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.

 AndrewC wrote:
Yes it is, it's perfectly clear.

These weapons are used together, using the profile below

How he uses them is explained in the rules. Now show me the rules for using them separately?

Cheers

Andrew

This should end it.

 AndrewC wrote:
Yes it is, it's perfectly clear.

These weapons are used together, using the profile below

How he uses them is explained in the rules. Now show me the rules for using them separately?

Cheers

Andrew

Robute has two chainswords. These weapons are used together using the profile below:

Chainword Range (-) Strength (User) AP (-) Type (Melee)


In the above scenario, Robute has two weapons with the Melee type. Therefore he gets +1A.


Robute's rules simply tell us that his weapons are 'used together', not that his weapons are 'used together as a single weapon'. 'Used together' by itself has no bearing on the rules whatsoever. He could be using them together as two weapons or counting as a single weapon. We don't know. We just know that he uses them together and it's nothing more than a fluff description when 'used together' is on its own.

Robute's rules also simply provide us with a profile. They do not say that this profile is to be used somehow as combined profile or somehow as a single weapon that the Emperor's Sword and Hand of Dominion count as - there is zero indication that the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion count as a single weapon. There is no statement to the effect that the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion count as a single weapon. So they are two separable weapons that Robute happens to be described as using together.

We know he has two weapons. So as far as we know the profile is simply being provided as a profile that equally describes both in the sense that they are identical, like identical chainswords. A profile that is simply provided after a listing of weapons is simply applied equally to each of the weapons listed, just as if I had listed 2 chainswords.


The Counter argument keeps reading into the information provided. There is nothing on Robute's dataslate to indicate that we are to count the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion as a single weapon. So we don't. Therefore he has two weapons with the Melee type. Therefore he gets +1A.

col_impact wrote:

 AndrewC wrote:
Yes it is, it's perfectly clear.

These weapons are used together, using the profile below

How he uses them is explained in the rules. Now show me the rules for using them separately?

Cheers

Andrew

Robute has two chainswords. These weapons are used together using the profile below:

Chainword Range (-) Strength (User) AP (-) Type (Melee)


In the above scenario, Robute has two weapons with the Melee type. Therefore he gets +1A.


Robute's rules simply tell us that his weapons are 'used together', not that his weapons are 'used together as a single weapon'. 'Used together' by itself has no bearing on the rules whatsoever. He could be using them together as two weapons or counting as a single weapon. We don't know. We just know that he uses them together and it's nothing more than a fluff description when 'used together' is on its own.

Robute's rules also simply provide us with a profile. They do not say that this profile is to be used somehow as combined profile or somehow as a single weapon that the Emperor's Sword and Hand of Dominion count as - there is zero indication that the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion count as a single weapon. There is no statement to the effect that the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion count as a single weapon. So they are two separable weapons that Robute happens to be described as using together.

We know he has two weapons. So as far as we know the profile is simply being provided as a profile that equally describes both in the sense that they are identical, like identical chainswords. A profile that is simply provided after a listing of weapons is simply applied equally to each of the weapons listed, just as if I had listed 2 chainswords.


The Counter argument keeps reading into the information provided. There is nothing on Robute's dataslate to indicate that we are to count the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion as a single weapon. So we don't. Therefore he has two weapons with the Melee type. Therefore he gets +1A.

It doesn't say "each with the profile below", just that you use the profile they give when he fights with the listed weapons. If they had meant for there to be +1 A, it would have been mentioned in the statement or in the profile. It wasn't.

The rule only cares that there is more than one Melee Weapon in order to get the +1A.



We know Robute has two weapons. We know that the profile associated with the weapons lists Melee type.

The rules simply tell us that the weapons are used together, which on its own does not mean anything.

The weapons could be used together as two weapons or as one weapon. Since its not specified we have to accept it as two weapons since no where in the datasheet are the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion described as a single weapon.

