having been caused in close combat for all purposes'

Page 58; Pslocculum; 'The bearer of the psylocculum (and his unit) count as being BS 10 if shooting a psyker, or unit containing one or more psykers.'

C:IG
Page 92; Battle klaw; '(Counts as a Power fist)'

C:Orks
Page 89; Power Klaw; 'Counts as a power fist in all respects'

Though it is not limited to the term 'counts as'. as It can also be 'treated as' or 'is a (insert weapon name here)' etc etc etc. All of which mean the same thing. They are what they say they are, if they have additional rules, or in this case rules that overide other then you use them in addition to as it is stated in C:CSM page 46 under the listing for Drach'nyen and the talon of horus;

'The effect of these two powerful artefacts means that Abaddon counts as being equiped with a Daemon Weapon (the weapon by name not the special rule) that doubles his strength instead of the normal +1 (a trait that is only associated with the unmarked lords variation of daemon weapons), and he may re-roll any failed roll to wound in close combat.'

I know its hard for you to accept this but a weapon can count as something without filling any of the weapons normal restrictions. That's the whole point of something counting as something else.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 Bausk wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Shw me where Abaddon is a Chaos LOrd with NO mark of chaos, then you would be right

There is no generic daemon weapon profile, it is now a special rule.

Tell me why I have to. Seeing as by your logic Drach'nyen and The Talon of Horus count as a X2S rather than +1S (for no apparent reason) AP- weapon that +D6 Attacks and allow a reroll to wound. The special rule, as you put it, does not state that it is a power weapon of any sort. Nor does it explain the initial +1S the X2S is replacing. The point is these supposed requirements are irrelevant, Drach'nyen and The Talon of Horus count as a Daemon weapon (including any perceived "requirements") that alters one characteristic, that it's clearly stated to initially have, and adds a reroll to wound.

Because you are attempting to use the profile for a Chaos Lord witn No Mark of Chaos. What is allowing you to do that?


Abddon is NOT a Chaos Lord. If you disagree please give a page and para which defines him as a Chaos Lord. You cannot, but please actually follow the tenets of the forum and back up your assertion with rules
Abaddon *does* have a Mark of Chaos - he is treated as having all 4.

Please find a rule where he "counts as" a Chaos Lord with No Mark of Chaos.

You are the one saying he needs to fill the criteria for the weapon to count as what it is. As I have just stated and shown there is no need for Abaddon to fill the set criteria for a Daemon weapon as it automatically counts as one without the criteria. And that sums up why I totally didn't care to post about his status as a lord or if he is marked or not, its irrelevant. If they just counted as having the Daemon weapon special rule then they wouldn't have an AP at all as under the Drach'nyen & Talon rule and FAQ the SR; DW; states nothing about Power weapons or APs so that seems a little far fetched that it only applies the DW SR.

Actually there is. All of your examples specifically state what they do. Abbadons does not. Its as simple as that. You cnanot make leaps of logic in a RAW argument. You will lose.

His weapon is not the same as an AP2 daemon weapon.

Now you MUST find a rule where it states "drach'nyen is AP2". There is no other way around this. You HAVE TO find a rule that states specifically that.

Not that, "Well its kinda like an AP2 Daemon Weapon"

Hemlock Root is Kinda like a Carrot, but if you eat it you die. Kinda like does not mean is.

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:
Actually there is. All of your examples specifically state what they do. Abbadons does not. Its as simple as that. You cnanot make leaps of logic in a RAW argument. You will lose.

His weapon is not the same as an AP2 daemon weapon.

Now you MUST find a rule where it states "drach'nyen is AP2". There is no other way around this. You HAVE TO find a rule that states specifically that.

Not that, "Well its kinda like an AP2 Daemon Weapon"

Hemlock Root is Kinda like a Carrot, but if you eat it you die. Kinda like does not mean is.

Its not a leap of logic or extrapolation from incomplete data nor is it 'kinda like'. It states that it counts as a Daemon Weapon that confers a +1S before alteration in the chaos codex. As only one of the 'Daemon Weapons; X' has a +1S in its profile and is called a 'Daemon Weapon' there is no assumption of what it counts as. Further more its the combination of Drach'nyen and the Talon that makes it count as a Daemon Weapon with stated alterations, not just one or the other. So there you go, they count as a Daemon weapon, a Daemon weapon has the profile listed in the latest FAQ, they don't use its +1S & instead use a X2S, in addition to this they grant re-roll to wound. Done.

In none, that's right none of the weapon examples I listed via what I previously cited as counts as lists the weapons profile that it counts as so it is unreasonable to presume I would need to do so in this example. If you would like another citation look no further than Codex DE; Page 49; Lilith Hesperax; Wicked blades and barbed hair; 'Counts as a shardnet and Impaler' and again, no profile listed.

