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.

ChrisCP wrote:
If you insist on bringing your argument down to fluff, then I'll point out "They are invariably wielded as a pair' they can't actually be used individual weapons, they are one weapon.

'invariably wielded as a pair' doesnt mean they arent separate weapons, in fact, the wording clearly says that they are 2 weapons wielded together. in the same way that LC's are normally wielded together due to the fighting style needed to use LC's effectively. And i know there is a mention in the codex somewhere about this (the LC thing)
(apologies if this has come up before)

In the Fluff, LCs are designed to be wielded as pairs, but on the table top you often use just one.


Falchions are 2 CCWs that just happen to never be used alone because you arn't given the option to.



are you still suggesting that, if my assault squad sergeant trades only his Bolt Pistol for a pair of LCs he doesn't get the benifit for having 2 CCWs, but if he traded his bolt pistol for a LC, and also traded his Chainsword for a LC, he would get the +1A?

Grey Templar wrote:In the Fluff, LCs are designed to be wielded as pairs, but on the table top you often use just one.


Falchions are 2 CCWs that just happen to never be used alone because you arn't given the option to.



are you still suggesting that, if my assault squad sergeant trades only his Bolt Pistol for a pair of LCs he doesn't get the benifit for having 2 CCWs, but if he traded his bolt pistol for a LC, and also traded his Chainsword for a LC, he would get the +1A?

No, not at all, i was just giving an example of another piece of wargear that is 'wielded as a pair' but that i have experience of, of course he only gets the +1A if hes using both the LC's
and yes i meant in the fluff Lc's are wielded as pairs.

Jidmah wrote:

VoidAngel wrote:Come on man! It says they "are twin power weapons". ARE. Are we going to argue what "is" is?

Where does it say that a weapon must be held in the hand? Can you please point that out to me? Does a tyranid warrior have to hold his bonesword in his hand? Oh, wait, it IS his hand...now what? The intent is obvious. There is no need to make things so difficult.

Note to self: Convert ork boy to have his choppa attached to its helmet.

I hear they are adding 'headbutt' attacks to 6th edition close combat rules. Choppa headbutt sounds nasty.

Revenent Reiko wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:In the Fluff, LCs are designed to be wielded as pairs, but on the table top you often use just one.


Falchions are 2 CCWs that just happen to never be used alone because you arn't given the option to.



are you still suggesting that, if my assault squad sergeant trades only his Bolt Pistol for a pair of LCs he doesn't get the benifit for having 2 CCWs, but if he traded his bolt pistol for a LC, and also traded his Chainsword for a LC, he would get the +1A?

No, not at all, i was just giving an example of another piece of wargear that is 'wielded as a pair' but that i have experience of, of course he only gets the +1A if hes using both the LC's
and yes i meant in the fluff Lc's are wielded as pairs.

My comment wasn't directed at you man.

ahh in which case i apologise, sorry GT

Grey Templar wrote:a Hydragauntlet is a single CCW that gives the bearer D6 bonus attacks instead of the usual one when used with another CCW. a Wytch buys a single Hydragauntlet IIRC to go with the models existing CCW.

You really don't know when to stop?
1) Hydra gauntlets - "these count as two close combat weapons, blahblah, instead of granting +1 attack they confer d6 bonus attacks."
Where the hell they become Single CCW ??? Where Wych buy single HG and keep existing CCW?

you just compromise yourself to the level where any arguing with you just become useless.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Magister187 wrote:You purchase a PAIR of Nemesis Force Falchions.
Falchions, in the GK codex are not listed as a pair in the wargear section. They do, however, mention in the fluff that they are ALWAYS used as a pair, ie. two of those weapons do exist, and while theoretically you could wield just one, this is almost never done. (ie. this is why they can't be bought separately).
Under Nemesis Weapons, it tells you that they are Force Weapons. ie, the ones in the BRB.
In the BRB, you find the description of force weapons, which tells you they are power weapons.

Except that every other NFW listed as Single one in their description (like Halberd, Stave, Daemon Hammer) and Falchions listed as plural..

Yes, under the part where they explain the special ability granted... which for a Nemesis Force Falchion is only granted when you wield two of them. Again, wielding TWO of them.

they never mentioned as single item. they always go as FalchionS <<< you seen S ??
And in theirs fluff said they "invariably wielded as pair"

penek wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:a Hydragauntlet is a single CCW that gives the bearer D6 bonus attacks instead of the usual one when used with another CCW. a Wytch buys a single Hydragauntlet IIRC to go with the models existing CCW.

