Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Lance845 wrote:

I would need a quote of the demon princes weapon profile to comment on it. I don't own the chaos book. show me the rule for the weapon in question and I would be happy to go over this point with you.

It says

Malefic talons: Each time a model fights, it can make 1 additional attack with this weapon. A model armed with two sets of Malefic talons can make 3 additional attacks with them instead.

Now, it is obvious that they are only extending +3 attacks to the model, hence the "instead". But, by your interpretation, I split my attacks between both sets of Malefic Claws, giving me +6 attacks.

 puma713 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

I would need a quote of the demon princes weapon profile to comment on it. I don't own the chaos book. show me the rule for the weapon in question and I would be happy to go over this point with you.

It says

Malefic talons: Each time a model fights, it can make 1 additional attack with this weapon. A model armed with two sets of Malefic talons can make 3 additional attacks with them instead.

Now, it is obvious that they are only extending +3 attacks to the model, hence the "instead". But, by your interpretation, I split my attacks between both sets of Malefic Claws, giving me +6 attacks.

No it doesn't.

The rule does not say "each time a model fights with malefic talons, it can make 1 additional attack with this weapon."
It says each time a model fights. what it fights with is irrelevant and has no bearing on the number of additional attacks the model gets. The additional attacks have to use the malefic claws profile. any other attacks the model gets can use any other profile available to it.

When I first read the trygon rules I assumed the bonus attack with the talons was to make up for the mandatory tail attack

 Lance845 wrote:

 puma713 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

I would need a quote of the demon princes weapon profile to comment on it. I don't own the chaos book. show me the rule for the weapon in question and I would be happy to go over this point with you.

It says

Malefic talons: Each time a model fights, it can make 1 additional attack with this weapon. A model armed with two sets of Malefic talons can make 3 additional attacks with them instead.

Now, it is obvious that they are only extending +3 attacks to the model, hence the "instead". But, by your interpretation, I split my attacks between both sets of Malefic Claws, giving me +6 attacks.

No it doesn't.

The rule does not say "each time a model fights with malefic talons, it can make 1 additional attack with this weapon."
It says each time a model fights. what it fights with is irrelevant and has no bearing on the number of additional attacks the model gets. The additional attacks have to use the malefic claws profile. any other attacks the model gets can use any other profile available to it.

I'm not sure we can have a relevant rules conversation together. What it fights with is absolutely relevant. It's how the model has access to the additional attacks in the first place. You don't get +1 attack just for having malefic talons. You have to use them to access their special rules. Furthermore, there are no other profiles available to the model if it has two sets of malefic talons. All attacks will use malefic talons. If I have two sets, per your interpretation, I can activate each set for half of my attacks, giving me the special rule twice.

 puma713 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 puma713 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

I would need a quote of the demon princes weapon profile to comment on it. I don't own the chaos book. show me the rule for the weapon in question and I would be happy to go over this point with you.

It says

Malefic talons: Each time a model fights, it can make 1 additional attack with this weapon. A model armed with two sets of Malefic talons can make 3 additional attacks with them instead.

Now, it is obvious that they are only extending +3 attacks to the model, hence the "instead". But, by your interpretation, I split my attacks between both sets of Malefic Claws, giving me +6 attacks.

No it doesn't.

The rule does not say "each time a model fights with malefic talons, it can make 1 additional attack with this weapon."
It says each time a model fights. what it fights with is irrelevant and has no bearing on the number of additional attacks the model gets. The additional attacks have to use the malefic claws profile. any other attacks the model gets can use any other profile available to it.

I'm not sure we can have a relevant rules conversation together. What it fights with is absolutely relevant. It's how the model has access to the additional attacks in the first place. Furthermore, there are no other profiles available to the model if it has two sets of malefic talons. All attacks will use malefic talons. If I have two sets, per your interpretation, I can activate each set for half of my attacks, giving me the special rule twice.

Ok.

So first, I dont know the profiles and options so I am going to just make some shot up.

Lets pretend demon princes have a attack characteristic of 4 and can either have a claw and a sword or 2 claws.

