Replacing stock PW swords with Axe to get the new 6ed Axe's rule (AP2, Int1)

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.

**Testify**

htj wrote:
Testify wrote:No one would really mind what you stuck on a tactical squad sargent - the issue is things like assassins, flying deamons, howling banshees, et al.

This is a valid point. It's where the new power weapon rules will interact with, shall we say, unusual units. Of course, the joke will be on you if you were to model power axes on your DCAs, just to have them ruled as Power Swords in a FAQ soon after.

Anyone who did that would deserve it imo

**tgjensen**

Testify wrote:Check line of sight through the model's eye view. I will stick my guy's head a few inches above his body in order to abuse this.
Same thing.
If your guys came with power swords and you've modelled them to something else, that's MFA.
I'm not judging you or anything, but if I was a guard player I'd probably be pretty vexed at facing S5 banshees, if I was a marine player I'd be pretty vexed by seeing them equipped with axes, etc.

That would probably be legal, as far as I know. I just wouldn't want to play against it due to it being poor sportsmanship.

But the different power weapons are reasonably balanced. Power mauls aren't very good against marines, swords are not good against terminators or meganobz. Axes are, but they always strike last, making them a poor man's power fist. What you describe is no worse than normal list tailoring, which may be poor sportsmanship - I certainly hated it when my Marine opponent saddled up in a couple Land Raiders and Razorbacks against my take-all-comers Orks - but not disallowed.

**htj**

Testify wrote:
htj wrote:
Testify wrote:No one would really mind what you stuck on a tactical squad sargent - the issue is things like assassins, flying deamons, howling banshees, et al.

This is a valid point. It's where the new power weapon rules will interact with, shall we say, unusual units. Of course, the joke will be on you if you were to model power axes on your DCAs, just to have them ruled as Power Swords in a FAQ soon after.

Anyone who did that would deserve it imo

Have to admit I'd find it hard not to smirk at them, at least.

That being said, I've plans to model up a Succubus with a Power Lance myself. I figure I'm onto a safe bet there, though, since the rulebook has a picture listed as something like 'Eldar Raider Power Spear.'

**Joe Mama**

DevianID wrote:I am still on jidmah's side here.

Oh really!?

A picture... no a mere drawing is enough from GW to tell us which version of a 'power weapon' is allowed. That's what he said. Please, if you would be so kind, tell us which pictures/drawings are ok. Do book covers count? Endorsed artwork posted on GW's website? What about user submitted artwork that GW posts on their site for a contest? Limited edition promotional materials sent to stores? What about pictures on GW's site showing conversions, mixing kits together? If they featured my sweet sweet DCA, which are a mix of Wood Elves, IG Cadian, GK falchions (and for sake of argument, Empire Axes), would all of a sudden axes be allowed?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

DevianID wrote:Instead we look to the model--not to army list, not to load-out.

Not quite. Since you agree with jidmah, when you say "the model" what you really mean is "official GW model, or some form of drawing or picture from GW." Again, if you are on jidmah's side you believe "the model" which is singular, applies to multiple GW models (plural) if they do exist, and probably, multiple GW drawings if they exist.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Luide wrote:I guess to break the arguments for more understandable form, we should use new definition
Modelling For Wargear:
MFW means converting model to have codex legal wargear options that are not present on the "official" model.
Examples: Converting model to have combi-flamer instead of combi-plasma. Converting model to have Power Axe instead of Power Sword.
Strict interpretation of this is that for multi-part plastic kits using weapons from other kits is MFW, examples include giving plasma gun or plasma cannon to tactical marine as they're not options for the official tactical marine kit.
There also seems to be interpretation that argues: "If there exists an official model X with wargear option Z, converting official model Y to have wargear option Z is not MFW".

For sake of argument, it is assumed that all MFW is done using proper sized weapons/other wargear and gives no other in-game advantage except by being WYSIWYG representation of a codex legal wargear option.

