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.

it can be fired in the shooting phases with the following profile.

rigeld2 wrote:Range template, Strength 5, AP 4, Type Assault 1

Where in that profile does it say it wounds on a 4+?

Could you answer my question please?

It does not say it wounds on a 4+ when using "the following profile"

DeathReaper wrote:it can be fired in the shooting phases with the following profile.

rigeld2 wrote:Range template, Strength 5, AP 4, Type Assault 1

Where in that profile does it say it wounds on a 4+?

Could you answer my question please?

It does not say it wounds on a 4+ when using "the following profile"

(hint: you and I agree)

DeathReaper wrote:The comma does not matter, as it tells you to use a specific profile for the shooting part.

Same thing with the space wolf throwing his thunder hammer as a range attack. No where in the range profile does it say you are reduce to initiative 1, yet according to the FAQ you still are.

And what is the name of the weapon you are firing?

or is it nameless and jsut has a profile.

how do you ignore its rules?

THE_GODLYNESS wrote:my main Hookup is

In addition. after it saysit wounds on a4+ there is a comma not a period. so to me it means it wounds on a 4 + with the folling profile

This feels like a grammar fail here.

The Ardent Blade's Rules wrote:This is a power weapon that always wounds enemies on a 4+ (unless a lower roll would be required). In addition, it can fire in the Shooting phase with the following profile...

You have two separate statements.
1) This is a power weapon that always wounds enemies on a 4+ (unless a lower roll would be required).
2) In addition, it can fire in the Shooting phase with the following profile...

Where's the confusion? How does "In addition," apply its CC properties to its shooting attacks?

Because the "can be fired in the shooting phases with the following profile." tells you to use the following profile, and nothing else.

Amerikon wrote:

THE_GODLYNESS wrote:my main Hookup is

In addition. after it saysit wounds on a4+ there is a comma not a period. so to me it means it wounds on a 4 + with the folling profile

This feels like a grammar fail here.

The Ardent Blade's Rules wrote:This is a power weapon that always wounds enemies on a 4+ (unless a lower roll would be required). In addition, it can fire in the Shooting phase with the following profile...

You have two separate statements.
1) This is a power weapon that always wounds enemies on a 4+ (unless a lower roll would be required).
2) In addition, it can fire in the Shooting phase with the following profile...

Where's the confusion? How does "In addition," apply its CC properties to its shooting attacks?

There is no period after (lower roll is required)

THE_GODLYNESS wrote:There is no period after (lower roll is required)

There most certainly is. Why else would "In addition" be capitalized?

And after staring heavily in to my screen and then at my WD and then everything else; there is a period after it there for i am incorrect.

Other wise i would still argue, point is conceded

There is very clearly (in my copy anyway) a period right before "In addition..."

THE_GODLYNESS wrote:And what is the name of the weapon you are firing?

or is it nameless and jsut has a profile.

how do you ignore its rules?

I'm not ignoring it's rules, I'm following them. The profile does not have anything about wounding on a 4+.

Arjac's hammer is worded differently. Also, different codex. Don't compare them please.

Let me read you Arjc Rockfist Foehammer rule from the space wolf codex
Foehammer: The Foehammer is a thunder hammer that can be used as a range weapon with the following profile: Range 6, Strength 10, AP 1, Type Assault 1.

Now lets take a look at the space wolf FAQ:
Q. Is a model that has suffered an unsaved wound, but hasn’t been killed, from Arjac throwing his Foehammer reduced to initiative 1 until the end of the next player turn? (p51)
A. Yes.

So how is different from Ardent Blade?

Necrosis wrote:Let me read you Arjc Rockfist Foehammer rule from the space wolf codex
Foehammer: The Foehammer is a thunder hammer that can be used as a range weapon with the following profile: Range 6, Strength 10, AP 1, Type Assault 1.

Now lets take a look at the space wolf FAQ:
Q. Is a model that has suffered an unsaved wound, but hasn’t been killed, from Arjac throwing his Foehammer reduced to initiative 1 until the end of the next player turn? (p51)
A. Yes.

So how is different from Ardent Blade?

Thanks for reading me something that I was already reading.
It's a single sentence. The Ardent Blade is two sentences.

rigeld2 wrote:

THE_GODLYNESS wrote:And what is the name of the weapon you are firing?

or is it nameless and jsut has a profile.

how do you ignore its rules?

I'm not ignoring it's rules, I'm following them. The profile does not have anything about wounding on a 4+.

Arjac's hammer is worded differently. Also, different codex. Don't compare them please.

