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.

RobPro wrote:If you've read the thread, you'll see that nobody is arguing whether a power fist doubles the user's strength.

I've read a lot of the thread and it sure as hell sounds like people are still making the mistake that the power fist is somehow has a stat line and profile and the living metal some how forces the power fist to have only str 4. I'm trying to dig into that error and demonstrate that the pfist does not have a stat line and thus strikes against living metal from a term with a pfist are resolved at str 9.

Do people still disagree with this assertion? That a term with pfist and furious charge has str 9 against a monolith?

visavismeyou wrote:

RobPro wrote:If you've read the thread, you'll see that nobody is arguing whether a power fist doubles the user's strength.

I've read a lot of the thread and it sure as hell sounds like people are still making the mistake that the power fist is somehow has a stat line and profile and the living metal some how forces the power fist to have only str 4. I'm trying to dig into that error and demonstrate that the pfist does not have a stat line and thus strikes against living metal from a term with a pfist are resolved at str 9.

Do people still disagree with this assertion? That a term with pfist and furious charge has str 9 against a monolith?

Actually sir, the argument is for Furious Charge, not Powerfists. Powerfists and klaws were FAQed to working on the Monolith's Living Armor a while ago, the problem is GW didn't explain WHY that is, and as such, we have crazy confusion when Furious Charge ads a single strenght point on the charge.

Except, of course, that the rules specify that the +1 is added after doubling, meaning it's not the users base strength at all. If it was, then it would be (ST+1)x2 instread of (STx2)+1

I am aware. The +1 to Strenght happens between the two events. The Powerclaw doubles at the start of the game (or even before then) but before the actual attack.

Ork Cyborg wrote:Actually sir, the argument is for Furious Charge, not Powerfists. Powerfists and klaws were FAQed to working on the Monolith's Living Armor a while ago, the problem is GW didn't explain WHY that is, and as such, we have crazy confusion when Furious Charge ads a single strenght point on the charge.

Yea I know, I was trying to point out that it seems that people are still violating this. My MO was to get someone to admit what you just said then quote:

Furious Charge:
Models with this skill are known for the wild ferocity of
their assaults. In a turn in which they assaulted into
combat they add +1 to both their Initiative and Strength
characteristics when attacking in close combat (note
that this has no effect on the Initiative tests for
sweeping advances).

which quite clearly states that the model gets the plus 1; thus, I'm confused why there are 7 pages in this thread... GW's FaQ clearly reads exactly the same as the Furious Charge rule... model = user... I'm sure no one is going to try to make an erroneous distinction between model and "The user of a power fist".

How is Furious Charge not a bonus? You get no bonuses of any kind against a Monolith, aside from exceptions which are explicitly mentioned.

RobPro wrote:How is Furious Charge not a bonus? You get no bonuses of any kind against a Monolith, aside from exceptions which are explicitly mentioned.

I see this is where the errors lie, please stop using words such as "You", if you're more precise then you may start understanding how this works.

The statement of: "You get no bonuses of any kind against a monolith" is completely erroneous in multiple ways. First, "You" would be referring to a player, this is just obviously wrong. Second, the monolith only restricts bonuses to Weapons... not models, so a model may receive a bonus, however, a weapon may not. Thus, the model receives a plus 1 to STR from Furious charge even while charging a Monolith. Finally, from my recollection, you are COMPLETELY misrepresenting the codex entry. Perhaps that is the way you want to play your monolith, but it has no basis in reality (again according to my recollection which may be faulty).

Now, reality, I am not exceedingly and thoroughly familiar with Necrons, I do not own a Necron Codex so please, if you could provide the exact wording of the living metal entry that demonstrates that my understanding of how it works to be erred, then please provide me this exact wording. I am working on the knowledge gained while arguing this a few weeks ago. I read the codex entry then, but I do not have it in front of me now.

Page 42 requires that you use weapons to hit in close combat.

You have two types - normal and special. But either way you are still using weapons to hit, and you are told modifications do nothing to help you when using a weapon to hurt the monolith.

Sliggoth wrote:What does the living metal rule say? It says any WEAPON (yes any weapon) attacking gets str +d6.

Now, does it in any way, shape or form limit attacks to weapons? No it does not. It does say any weapon attack has limits, but it does not even address any attacks from a model's own strength.

