Hi all! This post is based on thus far leaked rules from the upcoming Harlequins codex.
Spoiler:
If the Solitaire has both a Harlequin's kiss and Harlequin's caress does he choose one to use in assault? I ask as on BoLS someone implied he would get the effects of the Harlequis kiss regardless due to how the rules are worded.
Bhazakhain wrote: Hi all! This post is based on thus far leaked rules from the upcoming Harlequins codex.
Spoiler:
If the Solitaire has both a Harlequin's kiss and Harlequin's caress does he choose one to use in assault? I ask as on BoLS someone implied he would get the effects of the Harlequis kiss regardless due to how the rules are worded.
Thanks!
Per the assault rules you can't mix and match the abilities of melee weapons when it comes time to strike blows. In other words, pick one or the other. If you need the exact rule, I can post it, but this has been recently argued.
The intent (which we can never actually know short of an FAQ) MIGHT be that both can be used. However, the BRB is extraordinarily clear that you can't mix and match abilities. The Harlequin's Kiss is certainly an ability, so you can't mix it in with another Melee Weapon's attacks without a specific permission that says something like "The Harlequin's Kiss may be used when the model is attacking with a different Melee weapon."
It seems likely the intent is for the Solitaire to gain the benefits of the 1 special attack whilst using the caress. However RaW is that he can't. Perhaps the codex will be clearer than the white though I wouldn't hold my breath and a proper FAQ seems even less likely.
Yeah I thought you had to choose one weapon as that's pretty clear in the rules, but was just confused by what someone else said. I've seen a photo of the page in the codex for the Solitaire and also wargear but nothing about that is mentioned. There is something about the wording for the Harlequin's kiss that I can see might be read into but yes, looks like an FAQ will be needed!
I don't think we need to repeat this subject already.
Agreed. If you think the intent is to allow it when attacking with other weapons, make a house rule among your gaming group and have fun. I wouldn't count on it in a competitive gaming environment (e.g. tournament) or when gaming with strangers.
I think there is a valid RAW discussion that Harlequins kiss functions even if it is not the chosen weapon.
normally weapon rules state, and this is from harlequins caress:
"each to hit roll with a weapon that has this special rule.."
so the ability is coming from using the weapon.
in the case of harlequins kiss the wording is:
"when a model equipped with a harlequins kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of it its attacks will be a kiss of death attack"
The rules do not require the weapon the be used as a chosen weapon, just that the model is equipped. Further it does not state when making attacks with this weapon, or a weapon with the harlequins kiss rule, or anything of that nature. It states when the model makes its attacks. The model could attack with two rocks it found in its boots while dancing around, and will still gain the harlequins kiss attack if it is equipped with an item that has that rule the way it is worded.
this is a specific rule that changes the normal core rule of weapons of more than one type, in that it explicitly specifies the attacks come from the model not the weapon, and the model has to only be equipped with the item, there is no requirement that it is used as the melee weapon in the assault phase. In fact as it states the models attacks, and not the weapons attacks it is telling the reader that the special rule is not based on choosing the weapon.
so RAW harlequins kiss works regardless of if it is the chosen weapon, because it is based off the models attacks. It is not a house rule, but the actual rules as written as the rules for the kiss do not require you to choose it as the weapon you strike with to get the special bonus as it is worded in its own specific rules.
if you look at things like concussive, shred, armourbane, it specifies it comes from taking hits from a weapon, not a model.
as such it is not mixing and matching abilities from weapons, the item grants the model an ability it is not an affect from the weapon being chosen in assault to strike with. Its actually similar to the tyranid codex, you can get a model with crushing claws, bone sword and lash whip and although you choose one to strike with if you have a tail weapon you get 1 additional hit that is an attack in assault, that has a specific profile, just like here.
I don't think we need to repeat this subject already.
Agreed. If you think the intent is to allow it when attacking with other weapons, make a house rule among your gaming group and have fun. I wouldn't count on it in a competitive gaming environment (e.g. tournament) or when gaming with strangers.
Or you could Houserule that it doesn't work when attacking with other weapons which is going to be easier to adapt when playing new people or tournaments as worse case they disagree and your unit gets better.
blaktoof wrote: I think there is a valid RAW discussion that Harlequins kiss functions even if it is not the chosen weapon.
normally weapon rules state, and this is from harlequins caress:
"each to hit roll with a weapon that has this special rule.."
so the ability is coming from using the weapon.
in the case of harlequins kiss the wording is:
"when a model equipped with a harlequins kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of it its attacks will be a kiss of death attack"
The rules do not require the weapon the be used as a chosen weapon, just that the model is equipped. Further it does not state when making attacks with this weapon, or a weapon with the harlequins kiss rule, or anything of that nature. It states when the model makes its attacks. The model could attack with two rocks it found in its boots while dancing around, and will still gain the harlequins kiss attack if it is equipped with an item that has that rule the way it is worded.
this is a specific rule that changes the normal core rule of weapons of more than one type, in that it explicitly specifies the attacks come from the model not the weapon, and the model has to only be equipped with the item, there is no requirement that it is used as the melee weapon in the assault phase. In fact as it states the models attacks, and not the weapons attacks it is telling the reader that the special rule is not based on choosing the weapon.
so RAW harlequins kiss works regardless of if it is the chosen weapon, because it is based off the models attacks. It is not a house rule, but the actual rules as written as the rules for the kiss do not require you to choose it as the weapon you strike with to get the special bonus as it is worded in its own specific rules.
if you look at things like concussive, shred, armourbane, it specifies it comes from taking hits from a weapon, not a model.
as such it is not mixing and matching abilities from weapons, the item grants the model an ability it is not an affect from the weapon being chosen in assault to strike with.
Blaktoof, you might want to go back and read through the entire thread Ghaz posted a link to. The issue with your interpretation is that regardless of how the Harlequin's Kiss rules are written, you're not allowed to use them when a model "comes to strike blows" (the loosest interpretation of which would have to include making To Hit rolls) if that model is choosing to attack with a different Melee weapon. There is no permission in the Harlequin's Kiss rules to overturn this restriction. For the rule to be usable, the model has to be attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss. Had GW wanted you to be able to use the Kiss of Death when attacking with a different Melee weapon, they could simply have made it literally any other piece of non-Melee weapon wargear.
My take is you use the Caress when you want a chance at multiple auto wounds at AP2. You use the Kiss when you want at least one guaranteed strike at AP2 and don't really care about the rest of your hits being able to get through armour. Caress versus a Tactical Squad. Kiss versus a Captain with one wound left.
The plainest way to think of it is that the Kiss of Death rule is a WEAPON rule and not a WARGEAR rule. If the rule is duplicated in a Wargear section then yes, but as it is only currently shown as a Weapon Rule, the Weapon needs to be used to invoke the rule. There is no 40k definition of 'equipped' so we can only guess what that means so far.
Not trying to find a way around rules but Blaktoof has a point. Only the caress seems to say it applies to the weapon. The kiss and embrace seem to give an ability to the model.
blaktoof wrote: I think there is a valid RAW discussion that Harlequins kiss functions even if it is not the chosen weapon.
normally weapon rules state, and this is from harlequins caress:
"each to hit roll with a weapon that has this special rule.."
so the ability is coming from using the weapon.
in the case of harlequins kiss the wording is:
"when a model equipped with a harlequins kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of it its attacks will be a kiss of death attack"
The rules do not require the weapon the be used as a chosen weapon, just that the model is equipped. Further it does not state when making attacks with this weapon, or a weapon with the harlequins kiss rule, or anything of that nature. It states when the model makes its attacks. The model could attack with two rocks it found in its boots while dancing around, and will still gain the harlequins kiss attack if it is equipped with an item that has that rule the way it is worded.
this is a specific rule that changes the normal core rule of weapons of more than one type, in that it explicitly specifies the attacks come from the model not the weapon, and the model has to only be equipped with the item, there is no requirement that it is used as the melee weapon in the assault phase. In fact as it states the models attacks, and not the weapons attacks it is telling the reader that the special rule is not based on choosing the weapon.
so RAW harlequins kiss works regardless of if it is the chosen weapon, because it is based off the models attacks. It is not a house rule, but the actual rules as written as the rules for the kiss do not require you to choose it as the weapon you strike with to get the special bonus as it is worded in its own specific rules.
if you look at things like concussive, shred, armourbane, it specifies it comes from taking hits from a weapon, not a model.
as such it is not mixing and matching abilities from weapons, the item grants the model an ability it is not an affect from the weapon being chosen in assault to strike with.
Blaktoof, you might want to go back and read through the entire thread Ghaz posted a link to. The issue with your interpretation is that regardless of how the Harlequin's Kiss rules are written, you're not allowed to use them when a model "comes to strike blows" (the loosest interpretation of which would have to include making To Hit rolls) if that model is choosing to attack with a different Melee weapon. There is no permission in the Harlequin's Kiss rules to overturn this restriction. For the rule to be usable, the model has to be attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss. Had GW wanted you to be able to use the Kiss of Death when attacking with a different Melee weapon, they could simply have made it literally any other piece of non-Melee weapon wargear.
My take is you use the Caress when you want a chance at multiple auto wounds at AP2. You use the Kiss when you want at least one guaranteed strike at AP2 and don't really care about the rest of your hits being able to get through armour. Caress versus a Tactical Squad. Kiss versus a Captain with one wound left.
the point I am making is you choose a weapon to strike blows. You use the rules for the weapon, which is what you are stating. Normally a weapon has special rules like strikedown, shred, armourbane, etc which state "when a model is hit by an attack with this weapon, or when a model with this weapon hits, or when a model with this weapon wounds etc" the effect is tied to the weapon doing something. For the kiss the ability is granted from being equipped with the item, and has nothing to do with picking the weapon to attack with. If a model is equipped with a harlequins kiss and chooses to use its power sword and shuriken pistol in assault, its close combat attacks are still subject to the rules for harlequins kiss. Ie if a model equpped with an item that has special rule (equipped, which it is, not chosen as attacking with or as the weapon) makes its close combat attacks (no rule requiring the weapon again) one of its attacks is.."
as such there is no issue with mixing and matching weapons, because its not an effect of striking blows with the weapon, in fact if the model had 3+ weapons and was using weapons that were not the kiss the presence of the kiss even though it is not any of the chosen weapons would still result in 1 attack being a 'kiss of death attack' as the rules are written.
it does not matter if it is a rule from a weapon, because the special rule itself is not tied to using the weapon at all in assault, unlike other weapons where the special rule (shred, concussive, etc) is tied to the weapon being used as per their own rules entries.
blaktoof wrote: I think there is a valid RAW discussion that Harlequins kiss functions even if it is not the chosen weapon.
normally weapon rules state, and this is from harlequins caress:
"each to hit roll with a weapon that has this special rule.."
so the ability is coming from using the weapon.
in the case of harlequins kiss the wording is:
"when a model equipped with a harlequins kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of it its attacks will be a kiss of death attack"
The rules do not require the weapon the be used as a chosen weapon, just that the model is equipped. Further it does not state when making attacks with this weapon, or a weapon with the harlequins kiss rule, or anything of that nature. It states when the model makes its attacks. The model could attack with two rocks it found in its boots while dancing around, and will still gain the harlequins kiss attack if it is equipped with an item that has that rule the way it is worded.
this is a specific rule that changes the normal core rule of weapons of more than one type, in that it explicitly specifies the attacks come from the model not the weapon, and the model has to only be equipped with the item, there is no requirement that it is used as the melee weapon in the assault phase. In fact as it states the models attacks, and not the weapons attacks it is telling the reader that the special rule is not based on choosing the weapon.
so RAW harlequins kiss works regardless of if it is the chosen weapon, because it is based off the models attacks. It is not a house rule, but the actual rules as written as the rules for the kiss do not require you to choose it as the weapon you strike with to get the special bonus as it is worded in its own specific rules.
if you look at things like concussive, shred, armourbane, it specifies it comes from taking hits from a weapon, not a model.
as such it is not mixing and matching abilities from weapons, the item grants the model an ability it is not an affect from the weapon being chosen in assault to strike with.
Blaktoof, you might want to go back and read through the entire thread Ghaz posted a link to. The issue with your interpretation is that regardless of how the Harlequin's Kiss rules are written, you're not allowed to use them when a model "comes to strike blows" (the loosest interpretation of which would have to include making To Hit rolls) if that model is choosing to attack with a different Melee weapon. There is no permission in the Harlequin's Kiss rules to overturn this restriction. For the rule to be usable, the model has to be attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss. Had GW wanted you to be able to use the Kiss of Death when attacking with a different Melee weapon, they could simply have made it literally any other piece of non-Melee weapon wargear.
My take is you use the Caress when you want a chance at multiple auto wounds at AP2. You use the Kiss when you want at least one guaranteed strike at AP2 and don't really care about the rest of your hits being able to get through armour. Caress versus a Tactical Squad. Kiss versus a Captain with one wound left.
the point I am making is you choose a weapon to strike blows. You use the rules for the weapon, which is what you are stating. Normally a weapon has special rules like strikedown, shred, armourbane, etc which state "when a model is hit by an attack with this weapon, or when a model with this weapon hits, or when a model with this weapon wounds etc" the effect is tied to the weapon doing something. For the kiss the ability is granted from being equipped with the item, and has nothing to do with picking the weapon to attack with. If a model is equipped with a harlequins kiss and chooses to use its power sword and shuriken pistol in assault, its close combat attacks are still subject to the rules for harlequins kiss. Ie if a model equpped with an item that has special rule (equipped, which it is, not chosen as attacking with or as the weapon) makes its close combat attacks (no rule requiring the weapon again) one of its attacks is.."
as such there is no issue with mixing and matching weapons, because its not an effect of striking blows with the weapon, in fact if the model had 3+ weapons and was using weapons that were not the kiss the presence of the kiss even though it is not any of the chosen weapons would still result in 1 attack being a 'kiss of death attack' as the rules are written.
it does not matter if it is a rule from a weapon, because the special rule itself is not tied to using the weapon at all in assault, unlike other weapons where the special rule (shred, concussive, etc) is tied to the weapon being used as per their own rules entries.
So, your contention is that it's ok to mix and match abilities of weapons depending on the ability? Do you have any rules citations for this or is this just how you would play it?
Keep in mind that the restriction on mixing and matching abilities doesn't have ANY wording restricting the abilities to those involved with striking blows, it just restricts the mixing and matching from happening WHEN the model comes to strikes blows. The wording of Kiss of Death has literally zero impact on the game if you aren't using the Harlequin's Kiss when the model "comes to strike blows".
I think what Blaktoof means is that the weapon comes with a effect that always applies in much the same way Prince Yriel's Spear of Twilight (is that what it's called) has a rule which curses him and makes him re roll 6s on his armour saves or something like that. He could have decided to just slap his opponents with both his hands that assault phase but he still has his spear on him and it's still cursing him.
The weapon infers a special rule to the weilder of the weapon, not the usage of the weapon. The rule is quite clear that he gets to make a single S6ap2 attack regardless of the weapon he chose to fight with.
Bhazakhain wrote: I think what Blaktoof means is that the weapon comes with a effect that always applies in much the same way Prince Yriel's Spear of Twilight (is that what it's called) has a rule which curses him and makes him re roll 6s on his armour saves or something like that. He could have decided to just slap his opponents with both his hands that assault phase but he still has his spear on him and it's still cursing him.
This was actually addressed in the other thread as well.
First, Yriel can't decide to "slap his opponents with both his hands". That's not a thing. Yriel has precisely three options to use when making attacks during the fight sub phase. They are The Eye of Wrath, The Spear of Twilight and his Plasma Grenades (at least when assaulting Vehicles, Gun Emplacements or Monstrous Creatures).
If Yriel chooses to make his attacks with The Spear of Twilight, he must used the Cursed rule component of The Spear of Twilight and must re-roll saving throws of 6. If Yriel istead chooses to attack with The Eye of Wrath or his Plasma Grenades, he is prevented by the restriction in the BRB from mixing and matching abilities from other weapons. The Cursed rule would not come into play and Yriel would not have to re-roll saving throws of 6.
It sort of depends on what you think "comes to strike blows" means as that's when a model isn't allowed to mix and match abilities. I believe it means a round of combat. Some people seem to think it means ONLY during the To Hit rolls. It's not defined in the rules, so this is the sticking point that causes the outcome to be ultimately unknowable.
Interpreting it to mean only during the To Hit rolls would allow The Spear of Twilight's Cursed rule to come into play, but it would have no effect as Yriel never makes a saving throw during To Hit rolls. He still wouldn't allow the Kiss of Death to be used when attacking with the Caress.
My preferred interpretation is Interpreting it to mean during a round of combat. This would effectively mean that you pick a weapon each round and then pretend you don't have the others on you for the purposes of seeing what abilities you can use. This would also allow the Cursed rule to function.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
NauticalKendall wrote: The weapon infers a special rule to the weilder of the weapon, not the usage of the weapon. The rule is quite clear that he gets to make a single S6ap2 attack regardless of the weapon he chose to fight with.
The BRB is also quite clear that you can't mix and match abilities. The Kiss of Death rule doesn't overturn this restriction.
Still doesn't address Eldrad's spiritlink ability. That weapon's special rule has nothing to do with combat, and so could never be used, even if you interpret it as "during a round of combat".
I think until FAQ I'm quite happy allowing this. Seems quite clear in the wording. It's not like a model has a master crafted power sword and a power fist and decides to use the master crafted rule for the power fist.
The wording for Harlequin's Caress say attacks with that weapon... The wording for Kiss and Embrace suggest a model that has that thing in its possession gets the benefit of it. Note this only happens with the Solitaire as everyone else just gets one of these weapon choices.
This might be easier resolved if there were other examples.
EDIT: Exactly Bojazz. It's even got spirit link in the weapon profile right? No influence on melee whatsoever.
EDIT 2: If Eldrad uses his witchblade that phase, he still has the spirit link rule apply to him.
Since the Kiss says "When a model equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of it's attacks will be a Kiss of Death attack"
As this is the way the rule is written, there is no choice in what weapon to use. You will always use the Kiss. There is no choice in what rule to use.
Makes it appear to me that the intent is to allow both to function as what would be the reason to give it two weapons when it could never use one of them.
Bojazz wrote: Still doesn't address Eldrad's spiritlink ability. That weapon's special rule has nothing to do with combat, and so could never be used, even if you interpret it as "during a round of combat".
Actually, the restriction ONLY exists when the model "comes to strike blows". Presumably, in other instances, the model is free to use all of his various weapon's abilities. Most weapon abilities just aren't very useful outside of combat. Eldrad is free to use his weapon's abilities outside of combat if they're applicable.
If a model has more than one Melee weapon, he must choose which one to attack with when he comes to strike blows – he cannot mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons.
if a Model had Shuriken pistol, powersword, harlequins kiss.
Come melee time the model could opt to strike with its powersword.
It would still benefit from harlequins kiss because the wording of harlequins kiss grants an ability to the model regardless of how the model chooses to attack.
from harlequins kiss:
"when a model equipped with a Harlequins kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of them is a kiss of death"
Even if you choose not to use the harlequins kiss to make the attack, the model still is equipped with the item.
is the model equipped with the item? Yes.
Does the model have more than one weapon? Yes.
Pick which to strike with- powersword.
Is the model equipped with a harlequins kiss? Yes.
Is the model making close combat attacks? yes
one of them is now a kiss of death.
saying the model cannot make the attack is against the rules as written, the model is equipped with it, the model is making close combat attacks. None of them require the harlequins kiss to actually be chosen as the weapon striking.
This is granted by the rules of the item, which specifically as written modify how the models attacks are divided based not on the weapons the model chooses to use- which is the mix matching that is not allowed, but based on being equipped with the item and making any close combat attacks with anything.
compare it to another item. a lightning claw. Lets say a model has a Lightning Claw, and a power axe.
The lightning claw has the special rules S user, AP 3, shred, melee, and specialist weapon. The power axe has the special rules S user+1, AP2, unwieldy,melee.
the model is in assault.
Does the model have more than 1 weapon? Yes
the model chooses to attack with a power axe.
The power axe has special rules.
Unwieldy so the model strikes at I2, and at S+1 and AP2. The lightning claw has special rules, but we are not striking with it so they do not come into play.
Unlike the harlequins kiss, the lightning claws special rules are all tied to the weapon striking.
Shred:If a model has the Shred special rule, or is attacking with a Melee weapon that has the Shred special rule, it re-rolls failed To Wound rolls in close combat.
The model itself does not have shred, but the weapon grants it when striking with it- as per the rules for shred and the weapon. Since we are not striking with the weapon the model has no access to it.
looking back at harlequins kiss, the model gets the kiss of death ability itself by being equipped with the weapon, not by using the weapon or choosing to strike with it. This is why it does not matter if the model strikes with it, because it is not required to actually choose it to get Kiss of Death, as such it is not mix and matching at all.
Come melee time the model could opt to strike with its powersword.
It would still benefit from harlequins kiss because the wording of harlequins kiss grants an ability to the model regardless of how the model chooses to attack.
This is where your argument falls apart. It IS mixing and matching if you attack with one weapon and use an ability from another. You're adding a "well, it's not really an ability that impact the weapon, so I'm not gonna count it" element that the rules don't support. The rules don't differentiate between abilities that "granted to the mode" vs. "granted to the weapon". The rules just say you can't mix and match abilities.
If you believe that I am wrong and that the rules DO differentiate between types of abilities, please cite a rule. I'm more than happy to admit I'm wrong, but I have yet to see anything in writing to make me change my mind.
The ability of the other is not an ability based on the weapon striking.
Is the model equipped with a harlequins kiss?
Is it striking with anything in melee?
if the answer to both of those is yes, then per the specific RAW the model explicitly gets a kiss of death attack.
the entry for the item is the rule, and it has been cited. Entries for special rules, models, items have the ability to modify the core rules. Which is what is happening.
if you answer yes to the two above, and do not allow the special rule to work you are not following the rules.
Agree. I think what's confusing some people here is that the Harlequin's Kiss is a weapon with a special rule in the same way Eldrad's staff is. It might as well be some psychic gem, amulet, lucky coin - whatever! All it is is a normal close combat weapon with a rule that doesn't apply to itself but to the Harlequin itself.
'When a model equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of them is a kiss of death.'
Note that the description for the Harlequin's Caress starts 'Each To Hit role of 6 made by a weapon with this special rule...'
In the case of the Caress, it most definitely applies to the weapon and you will need to use that weapon to get that benefit. The Kiss and the Embrace have no such restrictions.
Bhazakhain wrote: Agree. I think what's confusing some people here is that the Harlequin's Kiss is a weapon with a special rule in the same way Eldrad's staff is. It might as well be some psychic gem, amulet, lucky coin - whatever! All it is is a normal close combat weapon with a rule that doesn't apply to itself but to the Harlequin itself.
'When a model equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of them is a kiss of death.'
Note that the description for the Harlequin's Caress starts 'Each To Hit role of 6 made by a weapon with this special rule...'
In the case of the Caress, it most definitely applies to the weapon and you will need to use that weapon to get that benefit. The Kiss and the Embrace have no such restrictions.
There is no confusion whatsoever. The BRB is very clear that mixing and matching of abilities isn't allowed. If you attack with the Caress, but use the Kiss's abiltiy, then you are mixing and matching and breaking the rules. Play it however you like, but there is no confusion on my part or on the part of the rules.
Eldrad's staff is an entirely different situation. The restriction on mixing and matching weapon abilities ONLY exists when the model comes to strike blows. In EVERY other situation, the model benefits from ALL weapon abilities. This generally doesn't come into play since MOST weapon abilities relate to combat. Examples are Shred and Concussive. The Staff of Ulthamar's Spritilink ability can be used outside of combat. Since there is NO RESTRICTION preventing a model from using ALL of its weapon abilities outside of combat, Eldrad is just fine regaining a Warp Charge point on a 5+ in those situations. The only time he wouldn't benefit from Spiritlink would be during a combat where he chooses to attack with his Witchblade instead of the Staff. I can't think of a reason he'd be passing a psychic test while attacking with a Witchblade, though, so losing Spiritlink has no practical downside.
Saying that the Kiss ability is an ability that impacts the model and not the weapon is adding a distinction that DOES NOT EXIST in the rules. A weapon ability is a weapon ability is a weapon ability. If you believe the distinction exists, simply cite the rule providing an exemption to the mix and match restriction.
It's all a trick question, at T3 the solitaire gets gunned down by bolters or lasguns or pulse rifles (ouch!) or basically any RF troop weapon and dies staring into the lifeless masks of the troope as they meet the same fate.
That's unless they can get original VoT or an outflanking assault transport that allows charges out of reserves.
I used to hold this opinion but the majority view here one on other web pages I have read all agree that both abilities work together.
I agree that a definitive answer would be helpful to put an end to the debate, but bear in mind that everywhere you get these situations, Games Workshop uses the same copy and paste wording for a reason.
'Attacks with this weapon...' This phrase is used when describing a special rule that applies just to attacks with that weapon.
'The bearer of this weapon...' This phrase is used when an effect applies to the bearer of the weapon.
'A model equipped with this weapon...' Similar as being the bearer of the weapon. By having, or being equipped with, this weapon, gives you the rule it is about to mention.
Examples:
We've already mentioned the Staff of Ulthamar. Now on to the Shard of Anaris. The bearer of that weapon is fearless, but then it goes on to expressly say that attacks with that weapon have certain other effects. If you have another bit of CC wargear in there too (assume we are outfitting an Autarch here) he's still fearless from possessing the Shard just by being the bearer of the weapon, as the words used confirm.
I have had a look through the rest of Codex Eldar and Iyanden and Games Workshop is very good at expressly saying 'attacks by this weapon...'. They even expressly say it for the Harlequin's Caress, but word it differently for the Kiss and Embrace.
In short, there is a reason that the rule doesn't say 'attacks made by this weapon allow one D6 as a kiss of death attack'. It just says that if you are equipped with a Harlequin's kiss then one of your close combat attacks (not one of your close combat attacks with that weapon - just one of your close combat attacks) is s6 ap2.
GW word these things consistently for a reason, so why the kiss and caress are deliberately worded like this and 'attacks made by this weapon...' isn't used is for a reason.
I think we're at the stage where we just agree to disagree. Yourself and Kriswall were staunch defenders of the other opinion in another thread I just discovered too so we'll just need to wait to see if the codex offers any clarification or if there is an FAQ.
I'm personally happy to let a Harlequin player use his Solitaire as a few of us have been arguing as I feel the rules are clear from my perspective and it seems to be a widespread view, but I'm happy to be proved wrong by GW.
I still think the new Harlies are awesome regardless! I'll personally be having a quick chat with any opponent about this before the game as I'm happy to play either way but still believe the kiss of death is rolled even when using the caress.
3 weapons:
-Harlequin's Caress
-Harlequin's Embrace
-Harlequin's Kiss
3 Special Rules:
-Caress of Death
-Embrace of Death
-Kiss of Death
Both Embrace and Kiss mention "when equipped" with the weapon, making it sound like only possession of the weapon is needed in order to use the rule.
Why would these be 3 different weapons then, and not equipment?
If you have all 3, can you just use the Caress and have ALL the other rules?
As Krisswall has adequately described, you only have Special Rules on weapons when you use the weapon.
BlackTalos wrote: 3 weapons:
-Harlequin's Caress
-Harlequin's Embrace
-Harlequin's Kiss
3 Special Rules:
-Caress of Death
-Embrace of Death
-Kiss of Death
Both Embrace and Kiss mention "when equipped" with the weapon, making it sound like only possession of the weapon is needed in order to use the rule.
Why would these be 3 different weapons then, and not equipment?
If you have all 3, can you just use the Caress and have ALL the other rules?
As Krisswall has adequately described, you only have Special Rules on weapons when you use the weapon.
I think the when equipped thing is just garbage rules writing. I really think GW intended for the "when equipped" rules to always function, but their own ruleset prevents this. I really just think this comes down to not playtesting and not having a technical writer on staff to edit the rules.
BlackTalos wrote: 3 weapons:
-Harlequin's Caress
-Harlequin's Embrace
-Harlequin's Kiss
3 Special Rules:
-Caress of Death
-Embrace of Death
-Kiss of Death
Both Embrace and Kiss mention "when equipped" with the weapon, making it sound like only possession of the weapon is needed in order to use the rule.
Why would these be 3 different weapons then, and not equipment?
If you have all 3, can you just use the Caress and have ALL the other rules?
As Krisswall has adequately described, you only have Special Rules on weapons when you use the weapon.
I think the when equipped thing is just garbage rules writing. I really think GW intended for the "when equipped" rules to always function, but their own ruleset prevents this. I really just think this comes down to not playtesting and not having a technical writer on staff to edit the rules.
Its a case where codex trumps rulebook. It's obviously confusing or there wouldn't be multiple threads about it though.
According to rigeld2 (from the other thread) the other weapon that grants HoW (embrace) won't actually grant give you HoW. According to him, the weapon only works at your initiative, so you can never make those HoW attacks (again, according to him)... Riight...
For what it's worth, I just read the WD and the way they describe him, the solitare actually really sounds like he was designed to be using both weapons.
Combining that with the fact that the wording on kiss actually supports using it with other weapons may be an indicator of RAI.. Too bad that they couldn't make it work RAW though! Here's to hoping for a quick FAQ though (a fools hope, I know)!
Zewrath wrote: According to rigeld2 (from the other thread) the other weapon that grants HoW (embrace) won't actually grant give you HoW. According to him, the weapon only works at your initiative, so you can never make those HoW attacks (again, according to him)... Riight...
For what it's worth, I just read the WD and the way they describe him, the solitare actually really sounds like he was designed to be using both weapons.
Combining that with the fact that the wording on kiss actually supports using it with other weapons may be an indicator of RAI.. Too bad that they couldn't make it work RAW though! Here's to hoping for a quick FAQ though (a fools hope, I know)!
And i'm actually agreeing to what Rigeld has said.
Sure, The rules are broken by RaW. Therefore we can all play by RaI and HYWPI: You CAN use all 3 powers while striking with the Caress.
Unfortunately you cannot say this is RaW.
Zewrath wrote: According to rigeld2 (from the other thread) the other weapon that grants HoW (embrace) won't actually grant give you HoW. According to him, the weapon only works at your initiative, so you can never make those HoW attacks (again, according to him)... Riight...
For what it's worth, I just read the WD and the way they describe him, the solitare actually really sounds like he was designed to be using both weapons.
Combining that with the fact that the wording on kiss actually supports using it with other weapons may be an indicator of RAI.. Too bad that they couldn't make it work RAW though! Here's to hoping for a quick FAQ though (a fools hope, I know)!
And i'm actually agreeing to what Rigeld has said.
Sure, The rules are broken by RaW. Therefore we can all play by RaI and HYWPI: You CAN use all 3 powers while striking with the Caress.
Unfortunately you cannot say this is RaW.
I never made such claim, I think you should read my post again. I agree with the fact that you can't benefit from the kiss, if you use the caress, what I don't agree with is how, according to this guy, axe of blind fury don't give you -1 BS, Yriel isn't cursed and normal harlequin's can't use their embrace, because those things only work on initiate.
Zewrath wrote: According to rigeld2 (from the other thread) the other weapon that grants HoW (embrace) won't actually grant give you HoW. According to him, the weapon only works at your initiative, so you can never make those HoW attacks (again, according to him)... Riight...
For what it's worth, I just read the WD and the way they describe him, the solitare actually really sounds like he was designed to be using both weapons.
Combining that with the fact that the wording on kiss actually supports using it with other weapons may be an indicator of RAI.. Too bad that they couldn't make it work RAW though! Here's to hoping for a quick FAQ though (a fools hope, I know)!
And i'm actually agreeing to what Rigeld has said.
Sure, The rules are broken by RaW. Therefore we can all play by RaI and HYWPI: You CAN use all 3 powers while striking with the Caress.
Unfortunately you cannot say this is RaW.
