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.

S10 Nemesis Greatsword?

I know there was another thread on this, but it was over a month old and they didn’t seem to come to an agreement, so I think the rules say to start a new one. Here’s what we know…

GK94 tells us the Dreadknight comes standard with 2 Nemesis Doomfists, which are Nemesis Force Weapons (GK54) specifically, and Unusual Force Weapons (GK FAQ 1.0, pg 3) generally. They follow the rules for Dreadnought close combat weapons (GK54) which are found in CR “Core Rulebook” 178) “Sx2, AP2, Type: Melee.

The Dreadknight is S6, so his attacks with the Nemesis Doomfists are doubled, but maxed out at S10 (CR8). Having two of them provides an extra attack (CR41), so his base 3 + 1 gives the Dreadnought 4x S10, AP2 attacks, 5 on the charge.

I don’t think anyone is arguing against that much. The Nemesis Greatsword is where things get hairy.
The Nemesis Greatsword is a Nemesis Force Weapon (GK54)/Unusual Force Weapon (GK FAQ 1.0, pg 3) meaning that there is no grounds to debate against a model with a Nemesis Greatsword having 4 attacks.

The Dreadknight is a Monstrous Creature (GK94) which gives it the Hammer of Wrath & Smash special rule (CR67), which states (CR171) “All Close Combat attacks, except Hammer of Wrath attacks, of a model with this special rule are resolved at AP2 (Unless attacking with an AP1 weapon).” So the Dreadknight is always AP2 in close combat, except for Hammer of Wrath which is AP-.

Hammer of Wrath (CR165) “makes one additional Attack that hits automatically and is resolved at the model’s unmodified Strength and AP-. This attack does not benefit from any of the model’s special rules…This attack is resolved during the fight sub-phase at the Initiative 10 step.” So it’s pretty straight forward, Hammer of Wrath is resolved at I10, S6, AP-.

Thus far the Dreadknight always has 4 attacks at AP 2, and its Hammer of Wrath attacks are resolved at Strength 6 AP-.

Regarding the use of two weapons (for which the Nemesis Greatsword, and Nemesis Doomfist have been proven to be), on page 41 of the Core Rulebook it states, “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. However, it’s worth remembering that if a model has two or more Melee weapons he gains +1 attack in close combat”. This reaffirms that the Dreadknight always has the +1 attack for having two melee weapons.

It’s the line “he cannot mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons” that causes the debate, along with the wording on the Nemesis Greatsword (GK54) states “A model with a Nemesis Greatsword re-rolls failed To Hit, To Wound and armour penetration rolls in close combat.” It all boils down to one word… “with”.

One interpretation is that simply by having the sword, the special rules are conferred to the model. This is because the literal definition of “with” means “accompanied by” or “possessing”. The profile gives the special rule to the model places no restrictions against using the Nemesis Doomfist in close combat. As for the rule “cannot mix and match the abilities of several different melee weapons”, the rerolls become a special rule possessed by the Dreadknight, and not residing on the sword, so it is not a factor.

The Second interpretation is the assumption that the rules-as-intended are that the Nemesis Greatsword must be chosen in order to gain the re-rolls, thus sacrificing the Strength 10, to be able to re-roll to-hit, to-wound, and armor penetration.
So each attack would be 4, S10, AP2… or…4, S6, AP2, with re-rolling to hit, to wound and armor penetration.

My thoughts are that the rules as written correspond to the first interpretation that the rerolls apply to all 4 of the Dreadknights S10, AP2 attacks.

What about Rules as intended? Remember that Grey Knights is a 5th Edition codex. The “FAQs have three primary sections, Errata, Amendments, and the actual FAQ. Errata and Amendments change rules or tweak wordings to make the codex work for the current rules. The (actual) FAQ section exists to clarify existing rules, not make new ones. So it is a good starting point for determining the Rules as Intended. I still have my printed 6th edition “Official Update for 6th Edition, Verson 1.5” and on the 6th page, the question was posed:

“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.”

Old FAQs aren’t binding regarding rules, but they are valuable if one is attempting to determine Rules as intended as being something other than Rules as Written. In this case, the Rules as Intended agree with the first interpretation of the Rules as Written.

Agree or Disagree? If I was wrong on any point please present an example with reference.

Well...
I always thought that the second interpretation is the best one... this gives the sword and hammer a different role... but if it was once FAQed... the first interpretation is what we should follow.

I've been playing it like the previous FAQ.