So what does this mean? It simply means that living metal (under 5th edition rules) only affects shooting attacks. The way that cc attacks are resolved means that living metal doesnt interact with cc attacks at all.

It really is that simple. Living metal affects attacks from weapons. Close combat attacks fo not use weapons in their resolution. If a weapon even has a strength it is ignored in cc. It is always the model's own str that is used in cc.



PS please note the wording on the relic blade. The hits are resolved at str 6, so that means that the relic blade must set the model's str to 6. It is certainly POSSIBLE that the relic blade has a str itself of 6, but we arent told that. We are told that hits while using it are str 6 hits. Which in game terms means that the user has str 6.

Well, except that it does affect cc weapons.. specifically those that allow more than 1d6 for penetration. Chainswords I believe, mc attacks, etc...

Man, you people really need to stop reading rules word for word and trying to eek out every advantage you can from it.

The spirit of the rule is, in my opinion rather obviously, that any weapon that gets a bonus versus vehicles, does not get that bonus. If you look at the examples listed, it is "lance, melta, chainfists, and monstrous creatures" all things that get a specific bonus when hitting a vehicle. Powerfists and furious charge have no specific anti-vehicle parts to their abilities.

The difference is this for an ork:
S = Base strength + weapon modification (in the OP's example, base strength again) + 1 when charging
Armor penetration = S + 1d6 (base)

Versus a SM with a chainfist and furious charge:
S = Base strength + weapon modification (in this case, base strength again) + 1 when charging
Armor penetration = S + 1d6 (base) + 1d6 (anti-vehicle addition to a chanfist)

Or something with tankhunter
S = Base strength + weapon modification
Armor penetration = S + 1d6 (base) + 1 (anti-vehicle addition due to tankhunter)

Living Metal applies SPECIFICALLY to modifications to vehicle damage and penetration rolls, that's IT. A line that says "in practice..." has to be ignored the moment the base rules system changes, because the practice has changed. There's nothing that can be done about it.

@nos Pg 42 does NOT require that you use weapons to hit in close combat. Yhere is no such requirement on that page. (which is a very good thing for the deceiver, otherwise he could never hit in cc) Models that have weapons in cc will use them, yes. But there is no strength associated with those weapons, so the bulk of the living metal rules do not apply to cc weapons. If a cc weapon adds to armor pen (say a rending cc weapon) then yes that part of the rules will apply. Its the idea that models use weapons that means that tank hunter probably doesnt work...a weapon is being used and there is an add to the armor pen roll.

But furious charge adds to the model's own stength, which living metal doesnt affect in any way.



Sliggoth

The deceiver does have a weapon - a normal CCW in so much as anything that does not confer a bonus to CC is called a "normal" CCW.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Page 42 requires that you use weapons to hit in close combat.

You have two types - normal and special. But either way you are still using weapons to hit, and you are told modifications do nothing to help you when using a weapon to hurt the monolith.

Yet still, no one has quoted Living Metal verbatim where it says: "You may not use any modifications". Furthermore, where is the stat line for the power fist? You have yet to provide this either.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sliggoth wrote:@nos Pg 42 does NOT require that you use weapons to hit in close combat. Yhere is no such requirement on that page. (which is a very good thing for the deceiver, otherwise he could never hit in cc) Models that have weapons in cc will use them, yes. But there is no strength associated with those weapons, so the bulk of the living metal rules do not apply to cc weapons. If a cc weapon adds to armor pen (say a rending cc weapon) then yes that part of the rules will apply. Its the idea that models use weapons that means that tank hunter probably doesnt work...a weapon is being used and there is an add to the armor pen roll.

But furious charge adds to the model's own stength, which living metal doesnt affect in any way.



Sliggoth

Sliggoth, I suggest you do not even approach those people who advance this nonsense about whether or not you use a weapon to hit in CC since it is completely irrelevant, they are wrong either way.

visavismeyou wrote:
Yet still, no one has quoted Living Metal verbatim where it says: "You may not use any modifications". Furthermore, where is the stat line for the power fist? You have yet to provide this either.

I provided it about 3 pages back.