 Bausk wrote:
Further more its the combination of Drach'nyen and the Talon that makes it count as a Daemon Weapon with stated alterations, not just one or the other.

Stop right there. You have changed the rules of the Daemon weapon by equiping and additional pice of wargear that you use in conjunction with it. Because of the Talon of Horus, you have a completely different ruleset. Its as simple as that.

In response to the lelith post, do you know what a "Counts As" daemon weapons ap is? Give you a hint, its 3. The Daemon Weapon blanket rule does not mention an AP, so therefore, unless otherwise specifically stated for THAT SPECIFIC DAEMON WEAPON its an unusual power weapon and is AP 3.

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:

 Bausk wrote:
Further more its the combination of Drach'nyen and the Talon that makes it count as a Daemon Weapon with stated alterations, not just one or the other.

Stop right there. You have changed the rules of the Daemon weapon by equiping and additional pice of wargear that you use in conjunction with it. Because of the Talon of Horus, you have a completely different ruleset. Its as simple as that.

No I didn't, Codex CSM did. Do you own a copy? Page 46 under the section detailing what Drach'nyen and the Talon of Horus effects in game are. I will repost it again for you;

'The effect of these two powerful artefacts means that Abaddon counts as being equiped with a Daemon Weapon that doubles his strength instead of the normal +1, and he may re-roll any failed roll to wound in close combat'

As you can see the combination of both these weapons counts as a single weapon called a Daemon Weapon. It uses the weapon profile provided for a Daemon Weapon: Range: - S: +1 AP2 Type: Daemon weapon, two handed, Melee. However the +1 is replaced by a X2S and the weapon gains the ability to re-roll failed to wound rolls as stated in the chaos codex as said Daemon Weapon has its profile altered by the special rules of 'Drach'Nyen and the Talon of Horus'.

I will give you a further example if you like. Codex DE: Page 51: The Serpents Bite. 'These Blades count as poisoned weapons (2+). Further more , so virulent is their toxin that any to wound roll of 5+ ignore armour saves.'

Meaning they count as, as in use the profile/SRs etc for, poisoned weapons (2+) as a base. Then in addition to that they have another special rule that alters the original weapons base profile.

 Bausk wrote:
It uses the weapon profile provided for a Daemon Weapon: Range: - S: +1 AP2 Type: Daemon weapon, two handed, Melee.

Find me where the blanket rule for Daemon Weapon says this. This exactly, for all daemon weapons. If you can fine me the rule that says every daemon weapon gets this, then I and everyone else here will concede the argument. Give you another hint, it dosent exist.


Again you are both wrong, and giving bad arguments. Counts as a serpents bite,

Not, counts as a serpents bite with a pink paintjob that does ___ in addition to its normal rules
Or a green one that does ____ in addition to its normal rules.

There is no example that is similar to daemon weapons because nothing changes its rules like they do. There is no example you can provide that is even close to a daemon weapon because there is no wargear like a daemon weapon. No unit gets a "Mark" that changes the way its wargear works but chaos marines.

Bausk wrote:
.....Page 46 under the section detailing what Drach'nyen and the Talon of Horus effects in game are. I will repost it again for you;

'The effect of these two powerful artefacts means that Abaddon counts as being equiped with a Daemon Weapon that doubles his strength instead of the normal +1, and he may re-roll any failed roll to wound in close combat'

As you can see the combination of both these weapons counts as a single weapon called a Daemon Weapon. It uses the weapon profile provided for a Daemon Weapon: Range: - S: +1 AP2 Type: Daemon weapon, two handed, Melee. However the +1 is replaced by a X2S and the weapon gains the ability to re-roll failed to wound rolls as stated in the chaos codex as said Daemon Weapon has its profile altered by the special rules of 'Drach'Nyen and the Talon of Horus'.

The mistake that you continue to make is in Bold.

No where does the CSM codex state that Abby's weapon use profile "X."
You are adding information that simply is not there.

The Codex says that his weapons "count as" a Daemon Weapon, true. But a daemon weapon has been redefined by the Codex FAQ.

A daemon weapon now, just gives the following:
Two Handed
Power Weapon
Daemon Weapon: This weapon gives its wielder +D6 Attacks in
close combat. Roll the dice at the beginning of each Fight subphase
the wielder is in close combat. If the result is a 1, the
model may not make any Attacks in this sub-phase and suffers
one Wound with no armour saves allowed.

The profile that you quoted is for a specific weapon being wielded by a specific model (Chaos Lord with no Marks of Chaos) and it is not applicable to Abby.

