Switch Theme:

Death Guard Helbrute with two fists, how many attacks?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Captain of the Forlorn Hope





Chicago, IL

p5freak and skchsan, Please re-read this breakdown and tell me why you think the logic is incorrect:

Spoiler:
Basically the process goes like this:

The bearer of the Hellbrute fists is selected to fight
At this point we see that the Hellbrute is equipped with a Hellbrute Fist (lets call this weapon #1), and a second Hellbrute Fist (lets call this weapon #2).
We make our 5 attacks with any given weapon (does not matter which).
Then we check our special rules
Weapon #1, the Hellbrute Fist, has a rule about extra attacks.

So we check the rule and see if we satisfy the conditions:

Condition 1: "Each time the bearer fights" (Yes, satisfied)
Condition 2: "if it is equipped with 2 Helbrute fists" (Yes, satisfied)
We satisfied both conditions, as the bearer is fighting and it is equipped with 2 Helbrute fists, therefore we get the benefit.
The benefit is "it makes 1 additional attack with this weapon."

So we get +1 attack with weapon #1 for simply having that weapon (and using its special rules).

Now we check for other weapons on the dataslate:

Weapon #2 , the other Hellbrute Fist, also has a rule about extra attacks.

So we check the rule and see if we satisfy the conditions:

Condition 1: "Each time the bearer fights" (Yes, satisfied)
Condition 2: "if it is equipped with 2 Helbrute fists" (Yes, satisfied)
We satisfied both conditions, as the bearer is fighting and it is equipped with 2 Helbrute fists, therefore we get the benefit.
The benefit is "it makes 1 additional attack with this weapon."

So we get +1 attack with weapon #2 for simply having that weapon (and using its special rules).

Count all the +1's and you get +2. Simple (Though you need to make 1 attack with with weapon #1, and one attack with with weapon #2).


"Did you notice a sign out in front of my chapel that said "Land Raider Storage"?" -High Chaplain Astorath the Grim Redeemer of the Lost.

I sold my soul to the devil and now the bastard is demanding a refund!

We do not have an attorney-client relationship. I am not your lawyer. The statements I make do not constitute legal advice. Any statements made by me are based upon the limited facts you have presented, and under the premise that you will consult with a local attorney. This is not an attempt to solicit business. This disclaimer is in addition to any disclaimers that this website has made.
 
   
Made in us
Deathwing Terminator with Assault Cannon





Because its each time it fights, not each time it attacks.

As per wording of the rules for helbrute fists, it is an ability that is checked for when you fight, not when you resolve the attack with the said weapon. (i.e. plasma's ability is checked on the hit roll, certain weapons' abilities trigger on wound roll, etc, different weapons & their abilities are triggered at different points/subphases/etc).

You check once how many helbrute fists you have equipped at the timing of you selecting your helbrute with 2x helbrute fists equipped.

The game makes clear distinction as to what "fight" is and what "attack" is. The rules are specific in their usage of the term "fight".

Thus, you get one additional attack using the weapon profile, not +1 A or +2 A. It's more akin to how bolter discipline can grant 1 additional attack using the bolter's profile - this is a "make a duplicate attack regardless of A characteristic" mechanic, which is explicitly different from "+X to A characteristic" mechanics.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slipspace wrote:
It is two separate weapons. That's been made clear by various people already. As far as precedent goes, we have chainswords and lightning claws as examples of applying a weapon's bonus for each one you have. I find the idea that a Helbrute equipped with 2 Helbrute Fists only has 1 weapon frankly absurd. Having duplicate weapons does not mean you only have 1 of that weapon in any case I can think of.
Can you point me to the bolded? AFAIK this is not the case, but I may be misinformed. I'm not saying that the helbrute fist counts only as 1 weapon - you simply cannot invoke the same rule twice because there are no precedents for doing so - if we follow this logic then two chainswords should give you 4 extra attacks, not 2 (swing CS#1, claim +1 attack, then claim +1 from inactive CS#2, then swing the CS#2, claim +1 attack, then claim +1 from CS#1 that is inactive). But that's not how it works as far as I understand the rules.