I never made such claim, I think you should read my post again. I agree with the fact that you can't benefit from the kiss, if you use the caress, what I don't agree with is how, according to this guy, axe of blind fury don't give you -1 BS, Yriel isn't cursed and normal harlequin's can't use their embrace, because those things only work on initiate.
"Unfortunately you cannot say this is RaW." Was a general "You". Should've written it as such:
'It cannot be said that this is RaW'
And the conclusion by RaW of only striking blows at your own initiative is correct, but obviously not HIWPI.
Zewrath wrote: According to rigeld2 (from the other thread) the other weapon that grants HoW (embrace) won't actually grant give you HoW. According to him, the weapon only works at your initiative, so you can never make those HoW attacks (again, according to him)... Riight...
For what it's worth, I just read the WD and the way they describe him, the solitare actually really sounds like he was designed to be using both weapons.
Combining that with the fact that the wording on kiss actually supports using it with other weapons may be an indicator of RAI.. Too bad that they couldn't make it work RAW though! Here's to hoping for a quick FAQ though (a fools hope, I know)!
And i'm actually agreeing to what Rigeld has said.
Sure, The rules are broken by RaW. Therefore we can all play by RaI and HYWPI: You CAN use all 3 powers while striking with the Caress.
Unfortunately you cannot say this is RaW.
I never made such claim, I think you should read my post again. I agree with the fact that you can't benefit from the kiss, if you use the caress, what I don't agree with is how, according to this guy, axe of blind fury don't give you -1 BS, Yriel isn't cursed and normal harlequin's can't use their embrace, because those things only work on initiate.
Instead of just defaming me, how about you come up with rules reasons I'm wrong?
Would you try to argue that my autarch with the shard isn't fearless except for the instance he is attacking? I've already houserulled it with my whole gaming group, so this argument doesn't affect me. But I've followed each of these debates, and the codex trumps BRB should apply. The weapon itself uses language that expressly sets its special rule apart from normal bonuses, and the language is repeated on numerous special weapons in the game, if my rune priest used a krak grenade to attack, why would he lose the adamantine will special rule? These examples keep being brought up to help this argument, no one ever tried to deny these inherent bonuses before, but (for some reason) these are denied as perfect examples of past practice of this exact situation. My two cents.
choosing a weapon does not matter in this case, because you can get the effect without choosing the weapon.
Some people in this thread are not quoting the full rule of mixing and matching.
If a model has more than one Melee weapon, he must choose which one to attack with when he comes to strike blows – he cannot mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons.
Clearly it shows the rule is requiring you to strike with one melee one weapon, if you have two. And not allowing you to combine the effects of striking with another weapon.
However the rules for embrace and kiss are clear, they are not based on the weapon striking. Most weapons have rules like 'strikedown' 'shred' 'armourbane' 'unwieldly' etc which state specifically they are are only used when the weapon with that rule is striking with that weapon. Therefore if it is not the chosen weapon you do not get the rules that require it to be striking something.
Kiss and Embrace have rules stating they give the model an ability that works when the model makes its close combat attacks.
There is no rule anywhere stating you do not get the special abilities/rules of your models equipped items while in combat and not using that equipped item.
Anyone arguing that the model cannot use the abilities is breaking the RAW of the item, and further is making silly claims like special rules which affect models do not work, so a model with poison (not a weapon) does not work, the effect of rolling a 6 on the perils chart 'warp surge' would not grant fleshbane, armourbane, storm shields would never grant a save if you striek with another weapon, tyranid tail biomorphs would have no effect, etc.
anyone who claims these items do not work has no actual RAW support for the stance that models do not get the benefit of their wargear special rules when striking in assault. The ability granted by Kiss/Embrace is an ability granted to the model contingent on the model being in assault and striking, not the model striking with a chosen weapon. There is no requirement that the weapon is actually chosen to be the weapon you strike with in these cases, and further the misinterpretation of the RAW on more than one weapon is silly and actually breaks the RAW.
No one has demonstrated why the kiss's rule doesn't trump the rule book. Codexes always trump the rule book.
"when a model equipped with a harlequins kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of it its attacks will be a kiss of death attack"
Overrides
"If a model has more than one Melee weapon, he must choose which one to attack with when he comes to strike blows – he cannot mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons."
Unless there is some reason it wouldn't that nobody has brought up.
Trystis wrote: No one has demonstrated why the kiss's rule doesn't trump the rule book. Codexes always trump the rule book.
Does the Harlequin's Kiss explicitly say that it can be used with another weapon? If not, then it doesn't meet the requirement for 'Basic versus Advanced' to come into play.
it explicitly says the special rule Kiss of death can be used by the model when it makes attacks in close combat attack.
so its not being used with another weapon, it gives the model a special rule that modifies its close combat attacks as per its RAW. see storm shield, dispersion shield, sump, shard, nightmare shroud, thunderwolf, a myraid of other wargear and equipped items that gives special rules to models when they strike in assault but not special rules that are based on choosing the weapon to strike with, as they are not special rules in any way tied to striking with the weapon as per the RAW.
blaktoof wrote: storm shield, dispersion shield, sump, shard, nightmare shroud, thunderwolf, a myraid of other wargear and equipped items that gives special rules to models when they strike in assault
megatrons2nd wrote: Doesn't the Storm shield count as a second close combat weapon? I am fairly certain the Wolf is wargear.
I'm not familiar with the others.
Nope. The Storm Shield provides an invuln save and denies the 2 weapon Attack bonus.
Did it in the past? I could have sworn it was, but I quit marines because they are crappy models, and I hated the fluff for them. Oddly enough I haven't fought against storm shields in years.
No where in basic versus advanced does it say that it must be explicitly stated that it overrides the rule book. It says that when there is a conflict then the rule printed in the codex always takes precedence.
Well in 3rd edition it was a once per turn use in melee only.
In 4th edition it was still melee only, but not once per turn. It also denied the bonus attack for two weapons.
In 5th it became as it is now - permanent invuln save, no 2 weapon bonus.
Trystis wrote: No where in basic versus advanced does it say that it must be explicitly stated that it overrides the rule book. It says that when there is a conflict then the rule printed in the codex always takes precedence.
If its not explicitly stated then you don't have proof of a conflict. All you have is your opinion that the wording is sufficient when its not.
I'm not sure why the Embrace and Kiss would not work. The rule simply need you to have the equipment, not use it.
The Embrace and Kiss are distinctively different from the Caress which states each hit made by a weapon with this special rule, while the others simple need a model to be equipped with it and it add special things.
The reason I am seeing why they are all melee weapons is so the troupes have to choose what they bring while models like the Solitude or the possible Great Harlequin can benefit from all of them if they choose to attack with the Caress.
Nilok wrote: I'm not sure why the Embrace and Kiss would not work. The rule simply need you to have the equipment, not use it.
Because its still the ability of the weapon, and you would be trying to "... mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons..." which is explicitly forbidden by the rules, nor is there a rule letting you use the ability of a weapon just by being 'equipped' with it. The only rule we have for the special abilities of Melee weapons is by using that weapon to attack.
Nilok wrote: I'm not sure why the Embrace and Kiss would not work. The rule simply need you to have the equipment, not use it.
Because its still the ability of the weapon, and you would be trying to "... mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons..." which is explicitly forbidden by the rules, nor is there a rule letting you use the ability of a weapon just by being 'equipped' with it. The only rule we have for the special abilities of Melee weapons is by using that weapon to attack.
Um, actually there is. It is the Kiss of Death Rule: "When a model equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of its Attacks will be a Kiss of Death Attack(Roll this Attack separately)."
That sure sounds like, just being equipped by it.
Core rules there is not, the Kiss of Death rule does explicitly state it.
Happyjew wrote: Nilok, per the rules I choose to use the Embrace. Please show permission to benefit from the Kiss's special rules when making an attack.
Please note that the "wwhen a model equipped with a harlequins kiss makes its close combat attacks" is not permission.
Because its still the ability of the weapon, and you would be trying to "... mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons..." which is explicitly forbidden by the rules, nor is there a rule letting you use the ability of a weapon just by being 'equipped' with it. The only rule we have for the special abilities of Melee weapons is by using that weapon to attack.
Then I would saw RAW is broken as some of the rules can only trigger after you have selected a weapon and thus fail to work at all.
Hammer of Wrath - "If a model with this special rule ends its charge move in base or hull contact with an enemy model," (end of the charge move)
More Than One Weapon - "If a model has more than one Melee weapon, he must choose which one to attack with when he comes to strike blows" (start of the fight sub-phase)
HIWPI would be that if the rule say you only need to be equipped with it to benefit from that specific special rule, it still works.
Time to send more FAQs to GW because they gutted their editors.
Except again, where does the rulebook ever say anything about using the abilities of an 'equipped' weapon? Where do we find in the rules what it means by being 'equipped' with a weapon versus 'attacking' with a weapon? What you're trying to do is akin to trying to shoot a bolter because you have the weapon profile but not the rules for the Shooting phase.
Again the rule doesn't state that it has to be explicit, that something you have added, just that if there is conflict the codex wins.
There is obviously conflict here.
"when a model equipped with a harlequin's kiss makes it close combat attacks one of them will be a kiss of death attack".
conflicts with
"If a model has more than one Melee weapon, he must choose which one to attack with when he comes to strike blows – he cannot mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons."
Because based in the wording for the kiss it only has to equipped in order for it to turn on the model's close combat attack into a kiss of death.
It gives a special rule (kiss of death) to the model when in close combat regardless of whether it's the weapon chosen, the rule is based solely on the kiss being present. It doesn't say that it must be chosen or used, it says that one of the models close combat attacks will be special.
Not to mention the fact that the way it is worded, a model with the Kiss and any other weapon choices could NEVER use the other weapons profile as it says "will be" not "can be", or "when making attacks with this weapon".
Ghaz wrote: Except again, where does the rulebook ever say anything about using the abilities of an 'equipped' weapon? Where do we find in the rules what it means by being 'equipped' with a weapon versus 'attacking' with a weapon? What you're trying to do is akin to trying to shoot a bolter because you have the weapon profile but not the rules for the Shooting phase.
You find the rules in the rule itself. I can only find "equipped" in a very few places and is used very restrictively.
Blacksun Filter - "A vehicle equipped with a blacksun filter has the Night Vision special rule."
In the Tau Codex, most of the other rules and the Infantry version of the Blacksun Filter say 'with a' instead of 'equipped', "A model with a blacksun filter has the Night Vision special rule..."
As I have said however, if you are arguing hard RAW at this point, you are saying that the Harlequin's Embrace does nothing since you select your weapon after you are already in base to base, after Hammer of Wraith can been triggered.
Actually Nilok, the argument being made is outside of striking blows (in other words choosing a melee weapon to fight with, and rolling to hit and to wound with it), a model benefits from all gear that it is equipped with. So a model with a Harlequin's Embrace and Harlequin's Kiss will have the Hammer of Wrath special rule until such a time as you get to it's Initiative step and choose to use the Kiss. Then while making those attacks, the model no longer has the Hammer of Wrath special rule. Once the model is done attacking, it again has HoW.
If you are arguing the rules for the word equipped then you are honestly stretching. They don't define the word in the rule book, probably because it's common usage.
There are some more examples though, like with grenades. If a models is equipped with assault grenades, or defensive grenades they gain x benefit. Based off of context it seems to indicate that the model "has" that item.
A space marine is equipped with a Bolter, a bolt pistol, frag and Krak grenades and so on...
Happyjew wrote: Actually Nilok, the argument being made is outside of striking blows (in other words choosing a melee weapon to fight with, and rolling to hit and to wound with it), a model benefits from all gear that it is equipped with. So a model with a Harlequin's Embrace and Harlequin's Kiss will have the Hammer of Wrath special rule until such a time as you get to it's Initiative step and choose to use the Kiss. Then while making those attacks, the model no longer has the Hammer of Wrath special rule. Once the model is done attacking, it again has HoW.
Or at least that is how I'm interpreting it.
I find that definition to be lacking since it's saying that once the Fight Sub-Phase comes around, the model is no longer equipped with the weapon.
A model always has all of his equipment. Normally he would have to choose between his equipped melee weapons, but the rules for the kiss and embrace specify that they just have to be equipped.
There is no core rule that you cannot use special rules form equipped items.
there is a core rule stating that you strike using the abilities of the weapon you choose to strike with.
which is fine.
The rules for the kiss/embrace are not tied to striking with the weapon as per the RAW unlike many weapons in the game. Therefore you can strike with a weapon, and get its chosen abilities which are required to be used when you strike with the weapon. You also would benefit from the rules for caress/kiss as they state they are given to the model when it attacks, not when attacking with the weapon as per shred/rend/etc/etc/etc. There is no conflict with choosing a weapon other than the kiss/embrace.
blaktoof wrote: There is no core rule that you cannot use special rules form equipped items.
there is a core rule stating that you strike using the abilities of the weapon you choose to strike with.
which is fine.
The rules for the kiss/embrace are not tied to striking with the weapon as per the RAW unlike many weapons in the game. Therefore you can strike with a weapon, and get its chosen abilities which are required to be used when you strike with the weapon. You also would benefit from the rules for caress/kiss as they state they are given to the model when it attacks, not when attacking with the weapon as per shred/rend/etc/etc/etc. There is no conflict with choosing a weapon other than the kiss/caress.
You are incorrect on the Caress since that is the only weapon of the three that requires that you hit with it to trigger its special rule. That is the important thing though, the special rules for the other two don't get triggered by using them, just by having them.
Caress of Death - "Each To Hit roll of a 6 made by a weapon with this special rule..."
To be honest my 2 pence is that is the Harlequin Kiss is a buff for the model.. not really part of anything else and doesn't need to be the close combat weapon.. the reason I say this is the conspicous wording.. there are hundreds of close combat weapons with all sorts or wording but i've never seen wording like that.. it shows clarity and emphasis on distinction... also you are wrong about the spear of twlilight curse being able to be opted out (of course it can't be) also this doubles thr flaw in the argument: models ALWAYS get their statline strength / attacks and they don't need to use a weapon.. so there *was* a 4th option you say "grenades / eye or spear".. I say "grenades / eye / spear or base model stats".. and none of them get you out of the curse. Sorry. Simply garbage.
Agree. If you have a kiss and caress and you choose to attack with the caress then by not separating off one dice for the kiss of death you are breaking the rules. There is a reason why the rules for the kiss and caress don't say 'attacks made by this weapon......'.
Anyway, hope GW reply to my email. Love that people are arguing over one S6 AP2 attack.
Bhazakhain wrote: Agree. If you have a kiss and caress and you choose to attack with the caress then by not separating off one dice for the kiss of death you are breaking the rules. There is a reason why the rules for the kiss and caress don't say 'attacks made by this weapon......'.
Anyway, hope GW reply to my email. Love that people are arguing over one S6 AP2 attack.
You are actually breaking the rules by mixing and matching abilities from different weapons. There is no conflict here. The BRB tells us we can't attack with one weapon and use abilities from another. The Kiss of Death is clearly an ability from another weapon. Since the Kiss of Death doesn't EXPLICITLY say that it works with other weapons, we have to assume it doesn't. Assuming it works with other weapons is adding an implied permission to override the BRB's restriction.
Implied permission = not actually a rule. It's HYWPI. Which is fine. Just mark it as such.
To be honest, this makes perfect RAI sense to me. The Kiss works by basically punching your opponent and activating the gun thing attached to your fist. If you're not attacking with the Kiss, but instead the Caress, you shouldn't get this ability.
the BRB tells us that you cannot get the benefits of a weapon striking if you are not striking with it.
the kiss/embrace unlike most weapons do not require the model to be striking with the weapon to get the effect, they require the model to be striking at all with any weapon.
is the model striking in assault?
Is the model equipped with this item?
if the answer is yes regardless of what it is striking with it gets kiss of death.
It gives the model a special rule, unlike most weapons it does not give special rules when striking with the weapon.
as such there is no conflict, you strike with a caress, and you are striking in assault and equpped with a kiss so you get 1 kiss of death attack from your total attacks.
claiming this does not work is the same as saying a model gets the benefit of no equipped items when striking in assault.
blaktoof wrote: the BRB tells us that you cannot get the benefits of a weapon striking if you are not striking with it.
the kiss/embrace unlike most weapons do not require the model to be striking with the weapon to get the effect, they require the model to be striking at all with any weapon.
is the model striking in assault?
Is the model equipped with this item?
if the answer is yes regardless of what it is striking with it gets kiss of death.
It gives the model a special rule, unlike most weapons it does not give special rules when striking with the weapon.
as such there is no conflict, you strike with a caress, and you are striking in assault and equpped with a kiss so you get 1 kiss of death attack from your total attacks.
claiming this does not work is the same as saying a model gets the benefit of no equipped items when striking in assault.
No one is claiming a model "gets the benefit of no equipped items when striking in assault". I'm not claiming anything in fact. I'm citing rules from the BRB that state that a model can't mix and match abilities from multiple weapons when it comes time to strike blows. As there is no restriction on other non-melee weapon pieces of wargear, they should work just fine.
blaktoof wrote: the BRB tells us that you cannot get the benefits of a weapon striking if you are not striking with it.
the kiss/embrace unlike most weapons do not require the model to be striking with the weapon to get the effect, they require the model to be striking at all with any weapon.
is the model striking in assault?
Is the model equipped with this item?
if the answer is yes regardless of what it is striking with it gets kiss of death.
It gives the model a special rule, unlike most weapons it does not give special rules when striking with the weapon.
as such there is no conflict, you strike with a caress, and you are striking in assault and equpped with a kiss so you get 1 kiss of death attack from your total attacks.
claiming this does not work is the same as saying a model gets the benefit of no equipped items when striking in assault.
No one is claiming a model "gets the benefit of no equipped items when striking in assault". I'm not claiming anything in fact. I'm citing rules from the BRB that state that a model can't mix and match abilities from multiple weapons when it comes time to strike blows. As there is no restriction on other non-melee weapon pieces of wargear, they should work just fine.
To be fair, you are telling us that the Solitaire can't use the Caress....EVER. Read the Kiss of Death rule. Does it give you a choice to NOT use the Kiss of Death attack? If you have the Harlequin's Kiss, you effectively have no other weapon, so why add it to the model if it can't use it?
blaktoof wrote: the BRB tells us that you cannot get the benefits of a weapon striking if you are not striking with it.
the kiss/embrace unlike most weapons do not require the model to be striking with the weapon to get the effect, they require the model to be striking at all with any weapon.
is the model striking in assault?
Is the model equipped with this item?
if the answer is yes regardless of what it is striking with it gets kiss of death.
It gives the model a special rule, unlike most weapons it does not give special rules when striking with the weapon.
as such there is no conflict, you strike with a caress, and you are striking in assault and equpped with a kiss so you get 1 kiss of death attack from your total attacks.
claiming this does not work is the same as saying a model gets the benefit of no equipped items when striking in assault.
No one is claiming a model "gets the benefit of no equipped items when striking in assault". I'm not claiming anything in fact. I'm citing rules from the BRB that state that a model can't mix and match abilities from multiple weapons when it comes time to strike blows. As there is no restriction on other non-melee weapon pieces of wargear, they should work just fine.
To be fair, you are telling us that the Solitaire can't use the Caress....EVER. Read the Kiss of Death rule. Does it give you a choice to NOT use the Kiss of Death attack? If you have the Harlequin's Kiss, you effectively have no other weapon, so why add it to the model if it can't use it?
I don't understand what you're getting at. If a model has more than one melee weapon, it can decide which weapon to attack with. If the Solitaire has both a Caress and a Kiss, he can choose to attack with the Caress and thus would ignore all abilities of the Kiss as he's explicitly not allowed to mix and match abilities from multiple melee weapons when it comes time to strike blows.
blaktoof wrote: the BRB tells us that you cannot get the benefits of a weapon striking if you are not striking with it.
the kiss/embrace unlike most weapons do not require the model to be striking with the weapon to get the effect, they require the model to be striking at all with any weapon.
is the model striking in assault?
Is the model equipped with this item?
if the answer is yes regardless of what it is striking with it gets kiss of death.
It gives the model a special rule, unlike most weapons it does not give special rules when striking with the weapon.
as such there is no conflict, you strike with a caress, and you are striking in assault and equpped with a kiss so you get 1 kiss of death attack from your total attacks.
claiming this does not work is the same as saying a model gets the benefit of no equipped items when striking in assault.
No one is claiming a model "gets the benefit of no equipped items when striking in assault". I'm not claiming anything in fact. I'm citing rules from the BRB that state that a model can't mix and match abilities from multiple weapons when it comes time to strike blows. As there is no restriction on other non-melee weapon pieces of wargear, they should work just fine.
To be fair, you are telling us that the Solitaire can't use the Caress....EVER. Read the Kiss of Death rule. Does it give you a choice to NOT use the Kiss of Death attack? If you have the Harlequin's Kiss, you effectively have no other weapon, so why add it to the model if it can't use it?
I don't understand what you're getting at. If a model has more than one melee weapon, it can decide which weapon to attack with. If the Solitaire has both a Caress and a Kiss, he can choose to attack with the Caress and thus would ignore all abilities of the Kiss as he's explicitly not allowed to mix and match abilities from multiple melee weapons when it comes time to strike blows.
The Harlequins kiss very clearly, and explicitly states: "When a model equipped with a Harlequins Kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of its attacks will be a Kiss of Death Attack"
No option, no "when making attacks with this weapon" no "When using this weapon to strike blows", it doesn't even say "may", nothing. You must use this weapon. No choice in the matter, if you have a Harlequins Kiss you WILL be using it.
blaktoof wrote: the BRB tells us that you cannot get the benefits of a weapon striking if you are not striking with it.
the kiss/embrace unlike most weapons do not require the model to be striking with the weapon to get the effect, they require the model to be striking at all with any weapon.
is the model striking in assault?
Is the model equipped with this item?
if the answer is yes regardless of what it is striking with it gets kiss of death.
It gives the model a special rule, unlike most weapons it does not give special rules when striking with the weapon.
as such there is no conflict, you strike with a caress, and you are striking in assault and equpped with a kiss so you get 1 kiss of death attack from your total attacks.
claiming this does not work is the same as saying a model gets the benefit of no equipped items when striking in assault.
No one is claiming a model "gets the benefit of no equipped items when striking in assault". I'm not claiming anything in fact. I'm citing rules from the BRB that state that a model can't mix and match abilities from multiple weapons when it comes time to strike blows. As there is no restriction on other non-melee weapon pieces of wargear, they should work just fine.
To be fair, you are telling us that the Solitaire can't use the Caress....EVER. Read the Kiss of Death rule. Does it give you a choice to NOT use the Kiss of Death attack? If you have the Harlequin's Kiss, you effectively have no other weapon, so why add it to the model if it can't use it?
I don't understand what you're getting at. If a model has more than one melee weapon, it can decide which weapon to attack with. If the Solitaire has both a Caress and a Kiss, he can choose to attack with the Caress and thus would ignore all abilities of the Kiss as he's explicitly not allowed to mix and match abilities from multiple melee weapons when it comes time to strike blows.
The Harlequins kiss very clearly, and explicitly states: "When a model equipped with a Harlequins Kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of its attacks will be a Kiss of Death Attack"
No option, no "when making attacks with this weapon" no "When using this weapon to strike blows" nothing. You must use this weapon. No choice in the matter, if you have a Harlequins Kiss you WILL be using it.
I understand what you're saying. The piece that you're either not understanding or purposefully ignoring, is that it doesn't matter what the ability does. You're not allowed to use it per the BRB if you aren't attacking with that weapon. It makes literally NO difference what the rule says. The BRB effectively tells you that if you choose to attack with weapon A, you ignore ALL abilities of other weapons. WHERE is your permission to use the ability? You would literally need something in the Kiss of Death special rule text saying "This ability works even when not attacking with this weapon." That wording is NOT there, so the restriction in the BRB stands.
If you feel otherwise, point me to the EXPLICIT permission allowing me to ignore the BRB restriction on using abilities from multiple weapons when attacking. Implied permissions don't count. Has to be in writing to be a rule.
I'm not missing it. Every other weapon with an ability gives you a phrase along the lines of "when making attacks with this weapon" or similar. The Kiss does not give the option to choose a different weapon. This is the written rule for this weapon, choosing to use the Caress is breaking the rule for the kiss. Thus the Caress is pointless on a model with a Kiss.
blaktoof wrote: the BRB tells us that you cannot get the benefits of a weapon striking if you are not striking with it.
the kiss/embrace unlike most weapons do not require the model to be striking with the weapon to get the effect, they require the model to be striking at all with any weapon.
is the model striking in assault?
Is the model equipped with this item?
if the answer is yes regardless of what it is striking with it gets kiss of death.
It gives the model a special rule, unlike most weapons it does not give special rules when striking with the weapon.
as such there is no conflict, you strike with a caress, and you are striking in assault and equpped with a kiss so you get 1 kiss of death attack from your total attacks.
claiming this does not work is the same as saying a model gets the benefit of no equipped items when striking in assault.
No one is claiming a model "gets the benefit of no equipped items when striking in assault". I'm not claiming anything in fact. I'm citing rules from the BRB that state that a model can't mix and match abilities from multiple weapons when it comes time to strike blows. As there is no restriction on other non-melee weapon pieces of wargear, they should work just fine.
You are claiming that a model only benefits from equipped items it is striking with, not any other equipped item.
I think you are also not properly quoting the rule.
If a model has more than one Melee weapon, he must choose which one to attack with when he comes to strike blows – he cannot mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons.
The rule is that the model can only choose to strike with one melee weapon, a model cannot choose to strike with more than one melee weapon. The 'flavor text' is this prevents mixing and matching of several abilities that require you to strike with a weapon in melee.
Kiss/Embrace do not require you to strike with them as melee weapons to have an effect.
You are still obeying the rule when you choose to strike with a weapon, and follow the rules for kiss/embrace which are not tied to striking with a melee weapon at all and as such their rules have nothing to do with the rule you are not fully quoting above.
blaktoof wrote: I think there is a valid RAW discussion that Harlequins kiss functions even if it is not the chosen weapon.
normally weapon rules state, and this is from harlequins caress:
"each to hit roll with a weapon that has this special rule.."
so the ability is coming from using the weapon.
in the case of harlequins kiss the wording is:
"when a model equipped with a harlequins kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of it its attacks will be a kiss of death attack"
The rules do not require the weapon the be used as a chosen weapon, just that the model is equipped. Further it does not state when making attacks with this weapon, or a weapon with the harlequins kiss rule, or anything of that nature. It states when the model makes its attacks. The model could attack with two rocks it found in its boots while dancing around, and will still gain the harlequins kiss attack if it is equipped with an item that has that rule the way it is worded.
this is a specific rule that changes the normal core rule of weapons of more than one type, in that it explicitly specifies the attacks come from the model not the weapon, and the model has to only be equipped with the item, there is no requirement that it is used as the melee weapon in the assault phase. In fact as it states the models attacks, and not the weapons attacks it is telling the reader that the special rule is not based on choosing the weapon.
so RAW harlequins kiss works regardless of if it is the chosen weapon, because it is based off the models attacks. It is not a house rule, but the actual rules as written as the rules for the kiss do not require you to choose it as the weapon you strike with to get the special bonus as it is worded in its own specific rules.
if you look at things like concussive, shred, armourbane, it specifies it comes from taking hits from a weapon, not a model.
as such it is not mixing and matching abilities from weapons, the item grants the model an ability it is not an affect from the weapon being chosen in assault to strike with.
Blaktoof, you might want to go back and read through the entire thread Ghaz posted a link to. The issue with your interpretation is that regardless of how the Harlequin's Kiss rules are written, you're not allowed to use them when a model "comes to strike blows" (the loosest interpretation of which would have to include making To Hit rolls) if that model is choosing to attack with a different Melee weapon. There is no permission in the Harlequin's Kiss rules to overturn this restriction. For the rule to be usable, the model has to be attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss. Had GW wanted you to be able to use the Kiss of Death when attacking with a different Melee weapon, they could simply have made it literally any other piece of non-Melee weapon wargear.
My take is you use the Caress when you want a chance at multiple auto wounds at AP2. You use the Kiss when you want at least one guaranteed strike at AP2 and don't really care about the rest of your hits being able to get through armour. Caress versus a Tactical Squad. Kiss versus a Captain with one wound left.
There is no need to specifically grant permission because the phrasing of the Kiss already provides it. They don't need to change the type of item because its rules is clear. The codex rule says that the kiss needs only be equipped in order for one of the models close combat attacks to be special, not be used. The codex rule trumps the rule book. Any other interpretation requires you to ignore the rule phrasing and is therefore invalid.
Ok put it this way. Why does the wording for kiss and embrace not say 'attacks with this weapon...'?. Don't say you assume it's because they forgot to write it the same way as they have for other codices because that's an assumption and we are talking about rules here. It is much easier for GW to use consistent wording. It saves time. Why would they not here? Why is this codex special?!
My question to you is why is the wording different between the caress in one case and the kiss and embrace in the other case.
A model equipped with the Harlequins Embrace has the Hammer of wrath special rule.
It gives the model the rule simply by having it.
I don't think this disagreement in the way the rules are written if the Kiss said a model equipped with a Harlequins Kiss has the Kiss of death rule.
It is, sadly, tied to the weapon. It is a poorly written rule that only allows a model to attack with the Kiss due to its wording.
It was probably intended to allow for that single attack, in addition to the other weapon, but as written you can only use the special rules for the Kiss when making attacks with this model.
Before anyone says I am Breaking a rule with this interpretation. I am applying both the core rulebooks use a single weapons ability, and the Harlequins Kiss abilities Will be S6 AP2 in equal measure. As both the core rules and the Kiss' rules timing is when the model makes its attacks.
Bhazakhain wrote: The kiss also says 'equipped'. It's only the caress that mentions it applied to attacks made with that weapon.
Yes, it says equipped, but it does not give the model the kiss of death rule. It says "When a model equipped with a Harlequins Kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of its attacks will be a kiss of death attack". Oddly enough, the same time you would choose a weapon is preempted by being forced to make a kiss of death attack. The rule is still tied to the weapon, at least for now. The weapon is what has the rule, and the rule does not give a rule to the model, unlike the embrace that says "a model equipped with a Harlequins Embrace has the Hammer of wrath special rule."
I believe the kiss was intended to work with other weapons. But RAW it only allows for a single Kiss of Death attack, and no other weapons usage.
I think the issue is you are still not properly applying the rule you are saying limits this.
The rule does not say the model gains no benefit from equipped items.
the rule does say the model must choose which weapon to strike with if it has more than one.
The rule prevents you from gaining the benefits of abilities that require you to strike with a weapon if you are not striking with it.
Kiss/Embrace as pointed out many times do not require the model strike with the weapon, they give a special rule that works if the model strikes at all with anything.
This is not even an RAI point, this is actually fully within the rules as written.
blaktoof wrote: I think the issue is you are still not properly applying the rule you are saying limits this.
The rule does not say the model gains no benefit from equipped items.
the rule does say the model must choose which weapon to strike with if it has more than one.
The rule prevents you from gaining the benefits of abilities that require you to strike with a weapon if you are not striking with it.
Kiss/Embrace as pointed out many times do not require the model strike with the weapon, they give a special rule that works if the model strikes at all with anything.
This is not even an RAI point, this is actually fully within the rules as written.
Is the Kiss of Death a weapon ability? Yes, it is.
Are you attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss? No, you aren't.
Are you allowed to mix and match abilities from other weapons when not attacking with them? No, you aren't.
This is a relatively straightforward chain of logic. If you want to mix and match in the Kiss's ability, then cite your explicit permission to do so. You need explicit wording overriding the BRB's restriction. You can't use implied permissions. Implied permissions don't override explicit restrictions. This is "permissive rule set 101" sort of stuff.
Without a specific and explicit citation overturning the BRB restriction, the restriction stands.
Implied permissions never work because two people can interpret them differently... which is obviously happening here.
Person A - "The BRB says you can NEVER use an ability from a weapon you're not attacking with."
Person B - "But... this ability just says I need to have the weapon equipped."