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:

 Bausk wrote:
It uses the weapon profile provided for a Daemon Weapon: Range: - S: +1 AP2 Type: Daemon weapon, two handed, Melee.

Find me where the blanket rule for Daemon Weapon says this. This exactly, for all daemon weapons. If you can fine me the rule that says every daemon weapon gets this, then I and everyone else here will concede the argument. Give you another hint, it dosent exist.


Again you are both wrong, and giving bad arguments. Counts as a serpents bite,

Not, counts as a serpents bite with a pink paintjob that does ___ in addition to its normal rules
Or a green one that does ____ in addition to its normal rules.

There is no example that is similar to daemon weapons because nothing changes its rules like they do. There is no example you can provide that is even close to a daemon weapon because there is no wargear like a daemon weapon. No unit gets a "Mark" that changes the way its wargear works but chaos marines.

FAQ Daemon weapons; Daemon weapon; Range:- S: +1S AP:2 Type: Melee, Two handed, Daemon weapon. This is the base rule for a Daemon weapon. It overwrites the codex which overwrites the the BRB. A Daemon Weapon is not a power weapon, no where in the FAQ is it stated to be a power weapon. All entries in the FAQ indicate a profile listing seperate to the codex and seperate to the power weapon listings. As the rule for Drach'Nyen and the Talon of Horus clearly states they count as a Daemon Weapon, they count as a Daemon Weapon.

The example with Liltith was also to point out she is equiped with Wych gear and weaponry, even though she herself is not a wych, nor is she a Succubus. Much as Abaddon is not a Chaos Lord or marked in the same manner as normal lords. These factors have no bearing on what they are counted to be equiped withas they just have these items because they can. The Rule states they are counted as having the weapons and items. Not that they have them and they need to prove that they are allowed to have them in the same manner lesser models have to.


Oh and FYI

The codex entry for Daemon Weapons only applies to The MoT weapon as it does not state it counts as a Daemon Weapon, its not incorperated into the latest FAQs and so it uses the latest update of its rules it counts as a power weapon, it has additional rules, it is AP 3. Its profile is thus: Range:- S: user AP: 3 Type: Daemon weapon, two handed, melee and in addition to that it may be used in the shooting phase with the profile listed under Deathscreamer on page 93 in the Chaos Codex.

 Bausk wrote:
FAQ Daemon weapons; Daemon weapon; Range:- S: +1S AP:2 Type: Melee, Two handed, Daemon weapon. This is the base rule for a Daemon weapon.

Its like Im talking to a wall.

Let me spell this out very plainly, because I'm begining to get irritated shooting down the same argument over and over again.

The blanket rule for a daemon weapon is as follows: 1d6 extra attacks, if you roll a 1 you take a wound with no armor saves and may not make an attack, 2 handed, power weapon.

The rule for a daemon weapon for a LORD, with NO MARK, (neither of which does abbadon fulfill) is, AP2, +1 strength, in addition to any other rule.

Abbadon is not a chaos lord via his rules. Abbadon has marks, via his rules. He is not an unmarked lord so his wepaon is not AP2. He has his own weapon that is not covered in the FAQ, so it is AP3, in addition to its own rules. If you post the same argument again, I will alert a mod because you are not following the tenets of YMDC.

You obviously need to re-read the Codex. Do not make another post on this thread until you read the relevent sections of abaddons rules and the relevant FAQ.

40k-noob wrote:

Bausk wrote:
.....Page 46 under the section detailing what Drach'nyen and the Talon of Horus effects in game are. I will repost it again for you;

'The effect of these two powerful artefacts means that Abaddon counts as being equiped with a Daemon Weapon that doubles his strength instead of the normal +1, and he may re-roll any failed roll to wound in close combat'

As you can see the combination of both these weapons counts as a single weapon called a Daemon Weapon. It uses the weapon profile provided for a Daemon Weapon: Range: - S: +1 AP2 Type: Daemon weapon, two handed, Melee. However the +1 is replaced by a X2S and the weapon gains the ability to re-roll failed to wound rolls as stated in the chaos codex as said Daemon Weapon has its profile altered by the special rules of 'Drach'Nyen and the Talon of Horus'.

The mistake that you continue to make is in Bold.

No where does the CSM codex state that Abby's weapon use profile "X."
You are adding information that simply is not there.

The Codex says that his weapons "count as" a Daemon Weapon, true. But a daemon weapon has been redefined by the Codex FAQ.

A daemon weapon now, just gives the following:
Two Handed
Power Weapon
Daemon Weapon: This weapon gives its wielder +D6 Attacks in
close combat. Roll the dice at the beginning of each Fight subphase
the wielder is in close combat. If the result is a 1, the
model may not make any Attacks in this sub-phase and suffers
one Wound with no armour saves allowed.

