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.

1) If I give my slaneesh Daemon Prince a combat familiar (2 extra STR:4 AP:- attacks), will those extra attacks also be rending and AP2?

2) If I manage to drop a portalglyph on top of a Bastion or an ADL, is it technically almost impossible to target since its ''blast marker thin'' ?

3) When you place a Portalglyph, it say ''scatter it 4D6''. What if you roll a Hit, do you still scatter (I know there is a small arrow on the hit symbol)

4) If I upgrade a plague drone of nurgle with a plague ridden equipped qith an eatherblade (AP2), and give my unit Venom stings. Will the 1 attack comming from the plague ridden be resoved at AP2 ?

Thanks.

1. If it specifies that the attacks are Str4 AP-, then that's what they are. They do not come from the Prince, but rather from another source.

2. TLoS is required to shoot at the Portalglyph. This means that, yes, it will be hidden behind most terrain. However, if you put it on top of a Bastion, then pretty much nothing else will be able to fit up there, and your spawned unit will prolly have to jump off the top when disembarking. If the Bastion has a Gun Emplacement, then it won't fit.

3. When you use a blast weapon, it scatters 2D6. Rolling a hit is still part of the scatter. The same is true of the Portalglyph. If things always move when rolling scatter, it will explicitly state that in the entry.

4. Since all the model's attacks are AP2, then the one attack with ID will also be AP2.

I'm afraid I must disagree with Elric regarding the attacks (unless I missed a faq). Per the familiar, the model gets bonus attacks. Per Smash, the models attacks are resolved at AP2. Since there is nothing overriding Smash (see HoW as an example), the bonus attacks are also AP2.

 Happyjew wrote:
I'm afraid I must disagree with Elric regarding the attacks (unless I missed a faq). Per the familiar, the model gets bonus attacks. Per Smash, the models attacks are resolved at AP2. Since there is nothing overriding Smash (see HoW as an example), the bonus attacks are also AP2.

Regarding the Familiar? It says in the codex it's Str4 AP-. I don't have my dex handy but I'm sure after it describes it's stat line it also describes it doesn't get any bonus rules.

From the way the OP worded it, and from the CSM book, it appears to me that the familiar makes the attacks, not the Prince. I think it's the difference between a weapon (that the model wields) and another piece of wargear (that the model merely carries). There is no mention of the familiar NOT getting the model's bonuses...but what would prevent these from being AP3 if a model with a power weapon used the familiar?

In my Daemon book, Pink Horrors can take a Blasted Standard, which does shooting hits that are a different Str and AP to the PSA. This is a piece of wargear that, while attached to the unit, does not follow the unit's rules (ie. the Standard's hits don't have Warpflame).

 Elric Greywolf wrote:
From the way the OP worded it, and from the CSM book, it appears to me that the familiar makes the attacks, not the Prince. I think it's the difference between a weapon (that the model wields) and another piece of wargear (that the model merely carries). There is no mention of the familiar NOT getting the model's bonuses...but what would prevent these from being AP3 if a model with a power weapon used the familiar?

a powersword's ap is used only when attacking with that weapon. Smash however overridds any weapon's AP, and is not really comparable because of that.

Raw, I would see it as debatable.

Rai and hiwpi, the familiar would not be able to smash.

hmmmm....
So the AP of the Familiar would be 2, but the strength of the attack would still be 4. That might work....
...except that the Familiar states what the attacks are at, overriding the AP2 of the MC. And a Familiar's special rule is more advanced than the Smash rule. Smash applies to a wide variety of models in (almost) all codices, whereas Familiars are only available to CSM models.

I could go either way. It's already an MC, what's the harm of paying 15pts for two more AP2 attacks?

Except the familiar is not making the the attacks, the Prince is. Since the Prince has Smash, all of his close combat attacks are made at AP2 (unless attacking with an AP1 weapon). Therefore, a Prince with the Black Mace, has AP2. A prince with 2 pistols, has AP2. A prince with bonus attacks granted by a familiar, are at AP2.

I feel if GW wanted the character to use their own AP (or that of their special rules or wargear) then they wouldn't specify that the attacks are made at "Str 4 AP -" and instead would have just said "The model makes 2 extra attacks." Why would they go through the time to add in the Str 4 AP - if they didn't want it to be used?

GreyChaos wrote:
I feel if GW wanted the character to use their own AP (or that of their special rules or wargear) then they wouldn't specify that the attacks are made at "Str 4 AP -" and instead would have just said "The model makes 2 extra attacks." Why would they go through the time to add in the Str 4 AP - if they didn't want it to be used?

