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.

If you use the Power Klaw to attack with he will not give any bonus attacks, since the only thing that can grant +1 attack is a second Power Klaw.(if the power Klaw is the same as a Power fist). The same goes for Power fists, thunder hammers, and Lightning claws. P.42 BRB

Have a look at P.42 It will explain it better.

Oooooohhh... I feel like a noob. That's why they were argueing whether or not he had to use the klaw. Ok. Thank you.

No, you never get an attack for 2xCCWs when using a power fist unless you have a pair of power fists.

That's why the choose-2-or-not debate is so important.

DR - so a special CCW does not make special close combat attacks?

Wrong.

No those are normal attacks ...
servo arms and Nest of vypers (naming 2)
...make special close combat attacks

A special close combat weapon makes special close combat attacks - but are nto the only things that make special close combat attakcs

Tri wrote:No those are normal attacks ...

This is correct, those are normal attacks.

Lets say 2 chaos marines are fighting 1 Vanguard veteran who has a storm shield. 1 chaos has Chainsword, one has powerfist.

both chaos marines roll to hit as normal, roll to wound as normal (with the str determined by their profile/Profile+weapon), the VV takes his invuln saves, and if he fails he is removed, this is a normal attack sequence. AKA normal attack.

On the other hand Gabriel seth uses whirlwind of gore, he is fighting 6 chaos marines, He inflicts 6 automatic hits on the marine unit, this is a special attack sequence. AKA special attack.

Except the powerfist ignores Armour Saves and so is a SPECIAL close combat attack

Meaning you HAVE to use a powerfist if you have one.

Inquisitor Cyotle wrote:You guys are getting off topic.... all I want to know is because of all his weapons, does he get even more attacks, other than just his 3. What I'm thinking, he would because although he does have the Power Klaw, it states in his wargear that he also has a CCW and Pistol. So even if he chooses not to use them, they are still an option for him, and rates the additional attack. Does this make sence? You guys are saying the same thing. It's obvious you're not going to CHOOSE to attack with the CCW when you have a Power Klaw.... common sence, but if he gets that extra attack, that is kind of a big deal.

If you use the CCW and pistol, he gets it. If you use the power Klaw he doesn't because the rules for Power Fist/Klaw states that only another PF/K can give youthe additional attack. Hope that clears that up for you. For the runaround thats happening, its done that in a million threads, so just let it roll, because noone is going to change their opinion until GW FAQs it.

Except you HAVE to use your special CCW. You have NO CHOICE in the matter

nosferatu1001 wrote:A special close combat weapon makes special close combat attacks - but are nto the only things that make special close combat attakcs

one thing about this I disagree with, Nos:

Pg 42:
A normal and a special close combat weapon

these models gain one additional attack. All of their attacks, including the bonus attack benefit from the special weapons bonuses.

States the same for 2 of the same special weapons.

It states that what the weapon does is give a bonus, it doesn't make your CC attacks special CC attacks.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except you HAVE to use your special CCW. You have NO CHOICE in the matter

I gotta agree with DR on this one, in that I would like to see where it states in the BRB that I have to use a special CCW over a regular one.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except you HAVE to use your special CCW. You have NO CHOICE in the matter

That's only true if you believe that you can't pick which two one handed CCW the model is using to attack with when the model is equipped with more than two one handed CCW.

Aaaaannnnnnnddddd back around the 3 CCW circle again.

Edit: Of course from a RAI point you can't choose another CCW in place of a power fist/klaw. You can't exactly unstrap your power fist on the way into assault. Unless the model has more than two arms I suppose.

kmdl1066 wrote:
Edit: Of course from a RAI point you can't choose another CCW in place of a power fist/klaw. You can't exactly unstrap your power fist on the way into assault. Unless the model has more than two arms I suppose.

Yeah you can't take it off, but I bet there is an off switch on that thing somewhere....... that way you could hold your chainsword in it.

<wanders off into the realm of speculative fiction>

Without the power would you even be able to open and close your fingers?

Now I just want to see Yarrick stabbing a dude with a tiny little combat knife held in his power klaw.

And to stay on topic, insert arbitrary rules argument here.

kmdl1066 wrote:<wanders off into the realm of speculative fiction>

Without the power would you even be able to open and close your fingers?

better question... look at the size of the Klaw Would he even be able to pick that arm up without the power??? (Yeah I know, I'm going against myself here, but had to throw that out there seeing as were going into the fiction realm )

So something whcih is demonstrably different to normal isnt special?

Ignoring armour isnt special?
Doubling strength isnt special?

Seriously

I'm with nosferatu on this one. You use a special weapon to attack, you're making special attacks.

kmdl1066 wrote:That's only true if you believe that you can't pick which two one handed CCW the model is using to attack with when the model is equipped with more than two one handed CCW.

While that's an extremely functional rule which sorts all of these problems out - only thing is, there isn't actually any RAW at all for how to handle more than two CCWs.

nosferatu1001 wrote:So something whcih is demonstrably different to normal isnt special?

Ignoring armour isnt special?
Doubling strength isnt special?