The profile that you quoted is for a specific weapon being wielded by a specific model (Chaos Lord with no Marks of Chaos) and it is not applicable to Abby.

The FAQ does not state that for the USR Daemon weapon. It only states:

'This weapon gives its wielder +D6 Attacks in
close combat. Roll the dice at the beginning of each Fight subphase
the wielder is in close combat. If the result is a 1, the
model may not make any Attacks in this sub-phase and suffers
one Wound with no armour saves allowed.'

This is the mistake you are making. You are confusing the weapon with the USR. The codex listing is now obsolete for every variation but the MoT for the reasons I listed above. Abaddon Counts as the weapon using its profile. much as every other counts as weapon example I have listed does. It even further states that it initially has +1S but is replaced by a X2S. No where in the FAQ does it say that it is a power weapon. why? because its no longer a power weapon, its a Daemon Weapon. And their rules and profiles are listed in the same FAQ funnily enough.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:

 Bausk wrote:
FAQ Daemon weapons; Daemon weapon; Range:- S: +1S AP:2 Type: Melee, Two handed, Daemon weapon. This is the base rule for a Daemon weapon.

Its like Im talking to a wall.

Let me spell this out very plainly, because I'm begining to get irritated shooting down the same argument over and over again.

The blanket rule for a daemon weapon is as follows: 1d6 extra attacks, if you roll a 1 you take a wound with no armor saves and may not make an attack, 2 handed, power weapon.

The rule for a daemon weapon for a LORD, with NO MARK, (neither of which does abbadon fulfill) is, AP2, +1 strength, in addition to any other rule.

Abbadon is not a chaos lord via his rules. Abbadon has marks, via his rules. He is not an unmarked lord so his wepaon is not AP2. He has his own weapon that is not covered in the FAQ, so it is AP3, in addition to its own rules. If you post the same argument again, I will alert a mod because you are not following the tenets of YMDC.

You obviously need to re-read the Codex. Do not make another post on this thread until you read the relevent sections of abaddons rules and the relevant FAQ.

I disagree with of how to interpret the RAW. Ive stated everything as it is written in the codex, the FAQ and offered countless example of the interpretation. I have stated why the codex entry for Daemon weapons no longer applies to anything but the MoT Deathscreamer (any further mention of daemon weapons excludes the Deathscreamer).

The FAQ supersedes the codex entry. They no longer count as power weapons. As it Counts as a Daemon weapon with a +1S modifier, both facts apply to the first 'Daemon weapons; Daemon weapon' entry in the FAQ. As it 'Counts As' this weapon Abaddon does not need to fulfill the criteria so it is irrelevant if he is or is not a lord that has or has not been marked.

On an related note, in the days of second ed Drach'Nyen only required Abaddon to hit a model. then it was automatically removed from play as it cut reality, literally. And We see in the leaked picture from what can presumed to be 6th Drach'Nyen is AP2. Now I don't know about you but I would just assume the lads at GW know how to make a close combat monster that should be feared by all. And given everything I've said up to this point wouldn't you presume that perhaps the most deadly pair of close combat weapons in the galaxy would have to be at least AP2?

Presumptions aside, even before 6th ed Abaddons counts as Daemon Weapon still counted as the unmarked lord variation. It never stopped counting as this variation. People just got stuck on the idea that the Don was nerfed (as was all Daemon weapons) to AP3 because of the BRB with no FAQ fixes. Now its fixed and people are trying desperately to keep him in a nerfed state. Of course no one questioned which daemon weapon it counted as in 5th ed. Funny.

Because all power weapons were AP2. Its that simple. Now that the AP of power weapons is different, we need more informaiton than we previously did.

What happened in 2nd or 3rd or 5th dosent matter. What matters is what happens now, and what happens now is that he wields a special daemon weapon with its own special rules.

This makes it AP3.

 Bausk wrote:

40k-noob wrote:

Bausk wrote:
.....Page 46 under the section detailing what Drach'nyen and the Talon of Horus effects in game are. I will repost it again for you;

'The effect of these two powerful artefacts means that Abaddon counts as being equiped with a Daemon Weapon that doubles his strength instead of the normal +1, and he may re-roll any failed roll to wound in close combat'

As you can see the combination of both these weapons counts as a single weapon called a Daemon Weapon. It uses the weapon profile provided for a Daemon Weapon: Range: - S: +1 AP2 Type: Daemon weapon, two handed, Melee. However the +1 is replaced by a X2S and the weapon gains the ability to re-roll failed to wound rolls as stated in the chaos codex as said Daemon Weapon has its profile altered by the special rules of 'Drach'Nyen and the Talon of Horus'.

