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.

sourclams wrote:Where Thunderhammer is located in the rulebook is irrelevant. Foehammer already states that it is a Thunderhammer and has a ranged profile. What, because Logan Grimnar isn't listed under the Independent Character special rules in the main book suddenly means he's not one?

There's no coherency to your argument.

"Thunderhammer" is not listed in tyhe special rules (as it would be stupid to list a CCW there....) so it ISNT a Thunderhammer when shooting.

Foehammer says it is. Explicitly.

And that ranged profile does not include anything about Initiative etc............

nosferatu1001 : No, I feel that if a player's chosen action carries a negative then that should be applied if there are rules to cover it, such as the Int=1 for striking in CC.

If the rules don't allow for such a penalty in shooting that's a different debate.

If a weapon's BASIC description has an effect which is not modified by HOW the blow is landed then those effects should be applied, after all they have been listed as fundamental to the weapon's design (and are the very reason for it being named THUNDER hammer !)

As another example, purely for illustrative purposes, just because the BRB doesn't cover the possibility of a player choosing the throw a photon grenade instead of shooting, that doesn't mean that it would cease to be a photon grenade if a way was found to allow the throw within the rules. It would still have the capability to blind the opponent as that is integral to it's design and function within the game.

All I can say is that if this somehow magically works out in the wolfie's favor, my Chaos termies better be able to throw Chainfists in the next codex.

And Tyranid MCs get 2d6 at range - the guns are using their Str after all.

kirsanth wrote:And Tyranid MCs get 2d6 at range - the guns are using their Str after all.

And TMC with Chainfists Get 6D4, just to shake things up!

@Gwar: Stick to rules arguments please.

Touche ? Sorry, couldn't resist

Reaper6 wrote:

@Gwar: Stick to rules arguments please.

Touche ? Sorry, couldn't resist

Huh? I have been. You are the one making things up.

If you mean my comment about TMC with Chainfists getting 6D4, you need to grow a sense of humour.

Gwar! wrote:You are the one making things up.

This should be interesting ! What, exactly, are you implying I have "made up"?

Reaper6 wrote:

Gwar! wrote:You are the one making things up.

This should be interesting ! What, exactly, are you implying I have "made up"?

Fluff argument.

Anyone else get the Forgotten Realms refernce to the Foehammer?

The part that gets me is the way the rule is written.

The Foehammer is a thunder hammer that can be used as a ranged weapon with the following profile: (Lists ranged profile).

Usage of a colon - A colon informs the reader that what follows proves and explains, or simply elements of what is referred to before.

I am on the fence about this one. I can see how in one instance, CC, that GW would be thinking that this character would be running into CC against MCs and ICs so striking at the same init would be a neat character perk.

On the other hand it may not have been intended such as using JAWS with his ranged attack.

In either case it is not a very game breaking ability, 6" inch range to a BT can be hard to do and they still have invul saves.

@Gwar : PM sent.

Clay Williams wrote:In either case it is not a very game breaking ability, 6" inch range to a BT can be hard to do and they still have invul saves.

No but a 5/6 chance of instakilling a DP with no Saves is.

Hmm, it appears Gwar is reluctant to communicate re his doubt of my fluff knowledge on the T-Hammer, so I'll throw this info into the debate:

Given the limited information provided in the current BRB & codecise, I'll quote from the 2nd ed Wargear book which gives a little more detail on the nature of the weapon. Those who bother to read it will notice that the current descriptions are merely distilled from this original text.

2nd Edition Wargear book, page 12.

Thunder Hammer.

This is a weapon used by Terminator Space Marines and is normally used in conjunction with a Storm Shield. The Thunder Hammer is a large hammer with a power generator which energises only when the hammer strikes its target. This allows the weapon to store a tremendous amount of energy and release it only at the moment of impact, producing a terrific blast of energy and a sound like the crack of thunder. Were it not for his Terminator Armour the Space Marine himself would probably be knocked over by the impact.

This should, if nothing else, give a better awareness of the functioning of the Thunder Hammer. Note that the passage quoted specifically refers to the energy being released at the moment of impact, which gives the weapon both it's name and it's defining strength which, you'll notice, is reflected in the ranged weapn profile provided in the SW codex.

