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.

Kommissar Kel wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Yes, 40k is a permissive ruleset.
I have permission to use Rending on all close combat attacks.
HoW is a close combat attack.
Find the rule that denies my permission to use Rending.

So along that train of thought a Monstrous Creature has AP2 on his HoW attack and not AP- ?

No. Smash gives me AP2. HoW specifies AP -. If HoW specified that no special rules applied, I'd be down. It doesn't.

No.

Smash Specifies that it does not function during HOW attacks.

Smash's AP vs HOW's AP is the single worst comparison of APs one could use to argue against other Special Rules coming into use alongside HOW.

Fair enough - I was right even if I was wrong about why I was right :-)
(sorry, working partially from memory for tonight)

S'alright; Nos got the same answer wrong(Instructed DR to look at the HOW rules, which say nothing about Smash), only reason why I picked on your post was that it was the more recent of the two and was also the correct Idea.

I got picked on.

rigeld2 wrote: I got picked on.

Ah, but picked on... For Great Justice!

... For the greater good?


... TAU LOVER!!!

Nurgle nurgle?

Topic?


No thank-you, I'm trying to quit.

Kommissar Kel wrote:Topic?

Indeed.

No, annoyingly I said to look at Smash first, then second guessed myself and thought it was under HoW.....

nosferatu1001 wrote:No, annoyingly I said to look at Smash first, then second guessed myself and thought it was under HoW.....

I missed it in the HoW rules. TY for the Smash rules, I did not even think to look there.

This discussion is interesting, what I gleaned from it is if a d-lord and his 6 wraith buddies change in and they all make base contact. They will get 7 HOW strikes at I10 AP- base S
meaning
1 S5 from the lord
and 6 S6 from the wraiths with rending potential.

Pile PE on from the lord and they will reroll failed to wound rolls of a 1.

HOW is good on that squad.

Correct.

Maybe I missed it but how are you rolling for HoW attacks when the hit automatically in order to rend? Wouldn't you need permission to roll for attacks that automatically hit even though they already hit? I have never read that you can roll something even if the hit is successful just misses.

Also when you roll 2d6 or rending (against a vehicle)it does modifiy the str and AP of the attack in order to pen the vehicle. Personally I could see the ID working on boneswords but not rending attacks because they require a roll, where as bone swords affect the wound and isn't worried about ap value. As long as you are only using unmodified str, and AP to satisfied the HoW rule then its fine.


Someone explain the reasoning for allowing rending,or armorbane etc for these attacks. I understand flesh bane or poison because how it wounds doesn't invalidate the str,nor ap value.

chewielight wrote:Maybe I missed it but how are you rolling for HoW attacks when the hit automatically in order to rend?.

Rending occurs on the To Wound roll, not To Hit.

And it modifiers the AP roll, not the str (same as 2d6 AP).

The way I see it, is that if the model has the rule, it's part of the model, regardless of how you want to fluff the HoW attack. If the model is making it (which it is, right? this attack isn't coming from the emprar) then why doesn't the model get the bonus?

If I had a monstrous creature that had a special rule for the model that says: "ignore all armor saves" then wouldn't the HoW attack ignore all armor saves?

As far as intent I kinda figure the HoW attack is only meant to imply the model isn't getting to use weapons, the only point of contention I have against my point of view is... why didn't GW just say "don't use any of the model's weapons when resolving this." Since they gave it a profile, maybe they meant it to just be that profile and nothing else?

Stupid GW... We really need an FAQ, there are so many rules like this where the answer is buried beneath conflicting and valid arguments and me and my bros just have to make our own calls. Maybe that's for the best, but for costing so much the rulebook could at least offer some more clarity.

Happyjew wrote:

chewielight wrote:Maybe I missed it but how are you rolling for HoW attacks when the hit automatically in order to rend?.

Rending occurs on the To Wound roll, not To Hit.

Doh I knew that and yet I have a brain fart. That being said it shouldn't be ap2 though but auto wound ap -

This would still satisfy the HoW rule without ignoring the ap part.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Maelstrom808 wrote:And it modifiers the AP roll, not the str (same as 2d6 AP).