Now there are two sides to the DCA argument:
Joemama argues that Modelling For Wargear is distinct, separate concept from Modelling For Advantage. MFW is just representing wargear choices in WYSIWYG manner and MFA still follows the 5e accepted definition, where the in-game advantage gained by MFA is completely separate from the wargear modelled (but obviously might interact with the wargear).

Jidmah argues that Modelling For Wargear is Modelling For Advantage. If official model doesn't have wargear option X modelled, then converting model to have that codex legal wargear is MFA.

Note that arguing that MFW is MFA in some cases (Converting DCA to have power sword and axe) and not in other (converting certain Tyranid models to have Lash Whips) is IMO extremely hypocritical. In both cases, the modelling will give you in-game advantage of having specific wargear. Either both are MFA or neither is.
Especially when you consider of the two "official" Citadel DCA models, one isn't even WYSIWYG and thus is "illegal" to use in game.

Considering that GW made Errata for C:SOB in the FAQ, changing DCA Power Swords to Power Weapons, there is no way you can argue in good faith that "DCA were only supposed to have Power Swords, not other Power weapons".

Reasonable, thorough and well-writen. So it will probably be ignored by many.

**Akroma06**

Testify wrote:
Akroma06 wrote:

How about the FAQ for normal marines. Pg 2. Left hand collumn 7th point.

Var - Power Swords
In the bestiary and army list, replace all references to "power
sword" with "power weapon".

Right there it says that you have a power weapon not a sword. Now the rules tell us to look at the model iteself (NOT THE OFFICIAL MODEL) to see what kind of power weapon it has. Just because a kit comes with something doesn't mean that those are the only options you can use. Otherwise you can never run a combi-weapon on a tac sgt. The option is there so it is now MFA if I convert one up? Is this what we have sunk to? So I guess the whole BT upgrade box is worthless in that case. Converting is a part of the hobby, and using the options at your disposal is a part of the game.
Also Testify are you saying that I can't run a PF on my sgt that he must have a power sword or a chain sword? My codex would disagree.

No because you are explicitly allowed to take a power fist. I am not denying that what you are saying isn't explicitly disallowed by the rules, just suggesting that it is MFA, and like all these things is open to interpritation. No one would really mind what you stuck on a tactical squad sargent - the issue is things like assassins, flying deamons, howling banshees, et al.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Check line of sight through the model's eye view. I will stick my guy's head a few inches above his body in order to abuse this.
Same thing.
If your guys came with power swords and you've modelled them to something else, that's MFA.
I'm not judging you or anything, but if I was a guard player I'd probably be pretty vexed at facing S5 banshees, if I was a marine player I'd be pretty vexed by seeing them equipped with axes, etc.

Again so since a tac squad box doesn't come with a Power Ax, but my BT upgrade box does that means I can't use it? Please show me the rule where it says that you must use what is in the box for that model. BTW I do play C:SM, CSM, and BT and I wouldn't care if someone wants to run axes on banshees or DCA, I would either shoot them or take advantage of the fact that if they want the S+1 then they are Int 1 and I get to go first. As for the LOS issue what about the IG catachan sniper who is prone? Doesn't that affect LOS? BTW I would love to see how you get the head to float above his body.

**Joe Mama**

Jidmah wrote:
Luide wrote:Jidmah argues that Modelling For Wargear is Modelling For Advantage. If official model doesn't have wargear option X modelled, then converting model to have that codex legal wargear is MFA.

Please do not misquote me. I claim that a power axe is not legal wargear for a model that does not come with axes.

Jidmah wrote an amazing summary of his position, I will re-post it, because it makes absurd unsupported-by-the-rules claims.

Jidmah wrote:As long as you find any model ever made by citadel with the weapon you desire, I'm fine with you counting even a bottle cap as that exact model. For me personally even a drawn picture from GW would suffice. If there is no model with any power/force weapon in existence, do whatever you want. You happy now?