Person A - "Doesn't matter, the BRB says NEVER."
Person B - "But there is an implied permission."
Person A - "Which page is this implied permission on? How is it worded? Does it specifically say to ignore the BRB restriction."
Person B - "Of course not, it's implied. It's not actually there. The ability just doesn't make sense unless I can use it all the time."
Person A - "It makes perfect sense, assuming you're actually following the BRB restriction. You get the ability when you actually attack with the weapon."
Person B - "But I want ALL OF THE THINGS."
PErson A - "To quote our grandparents, you can't have your cake and eat it too."
blaktoof wrote: I think the issue is you are still not properly applying the rule you are saying limits this.
The rule does not say the model gains no benefit from equipped items.
the rule does say the model must choose which weapon to strike with if it has more than one.
The rule prevents you from gaining the benefits of abilities that require you to strike with a weapon if you are not striking with it.
Kiss/Embrace as pointed out many times do not require the model strike with the weapon, they give a special rule that works if the model strikes at all with anything.
This is not even an RAI point, this is actually fully within the rules as written.
Is the Kiss of Death a weapon ability? Yes, it is.
Are you attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss? No, you aren't.
Are you allowed to mix and match abilities from other weapons when not attacking with them? No, you aren't.
This is a relatively straightforward chain of logic. If you want to mix and match in the Kiss's ability, then cite your explicit permission to do so. You need explicit wording overriding the BRB's restriction. You can't use implied permissions. Implied permissions don't override explicit restrictions. This is "permissive rule set 101" sort of stuff.
Without a specific and explicit citation overturning the BRB restriction, the restriction stands.
Implied permissions never work because two people can interpret them differently... which is obviously happening here.
Person A - "The BRB says you can NEVER use an ability from a weapon you're not attacking with."
Person B - "But... this ability just says I need to have the weapon equipped."
Person A - "Doesn't matter, the BRB says NEVER."
Person B - "But there is an implied permission."
Person A - "Which page is this implied permission on? How is it worded? Does it specifically say to ignore the BRB restriction."
Person B - "Of course not, it's implied. It's not actually there. The ability just doesn't make sense unless I can use it all the time."
Person A - "It makes perfect sense, assuming you're actually following the BRB restriction. You get the ability when you actually attack with the weapon."
Person B - "But I want ALL OF THE THINGS."
PErson A - "To quote our grandparents, you can't have your cake and eat it too."
The thing is your first point is not correct.
A weapon ability is an ability a weapon possesses that only works when the weapon is striking, there are many examples, caress, shred, armorbane, poison, etc.
The harlequins kiss grants the -model- an ability when it is equipped, the rule 'kiss of death' is a model based ability. Not an ability contingent on the weapon, ie 'a weapon ability'.
It is not implied permission, it is the RAW that is being misconstrued by certain people that kiss of death is not an ability of the model, but an ability contingent on striking with the weapon ie choosing to strike with the weapon.
and again there is no rule stating a model does not get the benefit of equipped items which affect the model when it chooses to strike with any weapon.
You have also failed to tie in the entire first part of the rule you are misquoting, which tells you that models with more than 1 weapon choose one to strike with, they cannot gain the benefits of striking with another weapon. As stated in the RAW and this thread, kiss of death is not a weapon ability nor is it tied to striking with the harlequins kiss it is an ability granted to the model.
if the wording of 'embrace' or 'kiss' were the same as caress, or a powerfist, or any weapon that has shred, etc you would be correct. However by the RAW they are not, as they are not abilities gained by choosing to strike with said weapon, they are not weapon abilities, they are abilities granted to the model by having the item. Unless you can find a RAW passage stating models lose their abilities and only use the abilities of the weapon they choose to strike with you actually have no rules support for your stance.
As already discussed in the thread you don't explicit permission. When there is a conflict, any conflict, the codex wins. The rule for the kiss is quite clear that one of the models close combat will be a kiss of death if equipped. All of your arguments require that you ignore this rule, quoting a rule book rule. That rule is over ridden by the phrasing of the codex rule so it's irrelevant.
There is a reason that pretty much everywhere else has arrived at the conclusion that you use both.
Where is the conflict? All we have is your word that 'equipped' conflicts with 'attacks with'. Where in the rulebook can I find what 'equipped with' means in order to decide if there is a conflict?
Trystis wrote: As already discussed in the thread you don't explicit permission. When there is a conflict, any conflict, the codex wins. The rule for the kiss is quite clear that one of the models close combat will be a kiss of death if equipped. All of your arguments require that you ignore this rule, quoting a rule book rule. That rule is over ridden by the phrasing of the codex rule so it's irrelevant.
There is a reason that pretty much everywhere else has arrived at the conclusion that you use both.
Please post what you consider to be a rules conflict. I don't see a conflict, so I need you to post the two explicit rules that tell you to do conflicting things.
Also, there is no "codex always wins" rule. That's something people say, but it's not really a thing. It just often works out that way. The actual rule is "Basic Versus Advanced" and is on page 13 of the small rulebook...
"Basic rules apply to all models in the game, unless stated otherwise."
So, the fact that you can't mix and match weapon abilities when you attack is a Basic Rule.
"Advanced rules apply to specific types of models, whether because they have a special kind of weapon (such as a boltgun), unusual skills (such as the ability to regenerate), because they are different to their fellows (such as a unit leader or a heroic character), or because they are not normal infantry models (a bike, a swarm or even a tank)."
Kiss of Death is clearly an Advanced Rule.
"Where advanced rules apply to a specific model, they always override any contradicting basic rules." "On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex or army list entry always takes precedence."
So, there has to be a contradiction for the advanced rule to override the basic rule. Is there a contradiction? Nope.
Let me show you what a contradiction would look like...
BRB: You can't mix and match weapon abilities when it comes time to strike blows.
Codex: You can use the Kiss of Death ability when attacking with a different weapon.
That's a contradiction and the Codex rule would take precedence.
Compare to...
BRB: You can't mix and match weapon abilities when it comes time to strike blows.
Codex: Harlequin's Kiss has an ability called Kiss of Death and this is what it does.
There is no specific contradiction. There may possibly be an implied one, but implications aren't enough.
So, your turn. Cite your rules that generate a specific contradiction. I'm looking for something in the codex that tells me to use an ability from weapon B when I attack with weapon A. That's literally the only thing that would cause a contradiction.
It doesn't matter what the Kiss of Death does. Unless it includes wording saying that it can be used alongside another weapon... there is no conflict and you're breaking the core rules when you mix and match it with abilities from another weapon.
The contradiction comes from the kiss rule itself. Generally you must choose which weapon to use, the kiss or the embrace, and can't mix or match per the rule book.
The kiss has a special rule that states it only needs to be equipped, not used, in order for its special rule to take effect. Other items have been listed with similar effects, but this may be the first with a special rule that is an attack. The weapon doesn't perform the kiss of death, it is specifically the model per the rule.
It doesn't need to say it can be used alongside other models, because it doesn't say it's used at all. It just says equipped. It isn't used used, per the rule phrasing, one of models attacks becomes a kiss of death, not one of the attacks made with the weapon.
That rule's phrasing overrides the rule book. The mix and match rule doesn't apply because you are not mix and matching weapons, you are using a special rule, that specifies it doesn't need to be used only equipped. This is RAW your argument requires the codex rule to be ignored. Maybe you are right as RAI, but not RAW.
Trystis wrote: The contradiction comes from the kiss rule itself. Generally you must choose which weapon to use, the kiss or the embrace, and can't mix or match per the rule book.
The kiss has a special rule that states it only needs to be equipped, not used, in order for its special rule to take effect. Other items have been listed with similar effects, but this may be the first with a special rule that is an attack. The weapon doesn't perform the kiss of death, it is specifically the model per the rule.
It doesn't need to say it can be used alongside other models, because it doesn't say it's used at all. It just says equipped. It isn't used used, per the rule phrasing, one of models attacks becomes a kiss of death, not one of the attacks made with the weapon.
That rule's phrasing overrides the rule book. The mix and match rule doesn't apply because you are not mix and matching weapons, you are using a special rule, that specifies it doesn't need to be used only equipped. This is RAW your argument requires the codex rule to be ignored. Maybe you are right as RAI, but not RAW.
It actually DOES need to say that it can be used alongside other weapons because that's the BRB restriction you're trying to create a contradiction with. Anything less than saying it can be used alongside other weapons and you don't have a contradiction.
You have two things instead. Thing 1 says "do this when a model has this weapon". This 2 says "ignore all other weapon abilities when attacking with a different weapon". This isn't a conflict. It's just two different rules that do different things and work fine together.
Trystis wrote: Where does it say it needs to be used? The rules for the kiss specifically say it only needs to be equipped.
Are you arguing that using the Harlequin Kiss's S6 AP2 single attack effect doesn't constitute using the Kiss of Death ability? The BRB rules say you can't use ANY weapon abilities unless you're attacking with that weapon. Does the Kiss of Death explicitly say it can be used when not attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss? No, it does not. Hence, there is no contradiction and both rules work fine together. You just only get the benefit of the Kiss of Death ability if you're attacking with the actual Harlequin's Kiss weapon. Which makes perfect sense. If you're not attacking with a weapon, why should you get to use its special rules? And to be clear, this is a weapon special rule.
Trystis wrote: Where does it say it needs to be used? The rules for the kiss specifically say it only needs to be equipped.
Are you arguing that using the Harlequin Kiss's S6 AP2 single attack effect doesn't constitute using the Kiss of Death ability? The BRB rules say you can't use ANY weapon abilities unless you're attacking with that weapon. Does the Kiss of Death explicitly say it can be used when not attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss? No, it does not. Hence, there is no contradiction and both rules work fine together. You just only get the benefit of the Kiss of Death ability if you're attacking with the actual Harlequin's Kiss weapon. Which makes perfect sense. If you're not attacking with a weapon, why should you get to use its special rules? And to be clear, this is a weapon special rule.
Im still not convinced the rule needs to say what you think it does in order to function as peoeple are suggesting.
BRB- Can't use unless attacking.
Kiss- Must make an attack if equiped.
I think the thing you are not seeing is that the rules for the kiss require the attack to be made. You are not given a choice. To follow both rules, you would never be able to use any weapon other than the kiss because you must make the attack, yet cant make it if you select another weapon. This is a clear and direct conflict of rules in my eyes, and it seems to be in many others.
Perhaps you can actually show where the Kiss actually says you must use it if 'equipped'. And while your at it, please show us what the rules for being 'equipped' mean in the first place.
Ghaz wrote: Perhaps you can actually show where the Kiss actually says you must use it if 'equipped'. And while your at it, please show us what the rules for being 'equipped' mean in the first place.
Sure, no problem.
when a model equipped with a harlequins kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of it its attacks will be a kiss of death attack
So, if equiped, 1 attack will be a kiss of death attack. No choice given there.
As for your second point....are you serious? Or just trolling? So are you're implying that we can never use the rule becasue we have no BRB definition of "equiped?"
Ghaz wrote: Perhaps you can actually show where the Kiss actually says you must use it if 'equipped'. And while your at it, please show us what the rules for being 'equipped' mean in the first place.
Sure, no problem.
when a model equipped with a harlequins kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of it its attacks will be a kiss of death attack
So, if equiped, 1 attack will be a kiss of death attack. No choice given there.
As for your second point....are you serious? Or just trolling? So are you're implying that we can never use the rule becasue we have no BRB definition of "equiped?"
I'm willing to grant that equipped with means "has" in this instance. What I'm still not clear on is why you think there is a contradiction.
"When a model equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of its attacks will be a Kiss of Death attack."
Ok... this is clearly an ability of the Harlequin's Kiss. Which you aren't allowed to use unless you are attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss per the BRB. As there is ABSOLUTELY NO WORDING contradicting this restriction (e.g. you may use this ability even when attacking with other weapons), we have to abide by the BRB's restriction.
I grant you that if you were actually allowed to mix and match abilities that you would be able to attack with a different weapon and have the Kiss of Death kick in. You aren't allowed to mix and match and have yet to show any wording allowing you to do so.
Ghaz wrote: Perhaps you can actually show where the Kiss actually says you must use it if 'equipped'. And while your at it, please show us what the rules for being 'equipped' mean in the first place.
Sure, no problem.
when a model equipped with a harlequins kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of it its attacks will be a kiss of death attack
So, if equiped, 1 attack will be a kiss of death attack. No choice given there.
As for your second point....are you serious? Or just trolling? So are you're implying that we can never use the rule becasue we have no BRB definition of "equiped?"
I'm willing to grant that equipped with means "has" in this instance. What I'm still not clear on is why you think there is a contradiction.
"When a model equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of its attacks will be a Kiss of Death attack."
Ok... this is clearly an ability of the Harlequin's Kiss. Which you aren't allowed to use unless you are attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss per the BRB. As there is ABSOLUTELY NO WORDING contradicting this restriction (e.g. you may use this ability even when attacking with other weapons), we have to abide by the BRB's restriction.
I grant you that if you were actually allowed to mix and match abilities that you would be able to attack with a different weapon and have the Kiss of Death kick in. You aren't allowed to mix and match and have yet to show any wording allowing you to do so.
It's clearly an ability of the kiss when it's equipped regardless of whether it's used. That absolutely is wording contradicting that restriction. You consistently ignore the rules of the weapon in your argument. Each time you try to imply that you get to ignore the word equipped and replace it with the word used. The rule from the BRB doesn't apply in this case because the phrasing of the rule for the kiss. I can choose the caress, the kiss still exist and is equipped and it's rule will still turn one of the model's close combats attacks into a kiss of death.
It doesn't say one of the attacks made with this weapon or anything remotely like that. The wording is very deliberate and it has to be ignored for the BRB rule to apply.
Wow so this is a circular argument. I'm in the camp of it's equipped and one of my attacks has to be a "kiss of death" but I'm using the caress as my weapon, so therefore you get both rules.
If the BRB states you can't do that, then there's the contradiction you claim not to exist.
This will just go round and round in a petty "I need to be right" argument until the FAQ comes out. I'd just say discuss it with your opponent if it's going to be an issue. Luckily I don't game with rule smiths so I shouldn't have to prove everything citing page numbers to be able to play a game. If i did, i wouldn;t bother playing against that opponent. If your oppoentn doesn't agree then flip a coin, problem solved, until GW clear it up. Perhaps they'll do a battle report which will clear it up in a forthcoming magazine
Gapow wrote: If the BRB states you can't do that, then there's the contradiction you claim not to exist.
And again, where is this wording for 'equip' found so we can compare it to rules for more than one weapon to determine if there is a conflict? How can you claim two rules conflict when you can't even provide the rule?
Gapow wrote: If the BRB states you can't do that, then there's the contradiction you claim not to exist.
And again, where is this wording for 'equip' found so we can compare it to rules for more than one weapon to determine if there is a conflict? How can you claim two rules conflict when you can't even provide the rule?
That is the problem.....There are two weapons that use the "equipped with" terminology. The Harlequins Kiss, and the Harlequins Embrace, literally every other weapon in the game says "when making attacks with this weapon" or similar to that phrase. We can't provide other rules, because these two rules are the first versions of it. As such we are providing the rules for comparison.
Trystis wrote: If you have nothing left but to argue over what the word equipped means you are effectively just trolling now. Have fun with that.
In other words, you can't support your position with anything other than "... because I said so..."? You keep saying there's a rules difference, but you won't provide a single rule to back up your claims.
Trystis wrote: If you have nothing left but to argue over what the word equipped means you are effectively just trolling now. Have fun with that.
In other words, you can't support your position with anything other than "... because I said so..."? You keep saying there's a rules difference, but you won't provide a single rule to back up your claims.
In other words you have nothing left than to debate the definition of a word that is in common usage. While the rule book doesn't define the word equipped it and other codexes provide plenty of in context examples. They along with the literal definition indicate that any piece of gear a model has is equipped. Using the logic of your argument I could demand the rule book definition of every rule in order to cast doubt on how it works.
We have provided the rule that matters. The one for the kiss.
Also it's insufficient to just say that we are wrong because you don't except the definition of equipped, you would need to provide one that indicate we are wrong. We are using it in the logical method based on both it's context in the game, and on its actual definition. Where is the rule that says we are using equipped incorrectly?
The Kiss of Death is an ability. Period. End of sentence.
It doesn't matter if it's an "on equip" ability or an "on use" ability (neither of which is defined in the BRB and is an arbitrary difference that one side is creating to help their argument) because the BRB doesn't care. It restricts ALL other weapon abilities.
You're basically saying "Oh, I know the BRB says I can't use this abilitiy, but this is an 'on equip' ability, so it's extra special and is exempted from the BRB restriction."
There is no EXPLICIT contradiction. The side wanting their cake and to eat it too has yet to post anything in the Kiss of Death rule explicitly saying it can be used with other weapons. THAT would create a contradiction since the BRB says it can't.
Until then, enjoy your house rule.
Mods, we might as well lock this thread. It's a he said/she said at this point.
End result... There is no clear consensus. Play it how you like. Don't expect strangers or tournaments to allow you to mix and match abilities from weapons you aren't attacking with.
I was trying to make the point that neither of us have rules for what equipped means. Equipped is a a word and shouldn't need a rule, because it has a definition. I do have a dictionary and a rule book of examples for context which is enough.
The rule says exactly what it means. You're the one trying to make it mean something else.
If there is no contradiction then you follow exactly what the rule says and get both the caress and kiss.
If there is a contradiction then the codex takes precedence and you get both the caress and the kiss.
I think it all comes down to "will be a KoD attack". You don't have a choice. When you make attavks, one will be KoD, and since you can't mix and match weapon abilities, then you can only ever attack with the kiss. Solved!
Ghaz wrote: Perhaps you can actually show where the Kiss actually says you must use it if 'equipped'. And while your at it, please show us what the rules for being 'equipped' mean in the first place.
Sure, no problem.
when a model equipped with a harlequins kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of it its attacks will be a kiss of death attack
So, if equiped, 1 attack will be a kiss of death attack. No choice given there.
As for your second point....are you serious? Or just trolling? So are you're implying that we can never use the rule becasue we have no BRB definition of "equiped?"
I'm willing to grant that equipped with means "has" in this instance. What I'm still not clear on is why you think there is a contradiction.
"When a model equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of its attacks will be a Kiss of Death attack."
Ok... this is clearly an ability of the Harlequin's Kiss. Which you aren't allowed to use unless you are attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss per the BRB. As there is ABSOLUTELY NO WORDING contradicting this restriction (e.g. you may use this ability even when attacking with other weapons), we have to abide by the BRB's restriction.
I grant you that if you were actually allowed to mix and match abilities that you would be able to attack with a different weapon and have the Kiss of Death kick in. You aren't allowed to mix and match and have yet to show any wording allowing you to do so.
I don't think you understand. The unit entry is telling us we must make the attack (regardless of what weapon is selected) while the book is telling us we cant make the attack if another weapon is selected. The rules directly contradict each other when we select a different weapon.
Gapow wrote: If the BRB states you can't do that, then there's the contradiction you claim not to exist.
And again, where is this wording for 'equip' found so we can compare it to rules for more than one weapon to determine if there is a conflict? How can you claim two rules conflict when you can't even provide the rule?
Ghaz wrote: Perhaps you can actually show where the Kiss actually says you must use it if 'equipped'. And while your at it, please show us what the rules for being 'equipped' mean in the first place.
Sure, no problem.
when a model equipped with a harlequins kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of it its attacks will be a kiss of death attack
So, if equiped, 1 attack will be a kiss of death attack. No choice given there.
As for your second point....are you serious? Or just trolling? So are you're implying that we can never use the rule becasue we have no BRB definition of "equiped?"
I'm willing to grant that equipped with means "has" in this instance. What I'm still not clear on is why you think there is a contradiction.
"When a model equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of its attacks will be a Kiss of Death attack."
Ok... this is clearly an ability of the Harlequin's Kiss. Which you aren't allowed to use unless you are attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss per the BRB. As there is ABSOLUTELY NO WORDING contradicting this restriction (e.g. you may use this ability even when attacking with other weapons), we have to abide by the BRB's restriction.
I grant you that if you were actually allowed to mix and match abilities that you would be able to attack with a different weapon and have the Kiss of Death kick in. You aren't allowed to mix and match and have yet to show any wording allowing you to do so.
I don't think you understand. The unit entry is telling us we must make the attack (regardless of what weapon is selected) while the book is telling us we cant make the attack if another weapon is selected. The rules directly contradict each other when we select a different weapon.
Gapow wrote: If the BRB states you can't do that, then there's the contradiction you claim not to exist.
And again, where is this wording for 'equip' found so we can compare it to rules for more than one weapon to determine if there is a conflict? How can you claim two rules conflict when you can't even provide the rule?
Just leave. You are not adding any value here.
I'm still on Krisswall's ideology side here. It's rather simple.
I have underlined where you are making a mistake above.
Who Has the special rule? The Harlequin or the Weapon? It should be easy to answer, the special rule is either
A) Under the model's list of special rules.
B) In the weapon's Profile.
If A, sure, the model has the rule, as you are proposing above.
If B, how can you use the rule of a weapon (Concussive, Strikedown, Shred,....) if you are not "equipped" with the weapon (IE - you are attacking with another weapon?)
Most weapon rules like shred, armorbane, fleshbane, strikedown, are rules that work from striking with the weapon.
Mixing and matching has been terribly misquoted many times in this thread, it does not say what many people are stating it does.
If a model has more than one Melee weapon, he must choose which one to attack with when he comes to strike blows – he cannot mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons.
You cannot mix and match the abilities by striking with more than one, you have to choose one to strike with. This does not prevent the model from using any abilities the model has that do not require striking with a weapon, ie if a model has poison, PE, or some such.
This limits weapons that have an effect on striking with the weapon, so any rule that says "when a weapon with special rule here strikes" such as shred, armorbane, poison, etc etc.
However the rule 'kiss of death' is not a rule granted by striking with the weapon. As is evident by its wording, it grants a special rule to the model.
So although it is a weapon that gives the model a rule, the model has the rule. The rule itself does not require the weapon to be striking to benefit as per caress, shred, strikedown, concussive, armorbane, etc etc.
It is a rule the model has by being equipped with the item, not a rule the weapon has that the model can use when striking.
This is most similar to the old NDK Greatsword, which was also an "equipped" ability, and was FAQd to confirm that this ability funcitoned even if using the powerfist-equivalent weapon.
You have a contradiction, in you have a rule requiring an effect to happen when something is equipped - and as we have no rule altering the definition we use the commonly accepted English use of the word - and a rule disallowing you from using this ability unless you are actively using the weapon.
Now, it isnt an explicit contradiction - wording ot the effect of "even if the weapon is not chosen for use, ...." would have bene crystal clear. But to say there isnt a contradiction is certainly not correct.
the codex states this WILL happen. the rulebook says it cannot happen. There is a conflict there
nosferatu1001 wrote: This is most similar to the old NDK Greatsword, which was also an "equipped" ability, and was FAQd to confirm that this ability funcitoned even if using the powerfist-equivalent weapon.
You have a contradiction, in you have a rule requiring an effect to happen when something is equipped - and as we have no rule altering the definition we use the commonly accepted English use of the word - and a rule disallowing you from using this ability unless you are actively using the weapon.
Now, it isnt an explicit contradiction - wording ot the effect of "even if the weapon is not chosen for use, ...." would have bene crystal clear. But to say there isnt a contradiction is certainly not correct.
the codex states this WILL happen. the rulebook says it cannot happen. There is a conflict there
If anything, this is a confirmation that it's poorly worded enough to require an FAQ. Without an FAQ, it's hard to know what they really intended. I choose to fall back on my interpretation, which is consistent with every other weapon ability excepting the prior edition NDK Greatsword.
Are there any actual, current instances of other weapon abilities a model is allowed to use when not attacking with the weapon?
nosferatu1001 wrote: This is most similar to the old NDK Greatsword, which was also an "equipped" ability, and was FAQd to confirm that this ability funcitoned even if using the powerfist-equivalent weapon.
You have a contradiction, in you have a rule requiring an effect to happen when something is equipped - and as we have no rule altering the definition we use the commonly accepted English use of the word - and a rule disallowing you from using this ability unless you are actively using the weapon.
Now, it isnt an explicit contradiction - wording ot the effect of "even if the weapon is not chosen for use, ...." would have bene crystal clear. But to say there isnt a contradiction is certainly not correct.
the codex states this WILL happen. the rulebook says it cannot happen. There is a conflict there
I think i am agreeing with you there, but i'm not sure which way your post was swaying.....
I understand that there is an argument for the "Equipped" part of a weapon, for a rule like: 'A model equipped with an X weapon has the Eternal Warrior Special rule'
It would be clear that the model has the rule, very much like existing rules of Storm Shields:
A storm shield confers a 3+ invulnerable save. In addition, a model equipped with a storm shield can never claim the +1 Attack gained for being armed with two Melee weapons in an assault.
It is clear from the above that the model could not "give up" the restriction.
Or could it?
If a model has bought the Storm Shield, could he decide to "not make use of it" for a Turn? Would he still be "equipped" then?
It all comes down to how the rules are written, and in then end, the rules is written on the weapon's profile. So if you are not using the weapon profile, how can the model get the rule?
I think the discussion is almost: Does a model not using a weapon in combat count as "equipped" with that weapon?
As Nos says:
we have no rule altering the definition we use the commonly accepted English use of the word - and a rule disallowing you from using this ability unless you are actively using the weapon.
I would agree with Krisswall and others that no: a Model is not "equipped" when he fights Close Combat using another weapon....
Oh I do think it is poorly worded - anytime you override a rule you should really be explicit about it, especially somethiung as fundamental as more than one weapon
However currently "equipped" presents a contradiction, as it is a mandatory occurrence no matter whether you use the item or not. the rulebook states you cannot use that ability unless "using", your rule doesnt care about "using", just "having".
nosferatu1001 wrote: Oh I do think it is poorly worded - anytime you override a rule you should really be explicit about it, especially somethiung as fundamental as more than one weapon
However currently "equipped" presents a contradiction, as it is a mandatory occurrence no matter whether you use the item or not. the rulebook states you cannot use that ability unless "using", your rule doesnt care about "using", just "having".
Oh sorry, other side then. Equipped as in "a model equipped with a space Marine bike" beig T5 is equipped: can't voluntarily "not have it".
And i do see your point wich is the only flaw in the argument that "You can't if you don't have it".
A lot of items with the wording "equipped" are quite final about having a rule or not. (As you say, they usually MUST have the rules)
nosferatu1001 wrote: This is most similar to the old NDK Greatsword, which was also an "equipped" ability, and was FAQd to confirm that this ability funcitoned even if using the powerfist-equivalent weapon.
You have a contradiction, in you have a rule requiring an effect to happen when something is equipped - and as we have no rule altering the definition we use the commonly accepted English use of the word - and a rule disallowing you from using this ability unless you are actively using the weapon.
Now, it isnt an explicit contradiction - wording ot the effect of "even if the weapon is not chosen for use, ...." would have bene crystal clear. But to say there isnt a contradiction is certainly not correct.
the codex states this WILL happen. the rulebook says it cannot happen. There is a conflict there
I think i am agreeing with you there, but i'm not sure which way your post was swaying.....
I understand that there is an argument for the "Equipped" part of a weapon, for a rule like:
'A model equipped with an X weapon has the Eternal Warrior Special rule'
It would be clear that the model has the rule, very much like existing rules of Storm Shields:
A storm shield confers a 3+ invulnerable save. In addition, a model equipped with a storm shield can never claim the +1 Attack gained for being armed with two Melee weapons in an assault.
It is clear from the above that the model could not "give up" the restriction.
Or could it?
If a model has bought the Storm Shield, could he decide to "not make use of it" for a Turn? Would he still be "equipped" then?
It all comes down to how the rules are written, and in then end, the rules is written on the weapon's profile. So if you are not using the weapon profile, how can the model get the rule?
I think the discussion is almost:
Does a model not using a weapon in combat count as "equipped" with that weapon?
As Nos says:
we have no rule altering the definition we use the commonly accepted English use of the word - and a rule disallowing you from using this ability unless you are actively using the weapon.
I would agree with Krisswall and others that no: a Model is not "equipped" when he fights Close Combat using another weapon....
Slightly off topic but with the mention of the storm shield this occurred to me. The wording on the Blizzard Shield in the Space Wolves codex gives the profile
S: user AP: 2 Type: Melee, Shield.
Shield: A blizzard shield confers a 3+ invulnerable save against all hits that strike the Dreadnought's front armor facing.
Now the wording is confers not equipped but by your and krisswall's logic the dreadnought doesn't get that save in CC unless he uses the shield as his weapon and not the x2 master-crafted giant axe.
It's the rules like this and other non attack related rules linked to weapons that make me believe that you may have the RAW on this but the RAI is definitely not on your side.
nosferatu1001 wrote: This is most similar to the old NDK Greatsword, which was also an "equipped" ability, and was FAQd to confirm that this ability funcitoned even if using the powerfist-equivalent weapon.
You have a contradiction, in you have a rule requiring an effect to happen when something is equipped - and as we have no rule altering the definition we use the commonly accepted English use of the word - and a rule disallowing you from using this ability unless you are actively using the weapon.
Now, it isnt an explicit contradiction - wording ot the effect of "even if the weapon is not chosen for use, ...." would have bene crystal clear. But to say there isnt a contradiction is certainly not correct.
the codex states this WILL happen. the rulebook says it cannot happen. There is a conflict there
I think i am agreeing with you there, but i'm not sure which way your post was swaying.....
I understand that there is an argument for the "Equipped" part of a weapon, for a rule like:
'A model equipped with an X weapon has the Eternal Warrior Special rule'
It would be clear that the model has the rule, very much like existing rules of Storm Shields:
A storm shield confers a 3+ invulnerable save. In addition, a model equipped with a storm shield can never claim the +1 Attack gained for being armed with two Melee weapons in an assault.
It is clear from the above that the model could not "give up" the restriction.
Or could it?
If a model has bought the Storm Shield, could he decide to "not make use of it" for a Turn? Would he still be "equipped" then?
It all comes down to how the rules are written, and in then end, the rules is written on the weapon's profile. So if you are not using the weapon profile, how can the model get the rule?
I think the discussion is almost:
Does a model not using a weapon in combat count as "equipped" with that weapon?
As Nos says:
we have no rule altering the definition we use the commonly accepted English use of the word - and a rule disallowing you from using this ability unless you are actively using the weapon.
I would agree with Krisswall and others that no: a Model is not "equipped" when he fights Close Combat using another weapon....
Slightly off topic but with the mention of the storm shield this occurred to me. The wording on the Blizzard Shield in the Space Wolves codex gives the profile
S: user AP: 2 Type: Melee, Shield.
Shield: A blizzard shield confers a 3+ invulnerable save against all hits that strike the Dreadnought's front armor facing.
Now the wording is confers not equipped but by your and krisswall's logic the dreadnought doesn't get that save in CC unless he uses the shield as his weapon and not the x2 master-crafted giant axe.
It's the rules like this and other non attack related rules linked to weapons that make me believe that you may have the RAW on this but the RAI is definitely not on your side.
I would agree that per RaW, the Dread doesn't get the 3++ when he's swinging the Axe. He would get the 3++ during shooting, for example, but not during combat.
Also, I'm not even remotely concerned with RaI. RaI is ultimately unknowable. In some cases it seems clearer than others, but I don't think this is one of those times. I'm just trying to point out that the actual RaW doesn't accomplish what most people seem to want it to accomplish. Actual RaW doesn't let you attack with one weapon and use an ability from another weapon.
nosferatu1001 wrote: This is most similar to the old NDK Greatsword, which was also an "equipped" ability, and was FAQd to confirm that this ability funcitoned even if using the powerfist-equivalent weapon.
You have a contradiction, in you have a rule requiring an effect to happen when something is equipped - and as we have no rule altering the definition we use the commonly accepted English use of the word - and a rule disallowing you from using this ability unless you are actively using the weapon.
