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.

Think of S6 lychguards with AP2 instead of 3 and all they give up is 1 init, which is really like giving up nothing.

Good grief man. Let's not go there. Sure... they "kinda" look like axe blades; but they "kinda" look like snazzy paperplates too.

EDIT:
Sorry, I was thinking voidblades. What are YOU thinnking though? It CLEARLY says "SWORD".
*and yes, I'm a cron player.* lol

You want to give people yet more reasons to loathe Crons and Cron players?

That and their weapon clearly says Hyperphase Sword, not Hyperphase Weapon. By the definition given in the RB, any power weapon modelled as a sword or dagger is a Power Sword.

Considering that they're wielding Hyperphase Swords, what basis do you have for saying it's an axe?

All power weapons are WYSIWYG now.

Lychguard have powerweapons.

Their weapons kinda look like axes.

Therefore lychguard can wield poweraxes.

Whether you model them as swords or axes, as long as they don't change mid-game there shouldn't be an issue.

also, dont they have some additional rules?

It's because in the weapon's entry, it says simply 'A Hyperphase Sword is a power weapon'

Because of the new classifications of power weapons, you could make an argument that it gives you free reign to model it however you please and claim the rules for power axes or lances or what-have-you.

Not saying I agree with it, I don't. Just explaining the basis behind the argument.

Hyperphase Sword, clearly they dodged it by giving it an actual name rather than just Power Weapon.

There was a 20 page thread that boiled down to a load of WAAC players claiming things like what the OP is claiming, basically MFA.
Feel free to do it, just don't expect people to play against you.

buddha wrote:All power weapons are WYSIWYG now.

Lychguard have powerweapons.

Their weapons kinda look like axes.

Therefore lychguard can wield poweraxes.

Whether you model them as swords or axes, as long as they don't change mid-game there shouldn't be an issue.

My guardsman's lasgun kinda looks like a lascannon, so all my guardsmen have lascannons.

How can a Hyperphase Sword be an axe? It might resemble an axe a little bit, but is it completely identifiable as one? No. You said it yourself, it 'kinda' looks like an axe, but it isn't an axe.

Lokas wrote:It's because in the weapon's entry, it says simply 'A Hyperphase Sword is a power weapon'

Because of the new classifications of power weapons, you could make an argument that it gives you free reign to model it however you please and claim the rules for power axes or lances or what-have-you.

Not saying I agree with it, I don't. Just explaining the basis behind the argument.

You're spot on, hence the MFA absurdness.
I could just as legitimately stick a pin in the top of my lascannon HWT's torse, then stick his head on top of that, and use that for drawing LOS. There's nothing in the rules that prohibit it, after all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Avatar 720 wrote:

buddha wrote:All power weapons are WYSIWYG now.

Lychguard have powerweapons.

Their weapons kinda look like axes.

Therefore lychguard can wield poweraxes.

Whether you model them as swords or axes, as long as they don't change mid-game there shouldn't be an issue.

My Guardsman's lasgun kinda looks like a lascannon, so all my guardsmen have lascannons.

How can a Hyperphase Sword be an axe? It might resemble an axe a little bit, but is it completely identifiable as one? No. You said it yourself, it 'kinda' looks like an axe, but it isn't an axe.

If you model it as an axe, it becomes an axe.

Testify wrote:There was a 20 page thread that boiled down to a load of WAAC players claiming things like what the OP is claiming, basically MFA.
Feel free to do it, just don't expect people to play against you.

Ah yes the horror of trading I2 attacks for I1, the humanity!

Seriously, you don't hear whines about GK players modeling their DCA with both a powersword + poweraxe but now that the necron codex is buffed people claim the sky is falling.

As long as the lychguard player doesn't change profiles mid-game I truly cannot see an issue.

Testify wrote:If you model it as an axe, it becomes an axe.

No it doesn't, it becomes an "I don't have any friends anymore because I tried to be a smartarse" weapon.

Lokas wrote:It's because in the weapon's entry, it says simply 'A Hyperphase Sword is a power weapon'

Because of the new classifications of power weapons, you could make an argument that it gives you free reign to model it however you please and claim the rules for power axes or lances or what-have-you.

Not saying I agree with it, I don't. Just explaining the basis behind the argument.

Exactly, it is interesting to see the ire coming so quickly, I was under the impression that if RAW said it was a power weapon you where now allowed to choose Sword, Axe, or Maul. It's interesting that because I thought I saw an opportunity to trade one init for +1 s and 1 better AP, I have several rude posters suggesting it is WAAC or MFA. I assumed GW was encouraging thinking outside the box and doing conversion work. Also lets be honest here if you are bringing lychguard to a battle you are definitely not WAAC.

buddha wrote:

Testify wrote:There was a 20 page thread that boiled down to a load of WAAC players claiming things like what the OP is claiming, basically MFA.
Feel free to do it, just don't expect people to play against you.