You really don't know when to stop?
1) Hydra gauntlets - "these count as two close combat weapons, blahblah, instead of granting +1 attack they confer d6 bonus attacks."
Where the hell they become Single CCW ??? Where Wych buy single HG and keep existing CCW?

you just compromise yourself to the level where any arguing with you just become useless.

ok, i was wrong, but weather or not you take 2 Hydragauntlets or 1, the result is the same(i know it's impossable to take just one)


I haven't been insulting anyone(there were plenty of times to do so) and neither should you.





But Falchions are clearly each a single Nemisis weapon.

Each nemisis weapon = Force weapon = power weapon = CCW.

you always get 2 falchions, therefore are armed with 2 CCWs.


these CCWs happen to also give you +1A for a total of +2A.


until you can prove that a single Falchion is NOT a CCW the +2A argument stands.

it also DOES NOT MATTER that you can't ever take a single Falchion. it's impossable for Terminators in any army to take a single LC, they always take Pairs, but they still count as 2 CCWs.

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/ultimate_game.png

Seemed appropriate

And that is why i don't play Role Playing Games.

I guess if you can wield a second 'pair' you would have two special (one-handed by omission evidently) close combat weapons each called the plural Falchions and thus gain the further bonus. A pair of falchions is just one weapon, right? well have fun with your WYSIWYG putting a pair of swords in one hand of a model.

I know using two falchions in one hand is a pretty common swordfighting skill among humanity's ultra elite warriors, so I see no reason why a second pair of falchions in the other hand can't be used to gain that extra +1A from having two identicle special ccws each considered to be a single entity for rules purposes despite being called a 'pair'.

Either a pair of falchions is considered a single weapon (which is stupid) that gives +1 A, and a second pair (attached to the feet maybe?) grants you the extra for having 2 identicle special ccws - or it is (more sensibly but less satisfying to the urge to look for every RAW ambiguity I can filch another illogical advantage from despite the fact that it makes everyone think I am a rules bureauracrat who uses suspension of disbelief for every advantage I can get) it is a PAIR of weapons - and as with any other pair of weapons, is already intrinsically an extra ccw, hence the +1A that they were nice enough to remind you of in the weapon's despcription. Does this have to go back to the marneus-calgar-with-sword-for-a-head debate?

I think eldar exarchs have paired weapons, mirror swords and sabres for a couple of factions, that also say they give +1 attack. How did they handle the question?

each Falchion is a single CCW as has been stated far too often in this thread.

the rules for Falchions are given in plural because you can't have just one, but its irrelevent.


because the +1A in the rules isn't stated to be the bonus for being 2 CCWs it is most definitly seperate.

and because Falchions are CCWs and you always have 2 of them you will get the bonus for wielding 2 CCWs.


+2A is the only logical way to read the rule as far as i am concerned.

Just applying common sense to this, what do you think the NFF are meant to give?

+1 attack is pretty decent but +2? That would give purifiers +5 attacks on the charge and bog standard PAGK 4 attacks. +2 attacks for taking NFF seems too good so I would expect a FAQ to state that they only give +1 attack full stop.

Hope I'm wrong, though.

They are confusing, because on purifiers they do seem to be a bit on the upper end of good if they are +2 attacks for 5 points. However, Purifiers already get their bonuses at a discount (look at Halberds, 2 points for +2 initiative?) so it still puts them in line.
However, for Strike Squads and Terminators (10 points and 5 points and giving up other bonuses) they seem perfectly in line, considering the way the army works in general (high quality individuals held back by expensive HQ's, low model count and difficulties in maneuverability/range). For reference, you can give those same units Force Thunder Hammers for 5 points each, or +2 Initiative for 5 points each. (no cost for Termies). Effectively making +1 Attack too low a benefit for the cost.

Grey Templar wrote:I say RAW 2 attacks and RAI 2 attacks.


for an additional 5 points they better give +2 attacks

Except that is not the convention of 5th edition codices where you pay double the price for most single special weapon entries (Thunder Hammers, Lightning Claws, and Power Fists) in order to be armed with a pair. You normally pay 15-25 pts for that extra attack.

Under "Master-Crafted Weapons" Page 57 of Codex: GK

"A pair of Nemesis Falchions can only be master-crafted the once, for a single re-roll."