Now, it isnt an explicit contradiction - wording ot the effect of "even if the weapon is not chosen for use, ...." would have bene crystal clear. But to say there isnt a contradiction is certainly not correct.
the codex states this WILL happen. the rulebook says it cannot happen. There is a conflict there
I think i am agreeing with you there, but i'm not sure which way your post was swaying.....
I understand that there is an argument for the "Equipped" part of a weapon, for a rule like:
'A model equipped with an X weapon has the Eternal Warrior Special rule'
It would be clear that the model has the rule, very much like existing rules of Storm Shields:
A storm shield confers a 3+ invulnerable save. In addition, a model equipped with a storm shield can never claim the +1 Attack gained for being armed with two Melee weapons in an assault.
It is clear from the above that the model could not "give up" the restriction.
Or could it?
If a model has bought the Storm Shield, could he decide to "not make use of it" for a Turn? Would he still be "equipped" then?
It all comes down to how the rules are written, and in then end, the rules is written on the weapon's profile. So if you are not using the weapon profile, how can the model get the rule?
I think the discussion is almost:
Does a model not using a weapon in combat count as "equipped" with that weapon?
As Nos says:
we have no rule altering the definition we use the commonly accepted English use of the word - and a rule disallowing you from using this ability unless you are actively using the weapon.
I would agree with Krisswall and others that no: a Model is not "equipped" when he fights Close Combat using another weapon....
Slightly off topic but with the mention of the storm shield this occurred to me. The wording on the Blizzard Shield in the Space Wolves codex gives the profile
S: user AP: 2 Type: Melee, Shield.
Shield: A blizzard shield confers a 3+ invulnerable save against all hits that strike the Dreadnought's front armor facing.
Now the wording is confers not equipped but by your and krisswall's logic the dreadnought doesn't get that save in CC unless he uses the shield as his weapon and not the x2 master-crafted giant axe.
It's the rules like this and other non attack related rules linked to weapons that make me believe that you may have the RAW on this but the RAI is definitely not on your side.
I would agree that per RaW, the Dread doesn't get the 3++ when he's swinging the Axe. He would get the 3++ during shooting, for example, but not during combat.
Also, I'm not even remotely concerned with RaI. RaI is ultimately unknowable. In some cases it seems clearer than others, but I don't think this is one of those times. I'm just trying to point out that the actual RaW doesn't accomplish what most people seem to want it to accomplish. Actual RaW doesn't let you attack with one weapon and use an ability from another weapon.
So you want to use a Melee weapon during the shooting phase? The brb says that Melee weapons can only be used in the Assault phase, and it has been claimed that you can't use an ability if your not using the weapon, so what RaW are you basing this on? Of course this argument falls apart as stated with Eldrad's staff, runic ward abilities and others like it. I disagree about the RaI being unclear because it would seriously handicap a bunch of weapons (even excluding the kiss) if we followed this RaW.
I retract the comment about the shield. I didn't realize it was a melee weapon. I thought it was wargear. My bad. That's what I get for reading this on my phone.
And not following RAW because it "would seriously handicap a bunch of weapons" is a terrible reason.
Kriswall wrote: I retract the comment about the shield. I didn't realize it was a melee weapon. I thought it was wargear. My bad. That's what I get for reading this on my phone.
And not following RAW because it "would seriously handicap a bunch of weapons" is a terrible reason.
Your right I should have used "limit" instead of "handicap". I don't believe that GW expected their rules to limit the blizzard shield this way, but if you allow it to benefit from the invulnerable save regardless of the fact that it's a melee weapon and what not then the same could be said about allowing the kiss while equipped to do its thing.
I think at this point the only way that you can say the kiss won't provide its rule is if you essential limit a bunch of weapons, which really doesn't seem like any wants.
Trystis wrote: I think at this point the only way that you can say the kiss won't provide its rule is if you essential limit a bunch of weapons, which really doesn't seem like any wants.
And it is the core of RaW V HYWPI positions.
We must all agree that the RaW would limit these weapons (because that is simply how the rules are written).
But i'm quite sure that Krisswall, Rigeld and any others who are adamant that RaW works in this way might actually play it completely differently when they are playing (HIWPI).
Trystis wrote: I think at this point the only way that you can say the kiss won't provide its rule is if you essential limit a bunch of weapons, which really doesn't seem like any wants.
And it is the core of RaW V HYWPI positions.
We must all agree that the RaW would limit these weapons (because that is simply how the rules are written).
But i'm quite sure that Krisswall, Rigeld and any others who are adamant that RaW works in this way might actually play it completely differently when they are playing (HIWPI).
You are correct. I would play it allowing it because I think that's what GW intended... but we're debating RaW here. In the real world (i.e. not a snarky sub forum dedicated to bickering about rules), I'm actually quite laissez-faire when it comes to my games. I'm more of a painter than a player. I don't tend to be competitive at all when I play 40k.
If our harliquin equips it, it is a trinket (in wow) and it buffs him.. we all know this.. he can still slam with his 2 hander because he isn't dual wielding cos it is a trinket
ConanMan wrote: If our harliquin equips it, it is a trinket (in wow) and it buffs him.. we all know this.. he can still slam with his 2 hander because he isn't dual wielding cos it is a trinket
This is the right answer.
Peace
I cannot choose between legitimate serious answer, a bout of trolling (post history seems completely clean) or an attempted joke for World of Warcraft players to understand...... lol Please elaborate / explain...
sorry just saw this.. it's simple.. the Harlequin Kiss says "equipped" which we can all agree is a new term in the rules vernacular with no precident.. it also says this new definition term TWICE once in the kiss and again in the Special Item Gear (some sort of rose) of the Harlequin codex.. so we can rule out accidental wording.. it was conspicuous and deliberate.
You see it wasn't a "Troll" it was a serious point. This word is used all the time in gaming. It means carrying in an item slot In every game. All these games have muliple equip slots but usually 2 or 3 weapon slots.. an equip is used all the time in this context.
What possible reason would there be to introduce a new term into the 40k rules vernacular if it WASN'T to introduce a new CONCEPT. This to me is RAW. Equipped. Holding. Not using. Why not using? Because they have words for that. They are in every codex ever put out.
You are buffed by it because you have it in your pocket. Why is it RAW? Because there are terms for the other things. And the emphasis is there
ConanMan wrote: sorry just saw this.. it's simple.. the Harlequin Kiss says "equipped" which we can all agree is a new term in the rules vernacular with no precident..
No, we can't. No, it's not.
"Equipped" has been used many times in multiple codexes. Off the top of my head, the Demons codex.
Bhazakhain wrote: Agree. If you have a kiss and caress and you choose to attack with the caress then by not separating off one dice for the kiss of death you are breaking the rules. There is a reason why the rules for the kiss and caress don't say 'attacks made by this weapon......'.
Anyway, hope GW reply to my email. Love that people are arguing over one S6 AP2 attack.
You are actually breaking the rules by mixing and matching abilities from different weapons. There is no conflict here. The BRB tells us we can't attack with one weapon and use abilities from another. The Kiss of Death is clearly an ability from another weapon. Since the Kiss of Death doesn't EXPLICITLY say that it works with other weapons, we have to assume it doesn't. Assuming it works with other weapons is adding an implied permission to override the BRB's restriction.
Implied permission = not actually a rule. It's HYWPI. Which is fine. Just mark it as such.
To be honest, this makes perfect RAI sense to me. The Kiss works by basically punching your opponent and activating the gun thing attached to your fist. If you're not attacking with the Kiss, but instead the Caress, you shouldn't get this ability.
So you're telling me because I choose to attack with my power sword in close combat, my sergeant with his frag grenades still fights at initiative 1 when charging into cover because I'm "mixing and matching" rules for weapons.
In other words, I think you're wrong.
I keep going back to grenades. The Kiss states model gains X ability. It does not state the weapon itself is needed for that attack. You're equipped with something just by having it, going on any other metric in the game. Therefore Harlequin gains advantage of Kiss while striking with Embrace. It's that simple. Why is this still being argued?
Kriswall wrote: I retract the comment about the shield. I didn't realize it was a melee weapon. I thought it was wargear. My bad. That's what I get for reading this on my phone.
All weapons are wargear. When a unit has a weapon, where's it listed in the rulebooks? Right in the Wargear section.
There is nowhere in the rules for Kiss that the stipulation is when striking with the Harlequin's Kiss. Doesn't matter if it's also got it's own melee profile or not. I keep going back to grenades. It's accepted just by having them, you fight at full initiative when charging into cover.
I'm not saying you are wrong - but would it be POSSIBLE that the BRB rule disallowing "mixing and matching" abilities from weapons is intended (but poorly expressed) to prevent mixing rules on the SAME ATTACKS?
As in a model with a lightning claw and a power fist getting both shred, AP 2 and Sx2 when attacking?
One COULD argue that combining the kiss and another weapon would not be considered "mixing and matching", since no single attack uses rules from more than one weapon.
Granted, you are not able to do this with any weapon combination, since the BRB tells you to use ONE weapon, but if that was how the "mixing and matching" rule was supposed to be interpreted, then the Kiss would work, using its rule.
To be honest, the "mixing and matching" rule itself is not very clear. It is very possible that you are right, but I wouldn't say that your interpretation of the BRB is an "absolute truth" in this case.
kiss is an ability granted to the model, it does not require the model to strike with the kiss. If kiss/embrace were worded the same as caress then it would not work, but they are not worded that way.
there is no RAW stating a model loses the abilities of its equipped items and only has the abilities of the item it is striking with in assault.
there is also no RAW stating a model does not gain the benefit of rules that affect the model when striking with a weapon. Ie if a model has a rule that lets it have armorbane when the model attacks in assault, and it strikes with a powersword does it have armorbane? yes.
ConanMan wrote: sorry just saw this.. it's simple.. the Harlequin Kiss says "equipped" which we can all agree is a new term in the rules vernacular with no precident..
No, we can't. No, it's not.
"Equipped" has been used many times in multiple codexes. Off the top of my head, the Demons codex.
What in the Demons Codex has the "equipped" wording? Maybe with a bit of reference for it, as I don't own the Demon Codex.
there is also no RAW stating a model does not gain the benefit of rules that affect the model when striking with a weapon. Ie if a model has a rule that lets it have armorbane when the model attacks in assault, and it strikes with a powersword does it have armorbane? yes.
I think I get what you're stating but you're wording it really awkwardly.
"If a model has this special rule or is attacking with a melee weapon that has this special rule..." opens the Armourbane rule. Your MODEL would need the armourbane rule, not simply a weapon that has it, to roll that extra d6 in all close assaults with any weapon.
Basically we're looking at the specific wording of the rule for Harlequin's Kiss. Just says the model has to be equipped, not that he's attacking with it. Therefore one of the attacks, even when hitting with the Embrace, is made at S6 AP2.
@megatrons2nd: You're missing the mountain for the mole hill. "Equipped" as rules wording is littered throughout even the Base Rule Book.
there is also no RAW stating a model does not gain the benefit of rules that affect the model when striking with a weapon. Ie if a model has a rule that lets it have armorbane when the model attacks in assault, and it strikes with a powersword does it have armorbane? yes.
I think I get what you're stating but you're wording it really awkwardly.
"If a model has this special rule or is attacking with a melee weapon that has this special rule..." opens the Armourbane rule. Your MODEL would need the armourbane rule, not simply a weapon that has it, to roll that extra d6 in all close assaults with any weapon.
Basically we're looking at the specific wording of the rule for Harlequin's Kiss. Just says the model has to be equipped, not that he's attacking with it. Therefore one of the attacks, even when hitting with the Embrace, is made at S6 AP2.
@megatrons2nd: You're missing the mountain for the mole hill. "Equipped" as rules wording is littered throughout even the Base Rule Book.
Yes, but none are weapons. So the multi weapon rule limitation bonks head on with the rule for kiss/embrace. Hence this discussion. As written, the Solitaire can only ever use the kiss, as it says that one attack will be a kiss of death attack. With the no mixing of multiple weapons it will not be able to use the embrace. As intended, it is probably meant to use both, due to the fact that it is stupid to give a model a weapon it can't use(though giving the option to take it is a different story). Though I suppose the rule could mean that any model with two weapon choices could choose to make some attacks with one weapon and some with the other.
Yes, but none are weapons. So the multi weapon rule limitation bonks head on with the rule for kiss/embrace. Hence this discussion. As written, the Solitaire can only ever use the kiss, as it says that one attack will be a kiss of death attack. With the no mixing of multiple weapons it will not be able to use the embrace. As intended, it is probably meant to use both, due to the fact that it is stupid to give a model a weapon it can't use(though giving the option to take it is a different story). Though I suppose the rule could mean that any model with two weapon choices could choose to make some attacks with one weapon and some with the other.
What?
You're not making any attacks with the Harlequin's Kiss.
A model being equipped with one makes one of it's attacks as a Kiss of Death attack. It says literally nothing about attacking with the weapon with that special rule. It does not say you are forced into attacking with the Kiss anywhere in it's rules.
As has been stated several times by now, grenades work this way. You gain the benefit of charging through terrain and retaining your initiative just for having them equipped.
I don't see what's so hard about any of this. Language is clear and concise. Why are people reading between the lines and making claims "RAW you have to attack with the Kiss" when there is literally no stipulation to do so? The multi-weapon in assault rules don't come into play here. The issue is people claiming, despite no language to support it, that you have to make your close combat attacks with the Kiss in order for one of them to be S6 AP2. That is not the case.
It's not like GW doesn't have precedent on how to word it such that you'd have to make the attacks with the kiss, seeing as the Caress contains such language and is actually listed first in the Wargear section. If they meant for it to be where you have to attack with the Kiss in order to gain the benefit of it's special rule, it'd be worded "When a model makes an attack with a weapon with this special rule..." for the Kiss of Death special rule.
As for the language of "equipped," that simply means it's an item on the model. That's it. If it's in their wargear section or is purchasable for the unit, it's equipped. End of story.
Yes, but none are weapons. So the multi weapon rule limitation bonks head on with the rule for kiss/embrace. Hence this discussion. As written, the Solitaire can only ever use the kiss, as it says that one attack will be a kiss of death attack. With the no mixing of multiple weapons it will not be able to use the embrace. As intended, it is probably meant to use both, due to the fact that it is stupid to give a model a weapon it can't use(though giving the option to take it is a different story). Though I suppose the rule could mean that any model with two weapon choices could choose to make some attacks with one weapon and some with the other.
What?
You're not making any attacks with the Harlequin's Kiss.
A model being equipped with one makes one of it's attacks as a Kiss of Death attack. It says literally nothing about attacking with the weapon with that special rule. It does not say you are forced into attacking with the Kiss anywhere in it's rules.
As has been stated several times by now, grenades work this way. You gain the benefit of charging through terrain and retaining your initiative just for having them equipped.
I don't see what's so hard about any of this. Language is clear and concise. Why are people reading between the lines and making claims "RAW you have to attack with the Kiss" when there is literally no stipulation to do so? The multi-weapon in assault rules don't come into play here. The issue is people claiming, despite no language to support it, that you have to make your close combat attacks with the Kiss in order for one of them to be S6 AP2. That is not the case.
It's not like GW doesn't have precedent on how to word it such that you'd have to make the attacks with the kiss, seeing as the Caress contains such language and is actually listed first in the Wargear section. If they meant for it to be where you have to attack with the Kiss in order to gain the benefit of it's special rule, it'd be worded "When a model makes an attack with a weapon with this special rule..." for the Kiss of Death special rule.
As for the language of "equipped," that simply means it's an item on the model. That's it. If it's in their wargear section or is purchasable for the unit, it's equipped. End of story.
I will check on the grenades in a while. However, the rules for the kiss very clearly say if it is equipped with the kiss, 1 attack will be a kiss of death attack. There is no option in the wording, you will do this, no choice in the matter, "End of Story". The rules also clearly state that you may not mix the abilities of multiple weapons. So, the kiss does occupy a weird spot in being a weapon that is obviously meant to allow it's use with another weapon, even though the rules do not allow for it. Now onto looking at the grenades rules. Be back later.
Yes, but none are weapons. So the multi weapon rule limitation bonks head on with the rule for kiss/embrace. Hence this discussion. As written, the Solitaire can only ever use the kiss, as it says that one attack will be a kiss of death attack. With the no mixing of multiple weapons it will not be able to use the embrace. As intended, it is probably meant to use both, due to the fact that it is stupid to give a model a weapon it can't use(though giving the option to take it is a different story). Though I suppose the rule could mean that any model with two weapon choices could choose to make some attacks with one weapon and some with the other.
What?
You're not making any attacks with the Harlequin's Kiss.
A model being equipped with one makes one of it's attacks as a Kiss of Death attack. It says literally nothing about attacking with the weapon with that special rule. It does not say you are forced into attacking with the Kiss anywhere in it's rules.
As has been stated several times by now, grenades work this way. You gain the benefit of charging through terrain and retaining your initiative just for having them equipped.
I don't see what's so hard about any of this. Language is clear and concise. Why are people reading between the lines and making claims "RAW you have to attack with the Kiss" when there is literally no stipulation to do so? The multi-weapon in assault rules don't come into play here. The issue is people claiming, despite no language to support it, that you have to make your close combat attacks with the Kiss in order for one of them to be S6 AP2. That is not the case.
It's not like GW doesn't have precedent on how to word it such that you'd have to make the attacks with the kiss, seeing as the Caress contains such language and is actually listed first in the Wargear section. If they meant for it to be where you have to attack with the Kiss in order to gain the benefit of it's special rule, it'd be worded "When a model makes an attack with a weapon with this special rule..." for the Kiss of Death special rule.
As for the language of "equipped," that simply means it's an item on the model. That's it. If it's in their wargear section or is purchasable for the unit, it's equipped. End of story.
Well I'm convinced. I'd still like a poll to get an idea of what the community support is. Even if I'm technically correct, im not going to try to argue RAW against a 90% majority. (Like allied ICs getting in BB transports in 6th.)
Until such time as you show permission to ignore the BRB restriction on mixing and matching weapon abilities, it doesn't matter how the Kiss of Death weapon ability is worded. If you're not attacking with the Kiss, you can't use its abilities. That would literally be mixing and matching abilities. The BRB explicitly tells us this is forbidden. If the Kiss of Death special rule/weapon ability had wording that said "this special rule may be used even when not attacking with the Kiss", you'd be in business. There is no such wording, so you either need a house rule or an FAQ/Errata to allow the mixing and matching of weapon abilities.
This seems extremely cut and dried. There is no conflict, so there is no advanced vs. basic going on here. If you attack with the Kiss, you get the Kiss of Death. If you attack with the Caress, you get the Caress of Death. The BRB specifically states you can't attack with one and gain the abilities of the other. The Kiss of Death does no explicitly override this restriction.
Pages and pages and nobody seems able to cite actual rules showing the restriction from the BRB being overridden.
He said/she said. Check with your opponents. Don't expect strangers/tournaments to necessarily be ok with mixing and matching weapon abilities. Etc, etc. Perhaps we're in need of a lock. This is going nowhere.
What if you dont attack with the kiss? Will the kiss still turn one of your attacks into a kiss attack?
Because it the kiss merely says turn one of your attacks. Do you get to choose to use it or not?
I dont care what RAW is im still using it the intended way, I was just interested on how gear selection works. Like if I took armour that made me I1, could I simply not use the armour and ignore the downsides? Same with the kiss, if I simply have the kiss would it change my attacks, regardless into a kiss attack? Or does it say I may use the kiss?
What about if a model has the instant death rule, but not his weapon? Can he mix the rules from another piece of gear (or himself) with the rules of a weapon in his hand?
Swastakowey wrote: What if you dont attack with the kiss? Will the kiss still turn one of your attacks into a kiss attack?
Because it the kiss merely says turn one of your attacks. Do you get to choose to use it or not?
I dont care what RAW is im still using it the intended way, I was just interested on how gear selection works. Like if I took armour that made me I1, could I simply not use the armour and ignore the downsides? Same with the kiss, if I simply have the kiss would it change my attacks, regardless into a kiss attack? Or does it say I may use the kiss?
What about if a model has the instant death rule, but not his weapon? Can he mix the rules from another piece of gear (or himself) with the rules of a weapon in his hand?
From a Rules as Written standpoint, if you attack with Weapon A, you may not use any abilities from Weapon B. If you attack with the Harlequin's Kiss, you MUST use the Kiss of Death. If you don't attack with the Harlequin's Kiss, you are not able to use the Kiss of Death as that would be mixing and matching weapon abilities.
Armour is entirely different. If the model has armour, it is in effect all the time. If you have multiple pieces of Wargear that offer an armour save, we are told in the rules to use the best save.
If a model has a special rule such as Instant Death, all attacks he makes will have the ID rule, regardless of Weapon used. Weapon abilities only work when the weapon in question is used.
I think its clear what it is meant to be, but as written technically it cannot be, unless we change the rules as per rules, to make it so.
Which we all do in numerous other examples (The SW Blizzard Shield for example). Also the kiss instructs us that a model equipped with it must make a kiss of death attack. So we have a direct conflict between rulebook and codex unless you're arguing that the Solitrair can never use his caress?
Kriswall wrote: Until such time as you show permission to ignore the BRB restriction on mixing and matching weapon abilities, it doesn't matter how the Kiss of Death weapon ability is worded. If you're not attacking with the Kiss, you can't use its abilities. That would literally be mixing and matching abilities. The BRB explicitly tells us this is forbidden. If the Kiss of Death special rule/weapon ability had wording that said "this special rule may be used even when not attacking with the Kiss", you'd be in business. There is no such wording, so you either need a house rule or an FAQ/Errata to allow the mixing and matching of weapon abilities.
It's not mixing and matching abilities. It's a piece of wargear. Saying you're mixing and matching abilities would be like telling someone they can either make an attack with their thunderhammer OR take 3++ saves from their stormshield.
And also, grenades.
Pages and pages and nobody seems able to cite actual rules showing the restriction from the BRB being overridden.
Because the wording of any sort of ability overrides the default rule. Sort of how Tau, utilizing Markerlights, can ignore the restrictions that must "always" take place in the BRB regarding snap firing.
The issue is you guys are placing a restriction on the Kiss of Death rule that is just not there in the language of the rule. It never says the wielder of the weapon must make attacks with the Harlequin's Kiss, but it does say someone with it equipped (which, again, simply means it's a thing they have default or have purchased and is a piece of wargear they have access to in the current game being played) makes an attack at S6 AP2.
Let's say he had a Harlequin's Embrace. Would you tell me he has to be wielding it in the combat in order to get the D3 Hammer of Wrath S6 hits, despite it simply saying a wielder must have it equipped? If your answer is "yes," then I guess Striking Scorpions can't actually use their Mandiblasters if they also want to make close combat attacks.
And again, no one would ever actually benefit from assault grenades unless assaulting a vehicle/MC that was in cover, and subsequently all grenade-dropped.
So, for me, personally, RAW? He makes one attack as Kiss of Death attack even when using the Caress. That's my interpretation of how it's all written.
Okay, it seems there is a lot of discussion but not much RaW in here.
Firstly, i am still agreeing with Kriswall and Rigeld: A model can only use the rules on a weapon when he is striking blows with that weapon. By RaW, if you use the Caress, you do not have access to the "Kiss of Death"USR.
When actually playing a game though, it is quite clear that "equipped" rules are meant to work "at any time" (as a few of the Eldar weapons show), and if i played a game against an opponent using the Caress, i would agree that one of the Attacks can be made with the "Kiss of Death".
So, why grenades work:
Rulebook wrote:Assault Models equipped with assault grenades don’t suffer the penalty to their Initiative for charging enemies through difficult terrain, but fight at their normal Initiative in the ensuing combat.
This is not a Special rule on the weapon "Assault Grenade". If you believe it is, show me the "Frag Grenade" weapons profile.
Why the "Kiss of Death" cannot be activated when you are fighting with the Caress:
Rulebook wrote:It may seem obvious, but unless stated otherwise, a model does not have a special rule. Most special rules are given to a model by the relevant Army List Entry or its unit type. That said, a model’s attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using.
So:
A) models do not have special rules, unless:
B) It is in the model's list of "Special Rules" (Unit Entry).
C) It is listed in the Weapon's Profile.
And then weapons RaW:
Special Rules
The type section of a weapon’s profile also includes any special rules that apply to the weapon in question. More information on these can be found either in the special rules section or in the codex or army list entry the weapon is found in.
MORE THAN ONE WEAPON
Unless otherwise stated,(...) If a model has more than one Melee weapon, he must choose which one to attack with when he comes to strike blows – he cannot mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons.
So, the "Special Rules" that apply to certain weapons are listed under the "TYPE" section, and these abilities cannot be mixed and matched: "he must choose which one to attack".
So the very final question about the Harlequins:
Where exactly are the Special Rules "Kiss of Death" and "Caress of Death" listed?
The answer to that question, if you have read my entire post, should indicate whether the ability can be used or not (by RaW)
nosferatu1001 wrote: Markerlights specifically state they can alter the BS of a snapshot
Please show the same language is in place for the HK. Page and graph.
So you can never use the caress? Is that your stance?
You can use the Caress by attacking with it. When you attack with it, you do not benefit from the Kiss of Death weapon ability, so it doesn't matter how the Kiss is worded.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Markerlights specifically state they can alter the BS of a snapshot
Please show the same language is in place for the HK. Page and graph.
So you can never use the caress? Is that your stance?
You can use the Caress by attacking with it. When you attack with it, you do not benefit from the Kiss of Death weapon ability, so it doesn't matter how the Kiss is worded.
Nope rules don't just disappear because you're not planing on using them. If equipped with a HK one of your attack is a kiss of death attack. This is not optional nor is it depending on using the weapon. So if I have a HK I have to make a KoD attack. Can I make that attack whilst swinging with a caress (or make use of assault grenades when swinging with a CCW, or have the 3++ from a blizzard shield against shooting or when using the Great Axe)?
FlingitNow wrote: Nope rules don't just disappear because you're not planing on using them. If equipped with a HK one of your attack is a kiss of death attack. This is not optional nor is it depending on using the weapon.
Rulebook wrote:It may seem obvious, but unless stated otherwise, a model does not have a special rule. Most special rules are given to a model by the relevant Army List Entry or its unit type. That said, a model’s attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Markerlights specifically state they can alter the BS of a snapshot
Please show the same language is in place for the HK. Page and graph.
So you can never use the caress? Is that your stance?
No. Otherwise I would have said that was my stance.
My stance is that, now the GKNGSFAQ of old is gone, we have nothing allowing us to mix and match the abilities of different weapons based on "equipped" wording.
Do you have a specific rule allowing you to use both abilities? If so page and graph.
FlingitNow wrote: Does it matter? Whether the Harlequin is using the Kiss or not he must make a KoD attack if equipped with a Kiss. This is not optional.
Does he have use of that special rule when not using it? No, because of the rule about one or more weapon.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Markerlights specifically state they can alter the BS of a snapshot
Please show the same language is in place for the HK. Page and graph.
So you can never use the caress? Is that your stance?
No. Otherwise I would have said that was my stance.
My stance is that, now the GKNGSFAQ of old is gone, we have nothing allowing us to mix and match the abilities of different weapons based on "equipped" wording.
Do you have a specific rule allowing you to use both abilities? If so page and graph.
So how do I use the caress? I know every time I'm in combat I have to make a Kiss of Death attack if I am equipped with a HK. So how do I use the caress?
FlingitNow wrote: Does it matter? Whether the Harlequin is using the Kiss or not he must make a KoD attack if equipped with a Kiss. This is not optional.
Does he have use of that special rule when not using it? No, because of the rule about one or more weapon.
If you disagree, page and graph.
Harlequin Codex page 91 column 2 paragraph 2 after bolded Kiss of Death.
Now prove a model not using a price of equipment is not equipped with that equipment (thus preventing them from ever using said gear).
I must have missed the specific reference to the rule. Coudl you type it out, so I can see where it is?
I'm not talking about that rule. If equipped with a HK you must make a KoD attack. That is what KoD says and it means whether you are using the weapon or not. So prove I am not equipped with a HK when I am equipped with a HK. Page and paragraph.
FlingitNow wrote: Does it matter? Whether the Harlequin is using the Kiss or not he must make a KoD attack if equipped with a Kiss. This is not optional.
It TOTALLY matters. The BRB very explicitly tells us we can't mix and match weapon abilities. You have yet to demonstrate that the model making the attack can benefit, in any way, shape or form, from the Kiss of Death weapon ability when not attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss weapon.
It is optional in that if you can choose not to use the Harlequin's Kiss when making attacks. If you do choose to use the Harlequin's Kiss, then I agree - you would have to use the Kiss of Death weapon ability.
I must have missed the specific reference to the rule. Coudl you type it out, so I can see where it is?
I'm not talking about that rule. If equipped with a HK you must make a KoD attack. That is what KoD says and it means whether you are using the weapon or not. So prove I am not equipped with a HK when I am equipped with a HK. Page and paragraph.
Dude... you're the one trying to override a BRB restriction here. We're not arguing how the Kiss of Death is written. Obviously, when attacking with the Kiss of Death, you use the rule. When not attacking with the Kiss of Death, you are explicitly forbidden from using its weapon abilities. If you think you can mix and match weapon abilities, simply cite permission to do so. Once you cite permission to mix and match weapon abilities when striking blows (not inferred permission... explicit permission), I'll gladly say you can use both abilities regardless of which weapon you're attacking with.
FlingitNow wrote: Does it matter? Whether the Harlequin is using the Kiss or not he must make a KoD attack if equipped with a Kiss. This is not optional.
It TOTALLY matters. The BRB very explicitly tells us we can't mix and match weapon abilities. You have yet to demonstrate that the model making the attack can benefit, in any way, shape or form, from the Kiss of Death weapon ability when not attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss weapon.
It is optional in that if you can choose not to use the Harlequin's Kiss when making attacks. If you do choose to use the Harlequin's Kiss, then I agree - you would have to use the Kiss of Death weapon ability.
Even if you choose not to attack with the Kiss you must make the KoD attack if you are equipped with it. So prove you are not equipped with the HK or you are arguing a Solitaire can never use his Caress. So page and paragraph that states you are not equipped with ite,ms when not using them.
FlingitNow wrote: Does it matter? Whether the Harlequin is using the Kiss or not he must make a KoD attack if equipped with a Kiss. This is not optional.
It TOTALLY matters. The BRB very explicitly tells us we can't mix and match weapon abilities. You have yet to demonstrate that the model making the attack can benefit, in any way, shape or form, from the Kiss of Death weapon ability when not attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss weapon.
It is optional in that if you can choose not to use the Harlequin's Kiss when making attacks. If you do choose to use the Harlequin's Kiss, then I agree - you would have to use the Kiss of Death weapon ability.
Even if you choose not to attack with the Kiss you must make the KoD attack if you are equipped with it. So prove you are not equipped with the HK or you are arguing a Solitaire can never use his Caress. So page and paragraph that states you are not equipped with ite,ms when not using them.
The Solitaire is obviously equipped with the Kiss of Death. I grant you this. Quit stonewalling. Page and paragraph granting an explicit permission to override the BRB restriction on mixing and matching weapon abilities when striking blows. Please.
I agree the model is equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss. Now, your turn to prove he can use its abilities when not attacking with it.
Dude... you're the one trying to override a BRB restriction here. We're not arguing how the Kiss of Death is written. Obviously, when attacking with the Kiss of Death, you use the rule. When not attacking with the Kiss of Death, you are explicitly forbidden from using its weapon abilities. If
You don't make a KoD attack when using a Kiss but when equipped with it. If equipped with it and striking blows in CC youmake a KoD attack. That is what the rules tell us. So either you can make a KoD attack whilst using the caress or you ccan't use the caress. Which is it?
FlingitNow wrote: Does it matter? Whether the Harlequin is using the Kiss or not he must make a KoD attack if equipped with a Kiss. This is not optional.
It TOTALLY matters. The BRB very explicitly tells us we can't mix and match weapon abilities. You have yet to demonstrate that the model making the attack can benefit, in any way, shape or form, from the Kiss of Death weapon ability when not attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss weapon.
