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.

Envenomed Blade Marbo carries a large Catachan knife coated with deadly toxins. Guardsmen Marbo's close combat attacks are Poisoned (2+)

Page 61, Codex Imperial Guard

Poisoned Weapons Poisoned weapons range from blades coated in venom to hypodermic claws. They do not rely on a comparison of strength and toughness to wound - They always wound on a fixed number, generally shown in the brackets. Some venoms are so lethal that the merest drop can kill - these may wound on a 3+ or even a 2+ (as described in the appropriate codex) In addition, if the strength of the wielder is the same or higher than the Toughness of the victim, the wielder must re-roll failed rolls to wound in close combat. These weapons confer no advantage against vehicles.

Page 42, Rule Book.

Fighting with two single-handed weapons Some models are equipedj with two single-handed weapons they can use in close combat, with the riles given below for the different possible combinations. Of course, if a model is using a two-handed close combat weapon (such as a rifle's butt or a two-handed battle axe), it may not use it together with another weapon.

Page 42, Rule Book.

A Normal and a Special Weapon These models gain one additional attack. All of their attacks, including the bonus attack, benefit from the special weapon's bonuses.
Power fists, Thunder hammers, and lighting claws are an exception to this. Only a second power fist, thunder hammer or lighting claw can confer a bonus attack to a model equipped with one of these weapons.

Page 42, Rule Book.


Guardsmen Marbo is armed with a Ripper Pistol and an Envenomed Blade. According to the rules a knife is a Close Combat weapon, and a Pistol is one as well... One close-combat weapon and one pistol equals two close combat weapons when in close combat.

Envenomed blade takes a large Catachan Knife (A Close Combat Weapon) and turns it into a speacial weapon, giving it a 2+ ability to wound. Now whether it is a Poisoned Weapon or not, that is shaky, and I would not classify it as a Poison weapon. But it is a special weapon, and so it falls under the Special Weapon's rules of giving the +1 attack if there is a second weapon.

If a butt of a rifle is called a close Combat weapon (though two-handed) and a Bayonet is a Close-Combat weapon, then surly a Large Catachan Knife is one.

The rules state that it is a knife. And the rule book states that a knife is a Close Combat Weapon. What do you know, He has a close Combat weapon, as defined in the rule book... Now look, his knife does something special... it is now a special close combat weapon and now follows the rules as a special close combat weapon.

The real Argument here should be whether this is a Poisoned weapon or a special weapon. The pure thought of not calling a knife a weapon is stupid and dumbfounding.

Gwar! wrote:

willydstyle wrote:I don't know why so many people have to make things up to pretend that the rules coincide with how they play the game. GW writes bad rules. If we all played 100% by the rules, we would hardly be able to play the game at all.

Exactly. However 95% of the game is perfectly playable, even if it doesn't "make sense" or "isn't supposed to work that way".

any one up for finding a single weapon, in the last 4 codices, that listed as being single handed ....

Exactly my point, Tri.

GW says single handed weapons give a bonus.

Then does not say that any weapons are single handed.

In a (supposedly) permissive ruleset, no weapons give the plus one attack bonus, yet since the rule is in the rulebook, that's obviously not what's intended.

@Sanchez: the problem with your line of reasoning is that "envenomed blade" is written as a special rule, and not explicitly as a weapon. In a permissive ruleset, it must say "this is a weapon" for it to work as one. However, as has been pointed out in this thread, most players will infer that it is indeed a weapon, and play it as such.

It says it is a large knife... what don't they understand about that. And it is under wargear, not special rules

And wargear is not always a weapon.

Is an Iron Halo a weapon?

Is a Storm Shield a weapon?

The description implies that it is a weapon, but as I said earlier, permissive ruleset and everything....

Sanchez01 wrote:It says it is a large knife... what don't they understand about that. And it is under wargear, not special rules

So? Wargear != Weapon.

Also, for all your rules quoting, you still have not shown me where it says "Envenomed Blade: This is a Poisoned Close Combat Weapon"

Read what I said Gwar.

It is under wargear, not special rules.

It is a knife there for it is a weapon.

the debate should be about if it is a poisoned weapon or a special weapon...

Sanchez01 wrote:Read what I said Gwar.

It is under wargear, not special rules.

