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.

My take, Executioner's Axe is unusual while Axe Mortalis and Glaives Encarmine are not.

Brother Ramses wrote:

Ub3rb3n wrote:If I have a force staff with nothing attached it is S: user ap4 I:user, but then I put master craft on it which allows me to re roll a hit it doesn't make it unusual it is still the same just I can re roll one hit

This thread is pointless anyone trying to argue Dante's axe is his initiative is a poop tard

Asteroth is ap 3 while daunte is ap 2

If you have a force weapon with no further rules you look to the model to determine type/rules. In your case, it would be determined to be type stave thus str +2, ap4, melee, concussive, force. If then choose to upgrade it via master-crafting, you are master-crafting a force weapon type stave, str +2, ap4, melee, concussive, force. Master-crafting a weapon after the fact does not make it special/unique as per the RAW, the force weapon wargear entry did not say it had further special rules. You may have gave it a special rule, but the wargear entry did not say it had further rules. Big difference between a weapon that has master-crafted and had master-crafting purchased.

It's the same thing, how can you argue that my master crafted stave that I purchased is somehow different then a master crafted stave that tigurius has, your saying tigurius' stave should be and unusual force weapon

Ub3rb3n wrote:

Brother Ramses wrote:

Ub3rb3n wrote:If I have a force staff with nothing attached it is S: user ap4 I:user, but then I put master craft on it which allows me to re roll a hit it doesn't make it unusual it is still the same just I can re roll one hit

This thread is pointless anyone trying to argue Dante's axe is his initiative is a poop tard

Asteroth is ap 3 while daunte is ap 2

If you have a force weapon with no further rules you look to the model to determine type/rules. In your case, it would be determined to be type stave thus str +2, ap4, melee, concussive, force. If then choose to upgrade it via master-crafting, you are master-crafting a force weapon type stave, str +2, ap4, melee, concussive, force. Master-crafting a weapon after the fact does not make it special/unique as per the RAW, the force weapon wargear entry did not say it had further special rules. You may have gave it a special rule, but the wargear entry did not say it had further rules. Big difference between a weapon that has master-crafted and had master-crafting purchased.

It's the same thing, how can you argue that my master crafted stave that I purchased is somehow different then a master crafted stave that tigurius has, your saying tigurius' stave should be and unusual force weapon

Because you do not purchase a master-crafted force stave, you have a force stave and then you mastercraft it. That is the difference. Read page 60 for force weapon and unusual force weapons if you need the rules since you obviously did not know them in your last post.

If it was as cut and dry as you claim then this discussion wouldn't have gone on for 6 pages. I don't consider master-crafted to be a unique rule, so in my interpretation of the rule it wouldn't matter if it was a master-crafted weapon or a weapon that is master-crafted (whatever that even means).

Orblivion wrote:If it was as cut and dry as you claim then this discussion wouldn't have gone on for 6 pages. I don't consider master-crafted to be a unique rule, so in my interpretation of the rule it wouldn't matter if it was a master-crafted weapon or a weapon that is master-crafted (whatever that even means).

Because according to RAW according to him there is an order of operations for deciding what kind of power weapon something is even though its not RAW.

Orblivion wrote:If it was as cut and dry as you claim then this discussion wouldn't have gone on for 6 pages. I don't consider master-crafted to be a unique rule, so in my interpretation of the rule it wouldn't matter if it was a master-crafted weapon or a weapon that is master-crafted (whatever that even means).

Quite. Master Crafted is in fact a universal special rule. While universal may not be the literal opposite of unique, it's well in that ball park.

Orblivion wrote:If it was as cut and dry as you claim then this discussion wouldn't have gone on for 6 pages. I don't consider master-crafted to be a unique rule, so in my interpretation of the rule it wouldn't matter if it was a master-crafted weapon or a weapon that is master-crafted (whatever that even means).

I have to agree with my fellow Massachusetts man... there is no cut and dry answer to this given the information we currently have. I really want Dante to be I6 but I just don't see anyway to undeniably convince my opponent of why it should be so.

I think in all honesty there is a cut and dried answer, but a lot of people who don't want that to be it. Coupled with sufficient wriggle room in the wording and ta-dah! 6 pages of posts.

Dante being I6 is still useful as you will almost never fail a hit and run test but change is always difficult to adjust to, and people want things that worked for them to stay around.

