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.

So the Scorpion Chainsword rules say:

"Scorpion Chainsword: This is a one-handed weapon that adds +1 S to the model's attacks."

Now, according to page 46 of the rulebook a model may only utilize a single special close combat attack at a time. The rulebook never comes close to defining what makes an attack "special", and while page 46 does present a number of special close combat attacks, the door is left wipe open by saying these are just the most "common" ones.

So does the Scorpion Chainsword's effect count as a special close combat attack in your opinion?

In other words, does a Scorpion Exarch with a Chainsword/Claw combo get to strike at S7 or S6? And does Khandras strike at S9 or S8?


I lean towards saying that it isn't a special close combat attack since it simply adds to his existing stats instead of making a special type of attack, but that's a slippery slope to go down, IMO).

Also, do you think this question is worth having clarified in a FAQ, or am I making a mountain out of a molehill?

Just to nickpick, if the Scorp Chainsword wasn't a special attack, the Scorp's Claw would be S7, not S8, for the same reasons a Chaos Asp Champ with a PF and D-Strength is S9 and not S10.

BYE

I had a similar problem with a model armed with powerfist and bolt pistol for Space Marines. I contacted games workshop directy to double check and they said that because the powerfist is labelled as a Single weapon in my codex it thereofre counted the pistol as being an additional weapon so you DO get +1 attacks.

He also went on to say all attacks could be made using the powerfists special ability

It adds +1 to the strength of all the model's attacks. Is that any different than adding +2 to the strength of all the model's attacks and ignoring armor saves (Executioner)? Not as far as I can tell. Both items are wargear. Both add strength of the model's attacks. One of them is a power weapon. The two entries are worded in almost exactly the same fashion. I doubt you would deny that an Executioner is not a kind of "special close combat attack." Sure, power weapons are listed as occasionally having strength bonuses on page 46 (BGB). But I don't think that precludes CCWs (which the rule book, of course lists as never having strength bonuses) that provide +1 to strength from counting as special CC attacks.

Verdict: Mountain of of a molehill.

Posted By hellsguardian316 on 12/05/2006 1:17 AM
I had a similar problem with a model armed with powerfist and bolt pistol for Space Marines. I contacted games workshop directy to double check and they said that because the powerfist is labelled as a Single weapon in my codex it thereofre counted the pistol as being an additional weapon so you DO get +1 attacks.

He also went on to say all attacks could be made using the powerfists special ability

See you're not getting it. The dispute isn't whether the model can get +1A (that much is clear). The question is whether he can use the powerfist's ability at the same time as the +1 Strength from the Chainsword.


@HBMC:  thanks for catching that, I'll edit my original post to avoid confusion.


@Big Chris:  It's funny you should say that its a mountain out of a moelhill because I have a sneaking suspicion that most players won't consider the +1S a special close combat attack and will use it without even thinking about it.

So the very fact that you're adamant its a special close combat attack makes me know that it needs to be clarified one way or another.

I'd say yes, it's a special close combat attack.

Exarch with a power fist would be strength 6.

I would say that a "Special Close Combat Weapon" is any weapon that modifies the way the vanilla-combat-procedure takes place. Don't have any rules to back me up, though. Just a gut feeling.

"Scorpion Chainsword: This is a one-handed weapon that adds +1 S to the model's attacks."

Let's break this down:

"This is a one handed weapon that" seems to indicate that the weapon is providing something.

"adds +1 S to the model's attacks" is what the weapon does.

Therefore the Weapon provides the Streangth Bonus, since you can only use one weapon a turn, you cannot gain the str. bonus without using the weapon.

Wow, I had just assumed that the chainsword was a special close combat attack and couldn't be use at the same time as the claw. I can see the argument now that it's pointed out, but it hadn't occured to me before. I took "special" in this case to mean anything that wasn't a basic ccw or pistol, thus the chainsword is one.