I posted this like six time before.

**Testify**

Akroma06 wrote:
Again so since a tac squad box doesn't come with a Power Ax, but my BT upgrade box does that means I can't use it? Please show me the rule where it says that you must use what is in the box for that model. BTW I do play C:SM, CSM, and BT and I wouldn't care if someone wants to run axes on banshees or DCA, I would either shoot them or take advantage of the fact that if they want the S+1 then they are Int 1 and I get to go first. As for the LOS issue what about the IG catachan sniper who is prone? Doesn't that affect LOS? BTW I would love to see how you get the head to float above his body.

WAAC players never mind playing against other WAAC players.That's fine, play against whomever you like.
A space marine sargent is explicitly stated to be allowed a power fist, so that's a none issue. The issue is giving models weapons that they aren't explicitly allowed and could potentially upset balance/be interprited as MFA.
could easily stick a pin in a model's torso and stick his head on top of it. Nothing in the rules prohibiting it.
I could even greenstuff a neck around it, paint it up and say it's a chaos mutation.

**Joe Mama**

Testify wrote:A space marine sargent is explicitly stated to be allowed a power fist, so that's a none issue. The issue is giving models weapons that they aren't explicitly allowed and could potentially upset balance/be interprited as MFA.

But in 6th edition some models are explicitly allowed a 'power weapon.' Which in 6th edition, the new edition with new rules, means a category that contains types of 'power weapons.' On the other hand, some models are only explicitly allowed a 'power sword.' They only can have that specific type of power weapon. It is a pretty obvious difference.

PS - Testify, why did several FAQs change codex entries from 'power sword' to 'power weapon'?

**Crimson**

Oh, wow! This thread is hilarious.

Of course in the internet you can always find that one guy to defend any ludicrous position, but seeing that there are so many, makes me wonder how wide spread this kind of thinking actually is.

Reminds me of how few weeks ago when I was visiting the local game store there were these guys playing 40K. One had an army that had Chaos Marines painted in Space Wolf colours. I asked what they were, and he got oddly defensive. He assured that they were from Space Wolf box (they obviously weren't) and 100% legal. He seemed to be worried that he had been caught 'cheating' by playing using Space Wolf rules with Chaos minis or someting. I just had meant whether they were supposed to be 13th Company or had some other interesting backstory...

PS. My new Primaris Psyker with a force axe looks really cool. MFA for sure?

PPS. I have a GW book with a picture of an assassin wielding an axe by John Blanche. I wonder whether Jidmah now allows me to equip my assassins with axes?

**Testify**

Joe Mama wrote:
Testify wrote:A space marine sargent is explicitly stated to be allowed a power fist, so that's a none issue. The issue is giving models weapons that they aren't explicitly allowed and could potentially upset balance/be interprited as MFA.

But in 6th edition some models are explicitly allowed a 'power weapon.' Which in 6th edition, the new edition with new rules, means a category that contains types of 'power weapons.' On the other hand, some models are only explicitly allowed a 'power sword.' They only can have that specific type of power weapon. It is a pretty obvious difference.

PS - Testify, why did several FAQs change codex entries from 'power sword' to 'power weapon'?

Why did they also change several "power weapon" entries to "power maul"?
Ask the guys who wrote it.

Crimson wrote:
PS. My new Primaris Psyker with a force axe looks really cool. MFA for sure?

modelling!=MFA.
I could give a Bloodthirster a power weapon for (iirc) about 5 points. Boom, power maul. S10, suck it. THAT is modelling for advantage, no one really cares what your Primaris psker has, have some perspective.

**Joe Mama**

Crimson wrote:PPS. I have a GW book with a picture of an assasin wielding an axe by John Blache. I wonder whether Jidmah now allows me to equip my assassins with axes?