This message was edited 15 times. Last update was at 2021/07/26 19:34:01


 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




Sk- no, you're wrong. Sorry only one way to say it now

You've ignored that, bar the requirement to hold two fists to trigger the rule, the rule is EXACTLY THE SAME as for a chain sword. We know 2 chainswords grant two attacks , yet you're adamant that - despite identical wording bar a requirement that is irrelevant to the discussion , that helbrute fists are different


To do this you are ignoring
- there are two weapons, EACH ONE with the rule
- these are not a single weapon
- you've concocted, out of whole cloth, that fight is a point in time, when it's a sequence. That's why the rule is fightS. It is continuing. You check the rules, plural, during the fight sequence

Why do you only check how many fists you have once? You have TWO RUKES, you are ignoring one of them. What gave you permission to break the rules here? Why does one rule not matter to you?

Again

Explain how your reasoning fits with the chain sword rule. Under your ignoring of rules concept, the entirely separate, not the same chain sort woukdnt be looked at, meaning on,y one additional attack, yet we know that's wrong

You're wrong in RAW and wrong inprecednt.
   
Made in us
Deathwing Terminator with Assault Cannon





"When a unit fights" is a mechanic that's clearly defined in the rulebook.
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 skchsan wrote:
"When a unit fights" is a mechanic that's clearly defined in the rulebook.

Yes. And when it fights, helbrute fist 1 makes one additional attack, as does fist 2

We know this is correct. Again. How are you squaring your reading of this, when it would result in only one chainsword attack, which is simply not correct?

You're wring in raw and precedent
   
Made in de
Prescient Cryptek of Eternity






Germany

nosferatu1001 wrote:

I've ignored nothing


You ignore that a differently written rule from the same author must mean something different, otherwise it wouldnt be written differently.
   
Made in us
Captain of the Forlorn Hope





Chicago, IL

 skchsan wrote:
Because its each time it fights, not each time it attacks. As per wording of the rules for helbrute fists
Okay so here is where your issue is. First point, it is helbrute fist (Singular), not helbrute fists (Plural).

Second:
Each time it fights Weapon #1 has a rule about giving an extra attack with this weapon if you meet the conditions.

Each time it fights Weapon #2 has a rule about giving an extra attack with this weapon if you meet the conditions.

Why would you not use all of your rules on your Dataslate?

The Hellbrute has two weapons, they both have a rule that can be used.

Therefore if you use both weapons rules you get +1 attack that can only be made with Weapon #1, and +1 attack that can only be made with Weapon #2.

Does this make it clear to you?

 skchsan wrote:
"When a unit fights" is a mechanic that's clearly defined in the rulebook.
True, but irrelevant to what we are discussing.

 p5freak wrote:
nosferatu1001 wrote:

I've ignored nothing


You ignore that a differently written rule from the same author must mean something different, otherwise it wouldnt be written differently.
and RAI you may be correct. The intent may have been to give only +1 attack if the hellbrute had two fists. However RAW, that is not how they wrote that rule.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/26 19:50:46


"Did you notice a sign out in front of my chapel that said "Land Raider Storage"?" -High Chaplain Astorath the Grim Redeemer of the Lost.

I sold my soul to the devil and now the bastard is demanding a refund!

We do not have an attorney-client relationship. I am not your lawyer. The statements I make do not constitute legal advice. Any statements made by me are based upon the limited facts you have presented, and under the premise that you will consult with a local attorney. This is not an attempt to solicit business. This disclaimer is in addition to any disclaimers that this website has made.
 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 p5freak wrote:
nosferatu1001 wrote:

I've ignored nothing


You ignore that a differently written rule from the same author must mean something different, otherwise it wouldnt be written differently.