The mistake that you continue to make is in Bold.

No where does the CSM codex state that Abby's weapon use profile "X."
You are adding information that simply is not there.

The Codex says that his weapons "count as" a Daemon Weapon, true. But a daemon weapon has been redefined by the Codex FAQ.

A daemon weapon now, just gives the following:
Two Handed
Power Weapon
Daemon Weapon: This weapon gives its wielder +D6 Attacks in
close combat. Roll the dice at the beginning of each Fight subphase
the wielder is in close combat. If the result is a 1, the
model may not make any Attacks in this sub-phase and suffers
one Wound with no armour saves allowed.

The profile that you quoted is for a specific weapon being wielded by a specific model (Chaos Lord with no Marks of Chaos) and it is not applicable to Abby.

The FAQ does not state that for the USR Daemon weapon. It only states:

'This weapon gives its wielder +D6 Attacks in
close combat. Roll the dice at the beginning of each Fight subphase
the wielder is in close combat. If the result is a 1, the
model may not make any Attacks in this sub-phase and suffers
one Wound with no armour saves allowed.'

This is the mistake you are making. You are confusing the weapon with the USR. The codex listing is now obsolete for every variation but the MoT for the reasons I listed above. Abaddon Counts as the weapon using its profile. much as every other counts as weapon example I have listed does. It even further states that it initially has +1S but is replaced by a X2S. No where in the FAQ does it say that it is a power weapon. why? because its no longer a power weapon, its a Daemon Weapon. And their rules and profiles are listed in the same FAQ funnily enough.

I realize that I added "Daemon Weapon:" there but lets be real, It is a USR now.

However you are mistaken in thinking the FAQ makes the codex entry obsolete. The FAQ updates or replaces only what it states in the FAQ. Please re-read the FAQ and you will notice that it only updates certain sections of page 93 of the Codex. It does not remove the Power Weapon statement under the Daemon Weapon section. As of now a Daemon Weapon is as follows:

Chaos Space Marines Codex wrote:
A Daemon Weapon:
- Two Handed
- Power Weapon
-This weapon gives its wielder +D6 Attacks in
close combat. Roll the dice at the beginning of each Fight subphase
the wielder is in close combat. If the result is a 1, the
model may not make any Attacks in this sub-phase and suffers
one Wound with no armour saves allowed.
- Has an additional ability that varies depending on the Mark given to the bearer, as described below.

Then the FAQ comes into play and changes the sections that follow, except for the Tzeentch Mark section

As has been pointed out prior and you have yet to provide any evidence to counter.

Abby is not a Chaos Lord as defined by his Codex
Abby has all the Marks of Chaos according to his Codex Entry.

Thus the profile that you quoted is not applicable to Abby.

Abby's weapon is an "unusual power weapon" which makes is AP3 plus 2x his strength with re-roll failed wounds until the new Codex comes out.

As above.

You have no permission to use the Entry for a Daemon weapon (lors with no mark of chaos) because Abaddon is

Not
A
Chaos
Lord
with
No
Mark

The profile for a chaos lord with no mark is +1S, Ap2. There is no entry for Abaddon, as he is not a Chaos Lord with No Mark

In short, Bausk, you are making the same discredited argument given throughout this thread, exactly as if you hadnt read it. You have no permission to use the Daemon weapon entry for lords with no mark, because Abaddon does not fit the criteria. Your continued misreading f the rule does not make yours "RAW"

Lets do this the easiest way I can think of.

Step 1- Are the rules for Drach different, in any way, shape or form, from the unmarked chaos lord Daemon Weapon?

If you answered yes, go to step 2, if you answered no, re-read your codex and then return to step 1.

Step 2- Does it list anywhere in Abbadon's entry that Drach is Ap2?
If you answered yes, re-reda your codex and then return to step 2. If you answered no go to step 3.

Step 3- does it say in the FAQ that Drach specifically is AP2? If you said no, then proceed to the answer step. If you said yes, re-read your FAQ

Answer step- You are not told, in any way, that the Daemon weapon specific to Abbadon is AP2, so we must fall back on the Daemon Weapon blanket rule for the AP value. Listed for the ap value of the daemon weapon blanket rule is "Power Weapon". This Power Weapon has other traits associated with it, making ti unusual, so we must follow the rule for an unusual power weapon. It is AP3 as per unusual power weapon rule.

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:
Because all power weapons were AP2. Its that simple. Now that the AP of power weapons is different, we need more informaiton than we previously did.

What happened in 2nd or 3rd or 5th dosent matter. What matters is what happens now, and what happens now is that he wields a special daemon weapon with its own special rules.