No where is there a 2d6 roll for Ap it starts at - and ends at 1. The 2d6 is for armor pen which modifies the users/weapons str. So for HoW it would still hit with unmodified users str and ap - . As long as this rule is satisfied and doesn't change those to aspects of HoW then I don't see an issue. Any additional issues during the wounding wouldn't be affected.

No, it would be AP2, as that is the AP of a rending HoW attack, the most specific case of all HoW attacks.

chewielight wrote:

Maelstrom808 wrote:And it modifiers the AP roll, not the str (same as 2d6 AP).

No where is there a 2d6 roll for Ap it starts at - and ends at 1. The 2d6 is for armor pen which modifies the users/weapons str. So for HoW it would still hit with unmodified users str and ap - . As long as this rule is satisfied and doesn't change those to aspects of HoW then I don't see an issue. Any additional issues during the wounding wouldn't be affected.

AP is also commonly used as short hand for armor penetration. In light of the conversation, I probably should have written it long hand, but was in a hurry. Anyway, you are modifying the armor penetration roll, not the user's strength. If you treat the 1d6 part of the armor pen roll as a modification of the user's strength, it causes problems in other areas. Thus, you can add the +d3 or the additional d6 from various rules without modifying the user's strength from what is listed in the HoW rule.


EDIT: And +1 to what Nos said.

Maelstrom808 wrote:

chewielight wrote:

Maelstrom808 wrote:And it modifiers the AP roll, not the str (same as 2d6 AP).

No where is there a 2d6 roll for Ap it starts at - and ends at 1. The 2d6 is for armor pen which modifies the users/weapons str. So for HoW it would still hit with unmodified users str and ap - . As long as this rule is satisfied and doesn't change those to aspects of HoW then I don't see an issue. Any additional issues during the wounding wouldn't be affected.

AP is also commonly used as short hand for armor penetration. In light of the conversation, I probably should have written it long hand, but was in a hurry. Anyway, you are modifying the armor penetration roll, not the user's strength. If you treat the 1d6 part of the armor pen roll as a modification of the user's strength, it causes problems in other areas. Thus, you can add the +d3 or the additional d6 from various rules without modifying the user's strength from what is listed in the HoW rule.


EDIT: And +1 to what Nos said.

I know what AP means. That's what confused me by your comment. When anything references armor pen it is modifying the users/weapons str, always has and always will. If your meaning ap of a weapon then ap1,2 means +to the damage chart or armors saves being ignored to wound. You stated that your modifying the armor penetration roll and adding + from various rules, but you can only modify the models str because that what those are added to. I don't see a rational argument for using a models unmodified str at ap - if you are adding a an extra d6 or d3 or ap anything other than -.

Its nit picking to be sure but rending,thunder hammers,powerfists,MC bonuses all add to the users/weapons str roll to determine if it can get through armor. That's why you add str plus modifiers and compare it to AV value. AP is a value give only to determined if armor saves on non vehicles can be made or on how penetration on vehicles damage charts are effected.

We cant have it both ways.

Please cite the rule that says modifying the armor penetration roll is modifying the user's str. You have modifiers to the user's str and modifiers to the armor pen roll. The latter is not a more specific version of the former. That's why rules like armorbane don't say "add 1d6 to str when rolling for armor penetration". Another clue is when you roll for armor penetration, it says "roll a D6 and add the weapon's Strength". It's not a strength modification, if anything it's the strength modifiying the armor pen roll.

HoW is not made with weapons, but the model's base stats profile.

In the case of thunderwolf cav, S5 AP- is the profile for the HoW, and THE MODEL has the RENDING special rule, NOT THE WEAPONS.

Any model with this rule makes an additional attack that autohits at base Str with Ap- at the I10 step.

My model has rending, therefore HoW can rend with TWC.

Wraiths have rending as well, therefore they can rend with HoW.