Voidangel, GW goes out of their way to say that your pair of Falchions can only be mastercrafted once. That means, without that blurb, you could mastercraft both of them. Keep in mind, you get no benefit from mastercrafting your 2 ccw, as the second weapon only provides +1 attack with all the bonuses of the primary weapon. This actually goes a LONG way to supporting that a pair of falchions are 2 weapons, as a lot of people have been saying and how the many instances of 'pairs of' have worked in the past.

And again, Demiklaves, Powerblades, Hydragauntlets, and chainsabers have ZERO in common with a pair of one handed falchions. Connecting the two and holding them up as equivalent is a logical fallacy, and the 'straw man' argument was DESIGNED to use as a illustration of this kind of flawed argument. Please stop mentioning wargear that is not related to the discussion?



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wyomingfox, who are we to say what the convention is? Spacemarines have the option of wielding a lightning claw with one hand, so they need to be able to buy them individually as well as in pairs. Greyknights dont have the option of adding 1 falchion at a time, so they just listed the pair version. Makes sense to me! Plus, there are space marines in 5th edition armed with 'pairs' of weapons. As has been mentioned. So the convention is most certainly not listing each weapon individually in 5th edition

wyomingfox wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:I say RAW 2 attacks and RAI 2 attacks.


for an additional 5 points they better give +2 attacks

Except that is not the convention of 5th edition codices where you pay double the price for most single special weapon entries (Thunder Hammers, Lightning Claws, and Power Fists) in order to be armed with a pair. You normally pay 15-25 pts for that extra attack.

I have no idea what this argument is supposed to add, but considering you get no additional bonuses (Such as those weapons you list) and that the Falchions ARE twice the price of Thunderhammers (and Halberds), this seem like a pretty flimsy argument.

the Falchions are expensive.

considering Deamon hammers are free, those Falchions better give me something decent.

5-10 points for just 1 extra attack sucks.

for 2 it's perfectly balanced as was analyzed in another thread.

Just for clarity.
* A Force Weapon is not a power weapon. A Force Weapon has the same effect as a power weapon (literal wording from BRB), but they are not the same.
* Power Weapons, Force Weapons, Witchblades, etc, are not single handed close combat weapons. They are all Special Close Combat Weapons.

DevianID, I don't see how the situation is different at all. The only single difference is that the Eldar codex does not explicitly state in each unit entry that it's a twin weapon.
As far as the actual rules entry, they are exactly the same linguistically. "Two of this weapon does this" is exactly what both rules say.
The fact is, that if you have the stance that a pair of NFF give +2 attacks total, then you also take the stance that some of the mentioned weapons must be re-evaluated and give the same bonus.
This is something that nosferatu is not arguing against, but I do not see why you persist.
What is it that makes the NFF so very different from, for example, Powerblades, that the NFF is a special case and none of the other races should be able to take advantage of this rules interpretation?

---

Now, here's the crux of the matter. A single Nemesis Force Weapon does not give any special bonuses. Using two of these you give a single +1 attack. Complicating the matter is the rules which say "a pair gives +1 attack". This is essentially echoing the BRB, where the BRB says that you use the stats for the single weapon +1 attack.

So is it +1 attack for "two of the same special weapon" and then an extra for pairing them -or- is it simply GW stating the same rule twice for clarity?

P.S.
Daemon Hammer and pair of NFF cost the same on some squads and different on others. Equating the two or differentiating them is a bad way to argue.

unless a CCW, of any type(special or not), says it takes 2 hands it is assumed to take 1 hand.


the Falchion entry wouldn't have had to say that wielding 2 falchions gives +1A because thats in the core rule book.

GW often clarifies any wargear that gives bonuses by clarifying that this includes or does not include any inherent bonuses that would come along anyway.



Force Weapons are still single handed CCWs under all interpertations unless specifically defined in an entry somewhere.

Weilding two falchions in one hand is....unweildy, but not impossible. You reverse one of them, and if your hands are big enough, you just close them around both hafts. Probably not even difficult for an 8' tall super warrior. Just sayin'. >;-)

If they are "invariably wielded as a pair" you could even envision specially crafted hafts that were each essentially two halves that could fit together when one was reversed. lolz


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DevianID wrote:Under "Master-Crafted Weapons" Page 57 of Codex: GK

"A pair of Nemesis Falchions can only be master-crafted the once, for a single re-roll."