Kevin949 wrote:The monolith is made of living necron metal which is not only self-repairing but is capable of adapting its structure to resist incoming attacks. Attacks which count the targets armour value as being less than it really is (such as bright lances and blasters) do not do so against the monolith. Similarily, weaapons that get additional armour penetration dice (such as chainfists, monstrous creatures or melta weapons) do not get the extra dice against the monolith. Ordnance weapons still roll 2d6 for armour penetration and select the highest score. In practice, any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what.

There you go, the whole living metal entry verbatim.

Sliggoth - all page 63 states is "strength of the attacker" - which is not necessarily their Strength statistic. For example Relic blades do not confer strength 6 to the wielder, but their hits are at S6 - which implies the weapon is what is performing the hits.

Page 42 tells us weapons are used in close combat, and does not give you any alternative as to what to use, so you must use the weapon - nothing else has permission.

Kevin949 wrote:

visavismeyou wrote:
Yet still, no one has quoted Living Metal verbatim where it says: "You may not use any modifications". Furthermore, where is the stat line for the power fist? You have yet to provide this either.

I provided it about 3 pages back.

Kevin949 wrote:The monolith is made of living necron metal which is not only self-repairing but is capable of adapting its structure to resist incoming attacks. Attacks which count the targets armour value as being less than it really is (such as bright lances and blasters) do not do so against the monolith. Similarily, weaapons that get additional armour penetration dice (such as chainfists, monstrous creatures or melta weapons) do not get the extra dice against the monolith. Ordnance weapons still roll 2d6 for armour penetration and select the highest score. In practice, any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what.

There you go, the whole living metal entry verbatim.

Excellent, thank you, what this is quite clearly saying, as I remembered, is that weapons that have a profile can have augmented strength, weapons that dont have a profile and instead confer bonuses onto a model still confer those bonuses onto the model; models that gain bonuses from abilities still gain those abilities.

Please point out how I am misunderstanding the line, "Any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what" interferes with furious charge in anyway? Is furious charge a weapon? No... is a model a weapon? No... Does furious charge augment the strength of a weapon? No... Do powerfists augment the strength of a weapon? No... So why is there an argument?

Please, I'm being completely serious and honest when I beg someone to point out how I'm misunderstanding this. I even contacted a friend of mine earlier today who plays necrons to ask him if I was missing something, originally he said what so many in this thread have said that "You may not use any modifications" and then I asked him to pull out his necron book and point out to me where the necron book says this and he couldn't find it. Eventually after looking at the book and FAQ's and talking to other people he agreed with me. People, such as Nosferatu1001 and my friend before he read the codex verbatim, are reading this how they wish it to be, not how it actually is... The necron book does not say anything about "no modifications at all".




Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Sliggoth - all page 63 states is "strength of the attacker" - which is not necessarily their Strength statistic. For example Relic blades do not confer strength 6 to the wielder, but their hits are at S6 - which implies the weapon is what is performing the hits.

Page 42 tells us weapons are used in close combat, and does not give you any alternative as to what to use, so you must use the weapon - nothing else has permission.

But if the relic blade is a special weapon... then it must fall under the category I quoted earlier... You are stepping outside of the rules to have this be the way you wish it to be, the rules state that SCCWs confer their abilities to the wielder and the rules are completely tacit on everything else you're trying to conjure up.

I, however, am a fan of stepping outside of either camp about the relic blade, that is, camp 1, "It confer's its strength 6 to the wielder" and camp 2, "The relic blade is able to magically create its own profile for just this one hit which magically disappears afterwards". I am actually against both camps because I understand what it means to say "Resolves as if". Neither camp is needed to make the game mechanic work properly, thus, the argument is irrelevant. When the game mechanic attempts to find out what the STR of the hit is, the relic blade rules comeback and respond with "Str 6". The game doesn't ask any other questions, the game does not care if it is the stat line of the model or the stat line of the weapon.

@Nos Actually, Pg 38 under rolling to wound explains precicly what is used in cc, and its the model's strength charactersitic. Also, pg 37 explains exactly how we use the model's WS to determine hits. Please notice that weapons arent involved in either stage here of cc. Neither in rolling to hit or rolling to wound is a weapon used.
Also, please actually read the deceiver's listing, we are told that he does not carry any weapons. Nothing, nada, zip...no weapons are involved and yet people have used him in cc for years.