It is optional in that if you can choose not to use the Harlequin's Kiss when making attacks. If you do choose to use the Harlequin's Kiss, then I agree - you would have to use the Kiss of Death weapon ability.
Even if you choose not to attack with the Kiss you must make the KoD attack if you are equipped with it. So prove you are not equipped with the HK or you are arguing a Solitaire can never use his Caress. So page and paragraph that states you are not equipped with ite,ms when not using them.
...thus breaking the "more than one weapon" rule, as you are USING (for sure) a rule from a weapon you are nOT using.
Your false dichotomies get old. Try arguing without them.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Ah, so youre breaking the "more than one weapon" rule without permission, as you are using a special rule from a weapon you are not using
Good to know.
You're breaking the KoD rule by attacking in CC and not making a KoD attack. Do you have an interpretation that doesn't break rules? Or does look at which rule we have to break between a Codex and BrB rule?
Dude... you're the one trying to override a BRB restriction here. We're not arguing how the Kiss of Death is written. Obviously, when attacking with the Kiss of Death, you use the rule. When not attacking with the Kiss of Death, you are explicitly forbidden from using its weapon abilities. If
You don't make a KoD attack when using a Kiss but when equipped with it. If equipped with it and striking blows in CC youmake a KoD attack. That is what the rules tell us. So either you can make a KoD attack whilst using the caress or you ccan't use the caress. Which is it?
Is the Kiss of Death a weapon ability? Yes.
Are you attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss? No.
Are you attacking with a different weapon but still using the Kiss of Death weapon ability? Yes.
Are you violating the BRB restriction on mixing and matching weapon abilities when striking blows? Yes.
Please provide page and paragraph demonstrating permission to mix and match weapon abilities when striking blows. This is a very simple request.
FlingitNow wrote: Does it matter? Whether the Harlequin is using the Kiss or not he must make a KoD attack if equipped with a Kiss. This is not optional.
It TOTALLY matters. The BRB very explicitly tells us we can't mix and match weapon abilities. You have yet to demonstrate that the model making the attack can benefit, in any way, shape or form, from the Kiss of Death weapon ability when not attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss weapon.
It is optional in that if you can choose not to use the Harlequin's Kiss when making attacks. If you do choose to use the Harlequin's Kiss, then I agree - you would have to use the Kiss of Death weapon ability.
Even if you choose not to attack with the Kiss you must make the KoD attack if you are equipped with it. So prove you are not equipped with the HK or you are arguing a Solitaire can never use his Caress. So page and paragraph that states you are not equipped with ite,ms when not using them.
...thus breaking the "more than one weapon" rule, as you are USING (for sure) a rule from a weapon you are nOT using.
Your false dichotomies get old. Try arguing without them.
Please quote the rule that you are not equipped with a HK when not using it.
FlingitNow wrote: Does it matter? Whether the Harlequin is using the Kiss or not he must make a KoD attack if equipped with a Kiss. This is not optional.
It TOTALLY matters. The BRB very explicitly tells us we can't mix and match weapon abilities. You have yet to demonstrate that the model making the attack can benefit, in any way, shape or form, from the Kiss of Death weapon ability when not attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss weapon.
It is optional in that if you can choose not to use the Harlequin's Kiss when making attacks. If you do choose to use the Harlequin's Kiss, then I agree - you would have to use the Kiss of Death weapon ability.
Even if you choose not to attack with the Kiss you must make the KoD attack if you are equipped with it. So prove you are not equipped with the HK or you are arguing a Solitaire can never use his Caress. So page and paragraph that states you are not equipped with ite,ms when not using them.
...thus breaking the "more than one weapon" rule, as you are USING (for sure) a rule from a weapon you are nOT using.
Your false dichotomies get old. Try arguing without them.
Please quote the rule that you are not equipped with a HK when not using it.
I'm not disputing that. You obviously aren't reading my posts.
Is the model equipped with the Harlequin's Kiss when not using it? Yes.
Is the model allowed to mix and match in the Kiss of Death weapon ability when not attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss? No.
Please address the second question. Your answer seems to be yes and I'd like page and paragraph where you're getting your yes from. If you are unable to provide page and paragraph granting an explicit permission to override the BRB restriction on mixing and matching weapons, I would ask that you mark all future posts on the matter as HIWPI and allow the rest of us to debate RaW in peace.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Ah, so youre breaking the "more than one weapon" rule without permission, as you are using a special rule from a weapon you are not using
Good to know.
You're breaking the KoD rule by attacking in CC and not making a KoD attack. Do you have an interpretation that doesn't break rules? Or does look at which rule we have to break between a Codex and BrB rule?
The problem with the interpretation of "Breaking the Kiss of Death rule" is that you are only breaking the rule if you have the rule ("Kiss of Death")
And you only have the "Kiss of Death" special rule if you use a weapon with "Kiss of Death" found under the Weapon TYPE: Harlequin's kiss.
If you do not use the Harelquin's Kiss weapons, you do not have the "Kiss of Death" Special Rule (obtained only when striking blows with the weapon).
If you do not have the "Kiss of Death" Special Rule, how are you breaking the rule by striking blows with the Harelquin's Caress, and you only have the "Caress of Death" special rule?
nosferatu1001 wrote: Ah, so youre breaking the "more than one weapon" rule without permission, as you are using a special rule from a weapon you are not using
Good to know.
You're breaking the KoD rule by attacking in CC and not making a KoD attack. Do you have an interpretation that doesn't break rules? Or does look at which rule we have to break between a Codex and BrB rule?
The problem with the interpretation of "Breaking the Kiss of Death rule" is that you are only breaking the rule if you have the rule ("Kiss of Death")
And you only have the "Kiss of Death" special rule if you use a weapon with "Kiss of Death" found under the Weapon TYPE: Harlequin's kiss.
If you do not use the Harelquin's Kiss weapons, you do not have the "Kiss of Death" Special Rule (obtained only when striking blows with the weapon).
If you do not have the "Kiss of Death" Special Rule, how are you breaking the rule by striking blows with the Harelquin's Caress, and you only have the "Caress of Death" special rule?
The Kiss of Death rule explicitly applies whenever you are equipped with a Harlequins Kiss. You do not need to be striking blows with it. The KoD rule tells us this.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Ah, so youre breaking the "more than one weapon" rule without permission, as you are using a special rule from a weapon you are not using
Good to know.
You're breaking the KoD rule by attacking in CC and not making a KoD attack. Do you have an interpretation that doesn't break rules? Or does look at which rule we have to break between a Codex and BrB rule?
The problem with the interpretation of "Breaking the Kiss of Death rule" is that you are only breaking the rule if you have the rule ("Kiss of Death")
And you only have the "Kiss of Death" special rule if you use a weapon with "Kiss of Death" found under the Weapon TYPE: Harlequin's kiss.
If you do not use the Harelquin's Kiss weapons, you do not have the "Kiss of Death" Special Rule (obtained only when striking blows with the weapon).
If you do not have the "Kiss of Death" Special Rule, how are you breaking the rule by striking blows with the Harelquin's Caress, and you only have the "Caress of Death" special rule?
The Kiss of Death rule explicitly applies whenever you are equipped with a Harlequins Kiss. You do not need to be striking blows with it. The KoD rule tells us this.
Yes, the KoD rule tells you this, if you have the rule in the first place, when using the weapon.
Rulebook:
Rulebook wrote:It may seem obvious, but unless stated otherwise, a model does not have a special rule. Most special rules are given to a model by the relevant Army List Entry or its unit type. That said, a model’s attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using.
Does the solitaire have the "Kiss of Death" Special Rule, if he is using the Harlequin's Caress?
A simple Yes or No will do.
We can then discuss how you follow the wording found in the "Kiss of Death" Special Rule (and things like "equipped")
Yes. As he is equipped with a Harlequins Kiss.
Page and paragraph of where an equipped weapon grants a special rule. I'll remind you of the RaW:
Rulebook wrote:It may seem obvious, but unless stated otherwise, a model does not have a special rule. Most special rules are given to a model by the relevant Army List Entry or its unit type. That said, a model’s attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using.
Are you attacking with a different weapon but still using the Kiss of Death weapon ability? Yes.
Are you violating the BRB restriction on mixing and matching weapon abilities when striking blows? Yes.
Please provide page and paragraph demonstrating permission to mix and match weapon abilities when striking blows. This is a very simple request.
Are you attacking CC? Yes
Are you equipped with a Harlequins Kiss? Yes
Are you making a Kiss of Death attack? No
Please show permission to break that rule. Page and paragraph. This is a very simple request.
Small Rulebook, Page 41, "More Than One Weapon" Section - "If a model has more than one Melee weapon, he must choose which one to attack with when he comes to strike blows - he cannot mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons."
Your turn. Page and paragraph that overrides this restriction. And remember that you need to override the restriction. We're not arguing HOW the Kiss of Death works. We're arguing whether or not you can use it in the first place.
I'm also done for now. RaW is extraordinarily clear in regards to models with more than one weapon... you can't attack with one and use an ability from another.
FlingitNow steadfastly refuses to show any wording removing the BRB restriction. How the Kiss of Death works is irrelevant if you're not allowed to use it in the first place.
Are you attacking with a different weapon but still using the Kiss of Death weapon ability? Yes.
Are you violating the BRB restriction on mixing and matching weapon abilities when striking blows? Yes.
Please provide page and paragraph demonstrating permission to mix and match weapon abilities when striking blows. This is a very simple request.
Are you attacking CC? Yes
Are you equipped with a Harlequins Kiss? Yes
Are you making a Kiss of Death attack? No
Please show permission to break that rule. Page and paragraph. This is a very simple request.
Small Rulebook, Page 41, "More Than One Weapon" Section - "If a model has more than one Melee weapon, he must choose which one to attack with when he comes to strike blows - he cannot mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons."
Your turn. Page and paragraph that overrides this restriction. And remember that you need to override the restriction. We're not arguing HOW the Kiss of Death works. We're arguing whether or not you can use it in the first place.
That doesn't give permission to count the Solitaire as not equipped with a Kiss. It at best prevents the Solitaire from ever attacking with a Caress as doing so breaks that rule.
As for your request, simple:
Page 91 column 2 paragraph 2 in the Harlequin Codex.
FlingitNow wrote: That doesn't give permission to count the Solitaire as not equipped with a Kiss. It at best prevents the Solitaire from ever attacking with a Caress as doing so breaks that rule.
As for your request, simple:
Page 91 column 2 paragraph 2 in the Harlequin Codex.
No, the quote about abilities simply means that the model [Solitaire] can only have one special rule:
Either he has [Kiss of Death] USR,
Or he has [Caress of Death] USR.
He cannot have both rules at once, as they are both found in the profile of 2 melee weapons, and "If a model has more than one Melee weapon, he must choose which one to attack with when he comes to strike blows".
So once he comes to strike blows, you select [Caress of Death].
You do not have [Kiss of Death].
Are you breaking the [Kiss of Death] USR if you do not have the USR?
Yes you are still equipped with the weapon. You *would* be breaking [Kiss of Death] if you had the rule. We completely agree on the fact you would be breaking that rule. If you had it.
Kiss or f Death disagrees. You strike with the caress KoD requires you make a KoD attack. Yes you choose which weapon. But KoD applies at all times to a model equipped with a Kiss. RaW that is literally what KoD says.
What special rules does a Solitaire have when he is in CC and using the Harlequin's Caress?
Answer: -Blitz -Deep Strike (etc) -The Path of Damnation -Caress of Death
He does not have the Special Rule, Kiss of Death (listed in a Weapon's profile he is not using)
The rules disagree with you unless you have a page and paragraph proving the Solitaire is not equipped with a Harlrequins Kiss.
So you are saying that the Solitaire HAS the "Kiss of Death" Special Rule?
Page and Paragraph of how he actually obtains that special rule without using the weapon in who's profile it can be found...
Page 91 column 2 paragraph 2 in the Harlequin Codex.
No, that describes the effect of the "Kiss of Death" Special Rule, not how the model is granted the rule. Try again
It does both. You gain the rule by being equipped with a Kiss as it states.
I have never heard of a Special Rule granting itself to a model. You gain Special rules by using the weapon with the rule, not by equipping the weapon, as per the BRB:
Rulebook wrote:That said, a model’s attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
It is very simple: You cannot benefit form a special rule on a weapon unless you're attacking with it.
If you disagree with the above, please quote some RaW. I have provided enough of it on this page.
FlingitNow wrote: Kiss or f Death disagrees. You strike with the caress KoD requires you make a KoD attack. Yes you choose which weapon. But KoD applies at all times to a model equipped with a Kiss. RaW that is literally what KoD says.
So we have two rules...
One says "When you attack, one of your attacks is a Kiss of Death attack."
The other says, "If you're not attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss, you can't use the Kiss of Death ability."
Nobody is debating the first thing. We're debating the second thing.
Fling... you have to show a basic permission to use the Kiss of Death ability when not attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss. Yes, a model equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss makes a Kiss of Death attack... WHEN attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss. When NOT attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss, we don't care whether or not the model is equipped with an HK because he can't benefit from the Kiss of Death weapon ability.
You've given page and paragraph to HOW the KoD works. Now, please type out the specific wording that you think says something along the lines of "you may use the Kiss of Death weapon ability when not attacking with an HK".
Kriswall wrote: I'm also done for now. RaW is extraordinarily clear in regards to models with more than one weapon... you can't attack with one and use an ability from another.
FlingitNow steadfastly refuses to show any wording removing the BRB restriction. How the Kiss of Death works is irrelevant if you're not allowed to use it in the first place.
BlackTalos wrote: 3 weapons: -Harlequin's Caress -Harlequin's Embrace -Harlequin's Kiss
3 Special Rules: -Caress of Death -Embrace of Death -Kiss of Death
Both Embrace and Kiss mention "when equipped" with the weapon, making it sound like only possession of the weapon is needed in order to use the rule. Why would these be 3 different weapons then, and not equipment? If you have all 3, can you just use the Caress and have ALL the other rules?
As Krisswall has adequately described, you only have Special Rules on weapons when you use the weapon.
But i'd rather have it where we're all agreed on the RaW and can move on, rather that "counting on" a mod lock.
If agreement cannot be reached and it is clear it cannot, just move on and let the thread die, it'll come back whether Locked or not
FlingitNow wrote: Kiss or f Death disagrees. You strike with the caress KoD requires you make a KoD attack. Yes you choose which weapon. But KoD applies at all times to a model equipped with a Kiss. RaW that is literally what KoD says.
So we have two rules...
One says "When you attack, one of your attacks is a Kiss of Death attack."
The other says, "If you're not attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss, you can't use the Kiss of Death ability."
Nobody is debating the first thing. We're debating the second thing.
Fling... you have to show a basic permission to use the Kiss of Death ability when not attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss. Yes, a model equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss makes a Kiss of Death attack... WHEN attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss. When NOT attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss, we don't care whether or not the model is equipped with an HK because he can't benefit from the Kiss of Death weapon ability.
You've given page and paragraph to HOW the KoD works. Now, please type out the specific wording that you think says something along the lines of "you may use the Kiss of Death weapon ability when not attacking with an HK".
Cool so those rules as you've written them are in conflict. One forces you to use KoD and one forces you to not KoD agreed?
Also the underlined is entirely made up by you. So your RaW is based on rules you've made up. Generally that is a good sign your stance isn't RaW.
I just think it's silly that someone can essentially go "NUH UH THE WORLD IS SQUARE!" over and over and the normal response is to get the thread locked.
rigeld2 wrote: I just think it's silly that someone can essentially go "NUH UH THE WORLD IS SQUARE!" over and over and the normal response is to get the thread locked.
Exactly I don't know why they persist in saying the Solitaire is not equipped with a Harlequins Kiss yet refuse to support that.
Kriswall wrote: I'm also done for now. RaW is extraordinarily clear in regards to models with more than one weapon... you can't attack with one and use an ability from another.
FlingitNow steadfastly refuses to show any wording removing the BRB restriction. How the Kiss of Death works is irrelevant if you're not allowed to use it in the first place.
BlackTalos wrote: 3 weapons:
-Harlequin's Caress
-Harlequin's Embrace
-Harlequin's Kiss
3 Special Rules:
-Caress of Death
-Embrace of Death
-Kiss of Death
Both Embrace and Kiss mention "when equipped" with the weapon, making it sound like only possession of the weapon is needed in order to use the rule.
Why would these be 3 different weapons then, and not equipment?
If you have all 3, can you just use the Caress and have ALL the other rules?
As Krisswall has adequately described, you only have Special Rules on weapons when you use the weapon.
But i'd rather have it where we're all agreed on the RaW and can move on, rather that "counting on" a mod lock.
If agreement cannot be reached and it is clear it cannot, just move on and let the thread die, it'll come back whether Locked or not
I'd much rather have a consensus also. To be honest, I think we do have a consensus between the people who are actually posting rules. RaW, you can't attack with the Caress and benefit from the Kiss.
Fling seems to have made up his mind on how this should work and seems ok with ignoring the restriction in the BRB. That's fine for him. Lots of people make house rules.
One says "When you attack, one of your attacks is a Kiss of Death attack."
The other says, "If you're not attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss, you can't use the Kiss of Death ability."
Cool so those rules as you've written them are in conflict. One forces you to use KoD and one forces you to not KoD agreed?
No, they're not in conflict. One isn't invoked at all unless the weapon is used.
And no, it's not "entirely made up". Please, cite the rule that grants a special rule form a weapon without using the weapon. You've (repeatedly) asserted it exists and yet have failed to show it.
Please actual quote a relevant rule for once.
rigeld2 wrote: I just think it's silly that someone can essentially go "NUH UH THE WORLD IS SQUARE!" over and over and the normal response is to get the thread locked.
Exactly I don't know why they persist in saying the Solitaire is not equipped with a Harlequins Kiss yet refuse to support that.
That's a lie, actually - they're not saying that. And they've told you they're not saying that.
It's like you're completely ignoring their argument. 100%.
rigeld2 wrote: I just think it's silly that someone can essentially go "NUH UH THE WORLD IS SQUARE!" over and over and the normal response is to get the thread locked.
Exactly I don't know why they persist in saying the Solitaire is not equipped with a Harlequins Kiss yet refuse to support that.
I've said over and over he IS equipped with the HK. You're the one claiming I'm saying he's not. Maybe go back and re-read the prior posts? You're clearly not understanding or retaining the content.
From my perspective, you claim over and over to be able to mix and match weapon abilities when attacking, yet refuse to support your claim.
rigeld2 wrote: I just think it's silly that someone can essentially go "NUH UH THE WORLD IS SQUARE!" over and over and the normal response is to get the thread locked.
Exactly I don't know why they persist in saying the Solitaire is not equipped with a Harlequins Kiss yet refuse to support that.
I've said over and over he IS equipped with the HK. You're the one claiming I'm saying he's not. Maybe go back and re-read the prior posts? You're clearly not understanding or retaining the content.
From my perspective, you claim over and over to be able to mix and match weapon abilities when attacking, yet refuse to support your claim.
So... pot calling the kettle black much?
So when attacking in combat he makes a Kiss Of Death attack always agreed? Or is he not equipped with a Harlequins Kiss?
rigeld2 wrote: I just think it's silly that someone can essentially go "NUH UH THE WORLD IS SQUARE!" over and over and the normal response is to get the thread locked.
Exactly I don't know why they persist in saying the Solitaire is not equipped with a Harlequins Kiss yet refuse to support that.
I've said over and over he IS equipped with the HK. You're the one claiming I'm saying he's not. Maybe go back and re-read the prior posts? You're clearly not understanding or retaining the content.
From my perspective, you claim over and over to be able to mix and match weapon abilities when attacking, yet refuse to support your claim.
So... pot calling the kettle black much?
So when attacking in combat he makes a Kiss Of Death attack always agreed? Or is he not equipped with a Harlequins Kiss?
Cite the allowance to reference the Kiss of Death rules when attacking with a Harlequin's Caress.
You've asserted permission exists. Prove it - for once.
rigeld2 wrote: I just think it's silly that someone can essentially go "NUH UH THE WORLD IS SQUARE!" over and over and the normal response is to get the thread locked.
Exactly I don't know why they persist in saying the Solitaire is not equipped with a Harlequins Kiss yet refuse to support that.
I've said over and over he IS equipped with the HK. You're the one claiming I'm saying he's not. Maybe go back and re-read the prior posts? You're clearly not understanding or retaining the content.
From my perspective, you claim over and over to be able to mix and match weapon abilities when attacking, yet refuse to support your claim.
So... pot calling the kettle black much?
So when attacking in combat he makes a Kiss Of Death attack always agreed? Or is he not equipped with a Harlequins Kiss?
Cite the allowance to reference the Kiss of Death rules when attacking with a Harlequin's Caress.
You've asserted permission exists. Prove it - for once.
Right the Kiss Of Death rule tells us whenever a model equipped with a Harlequins Kiss makes attack in CC one of those attacks is a kiss of death. So my premises are:
1. If equipped with a Harlequins kiss you make a kiss of death attack when striking blows in close combat. (Literal RaW of KoD).
2. The Solitaire is equipped with a Harlequins kiss
Which of those is wrong? Is page 91 of the Harlequin Codex wrong or is the Solitaire not equipped with a Harlequins kiss?
Right the Kiss Of Death rule tells us whenever a model equipped with a Harlequins Kiss makes attack in CC one of those attacks is a kiss of death. So my premises are:
1. If equipped with a Harlequins kiss you make a kiss of death attack when striking blows in close combat. (Literal RaW of KoD).
2. The Solitaire is equipped with a Harlequins kiss
Which of those is wrong? Is page 91 of the Harlequin Codex wrong or is the Solitaire not equipped with a Harlequins kiss?
So, again, you're failing to cite a rule that allows you to reference the Kiss of Death rule without using the weapon.
That's where your premise fails (as has been pointed out to you - repeatedly). You're invoking a rule that you have no permission to invoke.
Right the Kiss Of Death rule tells us whenever a model equipped with a Harlequins Kiss makes attack in CC one of those attacks is a kiss of death. So my premises are:
1. If equipped with a Harlequins kiss you make a kiss of death attack when striking blows in close combat. (Literal RaW of KoD).
2. The Solitaire is equipped with a Harlequins kiss
Which of those is wrong? Is page 91 of the Harlequin Codex wrong or is the Solitaire not equipped with a Harlequins kiss?
So, again, you're failing to cite a rule that allows you to reference the Kiss of Death rule without using the weapon.
That's where your premise fails (as has been pointed out to you - repeatedly). You're invoking a rule that you have no permission to invoke.
Page 91 gives me permission if the Solitaire is equipped. So is the Solitaire equipped with a Harlequins kiss?
rigeld2 wrote: I just think it's silly that someone can essentially go "NUH UH THE WORLD IS SQUARE!" over and over and the normal response is to get the thread locked.
Exactly I don't know why they persist in saying the Solitaire is not equipped with a Harlequins Kiss yet refuse to support that.
I've said over and over he IS equipped with the HK. You're the one claiming I'm saying he's not. Maybe go back and re-read the prior posts? You're clearly not understanding or retaining the content.
From my perspective, you claim over and over to be able to mix and match weapon abilities when attacking, yet refuse to support your claim.
So... pot calling the kettle black much?
So when attacking in combat he makes a Kiss Of Death attack always agreed? Or is he not equipped with a Harlequins Kiss?
When attacking with a Harlequin's Kiss, he makes a Kiss of Death attack. Agreed.
When not attacking with a Harlequin's Kiss, he doesn't make a Kiss of Death attack. I know this because the rule book very clearly and unambiguously prohibits mixing and matching of weapon abilities in combat.
Your questions are bad. You're providing me with two options that are both wrong, are not mutually exclusive and then claiming victory when I refuse to pick one of your incorrect options.
I assume you're not going to provide a rules citation allowing the mixing and matching of weapon abilities in combat? Serious question. If you're simply trolling, I'd rather do something else. If you're not trolling, I'm genuinely curious to know where the breakdown is. Your'e clearly not understanding the restriction in the BRB.
Right the Kiss Of Death rule tells us whenever a model equipped with a Harlequins Kiss makes attack in CC one of those attacks is a kiss of death. So my premises are:
1. If equipped with a Harlequins kiss you make a kiss of death attack when striking blows in close combat. (Literal RaW of KoD).
2. The Solitaire is equipped with a Harlequins kiss
Which of those is wrong? Is page 91 of the Harlequin Codex wrong or is the Solitaire not equipped with a Harlequins kiss?
So, again, you're failing to cite a rule that allows you to reference the Kiss of Death rule without using the weapon.
That's where your premise fails (as has been pointed out to you - repeatedly). You're invoking a rule that you have no permission to invoke.
Page 91 gives me permission if the Solitaire is equipped. So is the Solitaire equipped with a Harlequins kiss?
Please type out this alleged permission and highlight the bit that EXPLICITLY tells me I can use the Kiss of Death weapon ability when not attacking with the HK. I dont' see any such wording on page 91.
Right the Kiss Of Death rule tells us whenever a model equipped with a Harlequins Kiss makes attack in CC one of those attacks is a kiss of death. So my premises are:
1. If equipped with a Harlequins kiss you make a kiss of death attack when striking blows in close combat. (Literal RaW of KoD).
2. The Solitaire is equipped with a Harlequins kiss
Which of those is wrong? Is page 91 of the Harlequin Codex wrong or is the Solitaire not equipped with a Harlequins kiss?
So, again, you're failing to cite a rule that allows you to reference the Kiss of Death rule without using the weapon.
That's where your premise fails (as has been pointed out to you - repeatedly). You're invoking a rule that you have no permission to invoke.
Page 91 gives me permission if the Solitaire is equipped. So is the Solitaire equipped with a Harlequins kiss?
Do you not see how circular that logic is?
The rule you're quoting give you permission to reference the rule you're quoting?
Right the Kiss Of Death rule tells us whenever a model equipped with a Harlequins Kiss makes attack in CC one of those attacks is a kiss of death. So my premises are:
1. If equipped with a Harlequins kiss you make a kiss of death attack when striking blows in close combat. (Literal RaW of KoD).
2. The Solitaire is equipped with a Harlequins kiss
Which of those is wrong? Is page 91 of the Harlequin Codex wrong or is the Solitaire not equipped with a Harlequins kiss?
So, again, you're failing to cite a rule that allows you to reference the Kiss of Death rule without using the weapon.
That's where your premise fails (as has been pointed out to you - repeatedly). You're invoking a rule that you have no permission to invoke.
Page 91 gives me permission if the Solitaire is equipped. So is the Solitaire equipped with a Harlequins kiss?
Do you not see how circular that logic is?
The rule you're quoting give you permission to reference the rule you're quoting?
Well, this would actually be fine if the Kiss of Death actually did give permission to use it when not attacking with a HK. It doesn't. Therein lies the problem.
1. If equipped with a Harlequins kiss you make a kiss of death attack when striking blows in close combat. (Literal RaW of KoD).
2. The Solitaire is equipped with a Harlequins kiss
Number one is incorrect. You skipped a step.
1. Using a Harlequin's Kiss in CC gives the Kiss of Death rule to the Solitaire.
2. The KOD rule grants a KOD attack.
3. If the Solitaire uses the Caress, he never gains the KOD rule and thus cannot make that attack.
Right the Kiss Of Death rule tells us whenever a model equipped with a Harlequins Kiss makes attack in CC one of those attacks is a kiss of death. So my premises are:
1. If equipped with a Harlequins kiss you make a kiss of death attack when striking blows in close combat. (Literal RaW of KoD).
2. The Solitaire is equipped with a Harlequins kiss
Which of those is wrong? Is page 91 of the Harlequin Codex wrong or is the Solitaire not equipped with a Harlequins kiss?
So, again, you're failing to cite a rule that allows you to reference the Kiss of Death rule without using the weapon.
That's where your premise fails (as has been pointed out to you - repeatedly). You're invoking a rule that you have no permission to invoke.
Page 91 gives me permission if the Solitaire is equipped. So is the Solitaire equipped with a Harlequins kiss?
Do you not see how circular that logic is?
The rule you're quoting give you permission to reference the rule you're quoting?
Yes the rule I'm quoting tells me when it applies. It applies when I'm equipped with a Harlequins Kiss and striking blows in combat.
1. If equipped with a Harlequins kiss you make a kiss of death attack when striking blows in close combat. (Literal RaW of KoD).
2. The Solitaire is equipped with a Harlequins kiss
Number one is incorrect. You skipped a step.
1. Using a Harlequin's Kiss in CC gives the Kiss of Death rule to the Solitaire.
2. The KOD rule grants a KOD attack.
3. If the Solitaire uses the Caress, he never gains the KOD rule and thus cannot make that attack.
So the Harlequin codex is wrong or lying? Sorry but if your interpretation is based on the assumption the rules are wrong then you are not arguing RaW.
rigeld2 wrote:Do you not see how circular that logic is?
The rule you're quoting give you permission to reference the rule you're quoting?
Yes the rule I'm quoting tells me when it applies. It applies when I'm equipped with a Harlequins Kiss and striking blows in combat.
That's not what I said.
I said find permission to use KoD. You cited the KoD rule. That's the very definition of a circular argument, and cannot be used as a foundation for a rules as written discussion.
I mean, why can I not enforce the movement rules that require you to stay 1" away form an enemy model when you start to attack?
When attacking with a Harlequin's Kiss, he makes a Kiss of Death attack. Agreed.
So the Harlequin codex is wrong? It says equipped, not attacking with. Please read the relevant rules and then come back and make an argument.
Sigh...
BRB... More Than One Weapon Section - "Unless otherwise stated, if a model has more than one shooting weapon, he must choose which one to shoot – he cannot fire both in the same Shooting phase. If a model has more than one Melee weapon, he must choose which one to attack with when he comes to strike blows – he cannot mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons. However, it’s worth remembering that if a model has two or more Melee weapons he gains +1 attack in close combat."
Codex: Harlequins... Kiss of Death special rule - "When a model equipped with a Harlequin’s Kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of its Attacks will be a Kiss of Death Attack (roll this Attack separately). A Kiss of Death Attack is always resolved at Strength 6 AP2. If a 6 is rolled To Wound with a Kiss of Death Attack, that attack has the Instant Death special rule."
There are the relevant rules.
Please highlight the bit in the Kiss of Death rule that explicitly tells you that you can mix and match abilities OR an unresolvable conflict that would make it impossible to follow the BRB rule. I see neither.
I know you're going to use the "When a model equipped with..." wording to attempt to justify your point, but this clearly isn't explicit permission to mix and match. I can only assume you think this creates an unresolvable conflict. Does it? Let's look.
I am a Solitaire. I choose to attack with my Caress of Death. I know that I will benefit from the Caress of Death special rule. Will I benefit from the Kiss of Death special rule? Kiss of Death tells me to do something when I'm A. making attacks and B. equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss. Both of these things are true, so I guess I'll benefit from the Kiss of Death... but wait! The More Than One Weapon rules tell me I can't mix and match weapon abilities. So, the Kiss of Death tells me to do something when I attack AND am equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss. The core rules tell me to ignore the Kiss of Death when not attacking with a Halequin's Kiss.
Invoking both rules means I need to...
A. be making an attack
B. be equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss
C. be making my attacks with a Harlequin's Kiss
...to benefit from the Kiss of Death weapon ability. See? No unresolvable conflict. You're just ignoring the "C" requirement imposed by the core rules.
I see the two weapons as giving the Solitaire some utility.
So, do I want to...
A. Risk getting multiple automatic Wounds resolved at AP2 when rolling 6's.
...or...
B. Get one guarateed, higher strength attack resolved at AP2 that will cause Instant Death?
If I'm attacking a unit of Orks, I'll attack with the Caress. If I'm in a challenge with a Space Marine Captain, I'll attack with the Kiss.
No, it simply does not apply, as the model [Solitaire] never actually has the "Kiss of Death" USR unless he is using the weapon.