Because models don't have AP values, and so it has to get its AP value from somewhere. What is the AP of a Chaos Lord? They also, presumably, didn't want people making another 2 Chain Fist attacks, which is why it doesn't just say to make 2 extra attacks.

The wording is 'A model with a combat familiar makes two additional Attacks." The model makes the attacks not the familiar. So basically meaning in addition to his own or 2+ attacks.
Modifiers apply to all attacks in this case including the familiars as they are one and the same (RAW), just as if the prince was using a special CC weapon.

In addition say if given to a DP with MoS, those attacks would also be rending.

Actually the wording is "A model with a combat familiar makes two additional Str 4 AP - Melee attacks." When you leave out the bit in the middle it changes the context. The reason it is clarified as a melee attack is so the player understands when to resolve the benefits of the combat familiar. Since the attacks are specified about their stats then they should simply be resolved with that stat line.

Yes, I understand the model is making the attacks, if it wasn't stated that the model was making the attacks then there would be folks arguing that they could allocate the attacks to any models in the assault since it's not stated whom the attacks are coming from.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I have faith this will soon be added to the FAQ much like HoW and Vector strike

I left it out on purpose because I didn't want to quote the rule exactly as wasn't sure that is allowed.

And no it doesn't change the context at all, the wording states attacks are made with the model with the the familiar not the familiar itself.
Melle is mentioned because it has to be to say what the attacks are like all weapons but that doesn't change the fact the wording clearly states the model with the familiar makes the CC attacks and MC CC attacks are resolved at AP 2 as clarified by the Smash SR.

Does a Chaos daemon DP of Nurgle with Plague flail resolve its attacks at AP - because it states it the plague flail is AP - in its statline?

EDIT: You say that you understand the model is making the attacks? At that point go read the rules for Smash and then come back and say they are not AP 2.

Arn't HoW attacks from MC's resolved at AP - ?

Yes because HoW specifies how it interacts with Smash.

rigeld2 wrote:
Yes because HoW specifies how it interacts with Smash.

Becuase your given a profile for HoW?

A model with a combat familiar makes two additional Str 4 AP - Melee attacks

makes one additional Attack that hits automatically at the model's unmodified Strength with an AP of -.

To me, both rules tell you what STR and AP to use.

Nem - no, because you are SPECIFICALLY told Smash does not work with HoW. Check the rules.

I have a Black Mace. that *specifies* that attacks are made at Ap4. When a DP uses it Smash Overrules this and states it is AP2

Same here. The DP model makes the attacks, Smash specifically states ALL attacks made by the model with Smash are at AP2, unless they would be better.

I feel people are over complicating these rules...

1. "a model with a combat familiar makes 2 additional S4 Ap- melee attacks"
2. The model in question has the smash attack special rule
3. "All attacks, of a model with this rule, except hammer of wrath are resolved at Ap2 (unless attacking with an Ap1 weapon)"

Simple... the combat familiar as Ap2.....

That being said this is definitely a faq as I have seen this in several posts


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also in regards to the portalglyph, you cannot put a vehicle on a battlement so you cannot put it on top of a bastion. But you can create a circle of defense lines or simply hide it behind other terrain....

 Nem wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Yes because HoW specifies how it interacts with Smash.

Becuase your given a profile for HoW?

No. It's actually under Smash (sorry for misremembering).

All of the close combat attacks, except Hammer of Wrath Attacks, of a model with this special rule are resolved at AP 2

Knowing the actual rules is half the battle.

 Juggalo17 wrote:
I feel people are over complicating these rules...

1. "a model with a combat familiar makes 2 additional S4 Ap- melee attacks"
2. The model in question has the smash attack special rule
3. "All attacks, of a model with this rule, except hammer of wrath are resolved at Ap2 (unless attacking with an Ap1 weapon)"

Simple... the combat familiar as Ap2.....

That being said this is definitely a faq as I have seen this in several posts


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also in regards to the portalglyph, you cannot put a vehicle on a battlement so you cannot put it on top of a bastion. But you can create a circle of defense lines or simply hide it behind other terrain....

I'm not sure it does need an FaQ at all TBH. Like you say it it doesn't need complicating in slightest, it is simple enough to read and follow so I'm not sure how people are coming up with something else when it clearly says the model with it has the extra attacks.

I think it is more people over looking that it does in fact add smash on a DP or any other special rule/modifier on a model that might affect it and when people start realizing, its all "that can't be right?!" when has been all along.