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.

So this came up today when I was viewing the profile for Astorath in the Blood Angels codex. His weapon is considered a "Two-Handed Power Weapon." The rule book states to view the models actual weapon to determine the effects (whether it is a sword or an axe etc etc). My question is would it be legal to modify Astorath's weapon and convert it into a sword? Furthermore for models who are allowed to purchase "power weapons" that do not specify what type is it acceptable to model them for aesthetics and explain to your opponent what the weapons represent.

For example I use Sanguinary Guard as Death Company with Jump Packs (the poses look so awesome) however unfortunately some of them have axes, is it ok to tell your opponent you intended them to be power 'weapons (swords now)' when they were constructed and that is how you'd like to use them? Or would someone expect a player to destroy the model simply to change the weapon out because of the way it looks.

I realize the above is slightly different from WYSIWYG however I think saying "This whole squad has power weapons" is much more reasonable than saying "All of my flamers are power fists" or something that far outside of the realm of reason.

Thanks in advance for any input.

Yes, entries that say power weapons allow you to choose which one to model on your miniature.

I personally wouldn't mind if someone told me this whole squad has power swords. However on a tournament environment I'm sure you won't be allowed to use this.

It's GW's way to tell you to either break your models and get some bits or just get new models so that you can choose.

Luckly for chaos and maybe loyalist marines as well the starter pack thingie (CSM vs DA) will have chosens that you might strip off their weapons and build you any combinations you need to update your army.

Jstncloud wrote:So this came up today when I was viewing the profile for Astorath in the Blood Angels codex. His weapon is considered a "Two-Handed Power Weapon." The rule book states to view the models actual weapon to determine the effects (whether it is a sword or an axe etc etc). My question is would it be legal to modify Astorath's weapon and convert it into a sword? Furthermore for models who are allowed to purchase "power weapons" that do not specify what type is it acceptable to model them for aesthetics and explain to your opponent what the weapons represent.

Models that come with fixed gear are a bit of a contentious issue at the moment. While the power weapon rules tell you to look at the model to determine what type of power weapon it is, some players think this means that you have to use the model as it comes out of the box, while others think it simply means that your power weapons have to satisfy WYSIWYG (so if the model has a power axe, it has a power axe, but you can freely choose which type of power weapon to put on the model).

Edit - Having looked at Astorath's rules, none of that actually applies. As Formosa says below, it's a special power weapon, so it makes no difference what it looks like.

For example I use Sanguinary Guard as Death Company with Jump Packs (the poses look so awesome) however unfortunately some of them have axes, is it ok to tell your opponent you intended them to be power 'weapons (swords now)' when they were constructed and that is how you'd like to use them? Or would someone expect a player to destroy the model simply to change the weapon out because of the way it looks.

This is most definitely against the rules as they currently stand. If the model has a power axe, then it is used as a power axe in game.

Having said that, some players won't care so long as it is easy to tell what is what... If your entire army is using power swords, for example, then explaining at the start of the game that all of your power weapons are swords regardless of what they look like is probably not going to upset too many people, at least in casual games. But if you have some power axes that are axes and some that are swords, you're getting into 'too hard to keep track of' territory, and people aren't going to like it.


You don't generally need to 'destroy' a model to swap an arm or a weapon, though. Plastic marines in particular are generally fairly easy to get arms off.

Jstncloud wrote:So this came up today when I was viewing the profile for Astorath in the Blood Angels codex. His weapon is considered a "Two-Handed Power Weapon." The rule book states to view the models actual weapon to determine the effects (whether it is a sword or an axe etc etc). My question is would it be legal to modify Astorath's weapon and convert it into a sword? Furthermore for models who are allowed to purchase "power weapons" that do not specify what type is it acceptable to model them for aesthetics and explain to your opponent what the weapons represent.

For example I use Sanguinary Guard as Death Company with Jump Packs (the poses look so awesome) however unfortunately some of them have axes, is it ok to tell your opponent you intended them to be power 'weapons (swords now)' when they were constructed and that is how you'd like to use them? Or would someone expect a player to destroy the model simply to change the weapon out because of the way it looks.

I realize the above is slightly different from WYSIWYG however I think saying "This whole squad has power weapons" is much more reasonable than saying "All of my flamers are power fists" or something that far outside of the realm of reason.

Thanks in advance for any input.

You could make it a power sword if you wanted, but because its a "unique power weapon" it would still be striking at str6 and be ap3, this is because asty's axe is a "special" type of weapon.

End result is model it however you like, but you still have to use the rules of his unique weapon

insaniak wrote:

Jstncloud wrote:So this came up today when I was viewing the profile for Astorath in the Blood Angels codex. His weapon is considered a "Two-Handed Power Weapon." The rule book states to view the models actual weapon to determine the effects (whether it is a sword or an axe etc etc). My question is would it be legal to modify Astorath's weapon and convert it into a sword? Furthermore for models who are allowed to purchase "power weapons" that do not specify what type is it acceptable to model them for aesthetics and explain to your opponent what the weapons represent.