Ah yes the horror of trading I2 attacks for I1, the humanity!

Seriously, you don't hear whines about GK players modeling their DCA with both a powersword + poweraxe but now that the necron codex is buffed people claim the sky is falling.

As long as the lychguard player doesn't change profiles mid-game I truly cannot see an issue.

You don't hear about it because DCA aren't armed with _____ Swords, they're armed with Power Weapons. The reason that people "claim the sky is falling" (gross exaggeration btw, well done) with Hyperphase Swords is because they are swords that people are using a loophole to use as other weapons because it doesn't have the word 'Power' in front of it.

Also, considering that Necrons just became near enough the top dog, i'd say that scraping the barrel for these kind of exploits is pretty low. If it had happened with GKs back in 5th then i'm sure there'd be similar amounts of furore.

buddha wrote:

Testify wrote:There was a 20 page thread that boiled down to a load of WAAC players claiming things like what the OP is claiming, basically MFA.
Feel free to do it, just don't expect people to play against you.

Ah yes the horror of trading I2 attacks for I1, the humanity!

Seriously, you don't hear whines about GK players modeling their DCA with both a powersword + poweraxe but now that the necron codex is buffed people claim the sky is falling.

As long as the lychguard player doesn't change profiles mid-game I truly cannot see an issue.

Well the lychguard has gotten himself AP2 when it's obvious to anyone that it should be AP3. If that doesn't bother you, fine.
There was a lot of "whining" about DCA shinnanigans. Some people are bothered by exploiting rules exploits, some people aren't. Que sara.

Avatar 720 wrote:

Testify wrote:If you model it as an axe, it becomes an axe.

No it doesn't, it becomes an "I don't have any friends anymore because I tried to be a smartarse" weapon.

Yup. Totally agree.

The only thing I can say is, Bloodletters also have a Sword, and it were FAQ'd in Chaos Daemons to specifically become a Power Sword from a power weapon. If they didn't...then we'd see Axe-wielding Bloodletters, and everyone would be against that in a heart-beat. They did that, evidently, as to avoid advantage, while still allowing conversion at it's finest.

Notice that the loose definition of 'Power Weapons' apply to the models that aren't ridiculous; hence Bloodletters being altered.

When I look at my Lychguard, they have Hyperphase Axes.

CleverAntics wrote:The only thing I can say is, Bloodletters also have a Sword, and it were FAQ'd in Chaos Daemons to specifically become a Power Sword from a power weapon. If they didn't...then we'd see Axe-wielding Bloodletters, and everyone would be against that in a heart-beat. They did that, evidently, as to avoid advantage, while still allowing conversion at it's finest.

Notice that the loose definition of 'Power Weapons' apply to the models that aren't ridiculous; hence Bloodletters being altered.

When I look at my Lychguard, they have Hyperphase Axes.

This is an excellent find, and gives credence to the theory that you should indeed be allowed to model hyperphase swords as mauls, axes or swords. Another example is the Crozious were specificlly ammended to be power mauls. It seems to me that if they hyperphase sword was to be locked into being a sword they would have amended it to say replace is a power weapon to is a power sword. Thanks CleverAntics very good find.

Actually, i'm pretty sure that Bloodletters have Hellblades, which is ambiguous enough to warrant FAQing.

I'm of the mindset that GW expected Hyperphase Swords to be self-explanitory, and thus not require them to be FAQ'd.

It appears that they were drastically mistaken.

I just finished reading the aforementioned thread. When it comes down to it hyperphase swords do not have any special rules at all, so again I think there is a pretty good case to allow for the power weapon swap to happen here.

Avatar 720 wrote:Actually, i'm pretty sure that Bloodletters have Hellblades, which is ambiguous enough to warrant FAQing.

Not ambiguous.
"Hellblades are power weapons, as described in the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook".
Want a Bloodthirster with a Power Maul? It's yours!
Lord of Change can also take Soul Devourer as a Power Weapon. That doesn't even need to be modelled on (since it can't be), so you can feel free to chop and change around however you see fit (not mid battle, obviously).

Testify wrote:There was a 20 page thread that boiled down to a load of WAAC players claiming things like what the OP is claiming, basically MFA.
Feel free to do it, just don't expect people to play against you.

If you're talking about the DCA's one, let's not even go there. I don't play Grey Knights and I don't play Necrons and didn't see any problem with it.