In the claw and sword scenario the demon prince can make all 4a attacks with the sword profile. The claws rule stipulates that when it fights it gets +1 attacks that have to use the claw. So a try attack shows up that has to use the claws profile. What weapon is used for the 4 attacks is irrelevant to the claws bonus. The bonus triggers when the model fights. Not when it fights with claws.

So if it has 2 claws it doesn't need to divide its attacks between one claw and the other because the bonus attacks kick in regardless. The model fights = bonus attacks.

That being said, "instead" is ill defined on the claws. Instead of what? Instead of the one bonus attack from 1 claw? That interpretation gives you 6 attacks with each claw replacing its 1 attack for 3. Or instead of the 2 separate attacks from each claw? Now trading 2 bonus attacks for 3. This weapon profile, as quoted to me, does require a faq. Because the language is unclear.

The scytals have no such issue. Everything in their rule is well defined.

 Lance845 wrote:


Ok.

So first, I dont know the profiles and options so I am going to just make some shot up.

Lets pretend demon princes have a attack characteristic of 4 and can either have a claw and a sword or 2 claws.

In the claw and sword scenario the demon prince can make all 4a attacks with the sword profile. The claws rule stipulates that when it fights it gets +1 attacks that have to use the claw. So a try attack shows up that has to use the claws profile. What weapon is used for the 4 attacks is irrelevant to the claws bonus. The bonus triggers when the model fights. Not when it fights with claws.

In my opinion, this is incorrect. The rule for the claws says "Malefic talons: Each time this model fights, it can make 1 additional attack with this weapon." If you choose to use all 4 attacks with the sword, there is no +1 attack simply for having the claws. You must use the claws to activate their rules. This is a simple premise. We must agree on this before we can have intelligent discourse about any other parts of the rules. You must "use" a weapon to benefit from its rules.

Edit: I understand what you're saying. You're saying that no matter what I choose, I get +1 attack with the talons. It is giving me permission to make an "extra attack" on top of any other attack I choose. I can see how you can read that into the weapon. I don't agree that is how it is played, but I can see where your reading comes from.

 Lance845 wrote:

So if it has 2 claws it doesn't need to divide its attacks between one claw and the other because the bonus attacks kick in regardless. The model fights = bonus attacks.

Again, you must use the weapon to benefit from its rules. If I only use 1 set of malefic claws, I only get their special rules activated once. You're asserting that you must use the three sets of Scything Talons to receive their bonus activation three times. Otherwise, you're asserting that you receive +3 attacks simply for having the Scything Talons. And now you are trying to say that you don't even have to use the weapon more than once. You just "get' extra attacks. This is ludicrous. If you want to activate 3 sets of one weapon, you must use 3 sets of one weapon.

This is exactly what the "chainsword" argument is based on. If I have two chainswords, I must split my attacks between both of them to receive the extra attack from having two chainswords. You do not get extra attacks simply by having two chainswords. You must use them to activate their special rules. Similarly, your argument is based on the fact that the Trygon is using three separate sets of Scything Talons to make its attacks, therefore giving it +3 attacks because you're activating its special rule 3 times. If this is not what you're saying, then I don't think you have a leg to stand on.

If all of these things are true, then the same logic applies to the Daemon Prince, giving him +6 attacks for the same reasons.



Bottom line is I believe there are a few questions here that need to be FAQed and we won't have a clear answer until the FAQ is released. I didn't mean to get dragged back into this thread, especially since I don't think anything is going to be resolved by us few.

"This weapon" is "massive scything talons" not "pair of massive scything talons" so no matter how many pairs of massive scything talons a model has it is still a single weapon profile.

 puma713 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:


Ok.

So first, I dont know the profiles and options so I am going to just make some shot up.

Lets pretend demon princes have a attack characteristic of 4 and can either have a claw and a sword or 2 claws.

In the claw and sword scenario the demon prince can make all 4a attacks with the sword profile. The claws rule stipulates that when it fights it gets +1 attacks that have to use the claw. So a try attack shows up that has to use the claws profile. What weapon is used for the 4 attacks is irrelevant to the claws bonus. The bonus triggers when the model fights. Not when it fights with claws.