Therefore we have two weapons with the Melee type. Therefore +1A.

col_impact wrote:
Robute has two chainswords. These weapons are used together using the profile below:

No he doesn't, you're creating a narrative to fit an agenda.

In the above scenario, Robute has two weapons with the Melee type. Therefore he gets +1A.

Again he doesn't have any wargear at all. While your explanation of how two chainswords work together is factually correct, they do not apply here.

Robute's rules simply tell us that his weapons are 'used together', not that his weapons are 'used together as a single weapon'. 'Used together' by itself has no bearing on the rules whatsoever. He could be using them together as two weapons or counting as a single weapon. We don't know. We just know that he uses them together and it's nothing more than a fluff description when 'used together' is on its own.

I completely disagree with this assertion as it has absolutely no justification behind it. GW is usually quite meticulous in using italics for fluff and plain text for rules, so your conviction that used together is fluff cannot be accepted as there are other examples of weapons being used together to create a separate profile.

Robute's rules also simply provide us with a profile. They do not say that this profile is to be used somehow as combined profile or somehow as a single weapon that the Emperor's Sword and Hand of Dominion count as - there is zero indication that the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion count as a single weapon. There is no statement to the effect that the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion count as a single weapon. So they are two separable weapons that Robute happens to be described as using together.

Again an assertion with no evidence to back it up. Please provide me with evidence that they are two separate weapons for the purpose of melee? Where is the wargear listings to show two separate weapons and profiles, where each acts as a separate entity? I concede that there is no statement that the Sword and Hand is a single weapon, however there is no statement that they count as two weapons. That is an assumption by you with no evidence.

We know he has two weapons. So as far as we know the profile is simply being provided as a profile that equally describes both in the sense that they are identical, like identical chainswords. A profile that is simply provided after a listing of weapons is simply applied equally to each of the weapons listed, just as if I had listed 2 chainswords.

As I pointed out that this is simply unknowable from the rules provided. You have made assumptions that are not supported by the evidence. The only evidence is the "use together = profile"

The Counter argument keeps reading into the information provided. There is nothing on Robute's dataslate to indicate that we are to count the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion as a single weapon. So we don't. Therefore he has two weapons with the Melee type. Therefore he gets +1A.

And as this is a permissive ruleset and there is nothing to indicate that the Sword and Hand are two weapons we cannot claim that they are. In order to access the profile listed they have to be used together, we have no permission to use them separately in the melee phase.

Cheers

Andrew

Now, let's compare and contrast all that to Calgar's Gauntlets of Ultramar

Each Gauntlet of Ultramar can be used as a Melee weapon with the Melee weapon profile below. The combined pair can also be fired as a ranged weapon, using the ranged weapon profile below.

Range: -, 24"
S: X2, 4
AP: 2, 2
Type: Melee, Assault 2

The problem with the above is, only Calgar is only listed with 1 Gauntlets of Ultramar, not 2 Gauntlets of Ultramar or 4. Sure, the model has two, but means little in the rules. If I modeled a 4-armed Calgar (2 mechanical arms ala the Techmarines), would that mean he'd have to be Disarmed 3 times to lose an Attack Bonus for +1 Melee Weapon?

A Weapon can be called "Chicken & Dumplings", but until you have the phrase recognizing it as two Weapons, it is still one single Weapon. That's the whole point of using the entries. The title is only used to distinguish it from other Weapons and to specify it in its own rules, everything else is pure Fluff.

 AndrewC wrote:

Again an assertion with no evidence to back it up. Please provide me with evidence that they are two separate weapons for the purpose of melee? Where is the wargear listings to show two separate weapons and profiles, where each acts as a separate entity? I concede that there is no statement that the Sword and Hand is a single weapon, however there is no statement that they count as two weapons. That is an assumption by you with no evidence.

It's a bit laughable for you to claim that two weapons are not two weapons unless the rules contain a statement that they count as two weapons. By default two weapons are two weapons unless a rule changes that.