Yes, and it does mean something diffeeent. It means you only get the extra attacks, plural, by having two fists. Unlike the scourge, which only needs one

Why do you insist on ignoring this? Is it because you yet again know you're wrong, but cannot accept it? You're arguing in bad faith. Third time now, minimum.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/26 19:49:29


 
   
Made in us
Lieutenant General





Florence, KY

 p5freak wrote:
nosferatu1001 wrote:

I've ignored nothing


You ignore that a differently written rule from the same author must mean something different, otherwise it wouldnt be written differently.

And we've shown that the only difference is what the rule says (i.e., that you need to Helbrute fists for a Helbrute fist to give you 1 additional attack).

'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents
cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable
defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'

- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty
Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
 
   
Made in gb
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain





Cardiff

Is this thread about a rule that’s not ambiguous actually still going? Sheeeesh.

 Stormonu wrote:
For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 JohnnyHell wrote:
Is this thread about a rule that’s not ambiguous actually still going? Sheeeesh.

You have one person arguing dishonestly, and another from an honest position that can't explain why helbrutes can on,y get one attack from the same rule that lets double chainswords get two
   
Made in au
Dakka Veteran




 skchsan wrote:
Slipspace wrote:
It is two separate weapons. That's been made clear by various people already. As far as precedent goes, we have chainswords and lightning claws as examples of applying a weapon's bonus for each one you have. I find the idea that a Helbrute equipped with 2 Helbrute Fists only has 1 weapon frankly absurd. Having duplicate weapons does not mean you only have 1 of that weapon in any case I can think of.
Can you point me to the bolded? AFAIK this is not the case, but I may be misinformed. I'm not saying that the helbrute fist counts only as 1 weapon - you simply cannot invoke the same rule twice because there are no precedents for doing so - if we follow this logic then two chainswords should give you 4 extra attacks, not 2 (swing CS#1, claim +1 attack, then claim +1 from inactive CS#2, then swing the CS#2, claim +1 attack, then claim +1 from CS#1 that is inactive). But that's not how it works as far as I understand the rules.

I just wanted to question this as it seems confused.

Say we have a Space Marine with two Chainswords. The special rule is "Each time the bearer fights, it makes 1 additional attack with this weapon"
When they go to attack we check the special rules for each weapon and see if they apply.

For CS#1 we invoke the rule "Each time the bearer fights, it makes 1 additional attack with this weapon", which gives us +1 attack for a CS profile.
For CS#2 we invoke the rule "Each time the bearer fights, it makes 1 additional attack with this weapon", which gives us +1 attack for a CS profile.
This gives us a total of +2 CS attacks.

If we can't invoke each equipped weapons special rule, we would only get +1 CS attack.

The Helbrute fist works the same way.
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




Eh, I think pointing out it works exactly the same way as chainswords, with the same rule with an extra condition , was great insight.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




skchsan wrote:
Slipspace wrote:
It is two separate weapons. That's been made clear by various people already. As far as precedent goes, we have chainswords and lightning claws as examples of applying a weapon's bonus for each one you have. I find the idea that a Helbrute equipped with 2 Helbrute Fists only has 1 weapon frankly absurd. Having duplicate weapons does not mean you only have 1 of that weapon in any case I can think of.
Can you point me to the bolded? AFAIK this is not the case, but I may be misinformed. I'm not saying that the helbrute fist counts only as 1 weapon - you simply cannot invoke the same rule twice because there are no precedents for doing so - if we follow this logic then two chainswords should give you 4 extra attacks, not 2 (swing CS#1, claim +1 attack, then claim +1 from inactive CS#2, then swing the CS#2, claim +1 attack, then claim +1 from CS#1 that is inactive). But that's not how it works as far as I understand the rules.


That is exactly how it works. You talk about precedent for invoking the same rule twice. Why do we need precedent and where is this precedent anyway? AFAIK the only thing close to a restriction like that applies specifically to auras. We're just following the rules here. There's nothing that says you don't get to use all rules that apply from your equipped weapons/upgrades. Why are you adding an extra restriction without justification?