In my opinion, this is incorrect. The rule for the claws says "Malefic talons: Each time this model fights, it can make 1 additional attack with this weapon." If you choose to use all 4 attacks with the sword, there is no +1 attack simply for having the claws. You must use the claws to activate their rules. This is a simple premise. We must agree on this before we can have intelligent discourse about any other parts of the rules. You must "use" a weapon to benefit from its rules.

That isn't stated anywhere. If that were the case, Chaos Lords on Juggernauts couldn't use the Juggernaut attacks EVER because they don't get to choose to use those attacks.

You look at the rules of the wargear, and follow those. Things that say "you get 1 attack with this weapon each time this model fights" give you an attack with that weapon whether or not you choose to voluntarily use it outside of that rule. It's a plain reading.

I also agree that +3 attacks may not be RAI, but I'm 100% convinced it's RAW as of right now, based on a plain reading of the wargear rules. I used to disagree. Really, I thought it was 1 attack after glancing at it, then I read it again and now I know the rules are telling me my Trygon gets 3 extra attacks based on the wording. If it wasn't their intent, they'll clear it up soon enough, but that's what they wrote for now.

Jacksmiles wrote:


That isn't stated anywhere. If that were the case, Chaos Lords on Juggernauts couldn't use the Juggernaut attacks EVER because they don't get to choose to use those attacks.
.

This is a good example. This makes it more clear that a weapon's profile is used whether it is "activated" or not. I'm still not entirely convinced that it triggers 3 times for a Trygon, but this has shifted my interpretation of the RAW for weapon profiles.

 puma713 wrote:

Jacksmiles wrote:


That isn't stated anywhere. If that were the case, Chaos Lords on Juggernauts couldn't use the Juggernaut attacks EVER because they don't get to choose to use those attacks.
.

This is a good example. This makes it more clear that a weapon's profile is used whether it is "activated" or not. I'm still not entirely convinced that it triggers 3 times for a Trygon, but this has shifted my interpretation of the RAW for weapon profiles.

Cool. So getting back to the claws. The confusing part is the "instead". They don't define it. It could be 3 instead of 1 or it could be 3 instead of each weapons 1 since it requires both profiles to trigger anyway.

Again scytals have no such wording though. They just flat out grant the attacks.

For the sake of reasonableness I would request the chaos player play it as 3 attacks total until faqed. But there is an equally valid argument that it is in fact 6 attacks because they seem to have ended their sentence half way through.

To those saying no matter how many pairs of Scything Talons a model is armed with, it counts as a single weapon; how then does a model with two chainswords work?
There is no rule saying that they are a single pair no matter how many there are. Each weapon's (scything talons) bonuses kick in as long as they are equipped with those weapons. There are too many other instances in the books contradicting this to assume that just because you bought them at a group discount, that they count as a single weapon.
Now, I believe RAI is for a single attack, but that is not what the RAW states.

RAW states 'massive scything talons'.

No matter how many you have, its a single weapon.

If the rule said 'massive scything talon' or 'pair of massive scything talons' then it would be different.

But as it stands, any number of 'massive scything talons' is a single weapon with a single weapon profile.

There are countless examples of this. For example Wraiths have a single weapon with a single weapon profile called 'vicious claws'. They have 6 claws on the model but its a single weapon.

Does the Wraith say it has 3x vicious claws on it's wargear summary at the top of it's datasheet entry.

 Eldarain wrote:
Does the Wraith say it has 3x vicious claws on it's wargear summary at the top of it's datasheet entry.

Nope.

When you purchase a pair of massive scything talons you aren't purchasing a weapon if its beyond your first pair. The weapon's name is 'massive scything talons' not 'pair of massive scything talons'.

No matter how many pairs you have or purchase you still have the single weapon 'massive scything talons'.

The option to purchase an additional pair beyond your first is an UPGRADE that will grant a +1 A to the single weapon known as 'massive scything talons'.

That's the RAW. And it's also the RAI.

I would be satisfied with any situation that results in two pairs giving one bonus attack overall and three pairs giving two overall, with all attacks coming from the talons. There should be a difference between two pairs and three pairs in the game and the extras should always originate with the talons. But, hey this is 40k and it will work one way for Imps and another for Xenos because that's how it always ends up going.....