It is a knife there for it is a weapon.

the debate should be about if it is a poisoned weapon or a special weapon...

Bonding Knife ... So long as the bearer is alive, the bonded team may regroup even if bellow half strength

So knives does not always equal weapon

Sanchez01 wrote:Read what I said Gwar.

It is under wargear, not special rules.

It is a knife there for it is a weapon.

the debate should be about if it is a poisoned weapon or a special weapon...

Bonding Knives are Under Wargear. Are they also a weapon now?

Tri wrote:

Sanchez01 wrote:Read what I said Gwar.

It is under wargear, not special rules.

It is a knife there for it is a weapon.

the debate should be about if it is a poisoned weapon or a special weapon...

Bonding Knife ... So long as the bearer is alive, the bonded team may regroup even if bellow half strength

So knives does not always equal weapon

All I can say is:
MIVEHIND

Gah Double post

I'm starting to get complaints about this thread.

"Knife" in this case is a description, not a rule.

In real life, a shield can smash the crap out of someone; it's not hard to kill someone by bludgeoning them.

In the game, a storm shield does not act as a weapon.

In real life, a knife can stab the crap out of someone; it's not hard to kill someone by shanking them.

In the game, a knife is only a weapon if the rules explicitly state it is one.

That being said, almost everyone in this thread has said at one point or another that they are willing to play that knife=weapon, but that the rules, both in the codex and in the rulebook, are sloppy.

Nobody is criticizing the idea of people playing marbo as having an extra attack, if they agree with their opponent.

People are criticizing sloppy rules.

Sanchez01 wrote:Read what I said Gwar.

It is under wargear, not special rules.

It is a knife there for it is a weapon.

the debate should be about if it is a poisoned weapon or a special weapon...

In the last run of codices, since about Eldar (and really further back than that since Tau and Nids dont' really use the CCW rules), the dividing of weapons into "two handed" and "single handed" weapons has been replaced by a system by which all former single handed weapons are simply given the CCW rule. If you run down the codices, every pistol, power weapon, combat blade, etc. in the game now has the term "close combat weapon" somewhere in it's rules.

The problem with the rulebook definition of CCWs is that there isn't one. Read the rule again. It never says what "normal close combat weapons" are. It merely lists a group of weapons that give no save.

Now, note that the rules state that only single handed weapons can give a bonus attack, but there really is not rules anywhere saying that bolters, flamers, and lascannons aren't single handed weapons.

In addition, all units going back at least 3 years have either a pistol or a CCW listed, ending the need to worry, but it doesn't really answer the questions of "what is a weapon? Is it single handed?"

Yes, marbo is described as carrying a knife. That, alas, doesn't make what he carries immediatly a CCW by RAW, particularly since the rule doesn't even state that he is "Armed" with a knife, rather he simply "carries" it.

So, either RAW states that Marbo doesn't have a weapon aside from his pistol, or every Space Marine, guardsman, Blood angel, dark angle, etc all gain a bonus attack for having two weapons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

willydstyle wrote:"Knife" in this case is a description, not a rule.
-snip-

Nobody is criticizing the idea of people playing marbo as having an extra attack, if they agree with their opponent.

People are criticizing sloppy rules.

I admit I used to fall into this trap, but don't confuse poorly written and nonsensical rules with a moral imperative to show that they make sense. Sometimes the rules really are written that badly. That's when we all ignore the RAW and play the way they're meant to play.

Of course, I'd argue that if nearly everybody reads a passage and comes to the same conclusions, that while it says X it clearly meant Y, nobody is really breaking rules or ignoring RAW. They instead understand that written rules can contain content that's not restricted to an exacting rubric.

Is this something along the lines of Snikrot getting no attacks because he has no weapons, because his weapons are named ( morks teeth, ripping blades) like marbos knife and arent listed as CCW or anything else. Truthfully, I doubt anyone would cry foul and try to argue his knife isnt a CCW, aside form on dakka of course, just because it isnt listed as so.Much like Ive only ever seen the snikrot argument on dakka, everyone playes him with 5 attacks on the charge(snikrot). The best thing to do if you play him is to make a ruling at your store/home. If you use him in a tourney ask the judge before hand how to play him. Of course getting everyone elses opinion is cool too but ultimatley its up to you, no one here is official in any capacity despite what the voices in their heads say.