The relic blade tells us that hits are done at str 6 yes...but its still the model doing the hits, unless somehow the relic blade has a WS? So it is the model that is performing the hits. Even if the relic blade were taken to have a str of 6....that would mean that only models arned with a relic balde would be affected by the living metal rule? Since there has been no hint that any other weapon has a strength for cc? There really is nothing in the relic blade rule that tells us anything beyond that the hits themselves are str 6, neither the model nor the weapon.

The rules tell us that weapons can provide all sorts of bonus effects. There is nothing in the rules that suggests weapons are required for cc.


Sliggoth

Except the BRB defines anything which does not provide a bonus in CC as a "normal" CCW, whatever they actually are.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except the BRB defines anything which does not provide a bonus in CC as a "normal" CCW, whatever they actually are.

oh god, wrong again, so very very very wrong...

"Normal Close combat weapons do not provide a bonus in CC" IS NOT THE SAME AS "Whatever does not provide a bonus in CC is "normal". You are committing the fallacy of confusing necessary with sufficient conditions, please, for the love of god, Nos, back out of this conversation, you have been wrong about everything.

NORMAL CLOSE COMBAT WEAPONS
Weapons like chainswords, rifle butts, combat blades,
bayonets, etc., do not confer any particular bonus to
the model using them. Remember that, in close
combat, pistols count as normal close combat weapons
and so the Strength and AP of the pistol are ignored

So you are stating that ther eis a 3rd type of weapon, not defined in the BRB?

There are two types of weapon: normal and special. If what you use as a weapon (as you are told you MUST use weapons) is not a special weapon, it is a normal weapon.

Please vis, just back out.

nosferatu1001 wrote:So you are stating that ther eis a 3rd type of weapon, not defined in the BRB?

Nope



Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except the BRB defines anything which does not provide a bonus in CC as a "normal" CCW, whatever they actually are.

Rulebook:
IF "A" is a weapon and it is normal, THEN it does not confer any bonus to the model using them.

Nosferatu1001:
IF "A" is a weapon and it does not provide a bonus in CC, THEN it is a "Normal CCW".

You are mixing the rulebook's sufficient condition with its necessary condition. This is a proof, you cannot disagree with it.

It is an invalid proof, like most of yours.

You ignore that, if there are only two types of weapon and you are NOT one type, then you MUST be the other type.

nosferatu1001 wrote:It is an invalid proof, like most of yours.

You ignore that, if there are only two types of weapon and you are NOT one type, then you MUST be the other type.

You assert without providing any justification that its invalid... Why?

Furthermore, I'm not talking about the types of weapons, I'm pointing out that your attempt at analysis is wrong, you mixed the necessary and sufficient conditions. I already pointed out that your whole pursuit is irrelevant. You have not addressed the reality I pointed out earlier:

"Any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what" does not interfere with furious charge in anyway. Is furious charge a weapon? No... is a model a weapon? No... Does furious charge augment the strength of a weapon? No... Do powerfists augment the strength of a weapon? No...

This reality shows that living metal does not talk about Powerfists nor Furious charge since they confer bonuses onto models and not to weapons. Since living armor is tacit, and the rules explicitly permit the strength augmentation to the model... a term with furious charge charging a monolith will start with Str9 and add d6. Everything else you have to say about anything else is irrelevant. Relic blade is not relevant because the hit is resolved as if it is S6, this has nothing to do with Living Metal and Living Metal has nothing to do with Relic Blades.

The justification is on the next line. I assumed you could read that far. Sorry for overestimating you!

So, since you agree there are only two types of weapon, and we know that the type of weapon is not special, you surely agree that the weapon is Normal?

Can you at least admit your error in your "proof"?

While normally you would be correct, you ignore the restriction the turns the necesary into necessary and sufficient condition. Unless you pretend there is a 3rd type not defined, but you have already admitted you dont so.....

Edit: and relic blades do not hit "as if", their hits ARE S6. Big difference.

I have no intention of addressing your other point as yet, until you admit your error.

nosferatu1001 wrote:The justification is on the next line. I assumed you could read that far. Sorry for overestimating you!

So, since you agree there are only two types of weapon, and we know that the type of weapon is not special, you surely agree that the weapon is Normal?

Can you at least admit your error in your "proof"?

While normally you would be correct, you ignore the restriction the turns the necesary into necessary and sufficient condition. Unless you pretend there is a 3rd type not defined, but you have already admitted you dont so.....