Frankly I think the old FAQ addressed it unless the rules that affect it have changed in the new BRB. To my knowledge they have not, thus there's no reason to believe that the FAQ answer that was there is invalid.

no rules changed regarding this... no FAQ is needed, despite this, there was already an FAQ about the same, unchanged, rules, so the ruling still holds.

it was not an errata, changed no rules, and no rules regarding this have changed, so the FAQ answer still holds.

regardless of using the NGsword or not, you gain the rerolls from it.

It's not really "No rules changed, so it still stands even though it's not there". In a sense it is, but the reason behind it is the fact it was a question in the old FAQ: they added clarification to how it works, it was never an errata or fix on the wording.

 Ond Angel wrote:
It's not really "No rules changed, so it still stands even though it's not there". In a sense it is, but the reason behind it is the fact it was a question in the old FAQ: they added clarification to how it works, it was never an errata or fix on the wording.

Well, knowing GW they could've read over the 'S10' part and just focus on the rest of the wording

But I agree, the way its worded means it will always have those bonuses, even if it attacks with the Doomfist.

The greatsword is a separate CCW and should be treated as such.

Page 54 - Nemesis Force Weapons
Replace the Force Weapons special rule with the following:
'Force Weapons: All Nemesis Force Weapons have the Force special rule. Unless otherwise stated, all Nemesis weapons are Unusual Force Weapons, as detailed in Warhammer 40,000: The Rules.'

Then we take a look at this entry it talks about and we find.

The Rules Pg. 178

Unusual Force Weapons
Many models have unusual force weapons that have one or more unique rules. If a force weapon has its own unique close combat rules, treat it as an AP3 Melee weapon with the additional rules and characteristics presented in its entry.

That means our greatsword is AP3 (to note it's actually AP2 because it's on a MC), has the Force special rule and all the special rules presented to it in C:GK.

So how do multiple CCWs work?

The Rules Pg. 41

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.

So you do get the extra attack, but you cannot get 4 S10 attacks with all the rerolls. It's either 4 S10 attacks or 4 S6 attacks with rerolls. You can Hammerhand with the sword making it S8.

which would matter if you needed to use the sword for that ability.


good thing the swords ability isnt dependent on actually using the sword by RAW

So I just read through all the USR for weapons and I'm going to have to actually change my opinion on this. RAW, the NGS doesn't need to be used so yeah, 4 S10 attacks with rerolls. That's significantly better.

Side note: NDK having Hammerhand is a complete waste. Can i get Sanctuary please instead?

It doesn't matter about two close combat weapons.
The nemesis great sword says if a model is "armed" with a nemesis great sword it gets all the re-rolls. It doesn't say anything about attacking with it. That's why the model just attacks with the nemesis doom fist and still gets the re-rolls.

 Sothas wrote:
So I just read through all the USR for weapons and I'm going to have to actually change my opinion on this. RAW, the NGS doesn't need to be used so yeah, 4 S10 attacks with rerolls. That's significantly better.

Side note: NDK having Hammerhand is a complete waste. Can i get Sanctuary please instead?

Sanct would be nice, but a 4++ on the dk might be too good, but it does have less wounds than all the other MCs, so maybe not

I know what the FAQ ruling said..I personally think it's bunk. It's like claiming +x2 str just for having a powerfist in your wargear list for the model....
cuz...you know...it doesn't actually SAY "you must use this weapon in order to gain it's benefits."

let's be adults here....

bastion01 wrote:
I know what the FAQ ruling said..I personally think it's bunk. It's like claiming +x2 str just for having a powerfist in your wargear list for the model....
cuz...you know...it doesn't actually SAY "you must use this weapon in order to gain it's benefits."

let's be adults here....

Not a comparable situation. A powerfist doesn't give you x2 STR - the STR of the weapon is x2 User (according to the profile).
The Greatsword just gives a special rule.

bastion01 wrote:
I know what the FAQ ruling said..I personally think it's bunk. It's like claiming +x2 str just for having a powerfist in your wargear list for the model....
cuz...you know...it doesn't actually SAY "you must use this weapon in order to gain it's benefits."

let's be adults here....

Um, but you do have to use the Doomfist to get it's x2 str ability. It's not passive. The Greatsword's wording makes it different.

bastion01 wrote:
I know what the FAQ ruling said..I personally think it's bunk. It's like claiming +x2 str just for having a powerfist in your wargear list for the model....
cuz...you know...it doesn't actually SAY "you must use this weapon in order to gain it's benefits."

let's be adults here....