I putting together a unit of SG with plasma pistols and axe glaives to out the fear of god into any teq units I encounter!

azreal13 wrote:I think in all honesty there is a cut and dried answer, but a lot of people who don't want that to be it. Coupled with sufficient wriggle room in the wording and ta-dah! 6 pages of posts.

Dante being I6 is still useful as you will almost never fail a hit and run test but change is always difficult to adjust to, and people want things that worked for them to stay around.

I putting together a unit of SG with plasma pistols and axe glaives to out the fear of god into any teq units I encounter!

And you have every right to house rule that as you please because it is 100% against the RAW because you have absolutely zero permission to look at what is modeled to determine type and rules.

Glaive Encarmines and the Axe of Mortalis both have a further special rule which in the first sentence of the rule on power weapons prevents you from looking at what is modeled to determine type and rules. This is the plain RAW of the rule.

Now it is yours and others opinion that master-crafted is not a unique rule. However, that opinion leaves you with a weapon that is special enough to not be classed by how it is modeled but not unique enough to be classed unusual. That puts them in a unidentified limbo with zero rules to follow for the weapon.

However, if you do consider master-crafted unique, you resolve the RAW conflict completely. The Axe of Mortalis and Glaive Encarmines are not identified by how they look because they have a further special rule (following the RAW) and are instead classed unusual with user str/init, ap3 (thus not leaving them in an unidentified limbo). The only thing broken by classing master-crafted as a unique rule is the fragile egos of those continuing to hold the opinion that it isn't.

Brother Ramses wrote:

azreal13 wrote:I think in all honesty there is a cut and dried answer, but a lot of people who don't want that to be it. Coupled with sufficient wriggle room in the wording and ta-dah! 6 pages of posts.

Dante being I6 is still useful as you will almost never fail a hit and run test but change is always difficult to adjust to, and people want things that worked for them to stay around.

I putting together a unit of SG with plasma pistols and axe glaives to out the fear of god into any teq units I encounter!

And you have every right to house rule that as you please because it is 100% against the RAW because you have absolutely zero permission to look at what is modeled to determine type and rules.

Glaive Encarmines and the Axe of Mortalis both have a further special rule which in the first sentence of the rule on power weapons prevents you from looking at what is modeled to determine type and rules. This is the plain RAW of the rule.

Now it is yours and others opinion that master-crafted is not a unique rule. However, that opinion leaves you with a weapon that is special enough to not be classed by how it is modeled but not unique enough to be classed unusual. That puts them in a unidentified limbo with zero rules to follow for the weapon.

However, if you do consider master-crafted unique, you resolve the RAW conflict completely. The Axe of Mortalis and Glaive Encarmines are not identified by how they look because they have a further special rule (following the RAW) and are instead classed unusual with user str/init, ap3 (thus not leaving them in an unidentified limbo). The only thing broken by classing master-crafted as a unique rule is the fragile egos of those continuing to hold the opinion that it isn't.

Sigh.

Thank you for restating the arguement that I have totally understood and decided is incorrect.

I will reiterate my reasons why.

The BRB states a weapon is an unusual power weapon "if a weapon has its own unique close combat rules"
That is a direct quote.

By definition, Master Crafted specifically is not a unique rule. It is a universal rule that can be applied to many weapons in many units across many codexes. Master crafted often doesn't receive any further explanation in the codex entry, unique rules always do. Therefore a weapon being only master crafted with no other associated special rules cannot be considered a unique special weapon in game terms. In fluff terms absolutely, but not in game terms.

This is why the Executioners Axe is an unusual weapon and the Axe Mortalis isn't.

While I can understand why people take the other view, I believe this to be the weaker argument, and assuming it does get FAQed I believe this is the way it will go, especially as the Blood Crozius has already set a precedent.

edit got my terms muddled

azreal13 wrote:

Brother Ramses wrote:

azreal13 wrote:I think in all honesty there is a cut and dried answer, but a lot of people who don't want that to be it. Coupled with sufficient wriggle room in the wording and ta-dah! 6 pages of posts.

Dante being I6 is still useful as you will almost never fail a hit and run test but change is always difficult to adjust to, and people want things that worked for them to stay around.