Those both explain special rules added to a standard attack. The difference is that a special attack removes most/all rules of a standard attack (i.e. instead of attacking with the normal number of attacks in your profile, roll 1 attack ala Melta Bombs against a vehicle). Those things, AFAIK all happen *instead of your normal attack*, as written explicitly in the rulebook. However, attacking with a special weapon modifies your profile in one way or another, but does not replace the standard attack.

So thinking of it from a "phase window" perspective:

Model A attacks in initiative order:
1) Check for *special attack*, if so carry it out and this model is done attacking.
2) Roll regular attacks, using all profile modifications for extra weapons, charging, str boosts, etc (due to *special weapons*)

I don't see any reason why you can't choose which weapon(s), special or not, to attack with.

So you claim krak grenade is a special attack?

Great, means you can NEVER use your normal attacks against a vehicle (say, you're S5 vs AV10 when 4 attacks is better than 1) if you have krak grenades

No, a special attack is anything out of the ordinary. Ignoring armour is certainly a special attack, as it is not usual to ignore armour saves, same as ignoring to hit would be a special attack.

Stating otherwise a) has no rules backing and b) ignores a clear English meaning of the phrase "special attacks" in favour of an arbitrary, narrow one.

Nos lets start at the beginning ....

Must use special weapons ... this is a mistaken interpretation of page 35 who can fight. It actually reads ...

page 35 who can fight 2nd paragraph wrote:All engaged models will fight in this turns Assault phase with their full number of Attacks and use any special close combat attacks they have

... As you can see it clearly reads special close combat attacks not weapons and if it was a weapons rule then it would be found on page 42. Many models have Special Close Combat Attacks, those in addition to the attacks they have on their profile including modifiers; A Techpriest with a servo harness make two Special attacks, these are unaffected by what weapon he's using.

As much as people complain about the three weapons rule, the simple truth is there is no rule that you must use any weapons. The rules themselves only function if you assume that a model can pick what combination they'll use and read its effect from the list.

Scott-S6 wrote:

kmdl1066 wrote:That's only true if you believe that you can't pick which two one handed CCW the model is using to attack with when the model is equipped with more than two one handed CCW.

While that's an extremely functional rule which sorts all of these problems out - only thing is, there isn't actually any RAW at all for how to handle more than two CCWs.

I notice a distinct lack of RAW that allows you to choose which ranged weapon to fire when a non-vehicle, non-monstrous creature model is equipped with multiple ranged weapons. And yet that doesn't seem to be an issue!

(Yes, yes, I know the presence of guidelines on pg. 42 causes RAW confusion for multiple CCW, so it's not the same. But it's enough the same for me to make side comments.)

Please show me where "Special Attacks" is defined in the rulebook.

Oh wait, it isnt. You have arbitrarily chosen a narrower definition than the simpler English phrasing would lead you to pick.

If you do anything in close combat out of the ordinary (and we KNOW, for certain, that denying armour is something special) then you have made attacks which are special

Whether you ignore the normal to hit, to wound, or taking armour saves phase of close combat, you have done something special

I could not find special attacks defined in the BRB, but I found it in a codex.

Look at Blood Angels P.55

Gabriel Seth is armed with Blood Reaver (a str 8 rending 2h weapon)

under special rules for Gabriel Seth it lists whirlwind of gore.

whirlwind of gore states "Instead of making his normal attacks"

so we can take from this if he swings Blood Reaver with his 4 attacks rolling to hit, wound, and rending ignoring armor saves, this constitutes a normal attack for Seth. (even though it is "Special because it has rending and str8" as defined by nosferatu1001).

If he uses whirlwind of gore he replaces his normal attacks with the whirlwind of gore special attack (special rule that is an attack).

nosferatu1001 wrote:Please show me where "Special Attacks" is defined in the rulebook.

Oh wait, it isnt. You have arbitrarily chosen a narrower definition than the simpler English phrasing would lead you to pick.

If you do anything in close combat out of the ordinary (and we KNOW, for certain, that denying armour is something special) then you have made attacks which are special

Whether you ignore the normal to hit, to wound, or taking armour saves phase of close combat, you have done something special

Well let me think can I find anywhere in the rule book that defines Special Attack? No, Ok before jumping to any conclusions, is there a definition of attacks? Yes, "This characteristic indicates the number of dice a model rolls when fighting in close combat". So a special attack must be a special number of dice rolled when fighting in close combat, something that is not based on weapons or charging (like a techpriests servo arm).

Attacks /= attacks

You cant take the definition for a defined phrase "Attacks" and pretend it has a bearing on "attacks"

I do not think they are included in the profile as a blood angels seargent can take a bolter but he still has two attacks as he is a seargent.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Attacks /= attacks

You cant take the definition for a defined phrase "Attacks" and pretend it has a bearing on "attacks"

...

special attacks =/= special weapon
You cant take the definition for a defined phrase "Special attacks" and pretend it has a bearing on "Special weapons"

Tri wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Attacks /= attacks

You cant take the definition for a defined phrase "Attacks" and pretend it has a bearing on "attacks"

...

special attacks =/= special weapon
You cant take the definition for a defined phrase "Special attacks" and pretend it has a bearing on "Special weapons"

+1, read the Gabriel seth post, that makes it clear about attacks and special attacks.