Models that come with fixed gear are a bit of a contentious issue at the moment. While the power weapon rules tell you to look at the model to determine what type of power weapon it is, some players think this means that you have to use the model as it comes out of the box, while others think it simply means that your power weapons have to satisfy WYSIWYG (so if the model has a power axe, it has a power axe, but you can freely choose which type of power weapon to put on the model).

Edit - Having looked at Astorath's rules, none of that actually applies. As Formosa says below, it's a special power weapon, so it makes no difference what it looks like.

For example I use Sanguinary Guard as Death Company with Jump Packs (the poses look so awesome) however unfortunately some of them have axes, is it ok to tell your opponent you intended them to be power 'weapons (swords now)' when they were constructed and that is how you'd like to use them? Or would someone expect a player to destroy the model simply to change the weapon out because of the way it looks.

This is most definitely against the rules as they currently stand. If the model has a power axe, then it is used as a power axe in game.

Having said that, some players won't care so long as it is easy to tell what is what... If your entire army is using power swords, for example, then explaining at the start of the game that all of your power weapons are swords regardless of what they look like is probably not going to upset too many people, at least in casual games. But if you have some power axes that are axes and some that are swords, you're getting into 'too hard to keep track of' territory, and people aren't going to like it.


You don't generally need to 'destroy' a model to swap an arm or a weapon, though. Plastic marines in particular are generally fairly easy to get arms off.

Thanks for the responses, that is why I typically just default to all of my power weapons being power swords (during 5th ed that is how I ran them just basic 'power weapons') and I have no intent on using Axes, hasn't been an issue yet and ironically at the First to Fight this passed Saturday in Winston NC the staff was pretty comfortable (as well as the players) with models not being 100% so long as it was explained before the match.

Now for the special weapon issue with Astorath, where in the rule book does it cover him specifically so that I may be able to relate it to my play group.

Thanks in advance.

Edit:

Found it under 'Unusual Power Weapon' in the book.

Good to know now seeing as our Chaos player had Kharn swinning at initiative 1...

The FAQ for Kharn states that Gorechild is a 'Power Axe' which means he does follow the rules for a power axe.

Some other weapons have been FAQ'd to specific types, rather than just generic Power Weapons, and if this is the case, then they do follow the rules for the type of weapon as well.

Kiredor wrote:The FAQ for Kharn states that Gorechild is a 'Power Axe' which means he does follow the rules for a power axe.

Some other weapons have been FAQ'd to specific types, rather than just generic Power Weapons, and if this is the case, then they do follow the rules for the type of weapon as well.

Thank you for catching that.

And keep in mind that its "Unique" power weapons that are always AP3. That means PWs that have their own unique rules not found elsewhere. IE: Not USRs.


Relic Blades are PWs that give +2Str. the +2Str is a unique rule.

Nemesis Force Halberds are Force Weapons that have the Daemonbane special rule and give +2I. the +2I is a unique rule.

Glaive Encarmines are Master Crafted Power Weapons. Master Crafted is NOT a unique special rule, therefore a Glaive Encarmine is whatever it is modeled as that is also master crafted. So a model with an Axe has a Master Crafted Power Axe. A sword is a Master Crafted Power Sword.

Grey Templar wrote:And keep in mind that its "Unique" power weapons that are always AP3. That means PWs that have their own unique rules not found elsewhere. IE: Not USRs.


Relic Blades are PWs that give +2Str. the +2Str is a unique rule.

Nemesis Force Halberds are Force Weapons that have the Daemonbane special rule and give +2I. the +2I is a unique rule.

Glaive Encarmines are Master Crafted Power Weapons. Master Crafted is NOT a unique special rule, therefore a Glaive Encarmine is whatever it is modeled as that is also master crafted. So a model with an Axe has a Master Crafted Power Axe. A sword is a Master Crafted Power Sword.

Is this definition of 'unique special rule' in an FAQ because a helluva lot of people don't agree with you and claim your interpretation is RAI and not RAW.

nkelsch wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:And keep in mind that its "Unique" power weapons that are always AP3. That means PWs that have their own unique rules not found elsewhere. IE: Not USRs.


Relic Blades are PWs that give +2Str. the +2Str is a unique rule.

Nemesis Force Halberds are Force Weapons that have the Daemonbane special rule and give +2I. the +2I is a unique rule.

Glaive Encarmines are Master Crafted Power Weapons. Master Crafted is NOT a unique special rule, therefore a Glaive Encarmine is whatever it is modeled as that is also master crafted. So a model with an Axe has a Master Crafted Power Axe. A sword is a Master Crafted Power Sword.

Is this definition of 'unique special rule' in an FAQ because a helluva lot of people don't agree with you and claim your interpretation is RAI and not RAW.

No. Thats exactly why USRs arn't involved. Unique special rules must be just that, unique to that weapon. When the BRB doesn't define something, we use the common english definition. Unique means exactly that, ergo it must be a rule that that weapon and ONLY that weapon has.

It is muddy, but only if you make it so.

Grey Templar wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:And keep in mind that its "Unique" power weapons that are always AP3. That means PWs that have their own unique rules not found elsewhere. IE: Not USRs.