I putting together a unit of SG with plasma pistols and axe glaives to out the fear of god into any teq units I encounter!

And you have every right to house rule that as you please because it is 100% against the RAW because you have absolutely zero permission to look at what is modeled to determine type and rules.

Glaive Encarmines and the Axe of Mortalis both have a further special rule which in the first sentence of the rule on power weapons prevents you from looking at what is modeled to determine type and rules. This is the plain RAW of the rule.

Now it is yours and others opinion that master-crafted is not a unique rule. However, that opinion leaves you with a weapon that is special enough to not be classed by how it is modeled but not unique enough to be classed unusual. That puts them in a unidentified limbo with zero rules to follow for the weapon.

However, if you do consider master-crafted unique, you resolve the RAW conflict completely. The Axe of Mortalis and Glaive Encarmines are not identified by how they look because they have a further special rule (following the RAW) and are instead classed unusual with user str/init, ap3 (thus not leaving them in an unidentified limbo). The only thing broken by classing master-crafted as a unique rule is the fragile egos of those continuing to hold the opinion that it isn't.

Sigh.

Thank you for restating the arguement that I have totally understood and decided is incorrect.

I will reiterate my reasons why.

The BRB states a weapon is an unusual power weapon "if a weapon has its own unique close combat rules"
That is a direct quote.

By definition, Master Crafted specifically is not a unique rule. It is a universal rule that can be applied to many weapons in many units across many codexes. Master crafted often doesn't receive any further explanation in the codex entry, unique rules always do. Therefore a weapon being only master crafted with no other associated special rules cannot be considered a unique special weapon in game terms. In fluff terms absolutely, but not in game terms.

This is why the Executioners Axe is an unusual weapon and the Axe Mortalis isn't.

While I can understand why people take the other view, I believe this to be the weaker argument, and assuming it does get FAQed I believe this is the way it will go, especially as the Blood Crozius has already set a precedent.

edit got my terms muddled

And page 61, Types of Power Weapons

"If a model's wargear entry says it has a power weapon which has no further special rules, look at the model to tell which type of power weapon it has:......."

Reference SM codex, pg 131 Honor Guard Squad:

Wargear:
• Artificer armor
• Power weapon
• Frag and krak grenades
• Boltgun
• Bolt pistol

Notice that this wargear entry says it has a power weapon which has no further special rules. Can you figure out what to do?

Reference BA codex, pg 82 Commander Dante

Wargear:
• Artificer armor
• Infernus pistol
• The Axe of Mortalis
• Jump pack
• etc

Cross referencing pg 53 as directed, The Axe of Mortalis

The Axe of Mortalis: The Axe of Mortalis is a master-crafted power weapon.

Now do you see the difference between a wargear entry with a power weapon that has no further special rules and a wargear entry with a power weapon that has further special rules? By insisting that the Axe of Mortalis' rules are based on how it looks, you are directinly contradicting the RAW. And as I said, feel free to houserule it that way, but it isn't the RAW.

Two can play at that game.

Reference BA codex, pg 88 Lemartes

Wargear:
*Power armour
*Bolt pistol
*The Blood Crozius
*Frag and Krak grenades
*Jump pack
*Rosarius

Cross referencing pg 43 as directed, The Blood Crozius

The Blood Crozius: "...The Blood Crozius is a master-crafted power weapon."

Reference BA 6th Edtion FAQ, pg 2 Lemartes, Guardian of the Lost, The Blood Crozius

“The Blood Crozius is a master-crafted power maul.”

See how being master-crafted does not magically make it an unusual weapon?

Dude, I get it, no matter how many ways you restate the same things, unless you introduce new information I won't be persuaded.

There are two classifications of power weapon: standard or unusual. If you try and apply my quote with regard to the Axe Mortalis as a unusual power weapon, you cannot as it does not have any unique rules of its own.

I will concede that it isn't a tight fit for a standard power weapon RAW either, but as it MUST be one or the other, it fits this definitation better than an unusual weapon, and as I say there is precedent in the form of the Blood Crozius being counted as a standard, albeit master crafted, power maul.

I'm not calling you flat out wrong, I think there is definitely a fair shout on both sides here, but I believe my interpretation to be correct.

I wouldn't be surprised if there is some ruling stating all named characters are always considered to be weilding the specific weapon they are described as having, regardless of modelling choices.