 Lance845 wrote:

 puma713 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

This has been going on for 4 pages not because the rules are written unclearly (they are not, it's a single very clear sentence with a very obvious outcome). The 4 pages is because people cannot believe the benefit is actually that good.

Fair. Again, it may not be RAI that each pair generates it's own +1 attack. But it is RAW and no trying to justify it any other way changes it.

This is not true. You saying it matter-of-factly does not make it true. If it was as clear-cut as you say, yakface wouldn't have bothered to add it to the FAQ submission to GW, and there wouldn't be 4 pages of debate on it. You saying, "it may not be RAI that each pair generates its own +1 attack" indicates that you understand there is room for other interpretations. When there are ambiguous rules, or ambiguous wording, you should be prepared to take the least advantageous reading, at least on the tabletop.

And as for people "not believing the benefit is that good" is pretty silly. We're talking about a difference of 2 attacks. They either have 7 attacks or they have 9. It's not that people can't wrap their head around the amazing bonus of +2 attacks, it's that there are people that just don't agree with you.

Lets break down the sentence structure of the rule then.

If the bearer has more than one pair of monstrous scything talons, it can make 1 additional attack with this weapon each time it fights.

So, subject: "The bearer"
Qualifier "if/has more than one pair of monstrous scything talons"
Effect: "it (the subject = the bearer) can make 1 additional attack with this weapon" read, 1 additional attack that has to be made with the profile you are reading.
Timing trigger: "each time it (the subject = the bearer) fights"

That is very very clear. It's very simple english. Each time the bearer fights, if it has more than 1 pair of scytal, it gets to make a bonus attack that has to use the profile with this rule.

Now... if you have more than one pair... you have more than one profile.
So read the second profile.

If the bearer has more than one pair of monstrous scything talons, it can make 1 additional attack with this weapon each time it fights.

Oh look! It says the same thing.

At no point in any of that does it tell you you need to attack WITH the scytal to get the extra attack. It only says that the effect triggers when the bearer fights.

Does the bearer have 3 pairs? Well, better read the weapon profile of the 3rd weapon then.

If the bearer has more than one pair of monstrous scything talons, it can make 1 additional attack with this weapon each time it fights.

Well look at that! It's the same!

I guess thats +3 attacks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

It's ether 3 separate weapons like you say it is and you spend 90 points. Or its 2 or more pairs for 60 points which has a single profile. You make the call. That is how all the other weapons in this game work.

Again, show me a weapon profile for "Mounstrous Scything Talons (Hve Tyrant)". It doesn't exist. Because anything in () stipulates what/how much you are buying and who you are buying it for. Not the profile it references. Point costs are not profiles. This argument is dumb.

The argument isn't dumb - the data sheet tells you to buy 3 sets of massive scything talons - Not two or more scything talons. Which costs 90 points. 2 or more scything talons is obviously it's own melle profile which tells you exactly how to use it from the single weapon profile. Which says if you have more than one pair you get plus one attack every time you fight with it (obviously the single profile wouldn't say this if they intend for each talon to give you 1 attack beyond the first). How hard would it be really to say that in the weapon profile if that's what they intended? "For every additional set beyond the first you get an additional attack every time this model fights with this weapon." There is absolutely 0 chance that you are fighting with 3 separate weapons and not paying for 3 separate weapons. So at least until there is a clarification and you want to get +3 attacks - a fair solution is to pay 90 points for it - which you wont do - because it is expensive as crap.

Col_impact is spouting nonsense. His rule interpretation in this thread should be ignored.

Again sporecyst. 5 deathspitters. 5 profiles that shoot 3 times each or 1 profile shooting 3 times that represents 5 guns?

 Lance845 wrote:
Col_impact is spouting nonsense. His rule interpretation in this thread should be ignored.

Again sporecyst. 5 deathspitters. 5 profiles that shoot 3 times each or 1 profile shooting 3 times that represents 5 guns?

My argument is proven by the rules. You can ignore it but that isn't helping your argument. And it makes you look like you have conceded that my argument is correct.

Rather than just say it's nonsense, prove it's nonsense. Or else my argument wins as unchallenged.