Relic Blades are PWs that give +2Str. the +2Str is a unique rule.

Nemesis Force Halberds are Force Weapons that have the Daemonbane special rule and give +2I. the +2I is a unique rule.

Glaive Encarmines are Master Crafted Power Weapons. Master Crafted is NOT a unique special rule, therefore a Glaive Encarmine is whatever it is modeled as that is also master crafted. So a model with an Axe has a Master Crafted Power Axe. A sword is a Master Crafted Power Sword.

Is this definition of 'unique special rule' in an FAQ because a helluva lot of people don't agree with you and claim your interpretation is RAI and not RAW.

No. Thats exactly why USRs arn't involved. Unique special rules must be just that, unique to that weapon. When the BRB doesn't define something, we use the common english definition. Unique means exactly that, ergo it must be a rule that that weapon and ONLY that weapon has.

It is muddy, but only if you make it so.

Ah... So you are making up an interpretation which has no backing that they meant all USRs which are explicitly called special rules are somehow not applied because of an unclear and ambiguous definition of what counts as 'unique'.

Great, that will prevent a lot of arguments. Glad that is totally settled.

So basically what you are saying is Grey Knight weapons are ap 3 and follow the codex not the rules in the big book that might alter how they work?

Jstncloud wrote:So basically what you are saying is Grey Knight weapons are ap 3 and follow the codex not the rules in the big book that might alter how they work?

Yes, follow the code rules.
All Nemisis Weapons are AP3, except the hammer as it follows the rules for Thunder Hammers.

And Nemisis Doomfists as they are DCCWs.

Grey Templar wrote:And Nemisis Doomfists as they are DCCWs.

Last I checked DCCWs only applied to vehicles, not monstrous creatures, so unless they FAQed it the Dreadknight does not get the double STR. (Seem to recall reading about this previously).

Jstncloud wrote:Last I checked DCCWs only applied to vehicles, not monstrous creatures, so unless they FAQed it the Dreadknight does not get the double STR. (Seem to recall reading about this previously).

That was last edition. Under the 6th ed rules, a DCCW is just a close combat weapon that doubles the user's strength. Nothing limits it to vehicles any more.

insaniak wrote:

Jstncloud wrote:Last I checked DCCWs only applied to vehicles, not monstrous creatures, so unless they FAQed it the Dreadknight does not get the double STR. (Seem to recall reading about this previously).

That was last edition. Under the 6th ed rules, a DCCW is just a close combat weapon that doubles the user's strength. Nothing limits it to vehicles any more.

One of our players brought that to me attention as well, good to know (yay so many rules to re-learn).

Grey Templar, I would like to note that a Relic Blades +2 STR rule isn't unique, as the Black Sword of Faith from the Black Templars codex has an identical rule.

So neither is unique, then?

Unit1126PLL wrote:Grey Templar, I would like to note that a Relic Blades +2 STR rule isn't unique, as the Black Sword of Faith from the Black Templars codex has an identical rule.

So neither is unique, then?

Relic Blades don't do +2 Str. They always hit at Str6. Major difference.

According to the iPad version of the codex, they are Str +2, AP3 (I think), two-handed melee weapons.

Happyjew wrote:According to the iPad version of the codex, they are Str +2, AP3 (I think), two-handed melee weapons.

They didn't update the FAQ. Since I don't have the iPad version of the Codex I am stuck using the version of the codex I have.

Until the paper faq is changed, its probably better to play them as S6, as not everyone has access to the Digital Codex.

Only time it matters is in situations when a model with a relic blade has strength modifiers in combat. (such as BA allied with SM or similar.)

Kiredor wrote:Until the paper faq is changed, its probably better to play them as S6, as not everyone has access to the Digital Codex.

Only time it matters is in situations when a model with a relic blade has strength modifiers in combat. (such as BA allied with SM or similar.)

Yeah, its better this way. But it is annoying that they update the Digital Codex but not the FAQ. How does that make any sense?

@ nkelsch - a unique special rule just means use the rule in the codex and set aside any contradicting rules in the USR's... That's all. There isn't anything complicated or hard to understand there. The interpretation is neither unclear nor ambiguous. Nobody said ignore all USR's either when applying unique special rules just that the unique special rule gets priority!

I'd like to thank everyone for their input, I always like to see what the Dakka community says because I assume the general gaming community in person and online will feel about the same way.

The rules clarifications and opinions on WYSIWYG and 'count-as' weapons has been greatly appreciated.

Typhon the Storm Giant wrote:@ nkelsch - a unique special rule just means use the rule in the codex and set aside any contradicting rules in the USR's... That's all. There isn't anything complicated or hard to understand there. The interpretation is neither unclear nor ambiguous. Nobody said ignore all USR's either when applying unique special rules just that the unique special rule gets priority!

Page number for this definition? There is nothing anywhere saying any special rule which is not a USR is considered unique. No definition of what is considered unique.

If the weapon has special rules it is a unique power weapon. Nothing distinguishes USR from +2str or "I poop daemons on wounding"