How would anyone say the envenomed blade isnt a poisoned weapon when it clearly says "poisoned 2+". Now the logical Dakka argument would be its a poisoned blade (because it says it is) but it dosent say its a CCW because knives are CCW and not blades. Does this sound utterly ridiculous to anyone other than me? And yes the debate really is wether or not a poisoned weapon is a special weapon or not, being as it has its own category, however RAW would put it inot both because it isnt a standard CCW therfore it is special.

da gob smaka wrote:Is this something along the lines of Snikrot geeting no attacks because he has no weapons, because his weapons are named ( morks gteeth, ripping blades) like marbos knife and arent listed as CCW or anything else. Truthfully, I doubt anyone would cry foul and try to argue his knife isnt a CCW, aside form on dakka of course, just because it isnt listed as so.Much like Ive only ever seen the snikrot argument on dakka, everywhere playes him with 5 attacks on the charge. The best thing to do if you play him is to make a ruling at your store/home. If you use him in a tourney ask the judge before hand how to play him. Of course getting everyone elses opinion is cool too but ultimatley its up to you, no one here is official in any capacity despite what the voices in their heads say.

How would anyone say the envenomed blade isnt a poisoned weapon when it clearly says "poisoned 2+". Now the logical Dakka argument would be its a poisoned blade (because it says it is) but it dosent say its a CCW because knives are CCW and not blades. Does this sound utterly ridiculous to anyone other than me?

Does the fact that you only see people noticing sloppy rules on Dakka not say something to the level of intelect of said Dakkaites?

No its the fact that most people are intlligent and dont try to "lawyer" every little paragraph read. Honestly, these things come up now and then but out of the hundreds of players Ive had the joy of playing with all across the country they all normally come to the same conclusion. A few make funny arguments like "the rule says you must ASK your opponent" so you must ask me and I can say no, which get laughs then they move on and play it like it was intended. Most players (99.99%) that play the game count poisoned weapons as special for CC purposes. As far as the level of intellect on dakka, I think the fact that people can read something and just post a simple querry and get a thought by another person who has had far too much time to disect every aspect of the wording is what leads to comments and thinking that go way too far for raltional thinking. But please by all means play everything RAW, I hope you have fun. But as stated before numerous times you wont have too many people willing to play with you. I cant tell you the number of stores Ive been in where people find arguments on threads like this one great entertainment.

Can I ask where you got that 99.99% Statistic from? I would be very interested to see your data. Is there any chance it could be verified by a 3rd party?

And BTW, I have plenty of people to play with. In fact ever since someone else took over the LFGS, I have been invited in to run the club and teach the newbies to play. So far i have not had one complaint, not from the 3 week young player, to the guy who has been Tabletop gaming longer than I have been alive.

GW rules 70% printed then add common sense. For example I could deploy my army by tipping them onto the board, I have for filled every thing asked of me. I may refuse to reroll my reroll on the damage chart for your Venerable dreadnought. So on...

...but i won't because I'm able to fill in the unwritten rules like every one else. When I play with the toy soldiers I want every one to have fun, Win, Lose or Draw.

da gob smaka wrote:No its the fact that most people are intlligent and dont try to "lawyer" every little paragraph read. Honestly, these things come up now and then but out of the hundreds of players Ive had the joy of playing with all across the country they all normally come to the same conclusion. A few make funny arguments like "the rule says you must ASK your opponent" so you must ask me and I can say no, which get laughs then they move on and play it like it was intended. Most players (99.99%) that play the game count poisoned weapons as special for CC purposes. As far as the level of intellect on dakka, I think the fact that people can read something and just post a simple querry and get a thought by another person who has had far too much time to disect every aspect of the wording is what leads to comments and thinking that go way too far for raltional thinking. But please by all means play everything RAW, I hope you have fun. But as stated before numerous times you wont have too many people willing to play with you. I cant tell you the number of stores Ive been in where people find arguments on threads like this one great entertainment.

1) Is there anything more mildly amusing than declarations of intelligence with misspelled words? I know it happens, but it's always good for a chuckle.

2) I don't get why you're so upset. Every single person in this thread has agreed with you on how to play this. Nobody disagrees with you. You are reacting to people that simply do not exist.