"Massive scything talons' is the name of the weapon profile.

Additional pairs of massive scything talons are an upgrade to the single weapon.

You have zero proof that a 'pair of massive scything talons' is a weapon and not an upgrade. The weapon profile is 'massive scything talons' not 'pair of massive scything talons'.

@xenomancers. (2 or more) is also not a weapon profile. Otherwise please, show me where you get the rules for a profile called (2 or more).

The argument is very dumb.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

col_impact wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Col_impact is spouting nonsense. His rule interpretation in this thread should be ignored.

Again sporecyst. 5 deathspitters. 5 profiles that shoot 3 times each or 1 profile shooting 3 times that represents 5 guns?

My argument is proven by the rules. You can ignore it but that isn't helping your argument. And it makes you look like you have conceded that my argument is correct.

Rather than just say it's nonsense, prove it's nonsense. Or else my argument wins as unchallenged.

"Massive scything talons' is the name of the weapon profile.

Additional pairs of massive scything talons are an upgrade to the single weapon.

You have zero proof that a 'pair of massive scything talons' is a weapon and not an upgrade. The weapon profile is 'massive scything talons' not 'pair of massive scything talons'.

Think what you want lol. Say you win unchallenged. Bask in your own self righteous delusion. More power to ya. You didn't answer my question though.

 Lance845 wrote:
@xenomancers. (2 or more) is also not a weapon profile. Otherwise please, show me where you get the rules for a profile called (2 or more).

The argument is very dumb.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

col_impact wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Col_impact is spouting nonsense. His rule interpretation in this thread should be ignored.

Again sporecyst. 5 deathspitters. 5 profiles that shoot 3 times each or 1 profile shooting 3 times that represents 5 guns?

My argument is proven by the rules. You can ignore it but that isn't helping your argument. And it makes you look like you have conceded that my argument is correct.

Rather than just say it's nonsense, prove it's nonsense. Or else my argument wins as unchallenged.

"Massive scything talons' is the name of the weapon profile.

Additional pairs of massive scything talons are an upgrade to the single weapon.

You have zero proof that a 'pair of massive scything talons' is a weapon and not an upgrade. The weapon profile is 'massive scything talons' not 'pair of massive scything talons'.

Think what you want lol. Say you win unchallenged. Bask in your own self righteous delusion. More power to ya. You didn't answer my question though.

You can't just say an argument is dumb. You have to prove it.

What's your question?

If you are asking about the Sporocyst, deathspitter is the name of the weapon profile. It's singular. So the Sporocyst has 5 of them equipped, obviously.

Face it, not only is my argument RAW, it is also RAI.

The purchase of additional pairs of massive scything talons beyond the first is merely an UPGRADE on the 'massive scything talons' single weapon profile.

You have zero proof that 'pair of massive scything talons' is a weapon. There is no profile that is called 'pair of massive scything talons'.

 Lance845 wrote:
Col_impact is spouting nonsense. His rule interpretation in this thread should be ignored.

Again sporecyst. 5 deathspitters. 5 profiles that shoot 3 times each or 1 profile shooting 3 times that represents 5 guns?

5 individual weapons purchased. This is more akin to a twin linked las cannon - which has a special profile compared to a las cannon. It gets heavy 2. Pretty clear that's a las cannon with 2 shots. You are purchasing a set of weapons that act as one. Or you are purchasing 3 individual MST. I'm not sure what is right - that is what the debate should be about.

See I believe the RAW fits better with the +3 argument..

I just personally feel +3A feels like too many and that RAI was for only +1.. because the sentence was structured differently to chainswords

the use of plurals means nothing in this case as they are referring to a paired item. If it wasn't pluraled you would get the confusion you currently have in the IA book.. where it is referenced as Scything talon.. and there is an error where one of the Heriodules either has too many of not enough of them

 Lance845 wrote:
@xenomancers. (2 or more) is also not a weapon profile. Otherwise please, show me where you get the rules for a profile called (2 or more).

The argument is very dumb.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

col_impact wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Col_impact is spouting nonsense. His rule interpretation in this thread should be ignored.