Dude! You're my hero! Can I buy this book off of you, so that I will have proof that axes are legal on DCAs? It was a DCA right, not just a regular assassin? Oh wait, you said assasin, not assassin, maybe that's different and it won't work. Oh noes!

**Testify**

Why would you want a DCA with power axe? He'd die before getting to use it.

**Joe Mama**

Testify wrote:Why would you want a DCA with power axe? He'd die before getting to use it.

The why is outside the scope of this thread. It really and truly is irrelevant to the legality of the wargear option.

But one possible answer is that then they'd have a chance against TH/SS dudes. If they ever make it to them. In 6th edition, DCA are going to die before they get into assault anyway....

**DeathReaper**

Testify wrote:Why would you want a DCA with power axe? He'd die before getting to use it.

Because the crusaders would suck up most of the hits, leaving the assassins to strike with their weapons.

**Crimson**

Testify wrote:

Crimson wrote:
PS. My new Primaris Psyker with a force axe looks really cool. MFA for sure?

modelling!=MFA.
I could give a Bloodthirster a power weapon for (iirc) about 5 points. Boom, power maul. S10, suck it. THAT is modelling for advantage, no one really cares what your Primaris psker has, have some perspective.

AFAIK, GW does not broduce Primaris Psykers with force axes, only with staves. It is the exact same thing than the Death Cult Assassins.
I have no idea what the rules say Bloodthirster has. If they say 'power weapon', then indeed he could have a power maul.

**htj**

Crimson wrote:
Testify wrote:

Crimson wrote:
PS. My new Primaris Psyker with a force axe looks really cool. MFA for sure?

modelling!=MFA.
I could give a Bloodthirster a power weapon for (iirc) about 5 points. Boom, power maul. S10, suck it. THAT is modelling for advantage, no one really cares what your Primaris psker has, have some perspective.

AFAIK, GW does not broduce Primaris Psykers with force axes, only with staves. It is the exact same thing than the Death Cult Assassins.
I have no idea what the rules say Bloodthirster has. If they say 'power weapon', then indeed he could have a power maul.

Can't speak for CSM, but in Daemons it's an 'Axe of Khorne.' I cannot remember whether it is described as a power weapon, but it is explicitely an axe. If it is also a power weapon, then it's going to be a power axe. Meaning +2S... on an MC, so striking at base Initiative, not 1... Oh my.

**Crimson**

Joe Mama wrote:
Dude! You're my hero! Can I buy this book off of you, so that I will have proof that axes are legal on DCAs? It was a DCA right, not just a regular assassin? Oh wait, you said assasin, not assassin, maybe that's different and it won't work. Oh noes!

(Typo corrected, damn it!)

It is in The Inquisitor Sketchbook by John Blanche, as well as in the Assassins section of the Inquisitor rulebook, and those are specificly Death Cult Assassins.

I hope I can next find a picture of a a Primaris Psyker with an axe, lest I need to scrap my conversion!

**mrspadge**

this has raged on for 18+ pages.....

ok, can someone post an all-inclusive list of the power weapons available to a tactical marine sergeant (because the same RULES will apply to everything else)....

his rules say "power weapon" and the rulebook says to look at the model.

that should quite easily suggest i can use any of the 3......

i see no RULES issue here, what is the argument exactly?

as for modelling for advantage..... by virtue of upgrading your characters you have done that already. by virtue of moving/shooting/using psychic powers/assaulting you have taken advantage of the rules for your own benefit. personally i have no issue with death cult assassins striking at I1 anyway

**jkpz28**

Best thread ever.

**Joe Mama**

Crimson wrote:It is in The Inquisitor Sketchbook by John Blanche, as well as in the Assassins section of the Inquisitor rulebook, and those are specificly Death Cult Assassins.

OH YEAH. AXE WIELDING DCA ARE NOW LEGAL. *raises the roof* *does the worm, then the MC Hammer dance, throws out back*.