Basically this argument means: "I don't know how to counter this argument, so I'm just going to ask kindly if everyone could ignore it"

Necrosis wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

THE_GODLYNESS wrote:And what is the name of the weapon you are firing?

or is it nameless and jsut has a profile.

how do you ignore its rules?

I'm not ignoring it's rules, I'm following them. The profile does not have anything about wounding on a 4+.

Arjac's hammer is worded differently. Also, different codex. Don't compare them please.

Basically this argument means: "I don't know how to counter this argument, so I'm just going to ask kindly if everyone could ignore it"

No, that's not what it means. It means that the comparison is useless and to keep restating an incorrect argument is equally useless. I was politely asking him to stop restating an incorrect argument.

rigeld2 wrote:

Necrosis wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

THE_GODLYNESS wrote:And what is the name of the weapon you are firing?

or is it nameless and jsut has a profile.

how do you ignore its rules?

I'm not ignoring it's rules, I'm following them. The profile does not have anything about wounding on a 4+.

Arjac's hammer is worded differently. Also, different codex. Don't compare them please.

Basically this argument means: "I don't know how to counter this argument, so I'm just going to ask kindly if everyone could ignore it"

No, that's not what it means. It means that the comparison is useless and to keep restating an incorrect argument is equally useless. I was politely asking him to stop restating an incorrect argument.

Once again, you have not made an effort, your just saying "no your wrong" without backing up your claim.

Necrosis wrote:Let me read you Arjc Rockfist Foehammer rule from the space wolf codex
Foehammer: The Foehammer is a thunder hammer that can be used as a range weapon with the following profile: Range 6, Strength 10, AP 1, Type Assault 1.

Now lets take a look at the space wolf FAQ:
Q. Is a model that has suffered an unsaved wound, but hasn’t been killed, from Arjac throwing his Foehammer reduced to initiative 1 until the end of the next player turn? (p51)
A. Yes.

So how is different from Ardent Blade?

I wrote this earlier, but it bears repeating. (with a slight modification in square brackets)

Amerikon wrote:The Foehammer FAQ is explicitly specifying the behavior of a unique item.

[In order apply that ruling to the Ardent Blade] you actually have to make two extrapolations. First, that the Foehammer will stun an enemy it was "shot" at because it's also a thunder hammer and it's properties as a thunder hammer are applied to shooting attacks as well as CC attacks. Second, that therefore all CC weapons with a shooting ability have any CC special rules applied to that shooting ability. I don't think there's any justification for making either of those. Foehammer stuns its targets because it is Foehammer and was FAQ'd as such.

If we continued to apply that logic, we could conclude that since the Ardent Blade is a power weapon, the unit hit by the shooting attack gets no armor save.

All other (correct) arguments aside, if they wanted the shooting attack to wound on a 4+ it would have an asterisk next to it like this*

*and would say "Hits from the Ardent Blade always wound on a 4+".

Like pretty much every other special weapon profile.

DoW

Arjac's Hammer is worded completely differently. Arjac's Hammer is a thunder hammer that may be used as a ranged weapon. The Ardent Blade says that it may be "fired" with a shooting profile.

One is actually using the thunder hammer at range. The other is being used like a shooting weapon, with a profile.

It's the same as a Singing Spear or Triskele. Both wargear have a ranged profile, where the model actually throws the weapon. Of course how some of these weapons get back into the models hands are beyond me.

Necrosis wrote:Once again, you have not made an effort, your just saying "no your wrong" without backing up your claim.

Perhaps you'd like to read the thread where I've made my arguments, as have others, and present a counterpoint.

Perhaps you missed this post?
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/446912.page#4231700

rigeld2 wrote:

Necrosis wrote:Let me read you Arjc Rockfist Foehammer rule from the space wolf codex
Foehammer: The Foehammer is a thunder hammer that can be used as a range weapon with the following profile: Range 6, Strength 10, AP 1, Type Assault 1.

Now lets take a look at the space wolf FAQ:
Q. Is a model that has suffered an unsaved wound, but hasn’t been killed, from Arjac throwing his Foehammer reduced to initiative 1 until the end of the next player turn? (p51)
A. Yes.

So how is different from Ardent Blade?

Thanks for reading me something that I was already reading.
It's a single sentence. The Ardent Blade is two sentences.

It being two sentences is a massive difference.

hence why i was so hung up on the "comma".

.... Wow really this is taking a leap... First off if she is hitting something with Tou 6 doubt its going to matter next round. To me Its a heavy flamer like it used to be, its just not flame though I think they said in the INAT FAQ. Kinda like Fire Magic...