JohnnyHell wrote:Is this thread about a rule that’s not ambiguous actually still going? Sheeeesh.


Apparently so. Though if it's not ambiguous I'm wondering why your initial replies seem to indicate you don't think you get +2A as that's what the rules actually say, as discussed over the last 3 pages? Difficult to say if you still think that since your last few posts haven't actually been adding anything to the discussion.
   
Made in us
Painlord Titan Princeps of Slaanesh




As a side question would this mean that a Relic Space Marine Terminator with a pair of Lightning Claws would get 4 base attacks (Stat of 2 for Attacks +1 for the left claw +1 for the right claw)?

Also, what about units like warp talons? They have 2 lightning claws the troopers only have an A of 1 but the champions has an A of 2. Does this mean they have 2 and 4 attacks respectively?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/29 23:47:52


 
   
Made in us
Confessor Of Sins




Tacoma, WA, USA

Yes. A model armed with 2 Lightning Claws gains two additional Lightning Claw attacks each time it fights.
   
Made in us
Painlord Titan Princeps of Slaanesh




Even if it has an A of 1? How do you use the second claw and get that additional attack?
   
Made in us
Captain of the Forlorn Hope





Chicago, IL

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Even if it has an A of 1? How do you use the second claw and get that additional attack?
Sinple answer is that you don't need use the second claw to get that additional attack, because the abilities of a Lightning Claw say "Each time the bearer fights, it makes 1 additional attack with this weapon."

So each time they fight, even if they have 1 attack and use that attack on a CCW that is not a Lightning Claw, they get 1 additional attack with their weapons called Lightning Claw. If they have two Lightning Claw weapons, they get 1 additional attack with Lightning Claw #1, and 1 additional attack with Lightning Claw #2.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/30 02:39:01


"Did you notice a sign out in front of my chapel that said "Land Raider Storage"?" -High Chaplain Astorath the Grim Redeemer of the Lost.

I sold my soul to the devil and now the bastard is demanding a refund!

We do not have an attorney-client relationship. I am not your lawyer. The statements I make do not constitute legal advice. Any statements made by me are based upon the limited facts you have presented, and under the premise that you will consult with a local attorney. This is not an attempt to solicit business. This disclaimer is in addition to any disclaimers that this website has made.
 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

Why doesn't the Helbrute Fist follow the same logic as Astartes Chainswords?

I mean:
40k 9th Core Rulebook page 230 wrote:If a model has more than one melee weapon, select which it will use before resolving any attacks. If a model has more than one melee weapon and can make several attacks, it can split them between these weapons however you wish - declare which attacks are being made with which weapons before any attacks are resolved.
So I have two Astartes Chainswords, and A2 on my profile.

I split them between both my swords. My swords have the special rule:
Codex Space Marines, page 152 wrote:Each time the bearer fights, it makes one additional attack with this weapon.
So my first attack is with Chainsword #1, and the special rule triggers, so I get +1 Attack with that weapon. My second attack is with Chainsword #2, and the special rule triggers, so I get +1 Attack with that second weapon. 4A in total.

But say I don't split my attacks. Say I put all of my 2 attacks into Astartes Chainsword #1. I am attacking with an Astartes Chainsword, so I get +1A, and that's it. 3A in total.

So why wouldn't this also apply to the Helbrute fist in the Deathguard Codex? Two Helbrute fists are two distinct weapons, and why would the special rule that applies to the weapon trigger for each weapon? Helbrute Fist one attacks, we check, it has two of them, so +1A. Helbrute Fist two attacks, we check, yep, still has two fists, so another +1A, for +2A in total.

Gut feeling says that that's not what GW intended, but what they intended isn't the same as what they wrote.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/07/30 06:40:58


Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in au
Dakka Veteran




 H.B.M.C. wrote:
But say I don't split my attacks. Say I put all of my 2 attacks into Astartes Chainsword #1. I am attacking with an Astartes Chainsword, so I get +1A, and that's it. 3A in total.