This makes it AP3.

According the the previous FAQ yes the weapon Abaddon used was AP3. According to the the latest FAQ no. I've stated why, stated page numbers, rules, citations, examples, clarifications, outright stated the rules verbatim and even told you point blank told you that Abaddon has used that particular Daemon Weapon from when that codex was written. Yet you still insist you are right in spite of being shown you are using an outdated or plain wrong interpretation. You offer only irrelevant points about his status, marks or claim that it is a power weapon with the Daemon Weapon USR therefore counting as a unusual power weapon (which is what it [The unmarked Daemon Weapon] was before the latest FAQ).

I find it interesting that you focused on my side point, that was more a tid bit of information, rather than the statement of facts and rules. Then turn around an just declare it must be AP3.

Another side point, power weapons ignored armour in 5th ed, they did not have an AP.

Bausk - no, you showed rules that were irrelevant, as you made a critical flaw in logic

You are stating that all daemon weapons follow the "no mark" lord stats. Which is wrong

You have given the wrong rules consistently, meaning you have the wrong answer still.

Abby is, currently, AP3. RAW

I focused on that tifbit becuase that was the only thing even remotly relevant. I dont care what examples and exceptions the FAQ gave you. Unless it had Abbadons name in it or Drachnyen specifically, the point is moot because they are different weapons.

End of story.

There is no argument left to be had here.

Abbadons weapon is DIFFERENT.
Different = not the same.
Different weapons = different rules.

Its not that hard of a concept to grasp.

On that note, bowing out of here. It is a pointless argument as, in 2 weeks, the whole codex is different

nosferatu1001 wrote:
As above.

You have no permission to use the Entry for a Daemon weapon (lors with no mark of chaos) because Abaddon is

Not
A
Chaos
Lord
with
No
Mark

The profile for a chaos lord with no mark is +1S, Ap2. There is no entry for Abaddon, as he is not a Chaos Lord with No Mark

In short, Bausk, you are making the same discredited argument given throughout this thread, exactly as if you hadnt read it. You have no permission to use the Daemon weapon entry for lords with no mark, because Abaddon does not fit the criteria. Your continued misreading f the rule does not make yours "RAW"

He
does
not
need
to
fulfill
that
criteria

It is a moot point, the weapon counts as (and always has) the unmarked daemon weapon. He had it in5th and he has it in 6th. Nothings changed but people clinging to the hope that they can keep Abaddon in the preFAQ state.

Lets look at pages 46 and 93 and take everything into context that's written and stated here and in the FAQ.

Lets start on page 93...How many Daemon weapons can you see listed...if you answer more or less than 5 then math may not be your strong suit. There is the Daemon weapon and one for each Mark.

Look at the FAQ, just there under the unmarked lords Daemon weapon...what is that? Why its the USR for what a Daemon weapon grants of course. Bringing this weapon into the 6th edition and out of unusual power weapon limbo. Whats this, it doesn't state anything about being a power weapon? no, it no longer counts as a power weapon at all. Nor does it +1 to the users S.

Lets cross reference this with page 93 just to be sure the DW SR didn't confer a +1S either...nope. The 5th ed rendition did not +1to the users S either.

Now lets look at abaddons rules for Drach'nyen and the talon of Horus..Hmm it says they, when combined, count as a Daemon weapon. And further explains that its +1S is altered....but wait...neither Daemon weapon SR stated it has a +1S...lets look at page 93 to find the source of this +1S and cross reference it with the FAQ to see what Daemon Weapon they are talking about.

Why look its the Daemon weapon called with a profile name 'Daemon weapon'. In both the 5th ed and 6th ed it is the only Daemon weapon that confers a +1S bonus. But I guess Abaddons is just a generic Daemon weapon...which would be which of the 5 base daemon weapons again?



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:
I focused on that tifbit becuase that was the only thing even remotly relevant. I dont care what examples and exceptions the FAQ gave you. Unless it had Abbadons name in it or Drachnyen specifically, the point is moot because they are different weapons.

End of story.

There is no argument left to be had here.

Abbadons weapon is DIFFERENT.
Different = not the same.
Different weapons = different rules.

Its not that hard of a concept to grasp.