**Akroma06**

mrspadge wrote:this has raged on for 18+ pages.....

ok, can someone post an all-inclusive list of the power weapons available to a tactical marine sergeant (because the same RULES will apply to everything else)....

his rules say "power weapon" and the rulebook says to look at the model.

that should quite easily suggest i can use any of the 3......

i see no RULES issue here, what is the argument exactly?

as for modelling for advantage..... by virtue of upgrading your characters you have done that already. by virtue of moving/shooting/using psychic powers/assaulting you have taken advantage of the rules for your own benefit. personally i have no issue with death cult assassins striking at I1 anyway

Some people are calling it MFA or moddelling for advantage. Keep in mind that it must be wysiwyg for you to have it. The point is if I have a Death Cult Assassin with power sword (or similar) in one hand and an axe in the other. This would let you have tactical flexibility depending on what they charge since you get the extra attack anyway. Personally if someone wants to to go to that much trouble then so be it. Assault in this edition will struggle anyway. Now from a pure rules perspective there is nothing that prohibits me from doing this. I don't play GK or SoB so I don't really have a dog in this fight. All the rules say is that if a model has a PW then look and see what it has and that is what weapon you use.

**mrspadge**

Akroma06 wrote:
Some people are calling it MFA or moddelling for advantage. Keep in mind that it must be wysiwyg for you to have it. The point is if I have a Death Cult Assassin with power sword (or similar) in one hand and an axe in the other. This would let you have tactical flexibility depending on what they charge since you get the extra attack anyway. Personally if someone wants to to go to that much trouble then so be it. Assault in this edition will struggle anyway. Now from a pure rules perspective there is nothing that prohibits me from doing this. I don't play GK or SoB so I don't really have a dog in this fight. All the rules say is that if a model has a PW then look and see what it has and that is what weapon you use.

i'd say fair enough to them, it would look awesome

and barring dropping to ap2 can be achieved by attaching an inquisitor with hammerhand

edit - quote fail...

**Kommissar Kel**

OMG! Sooo much Butt-hurt.

For crying out loud all you "anything but a Power sword is OP!!!!!!1! Converting a Model to have a different sub-type of power weapon in MFA!!!" crying children; why don't you do a few test runs with some of the more common builds with involving the models you are crying about.

Do a few test assaults with each weapon subtype(including the stock option); or for those of you mathematically inclined, run the numbers.

If you find one that consistently outshines the others; then you can come in here and Complain.

A WS5, T3, S4 AP2 I1 model with 3 Attacks(4 on the charge) and a 5+ save is not going to last too very long against many opponents. For crying out Loud a Unit of 20 Ork boys(charged by 10 DCA with paired axes) kill exactly 10 DCA on average; more DCA die if the Boyz Charge(13.333 dead DCA at I3).

Most armies will remove several DCA from the unit before they get to strike back with their big bad S4(Oooooo!)

**Shandara**

It's tactical flexibility.

With axe/sword combo you can use the swords against everything BUT terminators and switch to axes for terminators (at least taking them with you).

**IdentifyZero**

htj wrote:
Testify wrote:No one would really mind what you stuck on a tactical squad sargent - the issue is things like assassins, flying deamons, howling banshees, et al.

This is a valid point. It's where the new power weapon rules will interact with, shall we say, unusual units. Of course, the joke will be on you if you were to model power axes on your DCAs, just to have them ruled as Power Swords in a FAQ soon after.

DCA have the 2nd weapon for purposes of close combat attack bonus (2nd weapon bonus).

It was not meant to give them the benefit of striking at AP3 and normal initiative or choosing to strike at +2STR/AP2 and lower initiative. If GW wanted them to have such an advantaged or intended it, it would have been some kind of option for them prior; this is logic, don't even bother to ask me how I know this, use some common sense.

It's not an issue to remodel your DCA to have another type of power weapon other than swords, so long as they ONLY use that type. Converting a DCA to have 2 different types of power weapons is an issue and is Modelling for Advantage and it will likely be FAQed.