It is upon this knowledge of the workings of the Thunder Hammer that my position in this debate is based.

And yet time and time again we see that the rules that govern how these things work in the game are completely different from what the fluff says.

Descriptions aren't rules, silly

Arschbombe : Unfortunately this is often true, but the point here is that even using the ranged profile to allow the character to throw the weapon doesn't change what it is,or that it's effect is the result of impact not pulling a trigger, so it's effects should still be used

Which would explain AP1.

Something Thunderhammers definitively do not have otherwise.

kirsanth wrote:Which would explain AP1.

Something Thunderhammers definitively do not have otherwise.

I suspect that the better AP is to represent the strength of the weapon with the added momentum of being thrown by a character noted for his strength, and is also much closer to the original profile for a thunder hammer btw

kirsanth wrote:Which would explain AP1.

Something Thunderhammers definitively do not have otherwise.

No, since it is AP1 in its ranged profile, it definitely would not be less powerful in melee! After all a thrown weapon cannot possess the same kinetic energy at the point of impact than it did when it left the throwers hand (except in a vacuum) so the energy release would be just as powerful in melee, if not moreso than it would be thrown. Therefore, because of the energy release, which has a firm basis in the rules, the thunderhammer is str D in hand to hand.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Reaper6 wrote:

kirsanth wrote:Which would explain AP1.

Something Thunderhammers definitively do not have otherwise.

I suspect that the better AP is to represent the strength of the weapon with the added momentum of being thrown by a character noted for his strength, and is also much closer to the original profile for a thunder hammer btw

Physics fail!

I figure fluff-wise the AP1 is the ranged equivalent of the Thunder Hammer special rules.

It makes at least as much sense as the alternative, really.

willydstyle wrote:Physics fail!

So, a hulking brute standing at almost point-blank range (in comparative terms), throwing a massive energised hammer in your face is going to hurt less than if he just bopped you with it ?

On a side-note, where did Gwar go ? I was enjoying his contributions.

Actually, yes. The kinetic energy of the hammer is going to be less at any point after it leaves the throwers hands.

Which is why the thunderhammer is str D in close combat. Thank you for leading me to this epiphany.

Reaper6 wrote:

willydstyle wrote:Physics fail!

So, a hulking brute standing at almost point-blank range (in comparative terms), throwing a massive energised hammer in your face is going to hurt less than if he just bopped you with it ?

On a side-note, where did Gwar go ? I was enjoying his contributions.

I left to do other, more enjoyable things than listen to someone quote outdated editions fluff during a rules debate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

willydstyle wrote:Actually, yes. The kinetic energy of the hammer is going to be less at any point after it leaves the throwers hands.

Which is why the thunderhammer is str D in close combat. Thank you for leading me to this epiphany.

Yay! Strength D ftw!

Because it's the only thing stronger than str 10 AP1, amirite?

willydstyle wrote:Because it's the only thing stronger than str 10 AP1, amirite?

How about Strength DD (the best strength IMO) and AP -1

Reaper6 wrote:nosferatu1001 : No, I feel that if a player's chosen action carries a negative then that should be applied if there are rules to cover it, such as the Int=1 for striking in CC.

If the rules don't allow for such a penalty in shooting that's a different debate.

No, it isn't: you want to use the rules for a TH, despite hgaving NO RULES to do so, so I will make you determine exactly how you are going to do so. So you now need to find rules for using Init in shooting.

If you cannot you cannot use the Foehammer at all.

Done egg hunting yet?

Reaper6 wrote:If a weapon's BASIC description has an effect which is not modified by HOW the blow is landed then those effects should be applied, after all they have been listed as fundamental to the weapon's design (and are the very reason for it being named THUNDER hammer !)

Yes, it is modified: it gives you, very clearly, exactly what the weapon is doing. At any point IN THE RANGED PROFILE does it state it is stilla thunderhammer? No? THen it isn't a thnuderhammer.