Lets look at the only other Unique character that has a Daemon weapon. Typhus. His manreaper originally stated it was a daemon weapon and followed all the rules for them, in addition to that it was also a force weapon. Now Typhus is also not technicly a lord. and even after 6th ed dropped with the first round of FAQs eveyong assumed (as it was previously FAQ'd) his Manreaper followed the rules for a Plague bringer with the additional change that it was also a force weapon (this sounds like something in this forum....Thats right The serpents bite, base weapon that has alteration) that he could always activate in addition to using a power in the same turn. No one argued that typhus is not a lord so he shouldn't get the plague bringer rule. Heck no ones even argued that as they are both 'not lords' they shouldn't have a daemon weapon as its something only lords get access to (also sounding like a post in this forum...yes thats right Lillith isnt a wych but has wych gear anyway). Let alone disputing that he shouldn't get the plague bringer rule because its different because it is also a force weapon. The fact they used Typhus' mark in the first place was because it made sense to use nurgles' Daemon weapon.

As the don has all marks it made sens to give him the unmarked version, but they couldn't because he is marked. so they bypass that by giving him unique weapons that count as the daemon weapon. Then spruce it up a bit to make it more like the weapons its representing.

But your likly to say the manreaper was FAQ'd at which point I say well that because it had to be. Then you'll say then why didn't they FAQ Drach'Nyen and the talon of Horus. And I'll say because they didn't need to, its rules are written plainly on page 46 of the chaos codex and the weapon in counts as is listed in the FAQ already. Then you'll disagree citing BRB page 61, refering to the previous FAQ and blindly stating he is not a lord and he has a a mark. Which I've pointed out numerous times is irrelevant for many reasons including there are only 5 daemon weapons, well 6 if you include the manreaper but Abaddon does not have that one for sure. And it can't be the marked 4 so that leaves us with the last one that is the unmarked version (which he had in 5th ed) and fits the Drach'Nyen And Talon of Horus SR nicely as it is also the only DW with +1S and is actually called a Daemon weapon in its profile.

Then the cycle starts again....

Bausk wrote:
He
does
not
need
to
fulfill
that
criteria

Okie Dokie

Meh... Rules... Who needs them...

I agree. At this point we are giving him rules and he is plugging his ears and saying "Nuh-Uh"

Bausk - no, no he didnt. He had a counts as daemon weapon, not the one for a lord with no mark. As he isnt a chaos lord with no mark.

Have fun for two weeks until this is fixed

40k-noob wrote:

Bausk wrote:
He
does
not
need
to
fulfill
that
criteria

Okie Dokie

Meh... Rules... Who needs them...

The rules are the bit that followed that part, I know its a bit of reading but its rather informative...much like the rule book, codex and FAQ.I find they are also helpful for playing the game right rather than just assuming something is true.
.
So which of the 5 Daemon weapons on page 93 is he counted as being armed with again?

Seeing as we are sticking to the rules and all I may have to remind you that it only has +D6 attacks so the blood feeders out for sure and it states it is replacing a +1S bonus form somewhere. Also, there is only one that is actually called a Daemon Weapon in its profile. This may narrow down the options some....


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Bausk - no, no he didnt. He had a counts as daemon weapon, not the one for a lord with no mark. As he isnt a chaos lord with no mark.

Have fun for two weeks until this is fixed

Well he actually did, seeing as all Daemon weapons had to and still have to fall under one of the 5 (manreaper no longer included) Daemon weapons.

Wrong.

Abaddon is not a CHaos lord. You keep ignoring this as you are unable to counter that with actual rules.

It does not HAVE to fall under anything. Its a counts as blanket rule daemon weapon with special traits. Seriously, we are beating a dead horse with a Daemon Weapon here. Can we get a mod to lock this?

They better make this clear in the new codex... hopefully its clearly AP3, I can't stand Abby.

From what I've heard all daemon weapons are going Ap2, and if you roll a 1 on the d6 you still get your bsae attacks.

Yup, rolling a 1 only reduces yous WS to 1 and makes you a wound, which is a lot better than the actual daemon weapon, and yes abaddon will have AP2 & AP3, depending on which weapons he uses Daemon Weapon/Talon

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Wrong.

Abaddon is not a CHaos lord. You keep ignoring this as you are unable to counter that with actual rules.

I don't deny that claim, never have. But by that logic as a model that isn't a chaos lord he "shouldn't" have a Daemon weapon at all. And if it just counts as a Daemon weapon as in the base rule then its AP-, Redundantly got a +1S from nowhere (that the weapon gets normally) at all only to replace it with X2S instead and gain the ability to re-roll all failed To wound rolls. Bravo, that nerfs him even more and makes no sense what so ever.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vindicare-Obsession wrote:
It does not HAVE to fall under anything. Its a counts as blanket rule daemon weapon with special traits. Seriously, we are beating a dead horse with a Daemon Weapon here. Can we get a mod to lock this?