As Rigeld has said, you say that you need to follow the "Kiss of Death" wording in order to have the "Kiss of Death" rule?
So, if i ask:
How do you get the Special Rule, "Kiss of Death"?
Your reply is: because the "Kiss of Death" Special Rule says so. So, to get "Kiss of Death" you need to follow the "Kiss of Death" Special rule, which you get by following the "Kiss of Death" Special rule, which you get by following the "Kiss of Death" Special rule, which you get by following the "Kiss of Death" Special rule, which you get by following the "Kiss of Death" Special rule, which you get by following the "Kiss of Death" Special rule, which you get by following the "Kiss of Death" Special rule.
Should i stop?
The RaW reply is:
Rulebook wrote:a model’s attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using.
So by Raw, using the Weapon: Harlequin's Kiss grants the "Kiss of Death" Special rule. You have no other method of obtaining that Special rule. Or quote the RaW that grants it (which obviously cannot be contained in the effect of the rule - which happens only when the rule is granted)
rigeld2 wrote:Do you not see how circular that logic is?
The rule you're quoting give you permission to reference the rule you're quoting?
Yes the rule I'm quoting tells me when it applies. It applies when I'm equipped with a Harlequins Kiss and striking blows in combat.
That's not what I said.
I said find permission to use KoD. You cited the KoD rule. That's the very definition of a circular argument, and cannot be used as a foundation for a rules as written discussion.
I mean, why can I not enforce the movement rules that require you to stay 1" away form an enemy model when you start to attack?
Yes the KoD rule tells me when it applies. The 1" movement rule tells you when it applies and other rules tell you when to over ride it by giving specific exemptions to it.
rigeld2 wrote:Do you not see how circular that logic is?
The rule you're quoting give you permission to reference the rule you're quoting?
Yes the rule I'm quoting tells me when it applies. It applies when I'm equipped with a Harlequins Kiss and striking blows in combat.
That's not what I said.
I said find permission to use KoD. You cited the KoD rule. That's the very definition of a circular argument, and cannot be used as a foundation for a rules as written discussion.
I mean, why can I not enforce the movement rules that require you to stay 1" away form an enemy model when you start to attack?
Yes the KoD rule tells me when it applies. The 1" movement rule tells you when it applies and other rules tell you when to over ride it by giving specific exemptions to it.
Potential breakthrough!!!
Yes, the KoD rule tells you when it applies.
The core rules tell you when it DOESN'T apply... i.e., when NOT using the Harlequin's Kiss to attack.
rigeld2 wrote:Do you not see how circular that logic is?
The rule you're quoting give you permission to reference the rule you're quoting?
Yes the rule I'm quoting tells me when it applies. It applies when I'm equipped with a Harlequins Kiss and striking blows in combat.
That's not what I said.
I said find permission to use KoD. You cited the KoD rule. That's the very definition of a circular argument, and cannot be used as a foundation for a rules as written discussion.
I mean, why can I not enforce the movement rules that require you to stay 1" away form an enemy model when you start to attack?
Yes the KoD rule tells me when it applies. The 1" movement rule tells you when it applies and other rules tell you when to over ride it by giving specific exemptions to it.
Find permission to reference the KoD rule. You cannot use the KoD rule to get this permission - as I've said, circular arguments are incorrect.
Spoiler:
Models in the Way
A model cannot move within 1" of an enemy model unless they are charging into close combat in the Assault phase, and can never move or pivot (see below) through another model (friend or foe) at any time. To move past, they must go around.
I choose to enforce this when you are Piling in your models. It's a move, and according to the quoted rule you can't move within 1" unless you're charging. Using your argument (that a rule can self-allow) disprove my statement.
No, it simply does not apply, as the model [Solitaire] never actually has the "Kiss of Death" USR unless he is using the weapon.
The Harlequin codex disagrees with this statement. Why keep making such a statement you know to be false?
Many rules tell you how and when they apply. So how do we have permission to shoot without referencing the shooting rules?
Where does the Harlequin Codex disagree? In the effects of a rule that your model does not have?
If you have a model, say a Solitaire, without the "Kiss of Death" Special Rule. What rule (quote anything at this point) does he use in order to obtain the Special rule: "Kiss of Death" and it's effects?
Do not forget, the model does not have the "Kiss of Death" USR, so its effects will ONLY apply once you can apply the rule to the model. Explain how you do this?
How does the solitaire obtain the "Kiss of Death" Special rule? (You are not allowed to use the "Kiss of Death" Special Rule, as you do not have it yet)
rigeld2 wrote:Do you not see how circular that logic is?
The rule you're quoting give you permission to reference the rule you're quoting?
Yes the rule I'm quoting tells me when it applies. It applies when I'm equipped with a Harlequins Kiss and striking blows in combat.
That's not what I said.
I said find permission to use KoD. You cited the KoD rule. That's the very definition of a circular argument, and cannot be used as a foundation for a rules as written discussion.
I mean, why can I not enforce the movement rules that require you to stay 1" away form an enemy model when you start to attack?
Yes the KoD rule tells me when it applies. The 1" movement rule tells you when it applies and other rules tell you when to over ride it by giving specific exemptions to it.
Potential breakthrough!!!
Yes, the KoD rule tells you when it applies.
The core rules tell you when it DOESN'T apply... i.e., when NOT using the Harlequin's Kiss to attack.
Only if that rule is more specific can it over ride the KoD rule. It isn't so doesn't. It at best restricts you from using the Caress ever.
No, it simply does not apply, as the model [Solitaire] never actually has the "Kiss of Death" USR unless he is using the weapon.
The Harlequin codex disagrees with this statement. Why keep making such a statement you know to be false?
Many rules tell you how and when they apply. So how do we have permission to shoot without referencing the shooting rules?
Where does the Harlequin Codex disagree? In the effects of a rule that your model does not have?
If you have a model, say a Solitaire, without the "Kiss of Death" Special Rule. What rule (quote anything at this point) does he use in order to obtain the Special rule: "Kiss of Death" and it's effects?
Do not forget, the model does not have the "Kiss of Death" USR, so its effects will ONLY apply once you can apply the rule to the model. Explain how you do this?
How does the solitaire obtain the "Kiss of Death" Special rule? (You are not allowed to use the "Kiss of Death" Special Rule, as you do not have it yet)
So back to the Solitaire isn't equipped with the Harlequins Kiss... So which is it as you keep flip flopping between the Solitaire doesn't have a Kiss equipped or he can never attack with a caress. Which are you arguing for?
rigeld2 wrote:Do you not see how circular that logic is?
The rule you're quoting give you permission to reference the rule you're quoting?
Yes the rule I'm quoting tells me when it applies. It applies when I'm equipped with a Harlequins Kiss and striking blows in combat.
That's not what I said.
I said find permission to use KoD. You cited the KoD rule. That's the very definition of a circular argument, and cannot be used as a foundation for a rules as written discussion.
I mean, why can I not enforce the movement rules that require you to stay 1" away form an enemy model when you start to attack?
Yes the KoD rule tells me when it applies. The 1" movement rule tells you when it applies and other rules tell you when to over ride it by giving specific exemptions to it.
Potential breakthrough!!!
Yes, the KoD rule tells you when it applies.
The core rules tell you when it DOESN'T apply... i.e., when NOT using the Harlequin's Kiss to attack.
Only if that rule is more specific can it over ride the KoD rule. It isn't so doesn't. It at best restricts you from using the Caress ever.
No, it simply does not apply, as the model [Solitaire] never actually has the "Kiss of Death" USR unless he is using the weapon.
The Harlequin codex disagrees with this statement. Why keep making such a statement you know to be false?
Many rules tell you how and when they apply. So how do we have permission to shoot without referencing the shooting rules?
Where does the Harlequin Codex disagree? In the effects of a rule that your model does not have?
If you have a model, say a Solitaire, without the "Kiss of Death" Special Rule. What rule (quote anything at this point) does he use in order to obtain the Special rule: "Kiss of Death" and it's effects?
Do not forget, the model does not have the "Kiss of Death" USR, so its effects will ONLY apply once you can apply the rule to the model. Explain how you do this?
How does the solitaire obtain the "Kiss of Death" Special rule? (You are not allowed to use the "Kiss of Death" Special Rule, as you do not have it yet)
So back to the Solitaire isn't equipped with the Harlequins Kiss... So which is it as you keep flip flopping between the Solitaire doesn't have a Kiss equipped or he can never attack with a caress. Which are you arguing for?
I salute your broken record style of debate, sir. But please do me a favor and stop putting words in my mouth. I do not appreciate it. Please do not do it again.
I have NEVER said a Solitaire isn't equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss.
I have NEVER said a Solitaire can't attack with a Harlequin's Caress.
What I have done is quote the relevant rules over and over again.
If you aren't using the weapon, you don't get the benefits. I know you desperately want to have your cake and eat it too, but this is not how the game works.
If you aren't using the weapon, you don't get the benefits.
The restriction from Kiss of Death (that one of your attacks must be a KoD attack when attacing in CC) applies when the Solitaire is equipped. So if Kiss of death doesn't apply the Solitaire isn't equipped with a HK. If he is then KoD applies. So saying KoD doesn't apply is the same as saying he is not equipped with a HK. Likewise saying he can't KoD when using the caress is the same as saying he can't use the caress whilst attacking in CC as he HAS to KoD when attacking in CC.
My stance on this discussion (for what its worth)
I have read the sections on special rules regarding on how a model gets special rules.
Spoiler:
WHAT SPECIAL RULES DO I HAVE?
It may seem obvious, but unless stated otherwise, a model does not have a special rule. Most special rules are given to a model by the relevant Army List Entry or its unit type. That said, a model’s attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using.
Ok, so this tells me that I get special rules either by making an attack with a weapon,its unit type, or by getting it from the army list entry. So what counts as an army list entry then?
Spoiler:
Army List Entries
The rules for your Citadel miniatures are found in a wide range of Games Workshop publications, such as codexes, codex supplements and dataslates. Regardless of where this information is found, it is known as an Army List Entry. Each Army List Entry describes a unit of Citadel miniatures and includes everything you will need to know in order to use that unit in a game of Warhammer 40,000.
Similarly a model might get special rules as the result of psychic powers, scenario special rules or being hunkered down in a particular type of terrain. Where this is the case, the rule that governs the psychic power, scenario or terrain type in question will make this abundantly clear.
Most of the more commonly used special rules in Warhammer 40,000 are listed here, but this is by no means an exhaustive list. Many troops have their own unique abilities, which are laid out in their codex or Army List Entry.
So by this excerpt from the BRB we see that special rules can be granted to the model via its codex, codex supplement or dataslate. Now as to the solitaire the KoD special rule is granted to the model as the rule itself is not activated by making an attack, nor is it given by being part of a unit type, but is it is granted by being equiped as per the relevant Army List Entry.
The model must retain all of its special rules
Spoiler:
A Compendium of Special Rules
... Unless specifically stated, a model cannot gain the benefit of a special rule
more than once. However, the effects of multiple different special rules are
cumulative
If you aren't using the weapon, you don't get the benefits.
The restriction from Kiss of Death (that one of your attacks must be a KoD attack when attacing in CC) applies when the Solitaire is equipped. So if Kiss of death doesn't apply the Solitaire isn't equipped with a HK. If he is then KoD applies. So saying KoD doesn't apply is the same as saying he is not equipped with a HK. Likewise saying he can't KoD when using the caress is the same as saying he can't use the caress whilst attacking in CC as he HAS to KoD when attacking in CC.
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc. Common fallacy. Your argument is garbage.
There are multiple reasons a model wouldn't benefit from a Kiss of Death attack. Maybe he actually isn't equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss. My Tau Commander doesn't benefit from a Kiss of Death attack, but then he's not equipped with a HK, so that makes sense. Maybe he is equipped with a HK, but is choosing not to use it in combat. That would also cause him to not benefit from the rule.
Saying that the KoD not applying necessarily means the Solitaire isn't equipped with an HK is garbage logic and causes your entire line of argument to fall apart.
Your last sentence is also garbage. Saying he can't use the KoD when making attacks with the HC just means he can't use the KoD when making attacks with the HC. The core rules tell us we can choose between the HC and the HK when attacking. Pick the HC and the CoD confers to your attacks. Pick the HK and the KoD confers to your attacks.
You keep making logical leaps that simply aren't true. You also keep using common logical fallacies.
I say this with all the honesty and goodwill in the world.... you might want to study up on logic and debate. You're making lots of beginner mistakes.
If you aren't using the weapon, you don't get the benefits.
The restriction from Kiss of Death (that one of your attacks must be a KoD attack when attacing in CC) applies when the Solitaire is equipped. So if Kiss of death doesn't apply the Solitaire isn't equipped with a HK. If he is then KoD applies. So saying KoD doesn't apply is the same as saying he is not equipped with a HK. Likewise saying he can't KoD when using the caress is the same as saying he can't use the caress whilst attacking in CC as he HAS to KoD when attacking in CC.
So... still refusing to actual cite a rule allowing you to reference KoD? Circular references aren't allowed, of course.
Arthurmw43 wrote: My stance on this discussion (for what its worth)
I have read the sections on special rules regarding on how a model gets special rules.
Spoiler:
WHAT SPECIAL RULES DO I HAVE?
It may seem obvious, but unless stated otherwise, a model does not have a special rule. Most special rules are given to a model by the relevant Army List Entry or its unit type. That said, a model’s attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using.
Ok, so this tells me that I get special rules either by making an attack with a weapon,its unit type, or by getting it from the army list entry. So what counts as an army list entry then?
Spoiler:
Army List Entries
The rules for your Citadel miniatures are found in a wide range of Games Workshop publications, such as codexes, codex supplements and dataslates. Regardless of where this information is found, it is known as an Army List Entry. Each Army List Entry describes a unit of Citadel miniatures and includes everything you will need to know in order to use that unit in a game of Warhammer 40,000.
Similarly a model might get special rules as the result of psychic powers, scenario special rules or being hunkered down in a particular type of terrain. Where this is the case, the rule that governs the psychic power, scenario or terrain type in question will make this abundantly clear.
Most of the more commonly used special rules in Warhammer 40,000 are listed here, but this is by no means an exhaustive list. Many troops have their own unique abilities, which are laid out in their codex or Army List Entry.
So by this excerpt from the BRB we see that special rules can be granted to the model via its codex, codex supplement or dataslate. Now as to the solitaire the KoD special rule is granted to the model as the rule itself is not activated by making an attack, nor is it given by being part of a unit type, but is it is granted by being equiped as per the relevant Army List Entry.
The model must retain all of its special rules
Spoiler:
A Compendium of Special Rules
... Unless specifically stated, a model cannot gain the benefit of a special rule
more than once. However, the effects of multiple different special rules are
cumulative
I'm not convinced it even matters if the Solitaire has the rule or not. If you are attacking in CC and equipped with a Kiss the rule activates and forces you to make a KoD attack.
If you aren't using the weapon, you don't get the benefits.
The restriction from Kiss of Death (that one of your attacks must be a KoD attack when attacing in CC) applies when the Solitaire is equipped. So if Kiss of death doesn't apply the Solitaire isn't equipped with a HK. If he is then KoD applies. So saying KoD doesn't apply is the same as saying he is not equipped with a HK. Likewise saying he can't KoD when using the caress is the same as saying he can't use the caress whilst attacking in CC as he HAS to KoD when attacking in CC.
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc. Common fallacy. Your argument is garbage.
There are multiple reasons a model wouldn't benefit from a Kiss of Death attack. Maybe he actually isn't equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss. My Tau Commander doesn't benefit from a Kiss of Death attack, but then he's not equipped with a HK, so that makes sense. Maybe he is equipped with a HK, but is choosing not to use it in combat. That would also cause him to not benefit from the rule.
Saying that the KoD not applying necessarily means the Solitaire isn't equipped with an HK is garbage logic and causes your entire line of argument to fall apart.
Your last sentence is also garbage. Saying he can't use the KoD when making attacks with the HC just means he can't use the KoD when making attacks with the HC. The core rules tell us we can choose between the HC and the HK when attacking. Pick the HC and the CoD confers to your attacks. Pick the HK and the KoD confers to your attacks.
You keep making logical leaps that simply aren't true. You also keep using common logical fallacies.
I say this with all the honesty and goodwill in the world.... you might want to study up on logic and debate. You're making lots of beginner mistakes.
The KoD rule tells us it applies to all models that are:
1) attacking in close combat
2) equipped with a Harlequins Kiss.
When attacking with a Caress which of the 2 criteria above is not met?
I'm not convinced it even matters if the Solitaire has the rule or not. If you are attacking in CC and equipped with a Kiss the rule activates and forces you to make a KoD attack.
That is exactly what I'm saying. The solitaire has the rule for the KoD as it is part of the relevant Army List Entry (as cited in the excerpts from the BRB) All of the models special rules are cumulative, so the solitaire will have all of its special rules at the all times, so whenever the solitaire makes an attack he will have access to the KoD Special rule and must use it. this does not conflict with the "mix and match" as the model has the rule by being equipped not by making an attack. Also the way I have thought this out would not work if the special rules for the model were to require an attack to be made ( does not open allow abuse as most other special rules require an attack to be made to use them)
I'm not convinced it even matters if the Solitaire has the rule or not. If you are attacking in CC and equipped with a Kiss the rule activates and forces you to make a KoD attack.
That is exactly what I'm saying. The solitaire has the rule for the KoD as it is part of the relevant Army List Entry (as cited in the excerpts from the BRB) All of the models special rules are cumulative, so the solitaire will have all of its special rules at the all times, so whenever the solitaire makes an attack he will have access to the KoD Special rule and must use it. this does not conflict with the "mix and match" as the model has the rule by being equipped not by making an attack. Also the way I have thought this out would not work if the special rules for the model were to require an attack to be made ( does not open allow abuse as most other special rules require an attack to be made to use them)
Agreed so say there is a special Harlequins kiss that gets Shred rending and master crafted added to it. When attacking with the caress the kiss of death attack would not get those special rules as they apply when attacking with that special kiss. Kiss of Death is a restriction that applies to all models equipped with a Hartlequins Kiss that are attacking I'm close combat.
Arthurmw43 633677 7673541 nulll wrote: The solitaire has the rule for the KoD as it is part of the relevant Army List Entry (as cited in the excerpts from the BRB)
No, it doesn't. Harlequin's Kiss does. When are you allowed to reference the special rules for a weapon?
When you are actually using the weapon. Look, it's in the rulebook:
a model’s attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using.
Unless someone can find another rule (obviously not in the rule you are trying to use - You don't have it yet! ) that allows a model "equipped" with a weapon, to use any special rules that weapon may have...
Unless someone can find another rule (obviously not in the rule you are trying to use - You don't have it yet! ) that allows a model "equipped" with a weapon, to use any special rules that weapon may have...
Cool see the Kiss of Death rule it has explicit rules allowing it to have an effect on all models equipped with a Harlequins Kiss when they make close combat attacks (with any weapon).
Unless someone can find another rule (obviously not in the rule you are trying to use - You don't have it yet! ) that allows a model "equipped" with a weapon, to use any special rules that weapon may have...
Cool see the Kiss of Death rule it has explicit rules allowing it to have an effect on all models equipped with a Harlequins Kiss when they make close combat attacks (with any weapon).
Glad we're all finally in agreement.
Obviously you ignored the underlined - because it destroys your argument.
You can't use a rule you don't have.
How do you have the rule? (Note that since you are attempting to justify having it, you can't cite the rule yet).
How do models gain special rules:
Most special rules are given to a model by the relevant Army List Entry or its unit type. That said, a model’s attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using.
I'm looking at this first line of the entry from the BRB.
Per the BRB what an Army List Entry is:
The rules for your Citadel miniatures are found in a wide range of Games Workshop publications, such as codexes, codex supplements and dataslates. Regardless of where this information is found, it is known as an Army List Entry.
So special rules can be granted to the model via its codex. Now the solitaire is granted the KoD special rule as the rule itself is not activated by making an attack, only by having the Harlequins Kiss equipped.
The model retains the effects all of its special rules:
Unless specifically stated, a model cannot gain the benefit of a special rule more than once. However, the effects of multiple different special rules are cumulative.
So by the rules in the BRB we can see how the Solitaire gets the Special rule KoD. This in not the Solitaire's attacks, this is a special rule granted to the model, and as such I do not see that the mix and match stipulation is being violated.
I also said that this interpretation would not be able to be abused in all other situations as the wording on other special rules does not use the equipped term that we see in the Harlequins Kiss, the other rules specify or reference that that an attack must be, or is being made.
Unless someone can find another rule (obviously not in the rule you are trying to use - You don't have it yet! ) that allows a model "equipped" with a weapon, to use any special rules that weapon may have...
Cool see the Kiss of Death rule it has explicit rules allowing it to have an effect on all models equipped with a Harlequins Kiss when they make close combat attacks (with any weapon).
Glad we're all finally in agreement.
Obviously you ignored the underlined - because it destroys your argument.
You can't use a rule you don't have.
How do you have the rule? (Note that since you are attempting to justify having it, you can't cite the rule yet).
Cool so how do we know what the turn sequence is note that we can use the turn sequence rules to tell us. Please stopwith the circular logic. The rule tells us when it applies and who it applies to. So again when attacking in CC with a caress which of the following is false?
1) The Solitaire is attack in close combat.
2) The Solitaire is equipped with a Harlequins Kiss
Unless someone can find another rule (obviously not in the rule you are trying to use - You don't have it yet! ) that allows a model "equipped" with a weapon, to use any special rules that weapon may have...
Cool see the Kiss of Death rule it has explicit rules allowing it to have an effect on all models equipped with a Harlequins Kiss when they make close combat attacks (with any weapon).
Glad we're all finally in agreement.
Obviously you ignored the underlined - because it destroys your argument.
You can't use a rule you don't have.
How do you have the rule? (Note that since you are attempting to justify having it, you can't cite the rule yet).
Cool so how do we know what the turn sequence is note that we can use the turn sequence rules to tell us. Please stopwith the circular logic.
Spoiler:
A Warhammer 40,000 battle is a chaotic affair. To bring a modicum of order to the anarchy of battle, players alternate moving and fighting with their units. So, one player will move and fight with his forces, and then their opponent will move and fight. This process is then repeated, with the first player moving and fighting again, and so on, until the game is done.
During his turn, a player can usually move and fight once with each of his units. For convenience and flow of game play, we divide a player’s turn into four main phases: Movement, Psychic, Shooting and Assault.
What circular logic? Right there I showed where they defined a turn and that a turn is split into 4 phases.
The rule tells us when it applies and who it applies to. So again when attacking in CC with a caress which of the following is false?
The underlined is. You keep asserting otherwise, but have failed to prove it - even going so far as to misrepresent what others are stating, ignoring evidence to the contrary, and other things.
Until you can actually prove the model has the rule, it doesn't.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Arthurmw43 wrote: So special rules can be granted to the model via its codex.
Absolutely! Now, when is KoD granted to the model?
"a model’s attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using."
I don't see any way for a weapon to bestow a special rule other than by using it. Do you?
So by the rules in the BRB we can see how the Solitaire gets the Special rule KoD. This in not the Solitaire's attacks, this is a special rule granted to the model, and as such I do not see that the mix and match stipulation is being violated.
No, we don't. You've shown not a single rule that allows a weapon to bestow a special rule when it's not being used. You've asserted it as fact, but haven't demonstrated it.
I also said that this interpretation would not be able to be abused in all other situations as the wording on other special rules does not use the equipped term that we see in the Harlequins Kiss, the other rules specify or reference that that an attack must be, or is being made.
You're actually under the impression that "equipped" is unique to Harlequin's Kiss/Kiss of Death?
A Warhammer 40,000 battle is a chaotic affair. To bring a modicum of order to the anarchy of battle, players alternate moving and fighting with their units. So, one player will move and fight with his forces, and then their opponent will move and fight. This process is then repeated, with the first player moving and fighting again, and so on, until the game is done.
During his turn, a player can usually move and fight once with each of his units. For convenience and flow of game play, we divide a player’s turn into four main phases: Movement, Psychic, Shooting and Assault.
What circular logic? Right there I showed where they defined a turn and that a turn is split into 4 phases.
The rule tells us when it applies and who it applies to. So again when attacking in CC with a caress which of the following is false?
The underlined is. You keep asserting otherwise, but have failed to prove it - even going so far as to misrepresent what others are stating, ignoring evidence to the contrary, and other things.
Until you can actually prove the model has the rule, it doesn't.
You're aware the rules quote is from the Turn rules right? So you can use the Turn rules to define the turn and how/when it occurs but I can't use the KSS of Death rules to define how and when it occurs? Seriously that is your stance?
Now answer the question which statement is untrue or is neither untrue? When attacking in CC with a caress which of the following is false?
1) The Solitaire is attack in close combat.
2) The Solitaire is equipped with a Harlequins Kiss
Just a simple 1, 2 or neither will suffice. (Remembering neither is conceding)
Unless someone can find another rule (obviously not in the rule you are trying to use - You don't have it yet! ) that allows a model "equipped" with a weapon, to use any special rules that weapon may have...
Cool see the Kiss of Death rule it has explicit rules allowing it to have an effect on all models equipped with a Harlequins Kiss when they make close combat attacks (with any weapon).
Glad we're all finally in agreement.
Obviously you ignored the underlined - because it destroys your argument.
You can't use a rule you don't have.
How do you have the rule? (Note that since you are attempting to justify having it, you can't cite the rule yet).
Cool so how do we know what the turn sequence is note that we can use the turn sequence rules to tell us. Please stopwith the circular logic. The rule tells us when it applies and who it applies to. So again when attacking in CC with a caress which of the following is false?
1) The Solitaire is attack in close combat.
2) The Solitaire is equipped with a Harlequins Kiss
Just a simple 1 or 2 will suffice.
There are three requirements for activating the Kiss of Death. You keep listing only two of them.
1. The model is equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss (From the KoD rule)
2. The model is attacking (From the KoD rule)
3. The model is attacking with a Harlequin's Kiss (From the BRB)
In your scenario above, when a Solitaire is attacking using a Harlequin's Caress... 1 and 2 are true while 3 is false. Since not all of the requirements are met, the Kiss of Death weapon ability is not used.
NOBODY is disputing that 1 and 2 have to be true. We ALL agree 1 and 2 have to be true. YOU are the one who is ignoring requirement 3.
I feel like you want to treat the Harlequin's Kiss the same way Eldar Mandiblasters work. Mandiblasters are a piece of Wargear that grant an additional attack with a set profile. Mandiblasters AREN'T Melee weapons. If the Harlequin's Kiss wasn't a Melee weapon, the abilities would stack with no issue. Unfortunately for you, this is not the case.
Absolutely! Now, when is KoD granted to the model?
"a model’s attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using."
I don't see any way for a weapon to bestow a special rule other than by using it. Do you?
WHAT SPECIAL RULES DO I HAVE?
It may seem obvious, but unless stated otherwise, a model does not have a special rule. Most special rules are given to a model by the relevant Army List Entry or its unit type. That said, a model’s attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using.
The underlined sentence states that it would be granted through the army list.
The italicized sentence does not include the word "only". I say this as it seems to me that your stance is that weapons can not give special rules unless they are being used in an attack, which is not true (see Eldrad's staff.
Rigeld, What other weapon has the "equipped" designation? As everything I have read that is a weapon says when making attacks with this weapon, or similar.
Grenades seem to be a bit of wargear that has the option to be used as a weapon, which further leads me to believe that the Serpent shield can't be twin linked with laser lock as it is similar in the way it is written, but that is another discussion.
The "equipped" with items, that I have found, are armor, or some other oddity, rather than a weapon, making the Kiss an different from the word go. Though I have a limited amount of Codecies to peruse.
As to the use of the KoD rule, it is granted when the model is equipped with it, as specified in the rule. When the model is allowed the choice of weapons to use, the choice has already been made from the moment the model paid for the HK. So in the case of the Solitaire, when they printed the codex, it was equipped with the kiss.
By breaking the least amount of rules, the Solitaire will always attack with the Kiss, and never be able to use the Caress.
RAI, I lean toward being able to use both, but the argument for being able to chose does hold merit, but is not as cut and dried as some believe.
megatrons2nd wrote: Rigeld, What other weapon has the "equipped" designation? As everything I have read that is a weapon says when making attacks with this weapon, or similar.
Grenades seem to be a bit of wargear that has the option to be used as a weapon, which further leads me to believe that the Serpent shield can't be twin linked with laser lock as it is similar in the way it is written, but that is another discussion.
The "equipped" with items, that I have found, are armor, or some other oddity, rather than a weapon, making the Kiss an different from the word go. Though I have a limited amount of Codecies to peruse.
As to the use of the KoD rule, it is granted when the model is equipped with it, as specified in the rule. When the model is allowed the choice of weapons to use, the choice has already been made from the moment the model paid for the HK. So in the case of the Solitaire, when they printed the codex, it was equipped with the kiss.
By breaking the least amount of rules, the Solitaire will always attack with the Kiss, and never be able to use the Caress.
RAI, I lean toward being able to use both, but the argument for being able to chose does hold merit, but is not as cut and dried as some believe.
Attacking with the Caress and NOT getting to use the KoD breaks ZERO rules.... so I'd say ZERO is the least amount of rules.
RAI, I'd say one or the other. If they wanted both to work, they could have just make the Kiss a non-Melee item of wargear like Striking Scorpion Mandiblasters. They didn't. They made it a Melee weapon... and they've been very clear across the entirety of the game up until this point that you can only attack with one weapon at a time and only gain benefit from the weapon you're attacking with.
There are three requirements for activating the Kiss of Death. You keep listing only two of them.
1. The model is equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss (From the KoD rule)
2. The model is attacking (From the KoD rule)
3. The model is attacking with a Harlequin's Kiss (From the BRB)
In your scenario above, when a Solitaire is attacking using a Harlequin's Caress... 1 and 2 are true while 3 is false. Since not all of the requirements are met, the Kiss of Death weapon ability is not used.
NOBODY is disputing that 1 and 2 have to be true. We ALL agree 1 and 2 have to be true. YOU are the one who is ignoring requirement 3.
I feel like you want to treat the Harlequin's Kiss the same way Eldar Mandiblasters work. Mandiblasters are a piece of Wargear that grant an additional attack with a set profile. Mandiblasters AREN'T Melee weapons. If the Harlequin's Kiss wasn't a Melee weapon, the abilities would stack with no issue. Unfortunately for you, this is not the case.
Requirement 3 doesn't apply to KoD. It states emphatically you must make a KoD attack if equipped with HK and attacking in CC. I see nothing about KoD anywhere in the BrB.
Attacking with the Caress and NOT getting to use the KoD breaks ZERO rules.... so I'd say ZERO is the least amount of rules.
Please don't state thing you know to be untrue. It is not helpful to discussion and does not make your side stronger just highlights the weakness of it. Zero and One are not the same number stop saying they are.
There are three requirements for activating the Kiss of Death. You keep listing only two of them.
1. The model is equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss (From the KoD rule)
2. The model is attacking (From the KoD rule)
3. The model is attacking with a Harlequin's Kiss (From the BRB)
In your scenario above, when a Solitaire is attacking using a Harlequin's Caress... 1 and 2 are true while 3 is false. Since not all of the requirements are met, the Kiss of Death weapon ability is not used.
NOBODY is disputing that 1 and 2 have to be true. We ALL agree 1 and 2 have to be true. YOU are the one who is ignoring requirement 3.
I feel like you want to treat the Harlequin's Kiss the same way Eldar Mandiblasters work. Mandiblasters are a piece of Wargear that grant an additional attack with a set profile. Mandiblasters AREN'T Melee weapons. If the Harlequin's Kiss wasn't a Melee weapon, the abilities would stack with no issue. Unfortunately for you, this is not the case.
Requirement 3 doesn't apply to KoD. It states emphatically you must make a KoD attack if equipped with HK and attacking in CC. I see nothing about KoD anywhere in the BrB.
Attacking with the Caress and NOT getting to use the KoD breaks ZERO rules.... so I'd say ZERO is the least amount of rules.