Where that may leave units like SG is anyones guess!

Orblivion wrote:Two can play at that game.

Reference BA codex, pg 88 Lemartes

Wargear:
*Power armour
*Bolt pistol
*The Blood Crozius
*Frag and Krak grenades
*Jump pack
*Rosarius

Cross referencing pg 43 as directed, The Blood Crozius

The Blood Crozius: "...The Blood Crozius is a master-crafted power weapon."

Reference BA 6th Edtion FAQ, pg 2 Lemartes, Guardian of the Lost, The Blood Crozius

“The Blood Crozius is a master-crafted power maul.”

See how being master-crafted does not magically make it an unusual weapon?

You can try and play that game except the Blood Crozius was specifically FAQ'd to become what it is now listed as and The Axe of Mortalis and Glaive Encarmines were specifically not. Considering that chaplains across the codexes were FAQ'd to have the maul type weapon, the premise points more towards making the Crozius Arcanum consistent across the board (exceptiona being wolf priests and Ulrik), instead of what you are trying to surmise.

Sorry, the fact that we're having this discussion means that these rules needed clarification, and that they didn't speaks more to GW's ahem, slapdash, approach to their rules than any far reaching intent to homegenize the Crosius while leaving all other slightly differently named weapons as they were.

whether the blood crozius is an unusual power weapon or not does not matter one lick: the rules will be Identical.

If not an unusual Power weapon: A Master crafted Power Maul: S+2, AP4, Melee, Concussion, master Crafted.

If an Unusual Power weapon: S+2, AP4, Melee, Concussion, master Crafted.

This is because as an unusual weapon one of it's special rules is "Power Maul".

For those that cannot understand how GW defines Unique and Special I'm going to repost what I said earlier.

Look at the top of Page 23.

It says at the top right that models with UNIQUE wargear have that wargear's rules written into their Entry because no one else uses it. Does it define the weapon as special? Nope. So its pretty clear GW is using the word Unique to mean that only one exists of it and it goes out of its way to use Dante's Weapon as a Unique Weapon (note: not unusual).

Now let's go further down the page to where it says Blood Angels Special Rules. It says in the first paragraph that models in the BA army use rules that are a common to more than one type of unit. And it goes on to say that those Special Blood Angel rules that are shared are written on that page. Hence these rules are not unique, but just special. There is no indication on this page that Special and Unique are the same thing. It goes on to say that if a Special Rule (the bolded rules) aren't written into the codex to check the BRB. This implies that Special Rules are not unique as well and all fall under the same category as USR even though not every army has ATSKNF or Red Thirst. I don't see how the two words are at all the same.

The reason the Blood Crozius was FAQ'd and the Axe Mortalis wasn't, is because while the AXE Mortalis is clearly an axe, it isn't so clear that the Blood Crozius is a maul. Likewise, it is easy to determine what the Glaives are by looking at them.

The Blood Crozius quite clearly represents an instance that does not follow your apparently iron-clad interpretation of the rule.

Kommissar Kel wrote:whether the blood crozius is an unusual power weapon or not does not matter one lick: the rules will be Identical.

If not an unusual Power weapon: A Master crafted Power Maul: S+2, AP4, Melee, Concussion, master Crafted.

If an Unusual Power weapon: S+2, AP4, Melee, Concussion, master Crafted.

This is because as an unusual weapon one of it's special rules is "Power Maul".

Wrong, that is not how unusual weapons work at all. Unusual is clearly designed for weapons where you do not use it's model to define it.

Since when does a Rod not look like a rod?

The Blood Crozius(or, any crozius Arcanum) is a Rod in model; a Power Maul, determined via model, includes Rods.

Kommissar Kel wrote:whether the blood crozius is an unusual power weapon or not does not matter one lick: the rules will be Identical.

If not an unusual Power weapon: A Master crafted Power Maul: S+2, AP4, Melee, Concussion, master Crafted.

If an Unusual Power weapon: S+2, AP4, Melee, Concussion, master Crafted.

This is because as an unusual weapon one of it's special rules is "Power Maul".

Except "Power Maul" isn't a rule is it? Its effect it the result of a composite of other rules.

Your argument means that the Blood Crozius is AP3 as an unusual power weapon.

