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.

"there are no saving throws of any sort allowed against warscythes"

Shoot a pariah's warscythe with built-in gauss blaster, and it's still the warscythe attacking. Welcome to the wonderful world of AP2/ignores invuln. Not to mention S+2D6.
Maybe not the best for friendly play, but when you want to shut up TFG/powergamer, this might be the way to go.

Not to mention that each weapon destroyed result gives the monolith an extra shot.

Thoughts?

Wrong on both counts.
+Waits for Necron codex backup.+

A weapon destroyed result reduces the number of gauss flux arcs shots by negative one.

A warscythe ignores all saves, and a warscythe with built-in gauss blaster is most certainly a warscythe.

Pariahs just got ten times better if that's correct.

It's a really harsh reading of RaW, but yes, it makes pariah amazing.

(Note that cover saves would also be disallowed.)

Edit: On the other hand, they're really not that far out of Grey Knights price range in terms of (amazing) abilities and cost, and GK are considered overpriced.

Oh, that's fair. Pariahs can now kill Land Raiders with ease and pretty much insta-kill anything.

ajfirecracker wrote:
A warscythe ignores all saves, and a warscythe with built-in gauss blaster is most certainly a warscythe.

Does that mean war scythe have a melee range of 24" ?
see what i did there?

5+2D6 only yields 12 average, but the odds of killing a LR are much, much better than simply 1 in 6 to glance (keep in mind that 2D6 would glance if either was a 6, even if the other one is a 1)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
LunaHound, the warscythe says nothing about only working in melee.

ajfirecracker wrote:LunaHound, the warscythe says nothing about only working in melee.

So a pariah can melee enemies from up to 24" away then right?

No, but they may shoot the gauss blasters built into their warscythes.

They may move 6" in the assault phase, count as engaged if within 2" of BTB, yadda yadda.

ajfirecracker wrote:No, but they may shoot the gauss blasters built into their warscythes.

They may move 6" in the assault phase, count as engaged if within 2" of BTB, yadda yadda.

If a gun can benefit rule from a melee weapon

then surely melee weapon can benefit same rule from a ranged weapon.

You cant have both ( thats what you are currently doing )

A gun can benefit from a melee weapon, if the rules permit (which they do here under certain especially strict RaW interpretations)

A melee weapon can benefit from a gun, if the rules permit. Have you heard of pistols?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Besides, pariah must be 0-1 for a reason. May we start a discussion concerning how to best maximize the value of this superior unit choice? (specifically the tactics required, as per this forum)

I think the best tactics may be to use the pariah as a spearhead for a larger assault, potentially leading FO to help with enemy LD tests.

ajfirecracker wrote:A gun can benefit from a melee weapon, if the rules permit (which they do here under certain especially strict RaW interpretations)

A melee weapon can benefit from a gun, if the rules permit. Have you heard of pistols?

What about pistols? are you going to say something like bolt pistol + power weapon now turns into ap-1 weapon?
Yes , but the last time i seen the codex ( just now ) Warscythe is warscythe , gauss blaster is gauss blaster .

This argument is so ridiculous ,by all means if people allow you to play this way , more power to you ^^
I'll leave the argument to someone else that find this worth their time , count me out , *huggles

*huggles is how you end distasteful conversations? I find that extremely amusing.

On a more relevant note: the purpose of this thread is to capitalize on strict, unreasonable RaW against players who would do the same.

You're welcome to introduce other armies or debate RaW, but the point of the thread is to collect the absurdities that overpower units, not to start a massive rules debate.

Edit: No, the point I was making is that pistols confer a bonus in CC (something ranged weapons don't normally do) because of their rules. Likewise, warscythes confer a bonus on built-in weapons shooting (something weapons don't normally do) because of their rules.
Edit2: Warscythe is warscythe, gauss blaster is gauss blaster, warscythe with built-in gauss blaster is both.

Cheese Elemental wrote:Pariahs just got ten times better if that's correct.