Again sporecyst. 5 deathspitters. 5 profiles that shoot 3 times each or 1 profile shooting 3 times that represents 5 guns?

My argument is proven by the rules. You can ignore it but that isn't helping your argument. And it makes you look like you have conceded that my argument is correct.

Rather than just say it's nonsense, prove it's nonsense. Or else my argument wins as unchallenged.

"Massive scything talons' is the name of the weapon profile.

Additional pairs of massive scything talons are an upgrade to the single weapon.

You have zero proof that a 'pair of massive scything talons' is a weapon and not an upgrade. The weapon profile is 'massive scything talons' not 'pair of massive scything talons'.

Think what you want lol. Say you win unchallenged. Bask in your own self righteous delusion. More power to ya. You didn't answer my question though.

Right I agree with you - it's not a weapon profile. However - the single weapon profile tells you exactly how to use more than one of them. It doesn't specify how 3 should be used and that is an error on GW part a FAQ is needed to address this issue. RAW supports +1 attack IMO.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

GodDamUser wrote:
See I believe the RAW fits better with the +3 argument..

I just personally feel +3A feels like too many and that RAI was for only +1.. because the sentence was structured differently to chainswords

the use of plurals means nothing in this case as they are referring to a paired item. If it wasn't pluraled you would get the confusion you currently have in the IA book.. where it is referenced as Scything talon.. and there is an error where one of the Heriodules either has too many of not enough of them

It reasonable to assume that nothing wields 3 chain swords (humans typically have only 2 hands) and that is indeed why it is worded differently.

GodDamUser wrote:
See I believe the RAW fits better with the +3 argument..

I just personally feel +3A feels like too many and that RAI was for only +1.. because the sentence was structured differently to chainswords

the use of plurals means nothing in this case as they are referring to a paired item. If it wasn't pluraled you would get the confusion you currently have in the IA book.. where it is referenced as Scything talon.. and there is an error where one of the Heriodules either has too many of not enough of them

The use of the plural indicates what the weapon is.

Any number of massive scything talons is a single weapon, per the RAW.

And since it does not say 'pair of massive scything talons' that means that when you purchase additional pairs of massive scything talons, you aren't purchasing a weapon but are purchasing an UPGRADE for your 'massive scything talons' single weapon profile.

@xenomancer: the rule doesn't tell you what to do with more than one pair of scytal. It tells you what to do with that specific pair of scytal when more than one is present.

Its a diference of kind.

col_impact wrote:

The use of the plural indicates what the weapon is.

Any number of massive scything talons is a single weapon, per the RAW.

And since it does not say 'pair of massive scything talons' that means that when you purchase additional pairs of massive scything talons, you aren't purchasing a weapon but are purchasing an UPGRADE for your 'massive scything talons' single weapon profile.

Do you always refer to Glasses as a 'Pair of Glasses' all the time or just 'Glasses'

in both cases it is the same thing and both use a plural

GodDamUser wrote:

col_impact wrote:

The use of the plural indicates what the weapon is.

Any number of massive scything talons is a single weapon, per the RAW.

And since it does not say 'pair of massive scything talons' that means that when you purchase additional pairs of massive scything talons, you aren't purchasing a weapon but are purchasing an UPGRADE for your 'massive scything talons' single weapon profile.

Do you always refer to Glasses as a 'Pair of Glasses' all the time or just 'Glasses'

in both cases it is the same thing and both use a plural

You don't understand the significance. The weapon profile is named 'massive scything talons' so any number of massive scything talons is a single weapon profile.

The rule for the 'massive scything talons' weapon checks for whether you have bought the additional 'pair of massive scything talons' UPGRADE.

Upgrades don't exist.wargear exists. Your spouting nonsense.

 Lance845 wrote:
Upgrades don't exist.wargear exists. Your spouting nonsense.

A 'pair of massive scything talons' is not a weapon profile.

'massive scything talons' is a weapon profile.

When you buy an additional 'pair of massive scything talons' it is wargear/equipment that is not a weapon profile but is wargear/equipment that will improve your 'massive scything talons' single weapon profile by giving it +1 A.

Are you basing all of that on the fact the word pair is used?