Not quite, otherwise things like mounted cavalry attacks wouldn't work. For example, Thunderwolf Cav have Crushing teeth and claws which say "Each time the bearer fights, it makes 3 additional attacks with this weapon and no more than 3 attacks can be made with this weapon". So even if you assign all of your attacks to your Astartes Chainsword, you still get to activate the Crushing teeth and claws special rule and make three attacks with them.

Same thing with two chainswords - just having the wargear allows access to it's special rules. It's worth noting here that most special rules have specific conditions that they need to meet before you can gain their benefit.
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




HBMC - what you're missing is that you don't need to make ANY attacks with the chainsword initially, for it to trigger. It's not "when using this chainsword to attack, make one additional attack", which is what you're saying, but "when fighting" - which is a condition of the model, not the weapon

If you have a power fist and chainsword, and make ALL your attacks with the fist, you get one additional attack with the chainsword.

If your model has a fist and 50 chainswords, it makes 50 chainsword attacks p,us the fist attacks, for example.
   
Made in gb
Ork-Hunting Inquisitorial Xenokiller




 H.B.M.C. wrote:

So why wouldn't this also apply to the Helbrute fist in the Deathguard Codex? Two Helbrute fists are two distinct weapons, and why would the special rule that applies to the weapon trigger for each weapon? Helbrute Fist one attacks, we check, it has two of them, so +1A. Helbrute Fist two attacks, we check, yep, still has two fists, so another +1A, for +2A in total.


Theres a difference between chainswords, that say "this weapon gives you +1 attack with this weapon", and the Helbrute fists that say "having two of these gives you +1A with this weapon".

Each time the bearer fights, if it is equipped with 2 Helbrute fists, it makes 1 additional attack with this weapon.


It's there in plain English, "two fists, 1 additional attack", not "if you attack with a fist, and have two, you get 1 extra attack", its fight over all, not a fist attack itself that gives the +1A.

The key is "fights", rather than "attacks".

Compare it to the Heavy Flamer, Multi-melta or Helbrute hammer, which all say "Each time an attack made with this weapon", so those have per-attack rules, compared to per-fight rules, like the Power Scourge, which says "Each time the bearer fights", or are people playing the Scourge such that each attack is +3 more attacks, and are making 20 attacks, 5 + 3x5, with it?
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer





Bristol (UK)

The point is you have TWO separate fist weapons. Both fists meet the condition to trigger their effect (fighting and having two fists), so each fist gets to trigger that rule and add their own +1 attack.
   
Made in us
Virulent Space Marine dedicated to Nurgle




Fictional wrote:
 H.B.M.C. wrote:

So why wouldn't this also apply to the Helbrute fist in the Deathguard Codex? Two Helbrute fists are two distinct weapons, and why would the special rule that applies to the weapon trigger for each weapon? Helbrute Fist one attacks, we check, it has two of them, so +1A. Helbrute Fist two attacks, we check, yep, still has two fists, so another +1A, for +2A in total.


Theres a difference between chainswords, that say "this weapon gives you +1 attack with this weapon", and the Helbrute fists that say "having two of these gives you +1A with this weapon".

Each time the bearer fights, if it is equipped with 2 Helbrute fists, it makes 1 additional attack with this weapon.


It's there in plain English, "two fists, 1 additional attack", not "if you attack with a fist, and have two, you get 1 extra attack", its fight over all, not a fist attack itself that gives the +1A.

The key is "fights", rather than "attacks".

Compare it to the Heavy Flamer, Multi-melta or Helbrute hammer, which all say "Each time an attack made with this weapon", so those have per-attack rules, compared to per-fight rules, like the Power Scourge, which says "Each time the bearer fights", or are people playing the Scourge such that each attack is +3 more attacks, and are making 20 attacks, 5 + 3x5, with it?