Please don't state thing you know to be untrue. It is not helpful to discussion and does not make your side stronger just highlights the weakness of it. Zero and One are not the same number stop saying they are.
Can you provide your explicit written permission to ignore requirement #3. Protip: the fact that KoD introduces two additional requirements does not give permission to ignore an existing requirement.
I'll wait while you type up a "if equipped, you can't caress because both or neither therefore you concede" tired old rehash of your same flawed argument.
OR... you could either provide the permission to ignore (which isn't in there) or admit that you've made a mistake... that you'd really like to be able to mix and match weapon abilities but can't find a permission to do so.
megatrons2nd wrote: Rigeld, What other weapon has the "equipped" designation? As everything I have read that is a weapon says when making attacks with this weapon, or similar.
Grenades seem to be a bit of wargear that has the option to be used as a weapon, which further leads me to believe that the Serpent shield can't be twin linked with laser lock as it is similar in the way it is written, but that is another discussion.
The "equipped" with items, that I have found, are armor, or some other oddity, rather than a weapon, making the Kiss an different from the word go. Though I have a limited amount of Codecies to peruse.
As to the use of the KoD rule, it is granted when the model is equipped with it, as specified in the rule. When the model is allowed the choice of weapons to use, the choice has already been made from the moment the model paid for the HK. So in the case of the Solitaire, when they printed the codex, it was equipped with the kiss.
By breaking the least amount of rules, the Solitaire will always attack with the Kiss, and never be able to use the Caress.
RAI, I lean toward being able to use both, but the argument for being able to chose does hold merit, but is not as cut and dried as some believe.
Attacking with the Caress and NOT getting to use the KoD breaks ZERO rules.... so I'd say ZERO is the least amount of rules.
RAI, I'd say one or the other. If they wanted both to work, they could have just make the Kiss a non-Melee item of wargear like Striking Scorpion Mandiblasters. They didn't. They made it a Melee weapon... and they've been very clear across the entirety of the game up until this point that you can only attack with one weapon at a time and only gain benefit from the weapon you're attacking with.
You do realize my way breaks ZERO rules also, right? The model is equipped with the HK, granting it the KoD rule as said rule is written, I go to attack, and am blocked from using another weapon because KoD forces it's use, and I can't mix and match weapons abilities, so......
You've obviously missed one of the Dreadknights weapons, and the original wording for the Djin Blade, which one was FAQ's to allow it's use in conjunction with other weapons, the other was FAQ'd not to allow it's use with other weapons. The Dreadkinghts weapons said "equipped with", the Djin Blade said "bearer", both mean, the guy who has it. Both FAQ's are now gone, but their implications leave us with naught but opinion on how the Rules read to us. It also breaks you're premise that GW has been very clear to only gaining the benefit of one weapon, until now.
As written the Kiss is, as pointed out in the post prior to mine, a way to give a model a special rule beyond just, a weapon can only ever grant a special rule when it is used. The "equipped with" nomenclature can very well fall into the here have a rule category. This discussion will never resolve until GWFAQ's the Harlequins Kiss.
Score another one for GW's shoddy rules writing capabilities.
A Warhammer 40,000 battle is a chaotic affair. To bring a modicum of order to the anarchy of battle, players alternate moving and fighting with their units. So, one player will move and fight with his forces, and then their opponent will move and fight. This process is then repeated, with the first player moving and fighting again, and so on, until the game is done.
During his turn, a player can usually move and fight once with each of his units. For convenience and flow of game play, we divide a player’s turn into four main phases: Movement, Psychic, Shooting and Assault.
What circular logic? Right there I showed where they defined a turn and that a turn is split into 4 phases.
The rule tells us when it applies and who it applies to. So again when attacking in CC with a caress which of the following is false?
The underlined is. You keep asserting otherwise, but have failed to prove it - even going so far as to misrepresent what others are stating, ignoring evidence to the contrary, and other things.
Until you can actually prove the model has the rule, it doesn't.
You're aware the rules quote is from the Turn rules right? So you can use the Turn rules to define the turn and how/when it occurs but I can't use the KSS of Death rules to define how and when it occurs? Seriously that is your stance?
You said, and I'll quote you so there's no misunderstanding:
Cool so how do we know what the turn sequence is note that we can use the turn sequence rules to tell us. Please stopwith the circular logic.
We know what the turn sequence is because the rules for a turn state it. Not because the rules for a turn sequence state it.
Simply reading the book shows that to play a game, you need turns. What makes up a turn? Right there - four phases.
You have a weapon with a special rule. When does that special rule apply, without reading the special rule (because you can't apply it before knowing when it applies).
1) The Solitaire is attack in close combat.
2) The Solitaire is equipped with a Harlequins Kiss
Just a simple 1, 2 or neither will suffice. (Remembering neither is conceding)
The underlined is false.
You're offering a false dichotomy, which I will refuse to play into. Although, due to typos, #1 is grammatically incorrect - do you mean is attacked or is attacking?
And there needs to be more context to those questions - you cannot offer them alone because they cannot be answered as true or false without more context. In the movement phase you can't prove either is true.
Absolutely! Now, when is KoD granted to the model?
"a model’s attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using."
I don't see any way for a weapon to bestow a special rule other than by using it. Do you?
WHAT SPECIAL RULES DO I HAVE?
It may seem obvious, but unless stated otherwise, a model does not have a special rule. Most special rules are given to a model by the relevant Army List Entry or its unit type. That said, a model’s attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using.
The underlined sentence states that it would be granted through the army list.
The italicized sentence does not include the word "only". I say this as it seems to me that your stance is that weapons can not give special rules unless they are being used in an attack, which is not true (see Eldrad's staff.
This right here, Having a rule because the item is equipped sure sounds like a way to give a model a special rule beyond just the weapons attacks, and is not omitted because it is not not omitted in the sentence describing how a model gets a special rule. "Most" does not equal "Only"
megatrons2nd wrote: Rigeld, What other weapon has the "equipped" designation? As everything I have read that is a weapon says when making attacks with this weapon, or similar.
Grenades seem to be a bit of wargear that has the option to be used as a weapon, which further leads me to believe that the Serpent shield can't be twin linked with laser lock as it is similar in the way it is written, but that is another discussion.
The "equipped" with items, that I have found, are armor, or some other oddity, rather than a weapon, making the Kiss an different from the word go. Though I have a limited amount of Codecies to peruse.
As to the use of the KoD rule, it is granted when the model is equipped with it, as specified in the rule. When the model is allowed the choice of weapons to use, the choice has already been made from the moment the model paid for the HK. So in the case of the Solitaire, when they printed the codex, it was equipped with the kiss.
By breaking the least amount of rules, the Solitaire will always attack with the Kiss, and never be able to use the Caress.
RAI, I lean toward being able to use both, but the argument for being able to chose does hold merit, but is not as cut and dried as some believe.
Attacking with the Caress and NOT getting to use the KoD breaks ZERO rules.... so I'd say ZERO is the least amount of rules.
RAI, I'd say one or the other. If they wanted both to work, they could have just make the Kiss a non-Melee item of wargear like Striking Scorpion Mandiblasters. They didn't. They made it a Melee weapon... and they've been very clear across the entirety of the game up until this point that you can only attack with one weapon at a time and only gain benefit from the weapon you're attacking with.
You do realize my way breaks ZERO rules also, right? The model is equipped with the HK, granting it the KoD rule as said rule is written, I go to attack, and am blocked from using another weapon because KoD forces it's use, and I can't mix and match weapons abilities, so......
You've obviously missed one of the Dreadknights weapons, and the original wording for the Djin Blade, which one was FAQ's to allow it's use in conjunction with other weapons, the other was FAQ'd not to allow it's use with other weapons. The Dreadkinghts weapons said "equipped with", the Djin Blade said "bearer", both mean, the guy who has it. Both FAQ's are now gone, but their implications leave us with naught but opinion on how the Rules read to us. It also breaks you're premise that GW has been very clear to only gaining the benefit of one weapon, until now.
As written the Kiss is, as pointed out in the post prior to mine, a way to give a model a special rule beyond just, a weapon can only ever grant a special rule when it is used. The "equipped with" nomenclature can very well fall into the here have a rule category. This discussion will never resolve until GWFAQ's the Harlequins Kiss.
Score another one for GW's shoddy rules writing capabilities.
Being forced to only attack with the HK would violate the rule saying that if you have multiple weapons, you can decide which to attack with. So there's that. That's one. Zero is still less than one.
And those other weapons sort of prove my point that an FAQ is required if GW's actual intent was to have the HK and HC work together. RaW doesn't currently allow it. You can stonewall all you want, but there is a very real restriction in the BRB saying a model cannot mix and match weapon abilities when fighting. The HK adds two addition requirements, but does not explicitly say that you can ignore the BRB restriction.
Permissive Rule Set 101 - If you want to ignore a restriction in the core rules, you need an explicit permission to do so.
9 pages in and nobody can point to an EXPLICIT permission to ignore the restriction in the core rules. I don't believe it's there and given that nobody has been able to supply it... sure looks like it isn't there.
Being forced to only attack with the HK would violate the rule saying that if you have multiple weapons, you can decide which to attack with. So there's that. That's one. Zero is still less than one.
Again with the lie. Not making a KoD attack breaks the KoD rule deliberately lying about that and repeating that lie illustrates you know your argument is completely flawed. Your concession is accepted.
You have a weapon with a special rule. When does that special rule apply, without reading the special rule (because you can't apply it before knowing when it applies).
When the model is equipped with the Harlequins Kiss, so when it is purchased for the model, or in the case of the Solitaire, when the codex was printed. Because if you read Arthurmw43's post you will see that there are other ways to get a special rule, not limited to anything, and as the rule quite clearly states when it is equipped, it has this rule.
Without going to the special rule, before knowing when to apply it how the heck would you ever resolve any special rule? Talk about a false argument, maybe you mean something else and wrote something that is highly impossible to do. But I'll bight, now you can't use FnP, Stealth, Shrouded, Instant Death......Because without reading the rule you can not know when it is applied. Guess what, when you read the relevant rule it tells you, it applies when it was equipped.
We know what the turn sequence is because the rules for a turn state it. Not because the rules for a turn sequence state it.
Simply reading the book shows that to play a game, you need turns. What makes up a turn? Right there - four phases.
You have a weapon with a special rule. When does that special rule apply, without reading the special rule (because you can't apply it before knowing when it applies).
You have a turn sequence. When does that turn sequence apply, without reading the turns rule (because you can't apply it before knowing when it applies).
Circular logic is circular. I know when KoD applies because KoD tells me. I can read the rules whenever I want. Not reading rules until you think they apply is a good way to miss things and get rules wrong. Many rules tell you when they apply themselves. Some require extra rules to work.
KoD requires every model that is equipped with a HK to make a KoD attack when they attack in close combat. If you're attacking in CC and equipped with a HK you must therefore make a KoD attack otherwise you are breaking rules. So again which is false 1 or 2?
Being forced to only attack with the HK would violate the rule saying that if you have multiple weapons, you can decide which to attack with. So there's that. That's one. Zero is still less than one.
Again with the lie. Not making a KoD attack breaks the KoD rule deliberately lying about that and repeating that lie illustrates you know your argument is completely flawed. Your concession is accepted.
Um. How is he able to make an attack - triggered by a weapon special rule - with a weapon he's not swinging with? Using your argument, a model could only ever swing with a Kiss.
You have a weapon with a special rule. When does that special rule apply, without reading the special rule (because you can't apply it before knowing when it applies).
When the model is equipped with the Harlequins Kiss,
I'm sure you read the underlined part of my question - now, please answer this:
What rule is giving you that ability?
Because if you read Arthurmw43's post you will see that there are other ways to get a special rule, not limited to anything, and as the rule quite clearly states when it is equipped, it has this rule.
I read, and addressed, his post. Perhaps you'd care to respond to my comments?
Without going to the special rule, before knowing when to apply it how the heck would you ever resolve any special rule?
Because we know when a model has a special rule.
We also know that a model gains the rules of a weapon when using it.
Talk about a false argument, maybe you mean something else and wrote something that is highly impossible to do. But I'll bight, now you can't use FnP, Stealth, Shrouded, Instant Death......Because without reading the rule you can not know when it is applied. Guess what, when you read the relevant rule it tells you, it applies when it was equipped.
Except I can. The relevant model has FnP, so I have permission to look at FnP and see what it does.
The relevant model has Stealth, so I have permission to look at FnP and see what it does.
The relevant weapon has Instant Death so when using the weapon, I have permission to look that up and see what it does.
So actually, using my argument, everything works fine. Using yours you have to invent self-permissive special rules. Seems like not inventing things is using the actual rules, while inventing things ... isn't.
Being forced to only attack with the HK would violate the rule saying that if you have multiple weapons, you can decide which to attack with. So there's that. That's one. Zero is still less than one.
Again with the lie. Not making a KoD attack breaks the KoD rule deliberately lying about that and repeating that lie illustrates you know your argument is completely flawed. Your concession is accepted.
No need to be rude. Attack the Argument not the person, and calling someone a liar is attacking the person. Please be nice.
@ FlingitNow The rule is quite explicit in the fact that it applies when equipped, and going back to Arthurmw43 post quoting the special rules and how to get them bit, you see that stuff can be granted to a model, most, but not all, come from the army list and so on. However, when the rule says when an item is equipped it has said rule, it does fit the previous category as giving the model a special rule beyond only allowing weapons to give a special rule for one attack.
Being forced to only attack with the HK would violate the rule saying that if you have multiple weapons, you can decide which to attack with. So there's that. That's one. Zero is still less than one.
Again with the lie. Not making a KoD attack breaks the KoD rule deliberately lying about that and repeating that lie illustrates you know your argument is completely flawed. Your concession is accepted.
I've asked before and I'll keep asking because I'm a gentleman. STOP calling me a 'deliberate liar' and STOP putting words in my mouth. I offered no concession. You are not keeping this debate even remotely polite.
Being forced to only attack with the HK would violate the rule saying that if you have multiple weapons, you can decide which to attack with. So there's that. That's one. Zero is still less than one.
Again with the lie. Not making a KoD attack breaks the KoD rule deliberately lying about that and repeating that lie illustrates you know your argument is completely flawed. Your concession is accepted.
I've asked before and I'll keep asking because I'm a gentleman. STOP calling me a 'deliberate liar' and STOP putting words in my mouth. I offered no concession. You are not keeping this debate even remotely polite.
I am trying to then you repeat stuff you know is untrue and deliberate repeat lies. So in order to remain polite can you please refrain from doing that and retract that break the KoD rule is not breaking any rules statement.
Being forced to only attack with the HK would violate the rule saying that if you have multiple weapons, you can decide which to attack with. So there's that. That's one. Zero is still less than one.
Again with the lie. Not making a KoD attack breaks the KoD rule deliberately lying about that and repeating that lie illustrates you know your argument is completely flawed. Your concession is accepted.
I've asked before and I'll keep asking because I'm a gentleman. STOP calling me a 'deliberate liar' and STOP putting words in my mouth. I offered no concession. You are not keeping this debate even remotely polite.
So, real question...
Does anyone agree with FlingitNow? If so, can you provide any rules wording allowing you to ignore the restriction in the BRB on mixing and matching weapon abilities?
Devil's Advocate...
Let's say you're correct. (You aren't). Let's say the Kiss of Death has some sort of rules wording that I obviously am not seeing that will allow you to use it when fighting with the Harlequin's Caress. Can you point me to the rule wording in the Caress of Death that allows you to mix and match it with the Kiss of Death? Presumably, the BRB restriction would apply to both weapons, so both weapons need an exemption. If you're correct, you wouldn't be able to use the Caress to attack at all because that would be mixing and matching the Caress of Death with another weapon ability (still prohibited from doing so in the BRB).
So, if you're correct, you can never, ever attack with the Harlequin's Caress. If I'm correct, you can attack with either, but gain benefit only from the weapon you're attacking with. Honestly, which seems more likely?
Because if you read Arthurmw43's post you will see that there are other ways to get a special rule, not limited to anything, and as the rule quite clearly states when it is equipped, it has this rule.
I read, and addressed, his post. Perhaps you'd care to respond to my comments?
No, I did not see your rebuttal to his post. Off to read it.
Being forced to only attack with the HK would violate the rule saying that if you have multiple weapons, you can decide which to attack with. So there's that. That's one. Zero is still less than one.
Again with the lie. Not making a KoD attack breaks the KoD rule deliberately lying about that and repeating that lie illustrates you know your argument is completely flawed. Your concession is accepted.
I've asked before and I'll keep asking because I'm a gentleman. STOP calling me a 'deliberate liar' and STOP putting words in my mouth. I offered no concession. You are not keeping this debate even remotely polite.
I am trying to then you repeat stuff you know is untrue and deliberate repeat lies. So in order to remain polite can you please refrain from doing that and retract that break the KoD rule is not breaking any rules statement.
So, you're the arbiter of what I know to be untrue? Again, please stop putting words in my mouth and please stop calling me a liar. I do not appreciate it and it damages this forum.
Um. How is he able to make an attack - triggered by a weapon special rule - with a weapon he's not swinging with? Using your argument, a model could only ever swing with a Kiss.
That's your argument. The KoD rule requires that the solitaire makes a KoD attack whenever he attacks in close combat. If you're saying he can't do that when attacking with the caress then he can't attack with the caress without breaking rules.
Being forced to only attack with the HK would violate the rule saying that if you have multiple weapons, you can decide which to attack with. So there's that. That's one. Zero is still less than one.
Again with the lie. Not making a KoD attack breaks the KoD rule deliberately lying about that and repeating that lie illustrates you know your argument is completely flawed. Your concession is accepted.
I've asked before and I'll keep asking because I'm a gentleman. STOP calling me a 'deliberate liar' and STOP putting words in my mouth. I offered no concession. You are not keeping this debate even remotely polite.
So, real question...
Does anyone agree with FlingitNow? If so, can you provide any rules wording allowing you to ignore the restriction in the BRB on mixing and matching weapon abilities?
Devil's Advocate...
Let's say you're correct. (You aren't). Let's say the Kiss of Death has some sort of rules wording that I obviously am not seeing that will allow you to use it when fighting with the Harlequin's Caress. Can you point me to the rule wording in the Caress of Death that allows you to mix and match it with the Kiss of Death? Presumably, the BRB restriction would apply to both weapons, so both weapons need an exemption. If you're correct, you wouldn't be able to use the Caress to attack at all because that would be mixing and matching the Caress of Death with another weapon ability (still prohibited from doing so in the BRB).
So, if you're correct, you can never, ever attack with the Harlequin's Caress. If I'm correct, you can attack with either, but gain benefit only from the weapon you're attacking with. Honestly, which seems more likely?
I agree that it was meant to function in tandem, I also agree with the Kiss always being forced to attack, though I am checking another posters rebuttal to something, so retain the right to alter my position, or refute your position in a later post. As to the Most likely.....It is GW, so there is no such thing, as they have been known to make changes between versions of their own FAQ's.
Um. How is he able to make an attack - triggered by a weapon special rule - with a weapon he's not swinging with? Using your argument, a model could only ever swing with a Kiss.
That's your argument. The KoD rule requires that the solitaire makes a KoD attack whenever he attacks in close combat. If you're saying he can't do that when attacking with the caress then he can't attack with the caress without breaking rules.
Actually, that's my argument. I know because I wrote it.
Perhaps you could use his words to craft his argument?
Being forced to only attack with the HK would violate the rule saying that if you have multiple weapons, you can decide which to attack with. So there's that. That's one. Zero is still less than one.
Again with the lie. Not making a KoD attack breaks the KoD rule deliberately lying about that and repeating that lie illustrates you know your argument is completely flawed. Your concession is accepted.
I've asked before and I'll keep asking because I'm a gentleman. STOP calling me a 'deliberate liar' and STOP putting words in my mouth. I offered no concession. You are not keeping this debate even remotely polite.
I am trying to then you repeat stuff you know is untrue and deliberate repeat lies. So in order to remain polite can you please refrain from doing that and retract that break the KoD rule is not breaking any rules statement.
So, you're the arbiter of what I know to be untrue? Again, please stop putting words in my mouth and please stop calling me a liar. I do not appreciate it and it damages this forum.
Nope but it was a point brought up and covered before. You well know what the KoD rule states so you know that not making a KoD attack breaks that rule, so you know that it doesn't break zero rules as you repeatedly tried to claim.
Um. How is he able to make an attack - triggered by a weapon special rule - with a weapon he's not swinging with? Using your argument, a model could only ever swing with a Kiss.
That's your argument. The KoD rule requires that the solitaire makes a KoD attack whenever he attacks in close combat. If you're saying he can't do that when attacking with the caress then he can't attack with the caress without breaking rules.
Actually, that's my argument. I know because I wrote it.
Perhaps you could use his words to craft his argument?
I know its your argument I never said it wasn't. So you believe the Solitaire can never use his caress correct?
I've asked before and I'll keep asking because I'm a gentleman. STOP calling me a 'deliberate liar' and STOP putting words in my mouth. I offered no concession. You are not keeping this debate even remotely polite.
Being forced to only attack with the HK would violate the rule saying that if you have multiple weapons, you can decide which to attack with. So there's that. That's one. Zero is still less than one.
Again with the lie. Not making a KoD attack breaks the KoD rule deliberately lying about that and repeating that lie illustrates you know your argument is completely flawed. Your concession is accepted.
I've asked before and I'll keep asking because I'm a gentleman. STOP calling me a 'deliberate liar' and STOP putting words in my mouth. I offered no concession. You are not keeping this debate even remotely polite.
I am trying to then you repeat stuff you know is untrue and deliberate repeat lies. So in order to remain polite can you please refrain from doing that and retract that break the KoD rule is not breaking any rules statement.
So, you're the arbiter of what I know to be untrue? Again, please stop putting words in my mouth and please stop calling me a liar. I do not appreciate it and it damages this forum.
Nope but it was a point brought up and covered before. You well know what the KoD rule states so you know that not making a KoD attack breaks that rule, so you know that it doesn't break zero rules as you repeatedly tried to claim.
Following the core rules in the rulebook which tell me I'm not allowed to use the Kiss of Death and then not using the Kiss of Death is breaking which core rule? Remember that you only gain the benefit of the Kiss of Death when attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss. The KoD is optional and contingent upon attacking with the HK. The restriction on mixing and matching is not optional.
Um. How is he able to make an attack - triggered by a weapon special rule - with a weapon he's not swinging with? Using your argument, a model could only ever swing with a Kiss.
That's your argument. The KoD rule requires that the solitaire makes a KoD attack whenever he attacks in close combat. If you're saying he can't do that when attacking with the caress then he can't attack with the caress without breaking rules.
Actually, that's my argument. I know because I wrote it.
Perhaps you could use his words to craft his argument?
I know its your argument I never said it wasn't. So you believe the Solitaire can never use his caress correct?
No, I don't. And haven't ever said that.
I said it was a consequence of your argument.
Following the core rules in the rulebook which tell me I'm not allowed to use the Kiss of Death and then not using the Kiss of Death is breaking which core rule? Remember that you only gain the benefit of the Kiss of Death when attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss. The KoD is optional and contingent upon attacking with the HK. The restriction on mixing and matching is not optional.
The KoD rule requires you make a KoD attack whenever a model equipped with a Harlequins Kiss attacks in close combat. So if you are equipped with a Harlequins Kiss and attacking in close combat you must make a KoD attack or you are breaking the Kiss of Death rule. The restriction on making a kiss of death attack is no it optional.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
No, I don't. And haven't ever said that.
I said it was a consequence of your argument.
I pointed out it was a consequence of yours pages ago. Glad you've caught up.,
Following the core rules in the rulebook which tell me I'm not allowed to use the Kiss of Death and then not using the Kiss of Death is breaking which core rule? Remember that you only gain the benefit of the Kiss of Death when attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss. The KoD is optional and contingent upon attacking with the HK. The restriction on mixing and matching is not optional.
The KoD rule requires you make a KoD attack whenever a model equipped with a Harlequins Kiss attacks in close combat. So if you are equipped with a Harlequins Kiss and attacking in close combat you must make a KoD attack or you are breaking the Kiss of Death rule. The restriction on making a kiss of death attack is no it optional.
How do I get benefits/restrictions from a special rule on a weapon I'm not using?
Following the core rules in the rulebook which tell me I'm not allowed to use the Kiss of Death and then not using the Kiss of Death is breaking which core rule? Remember that you only gain the benefit of the Kiss of Death when attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss. The KoD is optional and contingent upon attacking with the HK. The restriction on mixing and matching is not optional.
The KoD rule requires you make a KoD attack whenever a model equipped with a Harlequins Kiss attacks in close combat. So if you are equipped with a Harlequins Kiss and attacking in close combat you must make a KoD attack or you are breaking the Kiss of Death rule. The restriction on making a kiss of death attack is no it optional.
How do I get benefits/restrictions from a special rule on a weapon I'm not using?
Through the magic of breaking the core rules. Oh, and HIWPI.
Rigeld, I couldn't find your rebuttal for the other ways to acquire special rules. Being equipped with does still fulfill the first sentence of the granting of special rules, the second sentence is strengthened by the wording of weapons that state when attacking with whatever weapon, something not present in the Harlequins Kiss. So, the restriction for attacking with a weapon to get it's special rule might not apply in this case. Though, that is up to the interpretation of the reader. I am focusing on the granting of a special rule by the "equipped with" portion of the rule in question, this does firmly place the rule under the first part of the special rule a model has. The second part is for when a model makes attacks, and are limited to said attacks, something this rule is not limited to in the way it is written.
As to not allowing the choice, look at Psychers with set powers, they still "generate powers" but the roll and even the choice of charts is removed, but they still get access to other charts, though the choice was removed for choosing them. So not really a problem in forcing them to use the Kiss over the caress every time.
Yes this would have been simpler if they wrote better rules, but it is not, so it is up to the interpretations of the readers.
RAW the Kiss will always apply, then no mixing and matching weapons, thus blocking the caress. I do admit that your interpretation is a valid one, just focusing on, or adding more weight to, one line instead of another.
Following the core rules in the rulebook which tell me I'm not allowed to use the Kiss of Death and then not using the Kiss of Death is breaking which core rule? Remember that you only gain the benefit of the Kiss of Death when attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss. The KoD is optional and contingent upon attacking with the HK. The restriction on mixing and matching is not optional.
The KoD rule requires you make a KoD attack whenever a model equipped with a Harlequins Kiss attacks in close combat. So if you are equipped with a Harlequins Kiss and attacking in close combat you must make a KoD attack or you are breaking the Kiss of Death rule. The restriction on making a kiss of death attack is no it optional.
How do I get benefits/restrictions from a special rule on a weapon I'm not using?
Through the magic of breaking the core rules. Oh, and HIWPI.
Not breaking core rules. Just applying a different line due to the nature of the way the rule in question is written.
Following the core rules in the rulebook which tell me I'm not allowed to use the Kiss of Death and then not using the Kiss of Death is breaking which core rule? Remember that you only gain the benefit of the Kiss of Death when attacking with the Harlequin's Kiss. The KoD is optional and contingent upon attacking with the HK. The restriction on mixing and matching is not optional.
The KoD rule requires you make a KoD attack whenever a model equipped with a Harlequins Kiss attacks in close combat. So if you are equipped with a Harlequins Kiss and attacking in close combat you must make a KoD attack or you are breaking the Kiss of Death rule. The restriction on making a kiss of death attack is no it optional.
How do I get benefits/restrictions from a special rule on a weapon I'm not using?
From the KoD rule which clearly applies whenever a model equipped with a Harlequins Kiss attacks in close combat. Or is that not when it applies? Is the Harlequin codex lying when it says that is when the rule applies?
Can someone please give me a quote from the BRB that says that the only way to get a special rule from a weapon is to make an attack with it. I have seen this assertion in several posts however I do not seem to be able to find that rule in the BRB. I have posted what I found under the Special Rules entry in it listed 3 ways to get special rules, not just one.
Arthurmw43 wrote: Can someone please give me a quote from the BRB that says that the only way to get a special rule from a weapon is to make an attack with it. I have seen this assertion in several posts however I do not seem to be able to find that rule in the BRB. I have posted what I found under the Special Rules entry in it listed 3 ways to get special rules, not just one.
Special Rules Section - What Special Rules Do I Have? Section - "...a model's attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using."
I don't believe there is any permission in the rule book for a model or its attacks to gain special rules because of a weapon it ISN'T using. There are obviously many ways for a model or its attacks to gain special rules, but I believe this is the only wording surrounding getting a special rule from a weapon. Might be wrong. It's a big book, but I'm pretty confident this is the key wording.
This is actually the key issue. FlingitNow would like the Solitaire to gain special rules from of a weapon the Solitaire ISN'T using. There is no permission in the core rule book to do so. This is a permissive rule set. If there is no permission, you can't do a thing. Since there is no permission to gain the special rule, how the Kiss of Death rule is worded isn't important. The Solitaire's attacks never actually gain the Kiss of Death rule. The only way for his attacks to gain the Kiss of Death special rule is by using the Harlequin's Kiss weapon in combat.
Arthurmw43 wrote: Can someone please give me a quote from the BRB that says that the only way to get a special rule from a weapon is to make an attack with it. I have seen this assertion in several posts however I do not seem to be able to find that rule in the BRB. I have posted what I found under the Special Rules entry in it listed 3 ways to get special rules, not just one.
Special Rules Section - What Special Rules Do I Have? Section - "...a model's attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using."
I don't believe there is any permission in the rule book for a model or its attacks to gain special rules because of a weapon it ISN'T using. There are obviously many ways for a model or its attacks to gain special rules, but I believe this is the only wording surrounding getting a special rule from a weapon. Might be wrong. It's a big book, but I'm pretty confident this is the key wording.
This is actually the key issue. FlingitNow would like the Solitaire to gain special rules from of a weapon the Solitaire ISN'T using. There is no permission in the core rule book to do so. This is a permissive rule set. If there is no permission, you can't do a thing. Since there is no permission to gain the special rule, how the Kiss of Death rule is worded isn't important. The Solitaire's attacks never actually gain the Kiss of Death rule. The only way for his attacks to gain the Kiss of Death special rule is by using the Harlequin's Kiss weapon in combat.
You obviously missed his earlier post. The one where he points out that there are other ways to get special rules, not just by using said weapon. Try posting the whole rule again, from start to finish, and then you will see where the disconnect is. You are focusing on that last part, and we are focusing on the first part.
megatrons2nd wrote: Rigeld, I couldn't find your rebuttal for the other ways to acquire special rules. Being equipped with does still fulfill the first sentence of the granting of special rules, the second sentence is strengthened by the wording of weapons that state when attacking with whatever weapon, something not present in the Harlequins Kiss. So, the restriction for attacking with a weapon to get it's special rule might not apply in this case. Though, that is up to the interpretation of the reader.
Which sentence allows you to gain the special rules of a weapon? Simple question.
I am focusing on the granting of a special rule by the "equipped with" portion of the rule in question, this does firmly place the rule under the first part of the special rule a model has. The second part is for when a model makes attacks, and are limited to said attacks, something this rule is not limited to in the way it is written.
Sigh.
Again - how does the model have the special rule in the first place? If you reference "equipped with" for that it's a self-referential argument and not a valid discussion.
As to not allowing the choice, look at Psychers with set powers, they still "generate powers" but the roll and even the choice of charts is removed, but they still get access to other charts, though the choice was removed for choosing them. So not really a problem in forcing them to use the Kiss over the caress every time.
I wasn't stating the lack of choice as support for my argument, simply stating that was a consequence that Fling asserted didn't exist.
RAW the Kiss will always apply, then no mixing and matching weapons, thus blocking the caress. I do admit that your interpretation is a valid one, just focusing on, or adding more weight to, one line instead of another.
So first it's "up to interpretation" and now it's "RAW"? I'm confused - which is it?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Arthurmw43 wrote: Can someone please give me a quote from the BRB that says that the only way to get a special rule from a weapon is to make an attack with it. I have seen this assertion in several posts however I do not seem to be able to find that rule in the BRB. I have posted what I found under the Special Rules entry in it listed 3 ways to get special rules, not just one.