In my case she was going toe to toe with an avatar (after getting back up repeatedly) and i templated him never wound cause i needed a 5. but that is why i asked if it was always a 4+ or not.

Necrosis wrote:I would say no but after seeing Arjac ruling in the Space Wolf FAQ I would say yes.

Q. Is a model that has suffered an unsaved wound, but
hasn’t been killed, from Arjac throwing his Foehammer
reduced to initiative 1 until the end of the next player
turn? (p51)
A. Yes.

This sums up my thoughts as well. I thought at first, no that seems silly, it has a separate profile for shooting as has been the point of rigeld2 and others. However, with that being said, the Space Wolf FAQ for the Foehammer does seem to indicate to me that the special rules of CC weapons with special rules or effects would carry over to the shooting phase. Now to address the issue of armor saves and the denying or allowing thereof, as has been pointed out earlier, power weapons and the such that deny armor saves apply only in the assault phase in CC. I agree with this and frankly it does not create a conflict within the rules for either the Foehammer or the Ardent Blade. Both weapons have additional special rules that apply aside from being a power weapon or thunder hammer and those rules do apply to their shooting versions as indicated by the FAQ ruling for the Foehammer, and I could see it going the same way with the Ardent Blade. Perhaps it is a failure on my part, by why should a period matter in St. Celestine's listing matter? There was no * on the Foehammer's profile that says what the FAQ says, yet that is what GW went with. Why should St. Celestine's need one for the always wounding on 4+? (Granted I think there is enough of an issue that it SHOULD be FAQ'd one way or another)

THE_GODLYNESS wrote:In my case she was going toe to toe with an avatar (after getting back up repeatedly) and i templated him never wound cause i needed a 5. but that is why i asked if it was always a 4+ or not.

Your flamer is useless verse the avatar. As the avatar is immune to it.

Necrosis wrote:

THE_GODLYNESS wrote:In my case she was going toe to toe with an avatar (after getting back up repeatedly) and i templated him never wound cause i needed a 5. but that is why i asked if it was always a 4+ or not.

Your flamer is useless verse the avatar. As the avatar is immune to it.

Ah but the Ardent Blade is no longer listed as being a Flamer (or rather fired as a H. Flamer) in the WD codex. This was one of the points that was brought up for the INAT FAQ as it is most definitely not mentioned as such. It was clearly stated as such in the 3rd Ed. Codex though.

Evil_Lamp_6 wrote:However, with that being said, the Space Wolf FAQ for the Foehammer does seem to indicate to me that the special rules of CC weapons with special rules or affects would carry over to the shooting phase.

No! The special rules for Foehammer carry over and only because it was FAQd as such. You can't immediately extrapolate from the FAQ for a unique item like Foehammer to all other CC weapons with a shooting attack. Even if you could, Celestine isn't throwing the Ardent Blade. She's projecting magic fire from it and the rules for that fire are very explicitly enumerated.

Amerikon wrote:

Evil_Lamp_6 wrote:However, with that being said, the Space Wolf FAQ for the Foehammer does seem to indicate to me that the special rules of CC weapons with special rules or affects would carry over to the shooting phase.

No! The special rules for Foehammer carry over and only because it was FAQd as such. You can't immediately extrapolate from the FAQ for a unique item like Foehammer to all other CC weapons with a shooting attack. Even if you could, Celestine isn't throwing the Ardent Blade. She's projecting magic fire from it and the rules for that fire are very explicitly enumerated.

Did you read the rest of my post or just stop there? I agree that the rules for Foehammer carry over because they were FAQ'd as such and I can very well state that I feel that the same could be said for the Ardent Blade. That is my opinion.

Just out of curiosity, how many other CC weapons have a shooting attack? Perhaps listing all of those and comparing what rules would carry over where would help get a better consensus. I still think that it is not as clear as most people seem to think it is that it SHOULD be FAQ'd as such or we wouldn't be having this discussion.

And we don't KNOW that St. Celestine isn't throwing the Ardent Blade or some other form of gun shooting sword thing. She WAS projecting magic fire from it in the 3rd Ed. Codex. Now, it is not so clear what the shooting effect is or is not. I agree the shooting profile is very clear for the Ardent Blade's shooting attack, but then again so was the Foehammer's. But the latter was FAQ'd to carry over effects from the CC attack into the shooting attack for the same weapon, is it entirely unreasonable to say that the same could not happen for the Ardent Blade?

If you think it's a Power Weapon, when shooting, why is it AP 4?

Just saying...