I think if a rule is capable of producing this many different, incompatable outcomes among a group of people who are careful about rules, that suggests that it needs clarification.

I agree with Mahu. Im going to give an example in terms I understand so I hope I can type this out clearly. Think of it like a model that has a base weapon profile but you can add wargear to them. Think initiative and how high Init characters lose that ability by using a PF or Thunderhammer. Now Im using a Chaplain for an example here, but someone i play runs a chappy with a base weapon profile PLUS a storm hammer. Now on a charge say vs my marines he uses his Crozius and attacks at the Init of 5. However if he was going against a demonprince, he would use the thunderhammer and lose his Init and attacks at a 1. Make Sense? By having multiple weapons for wargear you are choosing which profile to use, so by using the normal weapon you are attacking with the +1 str, but with a claw or any other weapon you do not gain this bonus

I would say that a SS would be S6 with the claw.

Its also something that should make the faq due to the confusion that could come from the current wording.

Although I can see why the wording lends to confusuion, I think you have to classify the scorp chainsword as a special attack. The use of the word "that" followed by its effect is fairly common in special weapon descriptions. I would say it indicates that the weapon itself causes the effect, and not some general profile increase such as daemonic strength. For example, isn't a blessed weapon decribed as a master crafted power weapon that adds 2 to strength? You wouldn't try to use those 2 points of strength if you werent using the weapon. Also, a chaos great weapon could be a very good paralell to the scorp chainsword. A lord with a great weapon and a powerfist wouldnt attack at strength 9, so I dont think you can add the scorp bonus to the claw attacks either.

It is a special attack. The rules state it is a weapon and what the effects of using that weapon to make an attack are.

A model may only use 1 close combat weapon per turn to attack. Any additional special weapon rules are ignored and instead grant +1 A. It is analagous to a character with a Dark Blade and Power Fist. They can strike with the Dark Blade at +2 STR and the PFist grants +1 A or use the PFist for double STR and the Dark Blade grants +1A.

Str 6 is how I read it. Never even crossed my mind that it could be 7.

The crux of the matter, it seems to me, is that the phrase "special close combat attack" is not defined.

It seems to me that the implied definition is this: "any attack using a close combat weapon that allows a model to use rules other than the ability to fight, and the ability to gain an additional attack for having two close combat weapons."

Of course, I have no basis for this definition and will happily accept any improvements.

By this definition, any close combat weapon that has an effect (such has the Scorpion Chainsword, with its +1S bonus) is a special weapon.

That is not as conclusive as you make it sound. The actual wording Yak posted is ""Scorpion Chainsword: This is a one-handed weapon that adds +1 S to the model's attacks."
It is only an assumption that the weapon is actually in use unless there is more wording after that.

This indicates that just merely possessing the "Scorpion Chainsword" adds "+1 strength to the model's attacks".

The rule does not state that the Chainsword is actually in use when the attacks are made.

GW has been standing by the RaW reading of thier rules as of late.
I would add the +1 to the Claw based on the wording.

That is one of the most tortured arguments I have read in a while. While I am not saying you are de facto incorrect, your argument seems very weak. It doesn't say that possessing grants the bonus, either. All other CC weapons must be used in an attack to grant the bonus (see Power Fists, Lightning Claws, Power Weapons, Mirror Swords, Daemon weapons, Blessed weapons, etc.). It is not an ability granted to the model (cf. Daemonic Strength- the model gains +1 Strength) but to its attacks. Which implies attacks made with that weapon, just like every other special rule on weapons in the game.

Like I said, "unless there is more wording".

I was going strictly off of the wording provided.



Actually it does based on "that adds +1 S to the model's attacks." The item/weapons adds +1 str to the models attacks but never clarifies that the attacks have to use that weapon.

Would I play it that way? No. Does the wording support it, yes. If my opponent stated it as fact I would allow it as there is nothing to refute other than assumption. Then again this is one reason why I haven't wanted to play a GW product in well over two years. But that's another topic.