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.

 juraigamer wrote:

And.... the codex never says he can change his weapon. It never gives him an option. The only way to change it is to model it for an advantage, which is something you can do, but a TO may disallow it.

The codex does not say he can change his weapon, but the FaQ defines a Glaive Encarmine as a Sword or an Axe. So the underlined is not true.

The Sanguinor has a Glaive Encarmine as noted on P.51 and 82 of the Blood Angels Codex..

A Glaive Encarmine, as noted by the FaQ, is either a sword or an axe. The FaQ tells us the Glaive Encarmine can be a sword or an axe.

So the Sanguinor has a Glaive Encarmine (Which is a Axe or a Sword as noted in the FaQ).

rigeld2 wrote:

 juraigamer wrote:
*waves hand* I'm in the school of thought that the sanguinor cannot change the weapon he has, but the guard can. I guess I don't matter, that or someone can't read that there's more than one person saying something like that.

overlordweasel wrote:

But more to the topic, If you REALLY think that the sanguinator cannot change his weapon between axe or sword, when his codex says he can

And.... the codex never says he can change his weapon. It never gives him an option. The only way to change it is to model it for an advantage, which is something you can do, but a TO may disallow it.

The FAQ gives the option by giving two definitions for the weapon.

Yup. The FAQ allows glaives Encarmine to be either (sword) or ( axe). As the Sangiunor's wargear list simply states 'Glaive Encarmine' it is not specific and can go either way. Sorry, there is nothing concrete saying it must be one or the other, there simply isn't. To be fair, I could be wrong. If I am, please quote and cite the rules that you find so I may be educated.

MFA doesn't mean what most of the people using it thinks it means.

Totally agree that the Codex states he has a Glaive Encarmine. The FAQ states what a Glaive Encarmine can be. The GW model may come with something that looks like a sword, but it doesn't mean that he HAS to have a Glaive Encarmine (sword), as the FAQ provides two different options.

I'm not a BA player and when I did play them, I never used the model.

I'd be happy with BA players taking an axe over a sword, sure... Lose that I6 and become I1, My MSS and warscythes will feth you up first!

Quick question, can anyone point me to a page that defines what a Citadel model actually is?

There isn't one in the rules.

Happyjew wrote:
Quick question, can anyone point me to a page that defines what a Citadel model actually is?

First paragraph of page 2 under "Models & Units".

No, that tells you what a model is defined as. Citadel miniatures is never defined.

 pretre wrote:
No, that tells you what a model is defined as. Citadel miniatures is never defined.

First sentence.
Miniatures are defined as 'models'.
Models are defined as a representation.

Right, but where are Citadel miniatures defined. Also, models are miniatures isn't the same as miniatures are models.

 pretre wrote:
Right, but where are Citadel miniatures defined. Also, models are miniatures isn't the same as miniatures are models.

Irrelevant.
Miniatures are defined as models. Models have a solid definition.
One and the same as far as pure RAW is concerned.

Circular.

Well you did ask for a rulebook definition of a Citadel Miniature. And it is defined as being a model.
So if the rules give permission to equip a model...

Much like if I bought a Ford. It's defined as a type of car.
The Law gives me permission to change the colour of my car.
Therefore I can have my Ford re-sprayed.

The problem is twofold: the rules say all 40k models are citadel miniatures. The rules do not say all citadel miniatures are 40k models. Example: grave guard.

Secondly, it isn't commutative. All fords are cars is not te same as all cars are fords.

Thirdly (whoops), there is no permission to do anything (paint, modify or assemble) citadel miniatures.

 pretre wrote:
The problem is twofold: the rules say all 40k models are citadel miniatures. The rules do not say all citadel miniatures are 40k models.

You've got that backwards.
It says all Citadel Miniatures are Models. Not all Models are Citadel Miniatures.
So you're given permission to equip your models (and therefore equip Citadel Miniatures). True painting isn't covered. Not in a rules sense at least.

The rules also give permission to change the equipment on a model, so you have permission to change the equipment of a Citadel Miniature. There you go! Conversions are RAW.

Where is permission to equip, assemble or modify your models?

I don't have pg 2 in front of me for the rest.

 pretre wrote:
Where is permission to equip, assemble or modify your models?

I don't have pg 2 in front of me for the rest.

Permission to equip your models? You should be able to find that one yourself, surely?
The various Codex will tell you what equipment the model has (call it Wargear if you will). It also gives you permission to change it. The Rulebook tells you how to use it.
Since Miniature = Model and you have permission to modify a models equipment, you now have a RAW permission to modify a miniature.

You are falsely equating wargear purchases with the ability to model wargear. Either way, read back through my responses in the thread. I'm done repeating myself for a couple days.

 pretre wrote:
You are falsely equating wargear purchases with the ability to model wargear.

Can you explain how?
You can change the Wargear on a Model. A Citadel Miniature, as defined in the Rulebook, is a Model.
Lets be honest, this whole argument is ridiculous.

i love how its only pretty much one guy with one or two comments from others fighting this. It's been FAQd already, why are you fighting it? Generally speaking, when the entire forum is against you, that's usually a good sign your wrong.

*waves hand* I'm in the school of thought that the sanguinor cannot change the weapon he has, but the guard can. I guess I don't matter, that or someone can't read that there's more than one person saying something like that

i didn't exclude you, you just arent the one guy whos been consistently posting multiple times per page like liturgies of blood. Also, it is in the codex that he has an option, albeit in the FAQ, which are changes to the codex FAQ=Codex. It gives the definition of a glaive encarmine. It has two profiles, one being a MC sword or axe. It's there in black and white, RAW. Ergo, not MFA. smh.

 grendel083 wrote:

 pretre wrote:
You are falsely equating wargear purchases with the ability to model wargear.

Can you explain how?
You can change the Wargear on a Model. A Citadel Miniature, as defined in the Rulebook, is a Model.
Lets be honest, this whole argument is ridiculous.

The codices say (with a little variance) that the models have a cost and the wargear section lists what the model is armed with, not what the model can be armed with.
It looks like raw is to buy models to fit the wargear since there are no rules to convert. Fortunately nobody works from this starting point.

haha, every time i check this thread, it gets more and more off topic from the OP. This thread needs to be closed, the Op has his answer already.

^^^^
Yes he does, and that answer is yes, you can give the Sanguinir a Glaive Encarmine (Axe).