But, if you insist, there is proof aplenty!


The datasheet uses the plural, weapons.



That right there is incontrovertible evidence that we are dealing with more than one weapon when discussing the Emperor’s Sword and the Hand of Dominion.


Further we know that the profile is applied to each weapon separably.



The only way to resolve this issue of case agreement based on the information we have between 'weapons' (above) and 'this weapon' is to treat the profile as applied to the Emperor's Sword and also to the Hand of Dominion, otherwise the Touch of the Emperor would refer to 'these weapons [the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominon].'


Even further, we know the Hand of Dominion is described as separably both a melee weapon and a ranged weapon. Notice the rules are not describing 'the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion' as a weapon but 'the Hand of Dominion' as a weapon.




Even though I did not require proof that two weapons are indeed two weapons, the rules provide ample incontrovertible evidence of the fact that we are indeed dealing with two weapons.


Therefore, +1A.

It clearly says in the "relics of ultramar" Emperor's sword AND the hand of dominion

it goes on to say these weapons are used "together", using the profile below. Implying more than one weapon is using the profile below.

It also goes on in descriptions of the weapons "whirling flame" and "Hand of dominion" ranged version as separate.

 Lance845 wrote:
If he has 2 weapons with a single profile and that gets him an extra attack then the lashwhip + bonesword counts as 2 weapons for all tyranids and they can use their other arms to bring a gun.

I.E. there is already a precedent for this. A single profile is a single weapon. It doesn't matter how many arms it takes or different weapons are in different hands.

It's the same as twin linked guns being mounted on both shoulders of a tau suit. It's not 2 guns even though it's modeled as 2 guns. It's 1 gun because it's a single profile.

Tyranids actually have specific rules relating to weapons and bonus attacks and the weapon profiles state whether they get the bonus attack or not.

Guilliman uses a SINGLE profile for both weapons. It does not state he gets a bonus attack. It does not state he counts as having two close combat weapons.

It is a single profile ergo a single weapon for purposes of determining otherwise.


Also, don't try to use Tyranids as justification for things like this. They have explicit rules regarding close combat weapons and paired arms (else you could legitimately try to claim some of the larger creatures get +3 attacks for 3 extra ccw) - also, a lashwhip and bonesword do not grant the bonus attack for 2 ccw.

Rules state that Tyranids must fight with two pairs of close combat weapons for a bonus attack. - that counts as one.

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

It is a single profile ergo a single weapon for purposes of determining otherwise.

This is an assumption on your part no where supported by any rule.

Providing a single profile does not mean 'counts as a single weapon'.

col_impact wrote:

 AndrewC wrote:

Again an assertion with no evidence to back it up. Please provide me with evidence that they are two separate weapons for the purpose of melee? Where is the wargear listings to show two separate weapons and profiles, where each acts as a separate entity? I concede that there is no statement that the Sword and Hand is a single weapon, however there is no statement that they count as two weapons. That is an assumption by you with no evidence.

The datasheet uses the plural, weapons.

Spoiler:

These weapons are used together, using the profile below.

That right there is incontrovertible evidence that we are dealing with more than one weapon when discussing the Emperor’s Sword and the Hand of Dominion.

No it isn't. GW is littered with weapons that are used as pairs but not actually two weapons. IIRC there was a GK upgrade that was two swords, but were not counted as two weapons until a later faq. So no, for the purposes of the rules this is not proof of two weapons.

Further we know that the profile is applied to each weapon separably.

Spoiler:

Touch of the Emperor: Any attacks with this weapon with a To Hit roll of 6 are resolved at Strength D rather than Strength 10.

The only way to resolve this issue of case agreement based on the information we have between 'weapons' (above) and 'this weapon' is to treat the profile as applied to the Emperor's Sword and also to the hand of Dominion.

Huge leap of faith here, no, we do not know that the profile is applied to each weapon separately. Nor does the rule in question provide it. This relic requires both halves to access the profile. You can provide no justification from the evidence at hand for that.