You know, if you could get something like that to pass without having to lawyer your balls off, I would so be one step closer to building a CC based Necron army focusing on Pariahs and Flayed Ones. Now if only Flayed Ones didn't suck... or were troops... which would make them not suck...

@Fafnir: Pariahs aren't affected in CC by this interpretation of the rules, although they are affected overall. Also, if it becomes accepted on the internet, and then in tournaments, and then in general, you won't have to lawyer anything off. (Similar to how Space Puppies and Sisters of Battle used to be able to do ridiculous things involving Rhinos and rapid fire weapons.)

ajfirecracker wrote:*huggles is how you end distasteful conversations? I find that extremely amusing.

Er , sorry for the amusement i guess? You'll eventually find out , im not the type to have interest in arguing with this type of silly stuff ^^;

Please don't apologize. I enjoy amusement.

I don't think it's silly, I think it's a valid portion of tactics to be prepared to deal with rules-mongering. As preparation, I'd advise finding your own broken rules and being prepared to play them as such, should an opponent demand strict RaW play. (Such as if they don't let your DH take a LRBT, or SA destroys your precious Necron Warriors).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Of course, a much larger portion of your tactical thinking should be directed towards opponents who are interested in a fair, fun game.

Quick observation firecracker. SM Combiweapons. Has bolter attached, has flamer attached. Two seperate modes. See where I'm going with this? Could I say the flamer attachment can rapidfire? No. Two seperate weapons, with seperate profiles. Just built together.

It depends on the wording of the particular codex you're using, bsohi.

Combi-weapons tend to be pretty specific in that you must fire it exactly as a normal flamer or exactly as a normal metla or plas. There might be some codexes out in the realm of Inquisition/IG/Variants (like Eye of Terror)/Chaos that allow you to gain benefits.

Special ammunition, in particular, might be susceptible to this.

Of course, I'll gladly dispense another bit of cheesy goodness for those combating TFG, which is the point of this thread: Urien Rakarth, the DE HQ, has a flamer template that automatically wounds, and has D6 AP. This is great for roasting loads of whatever, especially since you have a 1/3 chance of ignoring all armor (and you always ignore cover). His anti-psyker wargear might also benefit from his auto-wound rule, so be sure to check the language on it. This one isn't so much rules-bending as it is the flamer being much better now than in 3rd or 4th ed.

Edit: bsohi, if you're arguing by analogy that the pariah should not get awesome shooting weapons, then I say: The warscythe with built-in gauss blaster is the equivalent of a combi-weapon which has a special rule allowing it to count as twin-linked, for example. Unless specified that this only applies to the bolter, it would apply to the combi part. Similarly, the warscythe has a special rule that's worded such that it can be interpreted to apply to the gauss blaster, since shooting wounds are still caused by a type of warscythe.

Firecrakcer..I say just try it, but you probably you won't like what happens.

For instance: The rules say that when an opponent Lashes your warriors, that he gets to move them. It does not say that he must gently and respectfully move them. So, he chooses to throw them on the table as hard as he can....see what I did there? RAW allows this.

This kind of rules lawyering will only make you enemies and turn you into the very type of person that you say you are trying to overcome......irony? YMDC.

Please take this to you make the call. That's where we like to keep "conversations" (read arguement inducing statements)

a rule is only a rule if it can be enforced.. If you believe you can win this argument swiftly in a most circumstances then I support you.. However if you dont think this will fly with most players then dont even bother

To most its obvious the gauss weapon is different from the close combat weapon.. Good luck in an actual game getting people to believe you

I changed your topic to make it clear what you are asking about.

To support Kirasu's point, a Hammerhead with a Railgun and an SMS is still a tank. Does that mean it can Tank Shock a target 72 inches away when it shoots its Railgun?

ajfirecracker wrote:"...Of course, I'll gladly dispense another bit of cheesy goodness for those combating TFG, which is the point of this thread: Urien Rakarth, the DE HQ, has a flamer template that automatically wounds, and has D6 AP. This is great for roasting loads of whatever, especially since you have a 1/3 chance of ignoring all armor (and you always ignore cover)..."