**DarknessEternal**

Testify wrote:
I could give a Bloodthirster a power weapon for (iirc) about 5 points.

No, you can't.

htj wrote:
Can't speak for CSM, but in Daemons it's an 'Axe of Khorne.' I cannot remember whether it is described as a power weapon, but it is explicitely an axe. If it is also a power weapon, then it's going to be a power axe. Meaning +2S... on an MC, so striking at base Initiative, not 1... Oh my.

There's no such thing as an Axe of Khorne.

There are Hellblades, for Bloodcrushers and Bloodletters, which are always power swords according to the FAQ.

**Testify**

Kommissar Kel wrote:
Do a few test assaults with each weapon subtype(including the stock option); or for those of you mathematically inclined, run the numbers.

If you find one that consistently outshines the others; then you can come in here and Complain.

10 Death Company with powerswords charge a lord of change:
50 attacks, 25 hits, 8.3 wounds, 2.72 unsaved.
10 death company with power mauls charge a lord of change
50 attacks, 25 hits, 16.6 wounds, 5.53 unsaved.
That's twice as many wounds.

Same guys vs TEQ:
Power swords:
50 attacks, 33.3 hits, 3.7 dead
Power Mauls:4.6 dead.

Against pretty much anything other than MEQ, the mauls are a huge boost.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

DarknessEternal wrote:
Testify wrote:
I could give a Bloodthirster a power weapon for (iirc) about 5 points.

No, you can't.

I think what you meant to say was "That's only for the lord of change and deamon princes to purchase at 10 points".
Please try to be more constructive when you post.

**Kommissar Kel**

Shandara wrote:It's tactical flexibility.

With axe/sword combo you can use the swords against everything BUT terminators and switch to axes for terminators (at least taking them with you).

I know I mentioned that much, much earlier in this thread.

A S3 AP3 attacks against T4, S4, I4 models Aren't any scarier than they were when they were flat ignores Armor saves. The DCA kills against Tac Marines go down with the sword due to getting an average of 16.666% less scored wounds.

It all actually Evens out(against MEQ especially):
Power Swords: Less scored wounds
Power Maul: More MEQ saves
Power Axe: Less attacks due to dead DCA
Power Lance: Effects dependent wholly on whether or not you get to Charge.

And now with overwatch, Random charge distances, and most units receiving flamers, etc soon; You would need a unit of 10 DCA starting just to have enough survive the Charging process to do any real damage against the targets. On top of that they are going to need to get themselves awfully close before the charge to ensure that those models slaughtered by overwatch do not cause the charge to fail(which is likely to open them up to at least 1 turn of shooting while they get close enough to move and then charge).

**DarknessEternal**

Testify wrote:

DarknessEternal wrote:
Testify wrote:
I could give a Bloodthirster a power weapon for (iirc) about 5 points.

No, you can't.

I think what you meant to say was "That's only for the lord of change and deamon princes to purchase at 10 points".
Please try to be more constructive when you post.

No, what I meant to say was that you can't buy a power weapon for a Bloothirster. Which is entirely correct, and what I typed.

Please try to actually be accurate when you post.

**Joe Mama**

IdentifyZero wrote:It was not meant to give them the benefit of striking at AP3 and normal initiative or choosing to strike at +2STR/AP2 and lower initiative. If GW wanted them to have such an advantaged or intended it,

Oh dear, sweet sweet irony. You prattle on about intent, while ignoring the clear rules in 6th edition about power weapons. Apparently GW didn't intend 6th edition to happen. Apparently a computer without any sort of AI (and therefore with no intention) randomly wrote FAQs to change 'power sword' to 'power weapons'.

PS - Also, IZ, DCA in 6th, even with an axe are far worse than their 5th edition counterparts. They are not 'advantaged' now, they are still nerfed quite hard.