Even further, we know the Hand of Dominion is described as separably both a melee weapon and a ranged weapon.

Spoiler:

The Hand of Dominion can also be used as a ranged weapon, using the profile below. It may be used as both a melee weapon and a ranged weapon in the same turn.

Even though I did not require proof that two weapons are indeed two weapons, the rules provide ample incontrovertible evidence of the fact that we are indeed dealing with two weapons.


Therefore, +1A.

An Ork flamer is described as both a melee and ranged weapon, but cant be used as both, that description could easily be a reminder that the Hand works in a completely different way. But the fact remains that the Sword and Hand, is not described as two individual weapons and require both halves to create a single profile. Until such time as you can show that each weapon has a separate, quantifiable profile as an individual entity/artefact then they cannot operate as two weapons to gain a +1A.

Cheers

Andrew

AndrewCMade in gb
Huge leap of faith here, no, we do not know that the profile is applied to each weapon separately. Nor does the rule in question provide it. This relic requires both halves to access the profile. You can provide no justification from the evidence at hand for that.

See my post above, it is list under relics as Emps sword and hand of dominion.

 AndrewC wrote:
Until such time as you can show that each weapon has a separate, quantifiable profile as an individual entity/artefact then they cannot operate as two weapons to gain a +1A.

First, we are not dealing with an individual artefact but 'relics' so please re-read the rules in question since your argument is failing at a fundamental level of reading comprehension.



The Emperor's Sword and also to the Hand of Dominion are referred to as 'weapons' and the profile is applied with rules referencing 'this weapon'.

Per case agreement and the absence of any rule stating that the weapons are counting as a single weapon we can come to no other conclusion than that we are dealing with two weapons and that the profile is separably applied.

Up until the time that you can show that these weapons are counting as a single weapon, the 'weapons' are operating as 'weapons' and not as a 'weapon' [no duh] and so gain a +1A.


In other words, the burden of proof is squarely on you, not me. The rule says 'weapons'. Prove it's actually a 'weapon'.

col_impact wrote:

 AndrewC wrote:
Until such time as you can show that each weapon has a separate, quantifiable profile as an individual entity/artefact then they cannot operate as two weapons to gain a +1A.

First, we are not dealing with an individual artefact but 'relics' so please re-read the rules in question since your argument is failing at a fundamental level of reading comprehension.



The Emperor's Sword and also to the Hand of Dominion are referred to as 'weapons' and the profile is applied with rules referencing 'this weapon'.

Per case agreement and the absence of any rule stating that the weapons are counting as a single weapon we can come to no other conclusion than that we are dealing with two weapons and that the profile is separably applied.

Up until the time that you can show that these weapons are counting as a single weapon, the 'weapons' are operating as 'weapons' and not as a 'weapon' [no duh] and so gain a +1A.


In other words, the burden of proof is squarely on you, not me. The rule says 'weapons'. Prove it's actually a 'weapon'.

I'm still waiting for you to show permission you are allowed to use the profile when not using the sword and fist together.

In your mind maybe.
However, it would list that they both use the profile below.
Rather than stating they are combined to the following profile.


Currently you have no actual proof it functions as 2 seperate weapons.
It's also laughable to think they would give a weapon a combined profile, yet allow them to use the profile twice.



So your saying that exact same profile applies separately to the sword and the fist right?
Why wouldn't they have 2 seperate profiles, 1 for each?
You know, like for every other model.

Also, to use that profile twice would require 2 sets of sword and fist.
If a profile is for combined weapons, it uses both.
To use that profile again would require another set of weapons.

Unlike the Burna example, the fist side of the weapon is given permission to fire and be used in CC.
However, the weapon profile states it's both the sword and fist being used.
So if they didn't allow it to be used as both, you wouldn't be able to use the profile atall in CC if you shot with it.