The plain english is “two fists, 1 additional attack” with this weapon. Two Fists is not a weapon, A Fist is a weapon and there are two of them.
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

JakeSiren wrote:
For example, Thunderwolf Cav have Crushing teeth and claws which say "Each time the bearer fights, it makes 3 additional attacks with this weapon and no more than 3 attacks can be made with this weapon". So even if you assign all of your attacks to your Astartes Chainsword, you still get to activate the Crushing teeth and claws special rule and make three attacks with them.
I was not aware of that rule. Thank you for pointing it out. It makes for an interesting comparison and helps clarify things for me.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
HBMC - what you're missing is that you don't need to make ANY attacks with the chainsword initially, for it to trigger. It's not "when using this chainsword to attack, make one additional attack", which is what you're saying, but "when fighting" - which is a condition of the model, not the weapon
You are completely correct! I did not read it that way initially, but yes, the condition for the Astartes Chainsword's +1A is "Each time the bearer fights" and not "Each time the bearer fights with this weapon". So yes, you could have an Astartes Chainsword and a Thunder Hammer, have A50 on your profile, make 50 attacks with the Thunder Hammer and still make a 51st attack with the Astartes Chainsword because you have met the condition of "Each time the bearer fights".

But that actually strengthens the argument for the two extra attacks with the fists because of the inclusion of "... with this weapon.". It specifies "with this weapon" and a Helbrute with two fists has two such weapons. Thus the effect would trigger twice, as the condition is met twice every time the Helbrute fights.

I'm actually now more convinced than ever that this is not what GW intended, but as I said above, what they intended and what they wrote are not the same thing.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/30 13:10:23


Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




Yep, which we've been saying all along

It takes rewriting rules to not allow both fists to give another attack.

Fictional - wrong. You've failed to read or condense the entire rule. With the fist, yiu get another attack. With the other fist, you get another attack
   
Made in us
Deathwing Terminator with Assault Cannon





But you're still effectively counting each fist twice. This is a rules interpretation requiring a certain degree of "the rules doesn't tell me I can't [count each fist twice, once per weapon, for total of two additional attacks]." The primary issue on hand is that the rule in question is tied to the weapon as its ability. In other words, this is a supposed RAW loophole that relies on the poor structure of the rules and not just the actual rules themselves being poorly written.

The RAW is insufficient in explaining what to do in this particular situation. There's no precedent for counting the same wargear multiple times for purpose of multiple rules, even if they are identical rules. In the case of CS's you count the number of CS's the model is equipped with, and apply the rule per CS; in the case of pairs of scything talons, you check whether you have more than 1 pair, and apply the rule when more than 1 pair; in the case of HBF, you check whether it is equipped with two HBF's, and apply the rule if it is equipped with two HBF's. There are actually no more apples to apples comparison (that I can think of) since the rules for LC's been revised.

If you are equipped with two same melee weapon, you don't declare "I swing my right CCW, then my left CCW" - this is not something that's instantiated by the rule since by "Weapon", it points to the "WEAPONS" section on the datasheet that shows the available equipment. Per rules, if you have multiple weapons, you can split them up however you wish, but the rules aren't clear when there are multiples of the same weapon. When you're taking multiple helbrute fists, your datasheet doesn't become:

Helbrute Fist (Base): MELEE/MELEE/x2/-3/3/Each time the bearer fights, if it is equipped with 2 Helbrute fists, it makes 1 additional attack with this weapon.
Helbrute Fist (Replaces MM): MELEE/MELEE/x2/-3/3/Each time the bearer fights, if it is equipped with 2 Helbrute fists, it makes 1 additional attack with this weapon.
Rather, there's still only 1 entry for HBF under "Weapons" no matter how many times you take it, despite the unit description effectively becomes
"A Helbrute is equipped with: multi-melta; Helbrute fist; Helbrute fist." In other words, there is no effective way in the rules to distinguish two same weapons when declaring an attack - it's number of attacks/quantities can be drawn up from summing up the A characteristics, but the rule doesn't give you the room to say "I swing with my right HBF here and my left HBF there." At best, what you can declare would be "I will split up my melee attacks using helbrute fists into these two squads, since this model is equipped with two HBF's."
Helbrute Fist: MELEE/MELEE/x2/-3/3/Each time the bearer fights, if it is equipped with 2 Helbrute fists, it makes 1 additional attack with this weapon.
Hence, I think it's fallacious to assume that "if has two" as to mean "check if there is another fist other than the one I am currently declaring to attack with."