Where's the cheese with Urien ? His Autohit-Autowound Flamer has been around for quite sometime now - but how often have you ever seen him on the table ? If he was truly that cheesy then every DE player would field him...

ajfirecracker wrote:"...His anti-psyker wargear might also benefit from his auto-wound rule, so be sure to check the language on it. This one isn't so much rules-bending as it is the flamer being much better now than in 3rd or 4th ed..."

Flame template worked the same now as it did then, no big deal... As for the Crucible of Malediction - it does not "hit" a model so there's no room for easter eggs or rules bending. Its not even a weapon so wouldn't matter in the first place.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
-- And so does this mean the Necron Lord's Staff of Light ignores all armor saves as well when it is used in the Shooting phase ?

My word, what is this?

Don't be silly you people. A Built in Gauss Blaster is not a Warscythe, just like how the Built in Flamer is not a DCCW on a Dreadnought.

The Gauss Blaster is just a Normal Gauss Blaster.

END. OF. DISCUSSION.

Gwar, I ask that you carefully read the rules on this point, particularly before making any analogies.

The DCCW doubles strength in assault and counts as a power weapon. The wording clearly prevents it from conferring any bonus to built-in weapons in the shooting phase.

Likewise, the Staff of Light, mentioned above is only a power weapon "in the assault phase".

Additionally, power weapon is a term that means something in assault, but not in shooting.

The warscythe has no such assault phase/CC restrictions. It simply says that it ignores all saves and rolls S+2D6 against vehicles.

The profile of the weapon under the Pariah entry makes it clear that it is a single weapon, and should therefore follow any general rules applied to all weapons of either type.

Please avoid RaI/the way it's been played and instead focus on RaW.
What rules underly the argument that the Warscythe/Blaster should be treated as anything but a Warscythe that can shoot?

But I want my heavy flamer to be S10 and ignore armor saves...

Honestly though, if you're thinking ahead of time of using "special" tactics to "shut up TFG" you probably need to be looking at your own behavior.

My favorite tactic for shutting up TFG: don't play him.

You want RaW? Fine:

Page 17:
Warscythe with Built In Gauss Blaster.

Page 14:
RANGED WEAPONS:
[...]
Gauss Blaster 24" S5 AP4 Assault 2
[...]
CLOSE COMBAT WEAPONS
Warscythe:
There are No Saving Throws of any Sort allowed against a Warscythe.

No mention that gauss Blasters ignore saves. The Warscythe is EXPLICITLY a Close Combat weapon, so you can only use it in the Assault Phase. Nowhere does it say "In Built Weapons use the rules of the weapon it is built into". Also, it makes it clear they are TWO weapons, a Warscythe, with a Built In Gauss Blaster, much like a DCCW with a Built in Heavy Flamer are 2 Weapons.

Actually a DCCW with a built-in flamer is considered 1 weapon for most game purposes (possibly all).

And no, neither the rules nor the weapons entry make it clear that they are two weapons. So what if the warscythe is a CCW? In the case of pariah, it may also shoot. This is similar to a bolt pistol, which is normally listed as a ranged weapon, being used in CC. If you had a pistol which simply said "no armor save may be taken" (without further rules), it would certainly count as both a power weapon and as AP:2.

The case here is equivalent. You've got a weapon that ignores armor saves (along with whatever else) that can also shoot.

As to the number of weapons that it is: It's 1. A warscythe with a built-in gauss blaster is still a warscythe, it can just shoot.

Suppose you had a squad that came with bolters. If you had options to twin-link all the unit's weapons, and to make some of them combi-weapons, would you insist that they may not use the combi parts as twin-linked? Of course not! (Unless there's a rule to that effect.)

Edit: The word "with" in the description seems to imply that the blaster is something the warscythe has, not a separate weapon. Also, what could built-in possibly mean, other than that it is part of the weapon? Is that not the meaning of the phrase "built in"?