No model ability is used for HoW. It's a special ability. That special ability has a characteristic. Str (user) Ap-. init 10. Done, nothing else. Stop adding things.

HoW is it's own attack. It is an additional attack but at a different profile. From my understanding it's from the force of the attackers bearing down on the enemy and not from swings from weapons. This is why the AP- is used. If it was a straight additional attack at init 10, then you can use what ever you want. But it doesn't say that.

Take the power for what it is. I little fluff that could get you a few kills.

Now I'm waiting for someone to tell me they can get auto hits with witch blades to wound on a 2+.

Just remember that HoW is not a Close Combat Attack. It's a special ability that you get for assaulting. Some people get +1 Str when they attack. HoW gets a free pimp slap.

Wrong. It is an Attack. that capitalisation means something - namely it is a close combat Attack.

Stop straw manning. The MODEL gets to use the MODELS abilities, barring Smash (because it says it doesnt work)

No it does not get to use abilities. HoW is it's own animal. Stop trying to change it's ability.

Lets break this down. The power represents the force of the attacker bearing down on the unit it attacked. This is why it's at Init 10 and at Str of user with an AP-.

If HoW was worded. Models with HoW get an additional attack at init 10 that auto hits. Then you can do what ever.

They don't want people to do the following.

Use rending ability, use power fists, use power weapons, use witch blades and implant attacks....

Why do they do this? Because GW doesn't want the Assault to end when you just jump into combat. It's a little bonus for having HoW. It's not a game changer vs infantry.

Vs Vehicles Str 4 can wreck Armor 10 vehicles. Just 3 glancing hits takes care of them.

MJThurston wrote:No it does not get to use abilities. HoW is it's own animal. Stop trying to change it's ability.

Lets break this down. The power represents the force of the attacker bearing down on the unit it attacked. This is why it's at Init 10 and at Str of user with an AP-.

If HoW was worded. Models with HoW get an additional attack at init 10 that auto hits. Then you can do what ever.

They don't want people to do the following.

Use rending ability, use power fists, use power weapons, use witch blades and implant attacks....

Why do they do this? Because GW doesn't want the Assault to end when you just jump into combat. It's a little bonus for having HoW. It's not a game changer vs infantry.

Vs Vehicles Str 4 can wreck Armor 10 vehicles. Just 3 glancing hits takes care of them.

It's an Attack.
It resolves during the Fight step (happens at I10)
How is it not a close combat attack?
You can't use Power Fists, Power Weapons, Witch Blades because they're weapons...
Show me where my Tyranid Shrikes are using anything but the default CCW as a weapon.

If a SM can't use it's weapons why would that change for a Nid to use it's weapons. Don't try to word screw this around to argue that Nid arms are just arms and not weapons.

The attack represents shoulders, knees, elbow and feet.

No matter how you want to word this. HoW is what it is. It's not a way to cycle abilities through.

This rule is already ridiculous with free hits and now people want to abuse it more.....

MJThurston wrote:If a SM can't use it's weapons why would that change for a Nid to use it's weapons. Don't try to word screw this around to argue that Nid arms are just arms and not weapons.

The attack represents shoulders, knees, elbow and feet.

No matter how you want to word this. HoW is what it is. It's not a way to cycle abilities through.

This rule is already ridiculous with free hits and now people want to abuse it more.....

While that may possibly be the intent of the rule, unfortunately the rules do not support that same conclusion as they are currently written. If GW wants it played the way you are describing, most likely it will get FAQ'd when then the BRB FAQ is released, but until then...

"Many warriors hurl themselves headlong into combat, seeking to CRUSH or TRAMPLE the foe".

This is in the description of the rule. It is assumed you are not using a weapon or ability with this, but the sheer mass and speed of the charge is doing damage. If you could use rending (or anything for that matter) why does this rule override the AP? I agree that if someone tried to stack abilities onto this, I would simply not let him. This is simply an example of people trying to exploit the rules.

I agree with MJThurston and what has been said above. There are no rules to support HoW otherwise.