The moment you’ve decided the phrasing the of the rule means “count each fists twice, since simply having two fists doesn’t make the first fist disappear, so it must mean that you count each fist twice”, you’ve detached your interpretation from strict RAW reading.

The wording of the rule falls short of providing ample premises to draw a logical conclusion that would yield “You get 2 additional attacks because you have 2 fists”. This is simply “my/our interpretation of RAW” and not the actual RAW.

This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2021/07/30 17:04:43


 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




Your entire analysis is flawed, for every single reason already posted.

You do indeed have two weapons. You cannot possibly claim otherwise.
Each weapon has a rule you evaluate when the model fights. Again, you cannot reasonably claim otherwise.

Exactly the same as the chainswords, every time you fulfil the requirements you get another attack

The only difference is that you have an additional requirement. Why you're deciding this magically changes everything I have no idea. It can't be explained any more than this.

Condition met? Then process the result

You have two fists. I can point to them on the model. Each has a rule. I can point to this on the data sheet. Why you think you ignore the existence of one weapon is a mystery


This thread was done two pages ago
   
Made in us
Deathwing Terminator with Assault Cannon





nosferatu1001 wrote:
This thread was done two pages ago
That's because you're not listening/reading anything I've posted.

The point stands - your interpretation requires you to count the weapons more than once in order to invoke the fist's abilities twice, once per weapon. Please explain to me (as I am a new comer to this particular discussion that's been taking place for the past few months supposedly) why this works the way it does.

If we follow this logic, then pair of scything talons, whose ability triggers upon instance of "having more than 1 pair of", would yield 2 additional attacks as opposed to 1 since having more than 1 pair of scything talons will have more than 1 pair, always, and it's limited to 2 additional attacks only because say, a carnifex, only has weapon slots for two pairs of scything talons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 DeathReaper wrote:
Please re-read this breakdown and tell me why you think the logic is incorrect:
The bearer of the Hellbrute fists is selected to fight
At this point we see that the Hellbrute is equipped with a Hellbrute Fist (lets call this weapon #1), and a second Hellbrute Fist (lets call this weapon #2).
We make our 5 attacks with any given weapon (does not matter which).
Then we check our special rules

Weapon #1, the Hellbrute Fist, has a rule about extra attacks.
Emphasis mine.

Weapons are taken pre-deployment, during "muster army".

You need to know when your weapon's abilities are triggered/procced.

The weapons' ability requires you to check at "when fighting", not "when attacking".

Hence, it would be illegal to check for existence of HBF #2 when attacking with HBF #1, and vice versa.

This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2021/07/30 17:43:40


 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

 skchsan wrote:
The point stands - your interpretation requires you to count the weapons more than once in order to invoke the fist's abilities twice, once per weapon. Please explain to me (as I am a new comer to this particular discussion that's been taking place for the past few months supposedly) why this works the way it does.
You count each weapon, each weapon has a special rule, and whenever the conditions for the special rule are met, the rule kicks in.

Each fist has a rule that provides +1A if the model has two fists. To meet that condition you have to:

1). Fight in melee.
2). Fight in melee using the fists.
3). Be equipped with two fists.

Each fist is a separate weapon. Therefore if you meet the conditions of one fist, you meet the conditions of both automatically. Therefore you gain +1A for each weapon.

Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K You Make Da Call
Go to: