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.

There are two weapons in the demon codex that seem to give you an ability by just possessing a weapon not needing to use the weapon.

Blade of blood and Mutating Warpblade both say the bearer, it does not appear you have to use the weapon to get the ability like you do with axe of khorne and staff of change.

Yes, Bloodlust, for example, says that. The weapon itself have Melee, Bloodlust and Specialist Weapon. So if your thinking about Disarm, it still makes the weapon plain Melee without Bloodlust.

not disarm. I am thinking that if you have axe of khorne and blade of blood you can use the axe of khorne and still get the blade of bloods rampage because of how its worded.

"The bearer" of a given weapon has typically been clarified in FAQs as only benefiting from the property of one weapon at a time. (See the dark elder FAQ for a couple examples).

It'd need to be worded differently (such as with the Grey Knight Dreadknights' Greatsword) in order for it's properties to stack.

tgf wrote:
not disarm. I am thinking that if you have axe of khorne and blade of blood you can use the axe of khorne and still get the blade of bloods rampage because of how its worded.

Ah yes they do stack. The bearer gets the Special rule and that's it. In the case of the Nemesis Greatsword the wording is "A model with a Nemesis Greatsword re-rolls...". That surely must work the same way as "The bearer of the Blade of Blood...". If anyone argues against this is for the Nemesis Greatsword ruling, then they play Grey Knights; they definitely don't play Chaos Daemons

Chaospling wrote:If anyone argues against this is for the Nemesis Greatsword ruling, then they play Grey Knights; they definitely don't play Chaos Daemons

Or, (and this is the interpretation 'I' prefer) they've read the FAQs I've referenced above and noticed that GW has already established precedent on how they handle phrases like 'the bearer of' vs. 'a model with' or similar.

Don't attribute bias where simple rules-familiarity should suffice.

 Neorealist wrote:

Chaospling wrote:If anyone argues against this is for the Nemesis Greatsword ruling, then they play Grey Knights; they definitely don't play Chaos Daemons

Or, (and this is the interpretation 'I' prefer) they've read the FAQs I've referenced above and noticed that GW has already established precedent on how they handle phrases like 'the bearer of' vs. 'a model with' or similar.

Don't attribute bias where simple rules-familiarity should suffice.

Don't take that last sentence seriously, I was just teasing a bit You may certainly be right based on the Dark Eldar codex and FAQ though I don't have their codex. If you are right, then it surely is the usual Space Marines > Other armies story. The "bearer of" sentence shouldn't imply that the weapon actually hits the enemy, just like the "a model with" sentence doesn't.

Chaospling wrote:

 Neorealist wrote:

Chaospling wrote:If anyone argues against this is for the Nemesis Greatsword ruling, then they play Grey Knights; they definitely don't play Chaos Daemons

Or, (and this is the interpretation 'I' prefer) they've read the FAQs I've referenced above and noticed that GW has already established precedent on how they handle phrases like 'the bearer of' vs. 'a model with' or similar.

Don't attribute bias where simple rules-familiarity should suffice.

Don't take that last sentence seriously, I was just teasing a bit You may certainly be right based on the Dark Eldar codex and FAQ though I don't have their codex. If you are right, then it surely is the usual Space Marines > Other armies story. The "bearer of" sentence shouldn't imply that the weapon actually hits the enemy, just like the "a model with" sentence doesn't.

If it was due to "Space Marines > Other armies", wouldn't it, you know, apply to all Space Marine weapons as opposed to one weapon for one model in one Codex?

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Chaospling wrote:

 Neorealist wrote:

Chaospling wrote:If anyone argues against this is for the Nemesis Greatsword ruling, then they play Grey Knights; they definitely don't play Chaos Daemons

Or, (and this is the interpretation 'I' prefer) they've read the FAQs I've referenced above and noticed that GW has already established precedent on how they handle phrases like 'the bearer of' vs. 'a model with' or similar.

Don't attribute bias where simple rules-familiarity should suffice.

Don't take that last sentence seriously, I was just teasing a bit You may certainly be right based on the Dark Eldar codex and FAQ though I don't have their codex. If you are right, then it surely is the usual Space Marines > Other armies story. The "bearer of" sentence shouldn't imply that the weapon actually hits the enemy, just like the "a model with" sentence doesn't.

If it was due to "Space Marines > Other armies", wouldn't it, you know, apply to all Space Marine weapons as opposed to one weapon for one model in one Codex?

Yes, all weapons with the same wording as "the bearer of" or "a model with".

So far they've been pretty consistent with 'no mixing two weapon abilities allowed' as a general rule. The only major exception is the Dreadknights sword; presumably because it's written differently from the templating they use on nearly all other weapons which grant the wielder some boon.

 Neorealist wrote:
So far they've been pretty consistent with 'no mixing two weapon abilities allowed' as a general rule. The only major exception is the Dreadknights sword; presumably because it's written differently from the templating they use on nearly all other weapons which grant the wielder some boon.

I'm going to assume it's because whoever wrote the FAQ didn't really know what they were talking about and got asked a leading question. If you didn't already know, or forgot, that the Dreadknight wasn't S10 and thus the S10 in the question was because of the Fist it would be easy to make the same mistake. Given the rules are explicitly clear that you only get the benefits of one weapon, and neither the Greatsword nor the Fist are explicit in being the only exception in the game, I'm going to go with it being a mistake. It wouldn't be the first time a FAQ contained seriously bogus rulings, anyone remember Counter-Attack + Furious Charge?

Going to ask the mods to move this to YMDC.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
here are the relavant passages so far relating to this discussion

GK .54
A model with a Nemesis Greatsword re-rolls failed To Hit,
To Wound and armour penetration rolls in close combat.

GK FAQ
Q: Does a Nemesis Dreadknight armed with a Nemesis greatsword have
4 Attacks at Strength 10 that, because of the Nemesis greatsword, can
re-roll To Hit, To Wound and Armour Penetration rolls?(p54)
A: Yes.

Daemons .62
Bloodlust: The bearer of the Blade of Blood has the
Rampage special rule.

Warp Mutation: If the bearer slays an enemy Character or
Monstrous Creature, roll a D(}n the roll of a 2+ the victim
is transformed into a Chaos Spawn under the control of the
Daemon player.

DE FAQ
Q: If a model is armed with a Djin blade and another special close
combat weapon, such as an agoniser, and he chooses not to attack with
the Djin blade, does he still get the two bonus Attacks? (p56)
A: No.

DE .56
A djin blade is a power
weapon. Furthermore, the bearer makes two bonus attacks
every round of combat - roll these separately.

Done.

Seems like it would gain the benefit. It reads more like the GK one to me.

Except for the fact that the daemon weapon uses the verbiage 'the bearer of' (similar to the dark elder FAQ ruling above), and not 'with a' (unique to the greatsword thus far).

I'm sure that justification can be made to indicate how they are 'similar' grammatically speaking; but the fact remains that the former wording has been FAQed to follow the normal '2 weapons abilities' rules, whereas the latter has (via wording, as clarified in their FAQ) an explicit exception to same.

I'm pretty sure every single weapon with the phrase 'the bearer of' has received an FAQ entry indicating it does not play well with others, so to speak.

 Neorealist wrote:
So far they've been pretty consistent with 'no mixing two weapon abilities allowed' as a general rule. The only major exception is the Dreadknights sword; presumably because it's written differently from the templating they use on nearly all other weapons which grant the wielder some boon.

Actually Power scourges on defilers in the CSM codex also get this exception as per their FAQ. It has the similar wording of, "model with a..."

As we have two instances of "model with a..." getting the exception, and precedent for "bearer of..." not getting the exception, it seems intent is clear.

Power Scourge from CSM dex.

"Flail: If one or more enemy models are in base contact
with a model with a Flail weapon at the beginning of the
Fight sub-phase, "

If I get the jist of where this is going you are all saying that bearer of means no bonus but if they use model with they get the bonus.

Without the FAQ's I am unsure how GW could have expected a literate person to glean this but I see the pattern as described.

GK FAQ is just stupid and should not be used as precedent for anything. IIRC, FAQ for their psychic powers breaks the normal rules for applying bonuses too.

Every Tyranid Close Combat weapon states "A model with this weapon..." and those also stack with each other.

 Happyjew wrote:
Every Tyranid Close Combat weapon states "A model with this weapon..." and those also stack with each other.

In a defined way and with rules to explain how.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
Every Tyranid Close Combat weapon states "A model with this weapon..." and those also stack with each other.

In a defined way and with rules to explain how.

I was using that as an example of wording. Every time a weapon says "A model with..." GW has said the model benefits without having to actually use the weapon. As compared to every ruling they have made on weapons that say "The bearer of...".

 Happyjew wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
Every Tyranid Close Combat weapon states "A model with this weapon..." and those also stack with each other.

In a defined way and with rules to explain how.

I was using that as an example of wording. Every time a weapon says "A model with..." GW has said the model benefits without having to actually use the weapon. As compared to every ruling they have made on weapons that say "The bearer of...".

Tyranid Close Combat Weapons are a terrible example because they aren't Weapons. Page 33 says they don't use Close Combat Weapons as such and they were never updated with a weapon profile, either in their FAQ or the Rulebook. They aren't weapons, they're closer to a Power Field Generator in rules than a Power Weapon. There's exactly one Melee weapon in the Tyranid Codex, "Claws and Teeth" - a normal CCW.

There is exactly one instance (that I'm aware of) where a weapon's rules can be used without using the weapon, and that's the Dreadknight Greatsword or alternatively the Doomfist. It's an exception, not the norm.

As it is there really is no true precedence to try to align which is right. Sincerely thank GW for going back and forth with their verbage.

tgf wrote:
DE FAQ
Q: If a model is armed with a Djin blade and another special close
combat weapon, such as an agoniser, and he chooses not to attack with
the Djin blade, does he still get the two bonus Attacks? (p56)
A: No.

DE .56
A djin blade is a power
weapon. Furthermore, the bearer makes two bonus attacks
every round of combat - roll these separately.

The other relevant quote is the base rule from the rulebook- More Than One Weapon on page 51:

If a model has more than one Melee weapon, he must choose which one to attack with when he comes to strike blows - he cannot mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons.

The Djin Blade ruling is in accordance with this. I agree that the Dreadknight ruling clashes with how the rules otherwise consistently treat weapon special rules/abilities, and should be regarded as an unexplained exception.

 Mannahnin wrote:

tgf wrote:
DE FAQ
Q: If a model is armed with a Djin blade and another special close
combat weapon, such as an agoniser, and he chooses not to attack with
the Djin blade, does he still get the two bonus Attacks? (p56)
A: No.

DE .56
A djin blade is a power
weapon. Furthermore, the bearer makes two bonus attacks
every round of combat - roll these separately.

The other relevant quote is the base rule from the rulebook- More Than One Weapon on page 51:

If a model has more than one Melee weapon, he must choose which one to attack with when he comes to strike blows - he cannot mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons.

The Djin Blade ruling is in accordance with this. I agree that the Dreadknight ruling clashes with how the rules otherwise consistently treat weapon special rules/abilities, and should be regarded as an unexplained exception.

The other FAQ along the same lines was the now defunct "Scorpion Chainsword being mixed with the Scorpion Claw" ruling, which also ruled against mixing and matching.