Reaper6 wrote:As another example, purely for illustrative purposes, just because the BRB doesn't cover the possibility of a player choosing the throw a photon grenade instead of shooting, that doesn't mean that it would cease to be a photon grenade if a way was found to allow the throw within the rules. It would still have the capability to blind the opponent as that is integral to it's design and function within the game.

No, you don't get this: you are making up rules. IF they allowed you to throw photon grenades it could indeed do something different than in CC, as you only have the ranged profile ot go off.

Here they specifically give you a ranged profile which encapsulates everything about the weapon: enhanced strength and ignoring armour really, really well.

If you have some actual rules here please post them, otherwise, and I say this with respect: fluff /= rules.

Ignoring Reaper's fluff arguments, here's the part that works purely off of rules as written:

Foehammer: is a thunder hammer, the thunder hammer has a ranged profile.

Thunder hammers, quoting from the rule book, ""an unsaved wound from a thunder hammer...reduces Initiative to a value of 1"

Note that it says nowhere that the wound is suffered in close combat, simply that any unsaved wound from a thunder hammer reduces initiative to 1.

Here's the point that you're arguing: "Being a special close combat weapon means that a thunder hammer is only a thunder hammer in close combat"

Here's why this is not a RAW argument:

RAW Fail 1 - Close combat weapons are not limited to close combat. They typically can only be used in close combat because they have no range. Foehammer does have a range; this does not prevent it from being a close combat weapon/special close combat weapon/Thunderhammer. The rule in the SW codex is quite explicit.

RAW Fail 2 - Ranged weapons are undefined in the rulebook. There is simply a blanket statement "Every weapon has a profile that consists of several elements, for example:" with a listing of a normal weapon profile.

Saying that a weapon profile [game term] unlinks the Thunderhammer [game term] descriptor because it's a ranged weapon [non-game term] is a fluff argument. You're using non-game terms to argue game terms.

To intelligently disagree with me, you have to show how either 1. the main rules disallow special close combat weapon rules to be used at range (explicitly, not supposedly; saying that close combat weapons don't have weapon profiles obviously doesn't work because that's specifically what the Foehammer rule does) or 2. that the wording of Foehammer specifies that the Foehammer is no longer a Thunderhammer when the player uses its ranged weapon profile.

It is a thunderhammer with the profile below.

The profile, nowhere, states any special rules of a thunderhammer. A thunderhammer is explicitly defined as a close combat weapon.

So if you beileve it is a TH at range then please show, with rules, how you determine you are firing at INit 1. You don't get to pick and choose, so you MUST show this. If you cannot do so intelligently then I will never let you "fire" foehammer, as you cannot resolve all the rules.

Ok can we stop this right now we have Shooting & Assault phases. Some weapons can be used in ether phase but the rules for the different phases don't interact with one another.

Take a Plasma Pistol. Its Str 7 AP2 ... being a pistol it can be used as a close combat weapon but it does not ignore armour saves; even though it would make sence to still have an AP of 2 which would still cut through armour (side note I think it would be nice to have some cheap CCW that have an AP value ... D6 would make a fun one for an ork or the dark eldar)

That's a very good argument.

Here's the counter: Power Fists attack at Initiative 1. 'Attack' is actually a game term, defined as 'the number of dice a model rolls when fighting in close combat'.

Since Foehammer has a weapon profile that allows it to fire at range, this circumvents the I1 restriction because you're not in a close combat.

And, again, there is nothing stating that close combat weapons are limited to close combat, only the mechanics of not having a weapon profile with a range actually limit them in such a fashion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tri wrote:
Take a Plasma Pistol. Its Str 7 AP2 ... being a pistol it can be used as a close combat weapon but it does not ignore armour saves; even though it would make sence to still have an AP of 2 which would still cut through armour

This is covered explicitly in the rulebook, "in close combat, pistols count as normal close combat weapons and so the Strength and AP of the pistol are ignored." If the phases don't interact, then why the need for this specific rule? (I know what the need is, to prevent this exact thing from having to be FAQed for the zillionth time, but this is YMDC RAW after all).

We can claim that the rules for different phases don't interact with one another, but we can just as easily say that this is exactly what the wording of Foehammer is allowing Arjac to do.