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.

Hey guys just to throw out the question I have, whats the deal with sanguinary guard weapons are the axes, axes? Because I was playing a tfg today at a tourney and he insisted again and a again they were only ap3 and gave no str. bonus and were like power swords. He had argued constantly throughout the game on every thing, but he had cheated often in movement and I was tired of the bitching so agreed and let it go, but it nags me I think he may be right so I'm posting this to ease my thought how do sanguinary guard weapons work are they ap 2 or 3 etc?
Thanks

glaive encarmines are two handed power WEAPONS. So its a power weapon of the type whatever the model is holding, if holding axe, then power axe, maul/sword/lance etc

It is debatable.

Since it has a special rule (Two-handed) you cannot look at the model. Since it has no unique close combat rules, you cannot use the unusual power weapon rules.

Therefore it cannot be used at all.

A glaive encarmine does not have unique close combat rules so it cannot be counted as unusual power weapons. If its not unusual, then its regular

I see strong arguments on both sides. My group decided to leave it with an outside source and follow the NOVA FAQ. Which ruled AP as modeled.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
http://www.novaopen.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/NOVA-FAQ-v6th.21.pdf

shock_at wrote:A glaive encarmine does not have unique close combat rules so it cannot be counted as unusual power weapons. If its not unusual, then its regular

Incorrect. You have the rule backwards. If the weapon has any further special rules then you are given no permission to look at the model and determine whether it is a power sword, power axe, etc.

 Lobukia wrote:
I see strong arguments on both sides. My group decided to leave it with an outside source and follow the NOVA FAQ. Which ruled AP as modeled.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
http://www.novaopen.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/NOVA-FAQ-v6th.21.pdf

Necron Hyperphase Sword - As Modeled

People can't even agree on what the default model looks like and this is what they consider a sufficient FAQ answer?

 Drunkspleen wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:
I see strong arguments on both sides. My group decided to leave it with an outside source and follow the NOVA FAQ. Which ruled AP as modeled.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
http://www.novaopen.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/NOVA-FAQ-v6th.21.pdf

Necron Hyperphase Sword - As Modeled

People can't even agree on what the default model looks like and this is what they consider a sufficient FAQ answer?

I'm not saying the NOVA FAQ is flawless or even right, but until GW answers some of these, clubs need a better solution than rolling off once a game begins. People need to build their armies knowing how their models will work. If you can find a more respected FAQ out there, go for it. But if you're waiting for one you agree with 100%, even the GW one won't give you that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
NOVA is highly respected in most 40k circles, so we went with that when we can't agree as a club.

I like the answer to Deathleapers "Where is It?" ability.

Tyranid FAQ wrote:
Page 59 - Deathleaper, Where is it?
Change this entry to read "Deathleaper has the Shrouded special rule>"

NOVA FAQ wrote:Round fractions down for purposes of “Where is it?”

Need I say more?

It's quite annoying tbh to in each and every rules thread see people who are just assuming how rules are meant to be in the next faq instead of just going with the text as it is until changes are made.

GW hasn't made a good job of the new edition transition but lets be a bit rational about the grey areas. Don't add stuff that isn't in the text.

 Stoff3 wrote:
It's quite annoying tbh to in each and every rules thread see people who are just assuming how rules are meant to be in the next faq instead of just going with the text as it is until changes are made.

GW hasn't made a good job of the new edition transition but lets be a bit rational about the grey areas. Don't add stuff that isn't in the text.

Not sure where you're coming from, but both sides of the AM, GE discussion believe they are reading the rules as written. Supporters may argue how they want it or think it will be, but if you've followed the threads (clearly you haven't), the thrust of both sides is RAW. I don't care or even have a side (see my sig?, no BA there), but I'm rule master for a club of around 20 members and I've choosen to follow an outside FAQ until GW gives us a ruling one way or another. Please don't degrade either side to wishful thinking, both are attempting to find RAW on this one.

Happyjew wrote:
I like the answer to Deathleapers "Where is It?" ability.

Tyranid FAQ wrote:
Page 59 - Deathleaper, Where is it?
Change this entry to read "Deathleaper has the Shrouded special rule>"

NOVA FAQ wrote:Round fractions down for purposes of “Where is it?”

Need I say more?

Especially when 6th edition tells you to always round UP

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Happyjew wrote:
I like the answer to Deathleapers "Where is It?" ability.

Tyranid FAQ wrote:
Page 59 - Deathleaper, Where is it?
Change this entry to read "Deathleaper has the Shrouded special rule>"

NOVA FAQ wrote:Round fractions down for purposes of “Where is it?”

Need I say more?

Especially when 6th edition tells you to always round UP

Well this would be if you think about it... rounding down for the distance IS rounding up for the Deathleaper's ability to hide

But agreed, they didn't port this on from 5th to 6th... but why would you be looking for this in the FAQ anyway? The rule is in the Nid FAQ.

 Lobukia wrote:

 Stoff3 wrote:
It's quite annoying tbh to in each and every rules thread see people who are just assuming how rules are meant to be in the next faq instead of just going with the text as it is until changes are made.

GW hasn't made a good job of the new edition transition but lets be a bit rational about the grey areas. Don't add stuff that isn't in the text.

Not sure where you're coming from, but both sides of the AM, GE discussion believe they are reading the rules as written. Supporters may argue how they want it or think it will be, but if you've followed the threads (clearly you haven't), the thrust of both sides is RAW. I don't care or even have a side (see my sig?, no BA there), but I'm rule master for a club of around 20 members and I've choosen to follow an outside FAQ until GW gives us a ruling one way or another. Please don't degrade either side to wishful thinking, both are attempting to find RAW on this one.

First of all, just because I have an opinion you don't agree on doesn't mean I haven't read the thread. Second, to make assumptions and not rely on actual text isn't very appliable. It's truly nothing else than an assumption to believe that you could make that transition without any actual clearly specified text to support it.

I wouldn't object at all if this unit gets more weapon choices. But I'm quite sick and tired of all the assumptions about rules and all the benefits people are trying to get out of those.

Not sure why this is even a discussion. The Glaive Encarmine clearly has close-combat special rules (2-handed and master-crafted), and therefore does not qualify for power weapon subtypes. This leaves it as an unusual power weapon. (The interpretation that its special rules are not "unique" and therefore it fails to qualify for either unusual or normal is amusing, but I wouldn't take it seriously.)

not sure y this is thread either, i have read up and, this is the sum of it, they are two handed (but angelus bolters can still be fired as the are wrist mounted) they allow on re-role to wound (or hit unsure), and the axes = +1 strength, my work here is done



1000
i know its coming along slowly...
1200 (now dust collectors, exempt for testing BA lists against)

Is thread is more than 2 years old...
Different Codex, different Rulebook.

Thread is being locked due to thread necromancy.