Actually the melee rules do say that , as they alter the strength of the user when used. This is actually clear, for once

yes, ok, fine - the powerfist was a bad example.
my point was that it's clearly intended to be the same way with the greatsword...just another poorly written snippet from a codex...
hence the invocation of adult reasoning....

Weapon A has profile/specialness X
Weapon B has profile/specialness Y

allowing the Greatsword (or anything else for that matter) to simply be worn/bought and have it magically grant it's specialness to something else is just silly - RAW be damned

bastion01 wrote:
yes, ok, fine - the powerfist was a bad example.
my point was that it's clearly intended to be the same way with the greatsword...just another poorly written snippet from a codex...
hence the invocation of adult reasoning....

Weapon A has profile/specialness X
Weapon B has profile/specialness Y

allowing the Greatsword (or anything else for that matter) to simply be worn/bought and have it magically grant it's specialness to something else is just silly - RAW be damned

Perhaps it was bad wording... and that's why last edition they made an FAQ to clarify. The FAQ said that you get 4 Str 10 attacks with rerolls.

Now we don't have an FAQ but the rules regarding multiple close combat weapons have not changed. So it's logical to assume the old ruling stands, especially since RAW agrees given the poor wording of the sword.

In fact, if you want to try an argue RAI... the old FAQ shows what they intended. And given that it is a 25 pt upgrade I'd say it was meant to give the model rerolls while using the x2 Str of the Doomfist.

bastion01 wrote:
my point was that it's clearly intended to be the same way with the greatsword...just another poorly written snippet from a codex...

Except the previous FAQ proves that the greatsword was not intended to be the same way, and even without that FAQ it still reads the same way.

Note that the rule says "A model with a Nemesis Greatsword" and that the rule does not say "The Nemesis Greatsword re-rolls failed To Hit, etc". This, along with the FAQ saying re-rolls are allowed is enough to say it has 4 S10 attacks wtih re-rolls.

Page 41 of the BRB, see the word "abilities"

In that you cannot mix and match attacks or ABILITIES granted by multiple weapons

bastion01 wrote:
yes, ok, fine - the powerfist was a bad example.
my point was that it's clearly intended to be the same way with the greatsword...just another poorly written snippet from a codex...
hence the invocation of adult reasoning....

Weapon A has profile/specialness X
Weapon B has profile/specialness Y

allowing the Greatsword (or anything else for that matter) to simply be worn/bought and have it magically grant it's specialness to something else is just silly - RAW be damned

"RAW be damned"? I never liked rules lawyering to make text mean something it doesn't say. The fact is that the special rules granted to the model by the Greatsword are possessed by the Dreadknight, and do not reside in the weapon's profile. Bad writing or not, the most recent FAQ to address the issue confirmed that Games Workshop was letting it stand, RAW.

5th Edition was a different animal, and back then the Dreadknight was one of the biggest badasses on the field, so it would make sense for them to FAQ it down. But in 6th and 7th, so many bigger and scarier Monstrous Creatures and Lords of War being introduced turned the Dreadknight into the little kid on the block, so it makes sense that the most recent FAQ to address it ruled in favor of RAW, and letting him use the special rule with the Nemesis Doomfist.

So in this instance the "adult reasoning" is that when GW goes out of their way to clarify that this RAW is the same as RAI, they probably mean what they are saying. And the omission from the current FAQ only implies that they no longer thought the clarification needed to be put in writing, not that they reversed their position.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

taurising wrote:
Page 41 of the BRB, see the word "abilities"

In that you cannot mix and match attacks or ABILITIES granted by multiple weapons

The quotation on page 41 is "cannot mix and match the abilities of several different Melle weapons."

There is a big difference between "of" and "granted by". "Of" just means the abilities in its profile (Shred, rending, etc), whereas "granted by" would prevent the Greatsword's special rules. But the word is "of", not "granted by".

I am no WH40K pro, but I wanted to throw my 2 cents in because I see the situation different then the majority here.. I think the core rule book directly answers this situation with the rule quoted above...

"Regarding the use of two weapons (for which the Nemesis Greatsword, and Nemesis Doomfist have been proven to be), on page 41 of the Core Rulebook it states, “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."

No where does this rule suggest that you can use some of the rules from a different melee weapon. It doesn't differentiate between rules that are active when wielding or rules that are passive and always on. The rule seems very definitive to me. "CANNOT mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons." Passive or actively wielding doesn't matter. The rules forbid it.