The 2+ Saves they ignore means they'll eat Terminators without TH/SS (which it seems everyone has), MegaNobz, etc. Yeah, pricey units, but I don't see many lists with vanilla Terminators and MNobz (which are or were considered sub-optimal, hence not taken; ironically it's always the other guy who is WAAC)

So... Why is this such a huge advantage when previously PW ignored any and all armour? (honest question)

Testify wrote:

Avatar 720 wrote:Actually, i'm pretty sure that Bloodletters have Hellblades, which is ambiguous enough to warrant FAQing.

Not ambiguous.
"Hellblades are power weapons, as described in the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook".
Want a Bloodthirster with a Power Maul? It's yours!
Lord of Change can also take Soul Devourer as a Power Weapon. That doesn't even need to be modelled on (since it can't be), so you can feel free to chop and change around however you see fit (not mid battle, obviously).

You misunderstood; I didn't mean the rules themselves, I meant the name. tgf was using the fact that the Bloodletter's 'swords' got FAQ'd and the Lychguard's didn't to establish precedent, and I pointed out that Bloodletters were never described as having swords in the first place, but that 'blade' could start a lot of arguments that I believe GW assumed would not occur with Hyperphase Swords.

Are nemisis force swords ap3 or ap2? I am asking because it is clearly a sword but I haven't seen the GK FAQ yet.

I have followed the whole argument as well; technically feasible, though practically invalid when playing locally and/or friendly. Essentially, it is subject to House Rules until GW announces clarification; which I hope is soon enough.

I follow the literal interpretation; what does my model have? My Lychguard have Hyperphase Axes that I converted; so they have Power Axes, as defined by the entry of their weapons as Power Weapons without any special rules of it's own as detailed in the Hyperphase Sword entry.

As the wording stands, that is feasible. Until they clarify their Power Weapon rule, I'll abide by that.

But yes, instead of veering off toward the argument, it gives you the more obvious choice. I always chose this unit over the Warscythe one for extra survivability; now that they're allowed to take the Hyperphase Axe, it gives me more of a reason to. They're I2 already, why not I1?

Avatar 720 wrote:

Testify wrote:If you model it as an axe, it becomes an axe.

No it doesn't, it becomes an "I don't have any friends anymore because I tried to be a smartarse" weapon.

lol..... sigged.

I would agree that the codex entry clearly says hyperphase "sword". It is very clear.

i would also say the weapon on the model is an axe. it does not "kind of look like one" or "looks like one a little bit", at face value, rules aside it is an axe. The first time I saw the leaked photos I thought cool axes.

it is not a kopesh or even resembles one. Though it may have been the intent of the designers for it to be.

The difference is the kopesh is a single blade attached to a sword hilt, the hyperphase sword had a flat broad blade attached on the side of a hilt that is much longer that a kopeshs hilt (also blade attached to top of hilt). look at the necron pic the google kopesh.

The significance is how the weapon is used depending on where the blade is attached. The kopesh is used as a sword and can be used to hook shields and such. The HP Sword, imo, looks likes its most effective attacks are hacks of various style befitting a skilled axeman. The design of the two are different. Though i can see this detail getting muddied in the design process as a kopesh is an elegant weapon and the HP Sword just looks mean!

Despite the aesthetics of the models weapon, as a necron player whose buddies I play with say its cool if i call them axes, I do feel the entry of HP "Sword" defines it as a sword..

Thus i will play them as swords if i ever field them. Heck I dont even own them, so moot for me anywhere. I modeled praetorians. not to hikack the thread but cant wait to partner them (praetorians) with a destroyer lord for some back door, beat stick, bully force goodness!

If you are such a bad player that you have to make your swords into axes then go ahead, because that will not help you win.

Blackmoor wrote:If you are such a bad player that you have to make your swords into axes then go ahead, because that will not help you win.

I'm assuming you're not a fan of this interpretation, or the tactical feasibility; I can't tell, as this is the internet.

Guys I think your being a tad too harsh on the OP. Yes it says it has Hyperspace Swords. Which emplies it is a sword. However it says in the entry for it. It is a power weapon, which RAW means he can look at the model and decide what it is. (Which it looks like an sci-fi ancient Egyptian style ax to me.)

However RAI it is most likely a Power Sword, or the Name would have been Hyperspace Ax.

I could go either way on this, I don't play lychguard, however if they could get axes, instead of swords I was going to consider it. I look at it like this a TH+SS termie is higher strength, better saves across the board and does not suffer LD wipe out. He costs less than an Axe wielding lychguard. If GW allowed the raw interpretation of Axe, Maul Sword stand, it would make a relatively average unit slightly more playable. Hardly a game breaking mechanic.