The 'blanket rule' (thats the USR that's in the FAQ btw) doesn't not confer a +1S bonus, nor did the previous version. The 'Blanket rule' is the what all daemon weapons get and must have as it is stated in the previous rendintionas the have the following additional effects as described for each mark:: +1S, an additional D6 attacks, poison 4+, instant death or a ranged profile. Further more this 'blanket rule' was FAQ'd, as I've pointed out, to only grant +D6 Attacks. No power weapon, no two handed weapon, no other rules what so ever. The reason for this is it is now a USR like armour bane or concussive.


On that point not one of you address the fact that the base pre-modified daemon weapon Abaddons weapons count as has a +1S bonus before its replaced with a X2S (i'nstead of the normal +1S'). You all just say 'oh, hes not a lord and he has a mark so he must not the only Daemon weapon that grants a +1S bonus.'

No, you stated it was irrelevant. However as you have shown yourself, once you actually *gasp* follow the rules you arrive at WHY it is important - currently Abby is AP3, as they have not replaced all of the daemon weapon rules from the codex, just yet. It is why Tzeentch guns are AP3 - they are an unusual power weapon. Same as Abby

What we are addressing is that "instead of" has no actual rules bearing, yet you are claiming it as the only actual rules basis for your argument. It is your unsupported leap that you refuse to see.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
No, you stated it was irrelevant. However as you have shown yourself, once you actually *gasp* follow the rules you arrive at WHY it is important - currently Abby is AP3, as they have not replaced all of the daemon weapon rules from the codex, just yet. It is why Tzeentch guns are AP3 - they are an unusual power weapon. Same as Abby

What we are addressing is that "instead of" has no actual rules bearing, yet you are claiming it as the only actual rules basis for your argument. It is your unsupported leap that you refuse to see.

So let me get this straight. You claim that Abaddon is not a lord, has at least one mark of chaos as described on page 25 of the chaos codex.

Even though its not said he is or is not a lord. Which is why I don't deny it, I do however doubt it as all indications point to him being a lord. I also see it as irrelevant as the weapon is granted to him by name and statistics relevant to 5th ed. Which carries over to 6th. Who has a rule backing their statement up again? Where does it say Abaddon is anything but a lord of chaos again?

Even though page 25 describes, clearly I might add, that; 'Most chaos space marines worship Chaos in all its glory, which means they dedicate their lives to all four greater powers of chaos with equal fervour.' This is known by some as being undivided and in this instance as being 'Unmarked' As abaddon worships all of them equally he is undivided/unmarked under this definition.

Continued page 25: 'If a model is given the Mark of one of four greater powers of chaos, this means the warrior has been claimed as its own by one of the four, and given special powers in return.' This in known as being Dedicated or marked. As abaddon is not specificly stated to have any mark in his wargear, just a special a unique special rule that confers the bonuses of all four marks and EW. Its description says he melded all four marks after attaining them in turn, meaning at the time of his printing he does not have those marks, just the bonuses. Further compounded by the statement that he did not become the pawn of any like those who normally attain marks But as I addressed before, its irrelevant as the daemon weapon is given to him by name and statistics under a special rule.

I have demonstrated that it counts a Daemon Weapons; Daemon Weapon repeatedly with rules. You however have used previous FAQs and rules that are not applicable for the many reasons I have gone over numerous times. By your own, and two other supporters,statements you admit it follows the rules for daemon weapons in the codex. Yet ignore the last bullet point of daemon weapons; 'Has an additional ability that varies depending on the mark given to the barer, as described below.'. Which is a clear indication that even a weapon that counts as a Daemon weapon before marks are considered must have one of the 5 additional rules listed and under the FAQ this means it must be one of only 5 daemon weapons available.

As you have not proven with a rules statement that Abadddon is not a lord, at this point its redundant as pointed out above and given that Typhus is stated to be a Psyker (not a lord) and was given the plague bringer rule in addition to the force weapon rule, making the issue with the bracketed 'Lord' statement moot by precedent. Nor have you proven with a rule that he is marked as described under page 25 or the MoCA, point of fact I just proved with the MoCA that he is not marked as it is not even wargear like other marks, he just has a special rule that is called a 'Mark' that grants bonuses similar to all four actual marks and grants EW.

There is no leaps, only facts in the rules that you and two others are ignoring. You and other have misquoted rules many times which is why I have taken to writing them out and addressing the rule as it is written right in front of everyone and yet you still claim that others an I are 'leaping' when we quote rules. Yet you fail to see that it is you who is leaping to a conclusion based on no rule (abaddon is not listed as a lord so he must not be a lord) or from a misinterpretation of wargears rules and unique character specific special rules.

Argument has gone circular and is not progressing. Locking.

Thankfully the new codex comes out soon. If you're using Abaddon in the meantime, agree with your opponent or ask the tournament organizer.