Rakur wrote:
I am no WH40K pro, but I wanted to throw my 2 cents in because I see the situation different then the majority here.. I think the core rule book directly answers this situation with the rule quoted above...

"Regarding the use of two weapons (for which the Nemesis Greatsword, and Nemesis Doomfist have been proven to be), on page 41 of the Core Rulebook it states, “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."

No where does this rule suggest that you can use some of the rules from a different melee weapon. It doesn't differentiate between rules that are active when wielding or rules that are passive and always on. The rule seems very definitive to me. "CANNOT mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons." Passive or actively wielding doesn't matter. The rules forbid it.

Since it mentions attacking with, it's talking about the abilities in the weapon's profile. Assuming it means more than that has no basis in the rules.
You can't mix the Concussive in a Power Mace with the 2xSTR of a Power Fist, but Digital Weapons will help either of those weapons when they're used.

Rakur wrote:
I am no WH40K pro, but I wanted to throw my 2 cents in because I see the situation different then the majority here.. I think the core rule book directly answers this situation with the rule quoted above...

"Regarding the use of two weapons (for which the Nemesis Greatsword, and Nemesis Doomfist have been proven to be), on page 41 of the Core Rulebook it states, “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."

No where does this rule suggest that you can use some of the rules from a different melee weapon. It doesn't differentiate between rules that are active when wielding or rules that are passive and always on. The rule seems very definitive to me. "CANNOT mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons." Passive or actively wielding doesn't matter. The rules forbid it.

Amendments and Errata are designated for rule changes to bring a codex into compliance with the new core rulebook. The FAQ section is to clarify poor wordings with unambiguous terminology. The FAQ on the Dreadknight was omitted from the 7th edition FAQ (along with most of the clarifications in all of the codexes), which is the only reason this debate exists. The rule in the core rulebook is word-for-word exactly the same as it was in 6th. So is the wording in the Grey Knights Codex. So, being as no rules on the topic changed, the most recent clarification of the rules from GW should still stand, until they say otherwise.

You guys all bring up great points, but referencing a replaced FAQ is going into the domain of RAI instead of RAW. By definition, those rules no longer exist, so are no longer written anywhere. Here is my thought process. Could you guys point out where I go off track?

1) The doomfist is a weapon, which has an ability to double your strength when used.

2) The nemsis greatsword is a weapon, which has an ability that states while you are in possession of this sword, you get lots of rerolls.

3) You attack with your doomfist and double your strength and get lots of rerolls from your sword. You are now using abilities originating from two different melee weapons.

4) You break the core rule which states that you can not mix and match abilities from different melee weapons.

5) The FAQ that previously existed that allowed this is gone. Intentionally or not, GW removed it.

Number 4 is false.

“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. However, it’s worth remembering that if a model has two or more Melee weapons he gains +1 attack in close combat”

In the context of the rule 'he cannot mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons' is referring to rules granted by the weapon when attacking with it since the whole sentence is talking about striking blows with a melee weapon. The ability granted by the Greatsword does not require you to attack with it.

Zimko wrote:
Number 4 is false.

“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. However, it’s worth remembering that if a model has two or more Melee weapons he gains +1 attack in close combat”

In the context of the rule 'he cannot mix and match the abilities of several different Melee weapons' is referring to rules granted by the weapon when attacking with it since the whole sentence is talking about striking blows with a melee weapon. The ability granted by the Greatsword does not require you to attack with it.

But to make that true, you are adding words to the rule that doesn't exist. The use of a dash can signify an independant clause. Which means, a statement that can stand on its own. It does not need to be directly related to the clause before the dash.

To make your case true, you are applying extra meaning to the words in the core book. To make my case true, you are taking the literal meaning of the words and not adding any assumptions.

The debate is around words like "with" and "of".

The question is that is its profile

Type: Melee, Force, Daemonbane, Rerolls to-hit to-wound & armour penetration

or is it

Type: Melee, Force, Daemonbane.*
*A model in posession of this weapon may reroll all to-hit to-wound and armour penetration rolls, regardless of which melee weapon is used.

Both could be argued as rules as written, but the second concurs with the previously mentioned rules as intended as well, as the FAQ was NOT a rule change, but an explanation of the existing rules which did not change from 6th to 7th, even though the clarification vanished.

The old FAQ ruling was bizarre even then and now that is gone I'd expect the nemesis sword to work just like every other weapon in this game: no mixing and matching effects.