Or are you going to argue that this hypothetical "rule" somehow overrides the rule for unusual weapons in the brb?

Occam's razor here people, and if we're going to start debating rules that don't even occur except in people's minds as a means to justify their opinion I'm out of here!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kommissar Kel wrote:Since when does a Rod not look like a rod?

The Blood Crozius(or, any crozius Arcanum) is a Rod in model; a Power Maul, determined via model, includes Rods.

Except, as is on evidence here, things can be misinterpreted and things can be exaggerated if someone thinks it offers an advantage. Most of the CAs I've seen on chaplain models have a fairly substantial imperial eagle on the top, and I can easily imagine someone arguing that it was an axe head if that's how they wanted their model to operate.

edit added quote for clarity

Kommissar Kel wrote:Since when does a Rod not look like a rod?

The Blood Crozius(or, any crozius Arcanum) is a Rod in model; a Power Maul, determined via model, includes Rods.

This.

And it was done across the board with exception to wolf priests and Ulrik the Slayer whose entries remain power weapons. So the assumption that the Blood Crozius FAQ is some kind of referendum on master-crafted power weapons is a logical fallacy as both master-crafted AND regular crozius arcanums were changed in their respective FAQ's.

Seriously, this assumption that GW can't find their ass with their own two hands ALL the time gets a little old, especially when it is used to try and backup an opinion based stance,

"Well despite what the rules say, GW writes crappy rules so we will just chalk it up to that!"

The word "crozius" is exclusive to Warhammer. In the current codices, a crozius is simply a power weapon. Therefore, if "crozius" is synonymous with "power weapon", then people could have put whatever weapon they wanted on their chaplains. GW defined them as mauls to prevent this.

Brother Ramses wrote:

Kommissar Kel wrote:Since when does a Rod not look like a rod?

The Blood Crozius(or, any crozius Arcanum) is a Rod in model; a Power Maul, determined via model, includes Rods.

This.

And it was done across the board with exception to wolf priests and Ulrik the Slayer whose entries remain power weapons. So the assumption that the Blood Crozius FAQ is some kind of referendum on master-crafted power weapons is a logical fallacy as both master-crafted AND regular crozius arcanums were changed in their respective FAQ's.

Seriously, this assumption that GW can't find their ass with their own two hands ALL the time gets a little old, especially when it is used to try and backup an opinion based stance,

"Well despite what the rules say, GW writes crappy rules so we will just chalk it up to that!"

You do see the hole in that post's logic I'm about to back a truck through right?

azreal13 wrote:Except "Power Maul" isn't a rule is it? Its effect it the result of a composite of other rules.

Your argument means that the Blood Crozius is AP3 as an unusual power weapon.

Or are you going to argue that this hypothetical "rule" somehow overrides the rule for unusual weapons in the brb?

Occam's razor here people, and if we're going to start debating rules that don't even occur except in people's minds as a means to justify their opinion I'm out of here!/quote]

Except, as is on evidence here, things can be misinterpreted and things can be exaggerated if someone thinks it offers an advantage. Most of the CAs I've seen on chaplain models have a fairly substantial imperial eagle on the top, and I can easily imagine someone arguing that it was an axe head if that's how they wanted their model to operate.

No, I listed the AP of the blood crozius in either sense 2 posts ago(Hint: it was 4)

Power Maul is a Rule. You don't have your Power sword Striking at +2 S and AP4 with the Concussion special rule now do you?

Yes, I will absolutely debate that a "power weapon" with Specific rules declaring it a specific Sub-type is a "rule".

This is the exact same as a Nemesis Daemon Hammer.
The Daemon Hammer is an Unusual Force weapon, it also
"Uses the rules for Thunder Hammers". Thunder Hammers are not Force weapons, nor POwer weapons normally, so one of the Daemon Hammers rules is that is is a Thunder hammer. The Daemon Hammer is a Sx2, AP2, Force, Melee, concussive, Unwieldy, Specialist Weapon, that removes Psykers/Daemons wounded by it as a casualty if they fail a Ld test.


Where the Devil did my Quotes go? I will re-edit them in.

Ok, we're getting into semantics a little here, but no, Power Maul is not a rule. Unwieldy is a rule, concussive is a rule, rending is a rule.

A power maul is a weapon type that is defined by the rules of S+2, I, AP4, Concussive.