Voidangel, GW goes out of their way to say that your pair of Falchions can only be mastercrafted once. That means, without that blurb, you could mastercraft both of them. Keep in mind, you get no benefit from mastercrafting your 2 ccw, as the second weapon only provides +1 attack with all the bonuses of the primary weapon. This actually goes a LONG way to supporting that a pair of falchions are 2 weapons, as a lot of people have been saying and how the many instances of 'pairs of' have worked in the past.

And again, Demiklaves, Powerblades, Hydragauntlets, and chainsabers have ZERO in common with a pair of one handed falchions. Connecting the two and holding them up as equivalent is a logical fallacy, and the 'straw man' argument was DESIGNED to use as a illustration of this kind of flawed argument. Please stop mentioning wargear that is not related to the discussion?



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wyomingfox, who are we to say what the convention is? Spacemarines have the option of wielding a lightning claw with one hand, so they need to be able to buy them individually as well as in pairs. Greyknights dont have the option of adding 1 falchion at a time, so they just listed the pair version. Makes sense to me! Plus, there are space marines in 5th edition armed with 'pairs' of weapons. As has been mentioned. So the convention is most certainly not listing each weapon individually in 5th edition

This is a good point. They could have made that entry under MCW to prevent you spending points uselessly - you only ever get one re-roll. So two MC NFFs is redundant and a waste of points. That would be uncharacteristically thoughtful of them...but there it is.

mister robouteo wrote:I guess if you can wield a second 'pair' you would have two special (one-handed by omission evidently) close combat weapons each called the plural Falchions and thus gain the further bonus. A pair of falchions is just one weapon, right? well have fun with your WYSIWYG putting a pair of swords in one hand of a model.

Using the DE wyches as an example (yet again) a model may only take the upgrade *once.* What you say might actually be an issue if you could take the upgrade more than once on a given model in a unit. But I doubt that's the case, since they're usually pretty good about specifying what exactly you can replace with "X piece of wargear" when you're equipping a unit or character.

DevianID, I don't see how the situation is different at all. The only single difference is that the Eldar codex does not explicitly state in each unit entry that it's a twin weapon.
As far as the actual rules entry, they are exactly the same linguistically. "Two of this weapon does this" is exactly what both rules say.

Umm Mahtamori, run that by me again?

Powerblades="Powerblades are twin power weapons fitted to the forearms, enabling the wearer to use both hands freely. Powerblades confer +1 attack and ignore armor saves.//The exarch may also be equipped with powerblades at +10 points."
Chainsabers="A model with chainsabers has +1 attack and can reroll all failed to hit and to wound rolls.//replace both {shuriken pistol and scorpion chainsword} with chainsabers at +5 points."
Nemesis Falchions="The wielder of a pair of Nemesis Falchions has +1 attack//May replace nemesis force sword with one of the following... Pair of nemesis falchions"

So the situations are very different. First, you get 2 Nemesis Falchions. You get one of the Powerblades or Chainsabers. Second, Powerblades take no hands, as part of their special rule. So they are not the same linguistically; the word 'Two' you mention is not in the powerblade OR chainsaber rule, so how can the rules say exactly that? Please, please stop using Eldar wargear to defend any point about Grey Knight wargear... They are not the same!

What have I done...

Nice of you to post in your own thread

I was posting earlier, but the argument has dragged out a long way.

Its odd. The vote still has NO in favour, but what has been said in this thread clearly disproves the possibility of Falchions only giving +1A. Its as if they voted for what they want, not what their opinion is.

No one is yet to disprove the Forcewep=powerwep=single handed wep argument (Its almost a philosophy now ) and the argument "They cannot be bought as a single so they cant be a pair in the first place" is completely moot and off sided.

RAW is clear, but as some may not think, RAI is not. Models with falchions have 1+ attack is a VERY interpretable statement. If it said Models with A Pair of Nemesis Falchions gain 1+ attack, it would be clearer.

Admittedly, it may have been intended that Falchions gain one attack BECAUSE they are a pair. But this is yet to be seen.

As it stands, A PAGK squad on the charge will get 41 Power weapon attacks for 300 points. thats around 11 wounds against MEQ, so you wipe a squad with little reprisal. But thats because your twice their points.

As it stands, I believe this to be correct.

Jaon wrote:the argument "They cannot be bought as a single so they cant be a pair in the first place" is completely moot and off sided.

"People don't agree with my opinion, so I'll just ignore theirs."

Bushido - no, it is simply a non-argument. It has no basis in rules, and therefore has no place in a rules thread.