Quite simply, show me where it states that it's 2 weapons and where they both have that profile separately.
And also where it states the weapons can be used separately.




If he is disarmed, he loses both.
Even if we say it's 2 weapons, losing either will prevent it's use.
You can't say that a combined profile can lose 1 side of it, yet still function exactly the same.

 Happyjew wrote:


I'm still waiting for you to show permission you are allowed to use the profile when not using the sword and fist together.

So?

Why does this even matter?

So what if the sword and fist are used together?

Used together does not mean that the weapons count as a single weapon.

They are considered weapons and when they are used together they are still considered weapons and not as a single weapon.

The profiles reference 'this weapon' and so must reference the Sword and Fist separably since the Sword and Fist collectively is referred to as 'weapons' and as 'relics' and never as weapon or relic.

Moreover, the Hand is explicitly discussed as being separably a 'weapon' and able to be used as both a melee and as a ranged weapon.


Therefore, we have two melee weapons when they are used together.

This rule is then fully satisfied.



Therefore, +1 A.


If you feel otherwise, prove that we are dealing with 'weapon' when we are dealing with the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion. The rules call them 'relics' and 'weapons' so you have your work cut out for you. Good luck.

It matters because the rules state it's a profile for the weapons combined.

As single weapons they have no profile atall.
It cannot be a combined profile if you are only using 1 weapon.

You are given no permission to seperate them at any point, nor are they given profiles for seperate use.


The idea that they both use that profile separately is just laughable as it ignores the chunk of text stating they are used together.

Not once does it mention they can be used separately.

 Jackal wrote:
It matters because the rules state it's a profile for the weapons combined.

It says nothing of the sort. We are not told its a combined profile or that the weapons count as a single weapon. You are making that up.

 Jackal wrote:

As single weapons they have no profile atall.
It cannot be a combined profile if you are only using 1 weapon.

The rules refer to the Emperor's Sword and Hand of Dominion as 'weapons' (and as 'relics').

The profile is never described as a combined profile. You made that up.

The weapons are never described as counting as a single weapon.

The profiles refer to 'this weapon'. Due to case agreement with 'weapons' this requires that the profile is separably applied to the Sword of the the Emperor and the Hand of Dominion.

 Jackal wrote:

You are given no permission to seperate them at any point, nor are they given profiles for seperate use.

I don't need to separate them. The profile is separably applied by case agreement entirely internal to the datasheet itself. Moreover, the Hand of Dominion is considered separable for melee and ranged attacks.

When Robute attacks and uses them together he has two melee weapons he is using together and he is not counting that as one. That's all I need for +1A. Whether or not they are seperable is not mentioned as a requirement for the rule to apply.

The rules refer unequivocally to 'weapons'

 Jackal wrote:
It matters because the rules state it's a profile for the weapons combined.

As single weapons they have no profile atall.
It cannot be a combined profile if you are only using 1 weapon.

You are given no permission to seperate them at any point, nor are they given profiles for seperate use.


The idea that they both use that profile separately is just laughable as it ignores the chunk of text stating they are used together.

Not once does it mention they can be used separately.

The fact that you keep saying it's a single weapon is laughable when it doesn't say that once.. anywhere.. What it DOES say is emperor's sword AND the hand of dominion. And it also states together , meaning more then one, use the profile below.

ZooPants wrote:

 Jackal wrote:
It matters because the rules state it's a profile for the weapons combined.

As single weapons they have no profile atall.
It cannot be a combined profile if you are only using 1 weapon.

You are given no permission to seperate them at any point, nor are they given profiles for seperate use.


The idea that they both use that profile separately is just laughable as it ignores the chunk of text stating they are used together.

Not once does it mention they can be used separately.

The fact that you keep saying it's a single weapon is laughable when it doesn't say that once.. anywhere.. What it DOES say is emperor's sword AND the hand of dominion. And it also states together , meaning more then one, use the profile below.