Also, "uses the rules for" is not the same as "is"

Frankly, I am a little sleep deprived but I can't really see what your point is?

Kommissar Kel wrote:No, I listed the AP of the blood crozius in either sense 2 posts ago(Hint: it was 4)

Power Maul is a Rule. You don't have your Power sword Striking at +2 S and AP4 with the Concussion special rule now do you?

Yes, I will absolutely debate that a "power weapon" with Specific rules declaring it a specific Sub-type is a "rule".

This is the exact same as a Nemesis Daemon Hammer.
The Daemon Hammer is an Unusual Force weapon, it also
"Uses the rules for Thunder Hammers". Thunder Hammers are not Force weapons, nor POwer weapons normally, so one of the Daemon Hammers rules is that is is a Thunder hammer. The Daemon Hammer is a Sx2, AP2, Force, Melee, concussive, Unwieldy, Specialist Weapon, that removes Psykers/Daemons wounded by it as a casualty if they fail a Ld test.

Then what you are saying is that in the majority of cases, the unusual power weapon rule does absolutely nothing. In your opinion, the Axe Mortalis is exactly the same whether it is a power weapon or an unusual power weapon.

Orblivion wrote:

Kommissar Kel wrote:No, I listed the AP of the blood crozius in either sense 2 posts ago(Hint: it was 4)

Power Maul is a Rule. You don't have your Power sword Striking at +2 S and AP4 with the Concussion special rule now do you?

Yes, I will absolutely debate that a "power weapon" with Specific rules declaring it a specific Sub-type is a "rule".

This is the exact same as a Nemesis Daemon Hammer.
The Daemon Hammer is an Unusual Force weapon, it also
"Uses the rules for Thunder Hammers". Thunder Hammers are not Force weapons, nor POwer weapons normally, so one of the Daemon Hammers rules is that is is a Thunder hammer. The Daemon Hammer is a Sx2, AP2, Force, Melee, concussive, Unwieldy, Specialist Weapon, that removes Psykers/Daemons wounded by it as a casualty if they fail a Ld test.

Then what you are saying is that in the majority of cases, the unusual power weapon rule does absolutely nothing. In your opinion, the Axe Mortalis is exactly the same whether it is a power weapon or an unusual power weapon.

I believe he means that the FAQ stating its a maul and ap4 somehow overrides the fact that unusual weapons are all ap3 Not sure on what basis though..

azreal13 wrote:A power maul is a weapon type that is defined by the rules of S+2, I, AP4, Concussive.

Just keeping the important bit for the sleep-deprived:

As "Power Maul" is the summation of the listed rules contained therein; Power Maul is itself a rule, the meaning of which is: A weapon containing the stats: S+2, I, AP4, Melee, Concussive.

This is a case of "it is what it is" see my reference to Nemesis Daemon Hammers in my prior post for quasi-related proof of concept(otherwise you could claim that Hammers are S as user, AP3 Force weapons with the Daemonbane rule, so basically nothing special at all).




Orblivion: No what I am saying is that when a Model has an unusual Power weapon that is defined in it's special rules as a specific subtype it does not matter.

I am not at this point weighing in much further on the "Axe Mortalis'" state of being at this time(I.E. I will not express my opinion on whether it is a "Power-Form defined as per model" that is master crafted, or an Unusual Power Weapon, thus always being a sword plus special rules.)

I haven't seen that to be the case anywhere though. Nemesis Daemon Hammer is a different situation as Thunder Hammers are not a subtype of power weapons, they are their own entry. I guess I'm just curious if you have seen any unusual power weapons defined as a power axe/maul.

Regardless, this discussion is now going in more directions than it was when I got involved and it is 3am. I'm out for now.

Kommissar Kel wrote:

This is a case of "it is what it is" see my reference to Nemesis Daemon Hammers in my prior post for quasi-related proof of concept(otherwise you could claim that Hammers are S as user, AP3 Force weapons with the Daemonbane rule, so basically nothing special at all).

I see what you're saying, but in essence you are using the same method to support your argument as those of us who say that MC does not make a power weapon unusual.

ie taking rules from elsewhere that appear to fit the same criteria and extrapolating from there.

Lets face it that neither argument is stronger than the other, and without outside ruling there will never be a resolution