There's only one sentence addressing how to get special rules from a weapon.
Without that, you never could - because the weapon isn't listed in any of the other methods to get a special rule.
There is no permission in the core rule book to do so.
There is however permission in the Harlequin codex. Or can codexes not change or add to any rules in the core rulebook now?
This is a permissive rule set. If there is no permission, you can't do a thing. Since there is no permission to gain the special rule, how the Kiss of Death rule is worded isn't important. The Solitaire's attacks never actually gain the Kiss of Death rule. The only way for his attacks to gain the Kiss of Death special rule is by using the Harlequin's Kiss weapon in combat.
Yet we have permission ignoring that permission is not RaW. Say that words don't matter is not RaW. Kiss of Death tells you exactly how and when it applies. Why do you keep ignoring that?
Arthurmw43 wrote: Can someone please give me a quote from the BRB that says that the only way to get a special rule from a weapon is to make an attack with it. I have seen this assertion in several posts however I do not seem to be able to find that rule in the BRB. I have posted what I found under the Special Rules entry in it listed 3 ways to get special rules, not just one.
Special Rules Section - What Special Rules Do I Have? Section - "...a model's attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using."
I don't believe there is any permission in the rule book for a model or its attacks to gain special rules because of a weapon it ISN'T using. There are obviously many ways for a model or its attacks to gain special rules, but I believe this is the only wording surrounding getting a special rule from a weapon. Might be wrong. It's a big book, but I'm pretty confident this is the key wording.
This is actually the key issue. FlingitNow would like the Solitaire to gain special rules from of a weapon the Solitaire ISN'T using. There is no permission in the core rule book to do so. This is a permissive rule set. If there is no permission, you can't do a thing. Since there is no permission to gain the special rule, how the Kiss of Death rule is worded isn't important. The Solitaire's attacks never actually gain the Kiss of Death rule. The only way for his attacks to gain the Kiss of Death special rule is by using the Harlequin's Kiss weapon in combat.
You obviously missed his earlier post. The one where he points out that there are other ways to get special rules, not just by using said weapon. Try posting the whole rule again, from start to finish, and then you will see where the disconnect is. You are focusing on that last part, and we are focusing on the first part.
WHAT SPECIAL RULES DO I HAVE?
It may seem obvious, but unless stated otherwise, a model does not have a special rule. Most special rules are given to a model by the relevant Army List Entry or its unit type. That said, a model’s attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using.
Where is it stated otherwise? Just one place. Where?
Special Rules Section - What Special Rules Do I Have? Section - "...a model's attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using."
I don't believe there is any permission in the rule book for a model or its attacks to gain special rules because of a weapon it ISN'T using. There are obviously many ways for a model or its attacks to gain special rules, but I believe this is the only wording surrounding getting a special rule from a weapon. Might be wrong. It's a big book, but I'm pretty confident this is the key wording.
So we are agreeing that a model can get special rules in other ways, other than by making attacks? If so we don't need to keep rehashing the whole mix and match argument. What I'm suggesting is that in the case of Special rules that do not require an attack to be made, confer their rules, to the model, without an attack being made.
But the logic of not being able to check what the special rule grants, one would have a problem getting outflank as a special rule as it is granted to most units via the special rule of infiltrate.
What I'm suggesting is on par with a genestealer with rending claws (comes stock) purchasing toxin sacs (biomorph). all its close combat attacks have both rending and poisoned. the toxin sacs are an add-on that confers additional Special Rules to the model. Now the Kiss is more than just an add-on it is also a weapon in its own right but the Special Rule from the kiss does not require an attack to be made, only to be equipped.
Yes, neither is armor, or formations, or helmets......
It only says "most" notice how it does not deny weapons, nor include any of the previous. So unless a special rule is in the unit entry, or unit type we can't apply it. So we have been playing it wrong this whole time, and Troops choices don't get objective secured in a CAD.
The weapon entry also does not say that it is the only way that a weapon can give a model a special rule. It does say it's attacks, however. Thus you are not mixing and matching if you do apply both, because it is only modifying 1 attack, so then all is well. As the limitation on using the abilities of two weapons is circumvented by the special rules that only limit the special rules to attacks only.
Under Weapons
Special Rules
The type section of a weapon's profile also includes any special rules that apply to the weapon in question. More information on these can be found either in the special rules section(pg156) or in the codex or army list entry the weapon is found in.
More than one weapon
Unless otherwise stated, if a model has more than one shooting weapon, he must choose which one to shoot-he cannot fire both in the same shooting phase. If a model has more than one Melee weapon, he must choose which one to attack with when it comes time to strike blows-he cannot mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons.
Notice how it doesn't say you can't use both, you just can't mix the abilities together. This could conceivably be interpreted as just deciding the number of each attack to be used.
Special Rules section
What Special rules do I have?
Most special rules are given to a model by the relevant Army list entry or its unit type. That said, a model's attacks gain special rules because of the weapon it is using.
So maybe models with attack special rules not attached to a weapon can't use them, because their attacks only get a special rule from its weapons.
See how wonderful over interpreting a rule can be.
Arthurmw43 wrote: So we are agreeing that a model can get special rules in other ways, other than by making attacks?
Slight correction - using the weapon. That's typically making an attack, but doesn't have to be.
What I'm suggesting is that in the case of Special rules that do not require an attack to be made, confer their rules, to the model, without an attack being made.
But the logic of not being able to check what the special rule grants, one would have a problem getting outflank as a special rule as it is granted to most units via the special rule of infiltrate.
Incorrect - the model has Infiltrate. That gives us permission to reference the Infiltrate SR. The Infiltrate SR bestows the Outflank SR - which means you have permission to reference that one as well.
What I'm suggesting is on par with a genestealer with rending claws (comes stock) purchasing toxin sacs (biomorph). all its close combat attacks have both rending and poisoned. the toxin sacs are an add-on that confers additional Special Rules to the model. Now the Kiss is more than just an add-on it is also a weapon in its own right but the Special Rule from the kiss does not require an attack to be made, only to be equipped.
The Toxin Sacs upgrade says
If a model has the toxin sacs biomorph, its close combat attacks have the Poisoned special rule.
So the model never has the Special Rule.
I'm not even sure how that example is relevant either..
In addition to the special rules reading, I think it would be good to have some disambiguation on the pronouns used in the Harlequin's Kiss rules:
Currently: ""When a model equipped with a Harlequin’s Kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of its Attacks will be a Kiss of Death Attack (roll this Attack separately). A Kiss of Death Attack is always resolved at Strength 6 AP2. If a 6 is rolled To Wound with a Kiss of Death Attack, that attack has the Instant Death special rule."
Does the "its," highlighted in red ("First It"), refer to the model or the Harlequins kiss? If it is the former, then the attacks are that of the model, and receive the kiss of death rule, regardless of whether or not the close combat attack is made by the Harlequins Kiss. If it is the latter, then it would follow that only close combat attacks made directly by the Harlequins kiss receive the kiss of death special rule.
The second "its", highlighted in green ("Second It"), is also important. Does it only reference Harlequin's kiss attacks or does it reference "close combat attacks" (see red "its" for what this references).
Finally, what does "equipped" mean in terms of 40k? Does the BRB differentiate between "equipped" and "attacks with", "uses" or another verb?
Option 1: The First It references the Harlequin's Kiss, therefore the close combat attacks are made with the Harlequin's Kiss. The Second it is irrelevant, as either way as both options refer directly to the use of the Harlequin's kiss in making the attack.
Option 2: The First It references the model that is "equipped with" but not necessarily making a close combat attack using the Harlequin's kiss. Now the Second It becomes important. If it references close combat attacks made with the Harlequin's kiss then you only get kiss of death if you make attacks using the Harlequin's Kiss as the weapon. Otherwise, one of the model's attacks receives Kiss of Death, regardless of whether or not all attacks are made by the weapon.
FWIW, my interpretation is that the attacks are all referencing that of the model since he/she/it is going through the physical motion of attacking with Weapon A in their hand, meaning that 1 of the attacks is always a Kiss of Death, even if the model use another weapon. I think we can all agree the writers need to go back to school and learn to not rely on pronouns so much!
It only says "most" notice how it does not deny weapons, nor include any of the previous. So unless a special rule is in the unit entry, or unit type we can't apply it. So we have been playing it wrong this whole time, and Troops choices don't get objective secured in a CAD.
So I can just write a special rule on something and it gets it? Sweet - Eternal Warrior Swarmlord here I come!
Oh - I need a rule allowing it? Darn, it's too bad Formations and Detachment's don't have a spec...
If you choose to use a Battle-forged army, you must tell your opponent what units belong to what Detachments and what Command Benefits each will receive (if any) before you start deploying your army.
Instead of including a Force Organisation chart, the Army List Entries that comprise a Formation are listed on it, along with any special rules that those units gain.
Oh. Darn.
The weapon entry also does not say that it is the only way that a weapon can give a model a special rule. It does say it's attacks, however. Thus you are not mixing and matching if you do apply both, because it is only modifying 1 attack, so then all is well. As the limitation on using the abilities of two weapons is circumvented by the special rules that only limit the special rules to attacks only.
No, it doesn't say "it's attacks". It says "using" which is typically, but not always attacks.
And I didn't realize the rules forbidding mixing and matching only applied to all but one attack. Could you explain that rule to me? Citing it would be great.
Notice how it doesn't say you can't use both, you just can't mix the abilities together. This could conceivably be interpreted as just deciding the number of each attack to be used.
No, you can't decide the number of each attack to be used - because you must pick one to attack with. It's right there in the rule you quoted. One - not "one for all but one attack" or "one but you can use the ability of another if you feel like it"
So maybe models with attack special rules not attached to a weapon can't use them, because their attacks only get a special rule from its weapons.
The attacks don't have the special rules from the model (unless the special rule specifically applies itself to a model's attacks).
See how wonderful over interpreting a rule can be.
Yes, making up rules can be fun.
So what I'm getting from you is that you don't have a good argument, you just want to present potential problems by making up rules.
That doesn't seem a polite method to have a rules discussion.
I made a point earlier, do you attack with the kiss? I thought it was like armour giving a model a reroll on the charge. He isnt attacking with the armour, but his attacks are still effected by both the weapon and the armour.
If you have 2 weapons, one gives fearless and the other is a power sword, and you attack with the powersword, do you still benefit from fearless?
So I can just write a special rule on something and it gets it? Sweet - Eternal Warrior Swarmlord here I come!
Well if you were on the GW Design team by all means yes. Are you trying to say stuff you add to your book is as valid as stuff written in there from the start? What an odd stance explain this to me in more detail.
The attacks don't have the special rules from the model (unless the special rule specifically applies itself to a model's attacks).
How do we know which special rules apply then? We apparently aren't allowed to read them until we know if they apply. So how do we know which special rules modify our attacks without looking at the special rules themselves?
Yes, making up rules can be fun.
So what I'm getting from you is that you don't have a good argument, you just want to present potential problems by making up rules.
That doesn't seem a polite method to have a rules discussion.
What you're doing here is attacking the poster not his argument. This is not polite.
"No, it doesn't say "it's attacks". It says "using" which is typically, but not always attacks."
What Special rules do I have?
"Most special rules are given to a model by the relevant Army list entry or its unit type. That said, a model's attacks gain special rules because of the weapon it is using."
Direct from the book quote. Do you see an allowance for using the special rules from the CAD? No, neither do I. Oh, you want to include that under the most, why can't the Equipped HK rule?
Oh, right because weapon special rules can only come from a weapon being used. Look closely at that part, see how it says "a model's attacks gain special rules because of the weapon it is using" Do you see an allowance for using a special rule from any other source when making attacks? No, there isn't even a most. So using the interpretation you have set forth, no special rules for attacks can come from another source.
"And I didn't realize the rules forbidding mixing and matching only applied to all but one attack. Could you explain that rule to me? Citing it would be great."
Did you read the whole thing? Do you see where the ranged portion specifically calls out not being able to shoot both weapons? Do you see that in the Melee part? No, so it is just as valid an interpretation the way the rule is written.
"Yes, making up rules can be fun."
Not making up, just interpreting what is written, to the absurd levels already presented.
"So what I'm getting from you is that you don't have a good argument, you just want to present potential problems by making up rules.
That doesn't seem a polite method to have a rules discussion."
I quoted the rules as written in the book, and then interpreted them in a similar manner to what has already been presented thus far. Limiting every special rule because it is on a weapon to the only when it is used bit is half using the rule. It also flies in the face of the "most" portion of the first sentence that would allow for the use from a weapon special rule outside of the second part of the second sentence, is just as poor.
So I can just write a special rule on something and it gets it? Sweet - Eternal Warrior Swarmlord here I come!
Well if you were on the GW Design team by all means yes. Are you trying to say stuff you add to your book is as valid as stuff written in there from the start? What an odd stance explain this to me in more detail.
It's almost like taking statements out of context leads to an incorrect interpretation. Read what I replied to, please.
The attacks don't have the special rules from the model (unless the special rule specifically applies itself to a model's attacks).
How do we know which special rules apply then? We apparently aren't allowed to read them until we know if they apply. So how do we know which special rules modify our attacks without looking at the special rules themselves?
No, you can read them when you're told you have them.
For model special rules, it's when the rule is on the army list entry (for example).
For weapons, it's when the weapon is used.
Yes, making up rules can be fun.
So what I'm getting from you is that you don't have a good argument, you just want to present potential problems by making up rules.
That doesn't seem a polite method to have a rules discussion.
What you're doing here is attacking the poster not his argument. This is not polite.
No, I'm not. I'm making statements about how I'm viewing his argument based on what he's said. I haven't attacked the poster at all - I'm strictly discussing his argument.
Do you have anything of substance to add yet? Maybe a rule proving your assertions correct? You've yet to provide one.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
megatrons2nd wrote: "No, it doesn't say "it's attacks". It says "using" which is typically, but not always attacks."
What Special rules do I have?
"Most special rules are given to a model by the relevant Army list entry or its unit type. That said, a model's attacks gain special rules because of the weapon it is using."
Direct from the book quote.
Yup! Does it say "it's attacks" or does it say "using"?
Do you see an allowance for using the special rules from the CAD? No, neither do I. Oh, you want to include that under the most, why can't the Equipped HK rule?
It's amazing you can pretend the explicit rules I quoted are even remotely like the, at best, implication, of "equipped" in the KoD rule.
Oh, right because weapon special rules can only come from a weapon being used. Look closely at that part, see how it says "a model's attacks gain special rules because of the weapon it is using" Do you see an allowance for using a special rule from any other source when making attacks? No, there isn't even a most. So using the interpretation you have set forth, no special rules for attacks can come from another source.
Not true. If a model's special rules modify its attacks, a weapon can further modify them (because it doesn't say "solely" or anything that would remove the other special rules).
"And I didn't realize the rules forbidding mixing and matching only applied to all but one attack. Could you explain that rule to me? Citing it would be great."
Did you read the whole thing? Do you see where the ranged portion specifically calls out not being able to shoot both weapons? Do you see that in the Melee part? No, so it is just as valid an interpretation the way the rule is written.
So somehow, "must choose which one to attack with" means you can attack with two weapons?
Are you sure?
"Yes, making up rules can be fun."
Not making up, just interpreting what is written, to the absurd levels already presented.
It's not absurd. Your "interpretations" either ignore rules or invent words - neither is an "interpretation" if we're being honest.
"So what I'm getting from you is that you don't have a good argument, you just want to present potential problems by making up rules.
That doesn't seem a polite method to have a rules discussion."
I quoted the rules as written in the book, and then interpreted them in a similar manner to what has already been presented thus far. Limiting every special rule because it is on a weapon to the only when it is used bit is half using the rule. It also flies in the face of the "most" portion of the first sentence that would allow for the use from a weapon special rule outside of the second part of the second sentence, is just as poor.
Your "interpretation" means that the weapon part of the rule is useless and never has an effect on the game. It also has to make some assumptions (as shown throughout the thread) that just aren't valid (mostly the self-referential one).
Mine uses the rules as they're presented and makes no assumptions.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Swastakowey wrote: I made a point earlier, do you attack with the kiss? I thought it was like armour giving a model a reroll on the charge. He isnt attacking with the armour, but his attacks are still effected by both the weapon and the armour.
Yes, in fact you must attack with it (or otherwise "use" it) to use the special rule.
If you have 2 weapons, one gives fearless and the other is a power sword, and you attack with the powersword, do you still benefit from fearless?
A weapon wouldn't bestow Fearless on it's wielded except when it's being used (attacking typically).
"Yup! Does it say "it's attacks" or does it say "using"? "
It says: "When a model equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss makes it's close combat attacks, one of its attacks will be a kiss of death attack(roll this attack separately)"
Far different from: When a model attacks with this weapon it does....(pretty much every weapon in the game)
I do not see "using" anywhere in that. It does say "it's attacks" It is written like special rules applied to models, not like the special rules applied to weapons.
Let me ask you this, If the weapon was the Harlequins Embrace how would it work?
Using your interpretation you would never be able to use the HoW attack. Since you can't reference the rule until you go to choose the weapon you are attacking with you have already missed the I10step(except for the Solitaire which is I10) and it is only I7. Do I lose the rule now? Am I just not allowed to resolve it? You don't choose a weapon until "he comes to strike blows" which as we know from the assault rules is the models respective Initiative value.
"Mine uses the rules as they're presented and makes no assumptions. "
Sadly you "assume" that the only way a weapon can give you a special rule is if you are using it/attacking with it. I do not make this assumption. I read that a rule is provided because it is "equipped with" the item. Which does fall into the Paradigm set in the first sentence providing special rules.
Self Referencing is what many rules do. If you don not Reference the rule, you will literally never be able to use some of them. Especially rules that provide other rules.
"Your "interpretation" means that the weapon part of the rule is useless and never has an effect on the game. It also has to make some assumptions (as shown throughout the thread) that just aren't valid (mostly the self-referential one)."
No, my interpretation leaves an opening for weapons that say equipped with to still provide a special rule outside of attacking with it, which 98% of the weapons tell you, explicitly, When making attacks with this weapon do whatever. Unlike the Kiss and Embrace. What other weapon says to do something when a model is equipped with it? There are none in the Dark Eldar Codex that don't specify when attacking with, or when wounding with said weapon. The Eldar have the Spiritlink rule, so great now Eldrad can't get bonus warp charges, as he can't "use" a staff outside of melee. Awesome, Yriel doesn't have to reroll saves of 6. The Shard of Anaris, Vaul's work rule, gives Fearless, and in a challenge making attacks with the weapon have Fleshbane and ID, so obviously, he is not fearless, except in melee. All the other Eldar stuff specifies when attacking with the weapon or wounding with the weapon.
Most of the rest of my "interpretations" are taking the absurdity to the same level I see when using 2 words out of a sentence, and ignoring another completely, to disallow a rule from functioning. I really do not believe them.
"When a model (equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss) makes it's close combat attacks, one of its attacks will be a kiss of death attack(roll this attack separately)"
If the part in parenthesis wasn't there would this be a weapon rule or a model rule?
megatrons2nd wrote: "Yup! Does it say "it's attacks" or does it say "using"? "
It says: "When a model equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss makes it's close combat attacks, one of its attacks will be a kiss of death attack(roll this attack separately)"
Sorry - we're talking past each other. I thought you were referring to the multiple weapons rule - going back and rereading I was wrong.
Far different from: When a model attacks with this weapon it does....(pretty much every weapon in the game)
Relevance?
Let me ask you this, If the weapon was the Harlequins Embrace how would it work?
Using your interpretation you would never be able to use the HoW attack. Since you can't reference the rule until you go to choose the weapon you are attacking with you have already missed the I10step(except for the Solitaire which is I10) and it is only I7. Do I lose the rule now? Am I just not allowed to resolve it? You don't choose a weapon until "he comes to strike blows" which as we know from the assault rules is the models respective Initiative value.
Correct! Embrace doesn't function as written. I've basically said that multiple times.
"Mine uses the rules as they're presented and makes no assumptions. "
Sadly you "assume" that the only way a weapon can give you a special rule is if you are using it/attacking with it. I do not make this assumption. I read that a rule is provided because it is "equipped with" the item. Which does fall into the Paradigm set in the first sentence providing special rules.
It's not an assumption - it's what the rules permit. As I've explained. Your argument requires the assumption that the rules mean things that they don't actually say.
Self Referencing is what many rules do. If you don not Reference the rule, you will literally never be able to use some of them. Especially rules that provide other rules.
You're not just self-referencing - you're self permitting.
"I have permission to use the rule because the rule give me permission to use the rule which I can use because the rule gives me permission to use the rule which I can use because ..."
Circular argument is circular.
"Your "interpretation" means that the weapon part of the rule is useless and never has an effect on the game. It also has to make some assumptions (as shown throughout the thread) that just aren't valid (mostly the self-referential one)."
No, my interpretation leaves an opening for weapons that say equipped with to still provide a special rule outside of attacking with it, which 98% of the weapons tell you, explicitly, When making attacks with this weapon do whatever. Unlike the Kiss and Embrace. What other weapon says to do something when a model is equipped with it? There are none in the Dark Eldar Codex that don't specify when attacking with, or when wounding with said weapon. The Eldar have the Spiritlink rule, so great now Eldrad can't get bonus warp charges, as he can't "use" a staff outside of melee. Awesome, Yriel doesn't have to reroll saves of 6. The Shard of Anaris, Vaul's work rule, gives Fearless, and in a challenge making attacks with the weapon have Fleshbane and ID, so obviously, he is not fearless, except in melee. All the other Eldar stuff specifies when attacking with the weapon or wounding with the weapon.
You act like this is new information. Some things the intent is obvious (Spiritlink, Harlequin's Embrace, etc). Hell, Yriel has come up in YMDC multiple times and this is the conclusion that's been reached.
Most of the rest of my "interpretations" are taking the absurdity to the same level I see when using 2 words out of a sentence, and ignoring another completely, to disallow a rule from functioning. I really do not believe them.
It's not an absurdity - and your mocking is even less polite than calling it that.
"When a model (equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss) makes it's close combat attacks, one of its attacks will be a kiss of death attack(roll this attack separately)"
If the part in parenthesis wasn't there would this be a weapon rule or a model rule?
Dozer Blades wrote: I wonder how many pages this will go - very entertaining to read !
I think the problem, is that upon further reading, it seems weapons with rules that arent related to Close Combat etc, cant properly function as written.
So technically heaps of stuff doesnt work (or as my understanding after reading these 2 threads) when it comes to melee weapons and their rules outside of combat.
So we have an issue, where do we assume that its meant to be used like most other special rules? Or do we play it as written where only when actually using a weapon do we get any of the special rules that come with it.
I think the vast majority of people will play it not as written. So a sword that gives FnP will always give FnP even when not using the weapon in combat or using another weapon, despite the rule saying otherwise.
Dozer Blades wrote: I wonder how many pages this will go - very entertaining to read !
I think the problem, is that upon further reading, it seems weapons with rules that arent related to Close Combat etc, cant properly function as written.
So technically heaps of stuff doesnt work (or as my understanding after reading these 2 threads) when it comes to melee weapons and their rules outside of combat.
So we have an issue, where do we assume that its meant to be used like most other special rules? Or do we play it as written where only when actually using a weapon do we get any of the special rules that come with it.
I think the vast majority of people will play it not as written. So a sword that gives FnP will always give FnP even when not using the weapon in combat or using another weapon, despite the rule saying otherwise.
But im still reading....
Yeah, the old thread was quite clear on that. I shall use some of Rigeld's posts:
rigeld2 wrote: So what you're saying is that you don't understand the argument at all. Cool.
Please show me the "Cursed" rule in Yriel's Army List Entry.
Since you can't, I'll point out that it's on his Spear. Do you agree?
Now - the rule you quoted says that if there is a conflict then the more advanced rule takes precedence.
There's no conflict between Cursed and when weapons are used, and how those rules interact. None. If you disagree, explain the conflict.
Drazosh wrote:With Cursed or Blinded, I'd be happy to ignore them when not attacking, since they're mostly drawbacks
Fortunately, the rules support that. You cannot benefit form a special rule on a weapon unless you're attacking with it.
I couldn't find a source for the word "benefit," or that would have clarified matters earlier. Cursed is clearly not a benefit, so it wouldn't be ignored, following that wording. Anything positive, though, would be.
Wait... or do you mean that the rules support ignoring those specific rules? Forgive the misunderstanding.
I do mean that the rules support ignoring special rule on a weapon that you're not currently using.
Meaning Cursed has no effect unless Yriel suffers wounds at his initiative step.
So technically, by RaW, Special Rules found under the weapons "TYPE" can only be used when the weapon is used to strike blows (at your Initiative step).
The RaW you need to follow was clearly given on Page 6 of the thread:
So, "Kiss of Death" is a special rule with rules already quoted: when equipped, the weapon gives "bonus XYZ". The special rule is listed under "TYPE" of the Harelquin's Kiss.
Rulebook about TYPE:
Special Rules
The type section of a weapon’s profile also includes any special rules that apply to the weapon in question. More information on these can be found either in the special rules section or in the codex or army list entry the weapon is found in.
So, "Kiss of Death" applies ONLY to the weapon in question. Any disagreement against this RaW would need a clear quote to prove the contrary.
It may seem obvious, but unless stated otherwise, a model does not have a special rule. Most special rules are given to a model by the relevant Army List Entry or its unit type. That said, a model’s attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using.
So, you can gain abilities from the weapons (the ones listed in "TYPE") when you "use" those weapon. Any disagreement against this RaW would need a clear quote to prove the contrary.
MORE THAN ONE WEAPON
Unless otherwise stated,(...) If a model has more than one Melee weapon, he must choose which one to attack with when he comes to strike blows – he cannot mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons.
So, if you have 2 weapons, with 2 abilities, IE Harlequin's Caress, with the ability "Caress of Death" + Harlequin's Kiss, with the ability "Kiss of Death", you must select one of the two weapons, and you only get the Special Rules from the one you are using. Any disagreement against this RaW would need a clear quote to prove the contrary.
Simple conclusion:
When you are using the Harlequin's Caress, with the ability "Caress of Death", you only have the Special Rule "Caress of Death" plus those listed in the Solitaire's profile.
You do not have the Special Rule "Kiss of Death".
If you do not have the special rule "Kiss of Death", why is there an issue about "not being able to follow / breaking the rule" ? You do not have it.
Can you break the "Fear" rule if none of your models have "Fear"?
"It's not an assumption - it's what the rules permit. As I've explained. Your argument requires the assumption that the rules mean things that they don't actually say."
But it is not what the rules actually say. If you went by what the rules actually say, then no rules outside of what is written on the army list entry or unit type, or given by psychic powers, terrain, or scenario special rules could function. Go ahead reread the rule, it says "most special rules are given to a model by the relevant Army unit list entry or its unit type." Do you see an exclusion for providing a special rule from a weapon. I don't. I see a second sentence that applies to weapons and attacks, but that sentence also does not only limit special rules given from weapons to only attacks. "That said, a model's attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using." I don't see a "the only way a weapon provides a special rule is".
You are literally excluding weapons from a list that can include them. Thus following logic, your interpretation that does not include other sources beyond what is stated, No formation special rules may apply, nor wargear as it is not part of the army list entry. Remember, I am applying the rule using your interpretation of the rule. It's not specifically called out, so they can not apply.
"Relevance?"
Go through every codex you have. Read every weapon entry. Notice how every weapon tells you that when attacking with this weapon, or wounds with this weapon it does something. Now go read the Kiss, see how it simply tells you to do something without a restriction to using the weapon.
"You're not just self-referencing - you're self permitting.
"I have permission to use the rule because the rule give me permission to use the rule which I can use because the rule gives me permission to use the rule which I can use because ..."
Circular argument is circular."
You do realize that the rules are all self permitting? Go ahead, try to use them without the permission in the rule. I'll wait.......
megatrons2nd wrote: "It's not an assumption - it's what the rules permit. As I've explained. Your argument requires the assumption that the rules mean things that they don't actually say."
But it is not what the rules actually say. If you went by what the rules actually say, then no rules outside of what is written on the army list entry or unit type, or given by psychic powers, terrain, or scenario special rules could function. Go ahead reread the rule, it says "most special rules are given to a model by the relevant Army unit list entry or its unit type." Do you see an exclusion for providing a special rule from a weapon. I don't. I see a second sentence that applies to weapons and attacks, but that sentence also does not only limit special rules given from weapons to only attacks. "That said, a model's attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using." I don't see a "the only way a weapon provides a special rule is".
So you're using a "doesn't say I can't" argument... yeah, that'll go places.
You need permission. You admit it doesn't exist.
You are literally excluding weapons from a list that can include them. Thus following logic, your interpretation that does not include other sources beyond what is stated, No formation special rules may apply, nor wargear as it is not part of the army list entry. Remember, I am applying the rule using your interpretation of the rule. It's not specifically called out, so they can not apply.
No, that's not correct.
Formation special rules apply because - as I've quoted - there's a rule specifying they apply.
Wargear is part of an army list entry, and it's not a weapon, so it applies.
You're not applying the rule using my interpretation, you're deliberately pretending that it doesn't work to put my argument in a bad light (which is failing).
Go through every codex you have. Read every weapon entry. Notice how every weapon tells you that when attacking with this weapon, or wounds with this weapon it does something. Now go read the Kiss, see how it simply tells you to do something without a restriction to using the weapon.
Again - so? And this isn't true. The Kiss isn't unique.
"You're not just self-referencing - you're self permitting.
"I have permission to use the rule because the rule give me permission to use the rule which I can use because the rule gives me permission to use the rule which I can use because ..."
Circular argument is circular."
You do realize that the rules are all self permitting? Go ahead, try to use them without the permission in the rule. I'll wait.......
So you don't understand what I'm saying then - awesome. You could've just said that.
Let's start simple: You need permission to use a rule, correct?
(This assumes a permissive rule set - which 40k must be. If you disagree with this then we'll never come to an agreement and the rules literally don't work.)
Rigeld, could you try actually addressing his argument?
Just saying, "you don't understand? cool." is neither constructive, helpful, nor does it do anything but irritate everyone who reads what you write.
His argument was that the weapon does not say "when attacking with this weapon" which almost every other weapon with special attack benefits does say. By not putting the requirement that blows be struck with the weapon, simply having it equipped is enough for the special rule to trigger. So no rules are broken by having the special rule triggered if the weapon is equipped.
Can you address this? In the 10 pages I have yet to see where you have addressed this critical question.
"you only get the Special Rules from the one you are using.."
Where is that in the rule book? I can't find it. Nowhere that I can find does it say "the only way to receive a special rule from a weapon is to attack with it".
Happyjew wrote: NightHowler, how does a model get special rules from weapons?
In the case of the weapon in question the model gets it by equipping it.
edited to add that there are other examples of this, but the Harlequin's Kiss is different from most. Where most of the other special rules are either "when attacking with this weapon - attack bonus" or "when equipped with this weapon - non attack bonus", the Kiss actually says "when equipped with this weapon - attack bonus".
I can see how this will cause no end of confusion until an FAQ comes out because it is unique in that you don't have to attack with it to get an attack bonus.
Also, when trying to hit the "edit" button I accidentally hit the "exalt" button... Is there a way to "un-exalt" my own post?
Happyjew wrote: NightHowler, how does a model get special rules from weapons?
In the case of the weapon in question the model gets it by equipping it.
That's not what I asked.
How does a model get special rules from weapons?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Let me rephrase this.
Without referring to the special rule, how does a model receive a special rule from a weapon?
The same way that a Rune Priest gets adamantium will from his runic staff. By equipping it.
"when a model equipped with a harlequins kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of it its attacks will be a kiss of death attack"
Notice that it does not say "...makes its close combat attacks with the harlequin's kiss.." but rather simply says when the model so equipped makes it's attacks.
This is not like any other piece of wargear that I'm aware of.