What's laughable is claiming that they're two weapons ruleswise when the only Melee profile provided is when they're used together...

 Ghaz wrote:

ZooPants wrote:

 Jackal wrote:
It matters because the rules state it's a profile for the weapons combined.

As single weapons they have no profile atall.
It cannot be a combined profile if you are only using 1 weapon.

You are given no permission to seperate them at any point, nor are they given profiles for seperate use.


The idea that they both use that profile separately is just laughable as it ignores the chunk of text stating they are used together.

Not once does it mention they can be used separately.

The fact that you keep saying it's a single weapon is laughable when it doesn't say that once.. anywhere.. What it DOES say is emperor's sword AND the hand of dominion. And it also states together , meaning more then one, use the profile below.

What's laughable is claiming that they're two weapons ruleswise when the only Melee profile provided is when they're used together...

You're making the assumption that when used together this is the profile. When it doesn't say that at all. It says These weapons are used together, <---(Comma indicated a pause in the sentence) using the profile below. Its not one sentence. Please tell me where it says otherwise.......

You've been shown multiple times where it says that they're used together with the listed profile, I'm not making any assumptions. Its what the rules clearly state.

Only in this forum can we reach the perfectly logical conclusion that a man armed with a powerfist and a sword only has one weapon.

 Ghaz wrote:

What's laughable is claiming that they're two weapons ruleswise when the only Melee profile provided is when they're used together...

The Hand of Dominion is explicitly called out as a melee weapon.



The only way that is possible is if the profile has been separably applied to both the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion.

Otherwise, instead of referring to the Hand of Dominion it would refer to the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion, thusly . . .



This completely refutes your argument.


And, we have completely proved our argument. Robute has two melee weapons. Therefore, +1A.

 Ghaz wrote:
You've been shown multiple times where it says that they're used together with the listed profile, I'm not making any assumptions. Its what the rules clearly state.

What we've been shown is assumptions of the wording. Let's break down the sentence since you're stuck on the wording.

These weapons (<--Plural indicating more than one) are used( two weapons are being used) together("together implying more than one) , using the profile below (two weapons have the same stats)


along with the fact that the relics of ultramar indicate Emperor's sword AND hand of dominion
Two relics not one.....

ZooPants wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
You've been shown multiple times where it says that they're used together with the listed profile, I'm not making any assumptions. Its what the rules clearly state.

What we've been shown is assumptions of the wording. Let's break down the sentence since you're stuck on the wording.

These weapons (<--Plural indicating more than one) are used( two weapons are being used) together("together implying more than one) , using the profile below (two weapons have the same stats)


along with the fact that the relics of ultramar indicate Emperor's sword AND hand of dominion
Two relics not one.....

Moreover, the Hand of Dominion is explicitly called out as a melee weapon. That is only possible if the profile is separably applied to the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion.

Where is the Hand called out as a melee weapon?

 JNAProductions wrote:
Where is the Hand called out as a melee weapon?

MattKing wrote:Only in this forum can we reach the perfectly logical conclusion that a man armed with a powerfist and a sword only has one weapon.

Only in GW can you have numerous examples of Weapons that are given the title of "Such & Other" to be used as one single Weapon, then follow it up with Weapons that are listed as "Blanks of Something" while not providing a number of "Blanks" involved.

In most other games, that's already defined in the basic system, such as Firestorm Armada. But in 40K-land, contradictions are the rule.

JNAProductions wrote:Where is the Hand called out as a melee weapon?

Only as part of the Sword Relic, from what I've seen.

 Charistoph wrote:

JNAProductions wrote:Where is the Hand called out as a melee weapon?

Only as part of the Sword Relic, from what I've seen.

Incorrect. Read the rules.





Since the Hand is definitively a melee weapon, this means that the profile has been separably applied to both the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion.

This in turn means that both the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion are melee weapons.

This in turn means that we satisfy the rule that grants an a model an additional attack for having two or more melee weapons.


The argument is proved.