3) Yes, I have too much time on my hands. I graduated law school in may, I took the bar in late july, I wont' find out the results until the end of Oct, and this is the worst legal employment market in history. I'm unemployed and stressing about student loans, credit card debt, and paying rent. So yeah, I dissect a little RAW to keep my mind busy.

4) I can tell you that there are a number of stores that find the little comics of Calvin peeing on the logo of a car manufacturer funny; that doesn't horribly impress me.

Tri wrote:GW rules 70% printed then add common sense. For example I could deploy my army by tipping the onto the board, I have for filled every thing asked of me. I may refuse to reroll my roll on the damage chart for your Venerable dreadnought. So on...

...but i won't because I'm able to fill in the unwritten rules like every one else. When I play with the toy soldiers I want every one to have fun, Win, Lose or Draw.

Which is exactly what I want as well. The problem is the need to fill in these unwritten rules causes the game to be unfun most of the time.
Believe me when I say that when given the option of "Advantageous to me but takes twisitng of the rules" and "Disadvantageous but is common Sense", 100% of people will pick the former. It is human nature.

Gwar! wrote:

Tri wrote:GW rules 70% printed then add common sense. For example I could deploy my army by tipping the onto the board, I have for filled every thing asked of me. I may refuse to reroll my roll on the damage chart for your Venerable dreadnought. So on...

...but i won't because I'm able to fill in the unwritten rules like every one else. When I play with the toy soldiers I want every one to have fun, Win, Lose or Draw.

Which is exactly what I want as well. The problem is the need to fill in these unwritten rules causes the game to be unfun most of the time.
Believe me when I say that when given the option of "Advantageous to me but takes twisitng of the rules" and "Disadvantageous but is common Sense", 100% of people will pick the former. It is human nature.

Which is why i make dam sure that i'm not doing something wrong before taking the root of power. Back when i first realised that Stealth boosted every ones cover save, i spent a long while making sure I hadn't missed something. You only need to to look at the thread when I first mentioned it here in these forums. So many people just saying it doesn't work like that or its not conferred to the unit (which its not ... but the effect does)... Any way thats enough of that before we get too off topic.

More complaints...

I'm starting to believe that any thread that goes 4+ pages in this place is a lost cause...

Gwar! wrote:

Tri wrote:GW rules 70% printed then add common sense. For example I could deploy my army by tipping the onto the board, I have for filled every thing asked of me. I may refuse to reroll my roll on the damage chart for your Venerable dreadnought. So on...

...but i won't because I'm able to fill in the unwritten rules like every one else. When I play with the toy soldiers I want every one to have fun, Win, Lose or Draw.

Which is exactly what I want as well. The problem is the need to fill in these unwritten rules causes the game to be unfun most of the time.
Believe me when I say that when given the option of "Advantageous to me but takes twisitng of the rules" and "Disadvantageous but is common Sense", 100% of people will pick the former. It is human nature.

While I'll agree with you that most people do seem to be that way, you really think human beings are utterly incapable of using common sense and logic when it disadvantages them? Each and every person out there? If you really think that, I'm sorry, I really don't know what to say to that, but I'm sorry Gwar! I thought I had a low opinion of humanity.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Alpharius wrote:More complaints...

I'm starting to believe that any thread that goes 4+ pages in this place is a lost cause...

As an overall rule you're likely right.

Mods I have a request can we PLEASE not see the Japanese catdude again...its disturbing.

THAT is more disturbing/morally reprehensible than anything said in this tread so far.

it's pretty clearly a catgirl

Its a dude...

Its a dude dressed as a catgirl...

Look again...

Red_Lives wrote:Its a dude...

Its a dude dressed as a catgirl...

Look again...

Is that an Adam's Apple?

Red_Lives wrote:Its a dude...

Its a dude dressed as a catgirl...

Look again...

LOL..somone needs glasses...that is definately a girl.

Alerian wrote:

Red_Lives wrote:Its a dude...

Its a dude dressed as a catgirl...

Look again...

LOL..somone needs glasses...that is definately a girl.

Look again... name 1 reason why its a girl not counting make-up, clothes, or hair. (as these are things that can look feminine on a man)

Now that said, look at the chin cheeks shoulders and chest (or lack there of)

LOL....nevermind.

If you can't see it's a girl by her features (not makeup), then whatever....