Edit: and relic blades do not hit "as if", their hits ARE S6. Big difference.

I have no intention of addressing your other point as yet, until you admit your error.

Sure I'll admit that I was wrong about something that is completely irrelevant. Now, as you promised, address the relevant point and only the relevant point do not vacillate and ignore the relevant and only point that matters in this discussion:

visavismeyou wrote:"Any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what" does not interfere with furious charge in anyway. Is furious charge a weapon? No... is a model a weapon? No... Does furious charge augment the strength of a weapon? No... Do powerfists augment the strength of a weapon? No...

This reality shows that living metal does not talk about Powerfists nor Furious charge since they confer bonuses onto models and not to weapons. Since living armor is tacit, and the rules explicitly permit the strength augmentation to the model... a term with furious charge charging a monolith will start with Str9 and add d6.

Finally! So any chance you can retract your inaccurate statement "this is a proof, you cannot disagree with it" as I did disagree with it (showing you were wrong) and proved that I was correct.

The point is that you *must* use weapons in close combat. So the line about unaugmented strength of the weapon *does* apply.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Finally! So any chance you can retract your inaccurate statement "this is a proof, you cannot disagree with it" as I did disagree with it (showing you were wrong) and proved that I was correct.

The point is that you *must* use weapons in close combat. So the line about unaugmented strength of the weapon *does* apply.

So you completely ignored:

"Any weapon attacking the monolith will roll for armour penetration using its unaugmented strength and a single d6 no matter what" does not interfere with furious charge in anyway. Is furious charge a weapon? No... is a model a weapon? No... Does furious charge augment the strength of a weapon? No... Do powerfists augment the strength of a weapon? No...

Furious charge does not augment the strength of a weapon... the model is not a weapon... FC augments the models strength and the Living Metal text that was cited earlier does not talk about the model's strength. Please respond to this point.

Furthermore, the following is the text that I have in front of me (Friend's Necron Codex), please tell me why my wording is different from the one that was quoted earlier.

Living Metal:
The Monolith is made of living necron metal which is not only self-repairing but is capable of adapting its structure to resist incoming attacks. Attacks which count the target's Armour Value as being less than it really is (such as bright lances and blasters) do not do so against the Monolith. Similarly, weapons that get additional Armour Penetration dice (such as chainfists, monstrous creatures or melta weapons) do not get the extra dice against the Monolith. Ordanence weapons still roll 2d6 for Armour Penetration and select the highest score.

If this is not the latest text, please tell me why my friends is old or wrong, where is the most recent? Is there an errata I cannot find? If this is the proper text then there is nothing about strength and much of this debate is completely irrelevant.

This is not the current text, if you compare the ISBN number yours has a "1" at the end of the 5 digit segment, the current has a "4", from memory - if you check back earlier in the thread the full ISBNs were quoted.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Yes, you have the older version.

the one with the added line "in practice...." has a similar ISBN - instead it is 84154

My ISBN is 1-84154-190-7

It says nothing about strength. Not to mention, you have still not responded to my point, the model's strength is being augmented not the weapon, thus, Living Metal (in any edition) does not speak about the model's strength, thus, a Term with power fists furiously charging will attack with str 9 and a hit from a runic blade is str 6 under any edition of the codex.

The codex does say "second printing" on the very very first page in the middle towards the bottom.

So yea, I still dont see anyone throughout this thread or the people I've been talking to about this address the point:

Furious charge does not augment the strength of a weapon... the model is not a weapon... FC augments the model's strength and the Living Metal text does not talk about the model's strength. Since weapons without profiles use the profile of the model, Living Metal does not interfere with any augmentation of the model's strength.

The point is that you *must* use weapons in close combat. So the line about unaugmented strength of the weapon *does* apply

Except....weapons do not have a strength in cc (lets just say atm that the relic blade may have a strength, so all other weapons do not have a strength). So living metal can only possibly apply to a model using a relic blade.

And please not, there is still nothing suggesting that a model has to have a weapon to attack in cc. This point has been raised several times and not addressed either.

1) Weapons do not have a strength in cc (possibly excepting the relic blade, that being the only example that has been subnitted as possinly having a str).

2) There is no requirement that a model actually have a weapon to fight in cc.


Sliggoth