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.

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.php?showtopic=260447&st=75

Check it out. Good points on each side.

ianj253 wrote:
http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.php?showtopic=260447&st=75

Check it out. Good points on each side.

Really? I don't see good points on both sides, I see one person making stuff up which are not supported by RAW and trying to say 'the FAQ doesn't say I can't as a way to use the default rules for power weapon which BTW don't work anyways hence the need for a FAQ.

You are not using the rules for power weapons, we are only allowed to use the rules for 'types' of power weapons. To have the power weapon rules work with any type, you need to be able to 'look at the model' which requires 'no further special rules'. The only way to have a type of power weapon with a special rule is if the type is explicitly specified like with Crozariuses and Glaives. We have permission for axes and swords... if you attempt to 'look at the model' to gain access to lances or mauls you may not have further special rules... since you do, you can never look at the model to get a maul or lance since we are not allowed to.

So the only way anything works is with the explicit types in the FAQ. This is how all the other explicit power weapons are also worded across dozens of other FAQs.

This is beyond the pale of being a git. Not even devils advocate can accept the maul/lance argument as there is simply not a shred of support for it withotu basically using 'it doesn't say I can't so i can' argument which is bunk.

There were people arguing for both sides but I guess you overlooked that or didn't read all of the thread. You can be an ***hat and call someone stupid or you can have a civil debate about it. But I guess you have chosen the ***hat route.

I read the whole thread. I saw 1 person arguing from a position of "it doesn't say I can't so I can' with no other rules support, and I see dozens of other people making extremely valid points.

The only two ways you may look at the 'types' of power weapon section on page 61 is:

1. You have a weapon with an explicit Power Weapon Type.

2. You have a "power weapon" with 'no further special rules' which allow you to look at the model to determine the type.

Glaive Encarmines have 'further special rules' which is an undenyable fact which cannot be argued away under any circumstances. So you may never look at the model to determine the type.

The FAQ has allowed us to look at the rules for 'TYPES' of power weapons (not all the rules for power weapons) and choose two of the types... Axes and swords. Just like dozens of weapons across dozens of FAQs who have had their type explicitly FAQed in the same way by specifying a type of power weapon to use which means no need to look at the 'power weapon' rules.

No one anywhere is going to allow anyone to play with lances or mauls. It is clear and if you are going to ruin your models to try to exploit some gamemanship attitude then no one will play you. It is pretty clear and there is no valid argument against it which has been presented because if you fall back to it being a 'power weapon' you still don't have any permission to 'look at the model' for the type due to having 'further special rules' and nothing in the FAQ clarifies that two-handed or Master Crafted don't count for 'special rules'... just that you don't need to check for special rules because the type has been explicitly defined.

nkelsch wrote:

rogueeyes wrote:
A:Glaive Encarmines follow the rules as described in the Type of Power Weapon section on page 61 ... but also have the Master crafted and two handed special rules. Therefore would have the following profiles.

This faq allows for a glaive encarmine to be any type of power weapon. They follow the rules for mains just that.

Nope. Wrong. Dozens of power weapons were erattated to be a specific type and only a specific type. They are no longer power weapons. They are now explicit types.

By giving them example profiles you understand how they work. Can you use a staff? Yes ssince it would follow the rules for power weapons and have the additional rules of two handed and master crafted. This does not make it unique. It gives no further rules.

Wrong. Master-crafted is a special rule... if a power weapon has NO FUTHER SPECIAL RULES you look at the model. That is all now irrelevant as they have FAQed the type explicitly.

The only weapon which does not flow this precedent is Astorath's executioners axe which should have been a unique weapon since it has further special rules attributed to it.

All MC powerweapons have further special rules which means you may never look at the model.

Further special rules has been shown as rules that a specific to the weapon and are not defined in the rules as special weapons. For example a power axe that has fnp would still be a power axe. A power axe withshred would still be ap2 and s+1. This is not a further rule.

Has been shown? Where? it has not been shown and they have explicitly FAQed about 90% of weapons wit further special rules because they had further special rules and needed to be distinguished.

Grey knights with +2 i is special for halberds. Rules are given that further modify the weapon within the codex. Not rules within the main rulebook that add to the weapon. These are not further rules.

C odex = further rules.
Rulebook = not further rules.

Page number of that distinction and definition please? That is certiantly a RAI intepretation but by no means a RAW one and not defined anywhere down these arbitrary lines.

Mc pw is any type of pw with the mc rule.
It is NOT unique.

Oh ho ho... now you are talking about a totally different issue. There is a 'hole' in the rules for models who have 'further special rules' but do not have arguably 'unique CC rules'. They are two different clauses and it was common for PWs to have a further special rule but not have a unique CC rule which left the weapon in a gaping hole in the rules... Most of those weapons got explicit types FAQed into them, which is why we now have glaive axes and swords because by RAW the galive didn't work as it had a 'further special rule' which prevented you from looking at the model, but arguably not a unique CC rule so they were not unusual which made them 'nothing'.

But now they are axes or swords... nothing else.

Can you show me where they can only be swords and axes? It states they follow the rules for power weapons. Power weapons allow for swords axes lances and staffs. Precedence has been given by the FAQs. The argument is quite clear between codex and main rulebook. Grey knight force weapons are all unique force weapons. They have codex special rules.

Raw i can have a glaive encarmine that is two handed master crafted and a power weapon. Every thing is defined. Nothing else is further defined once we hit power weapon. Argue as you wish this is what the codex and faq states. The weapon profiles given are what happens when you put these rules in place. I havent ignored any part of the faq or original rule.

By defining further in a setting of time we see further must be more than what is tthere at a certain point in time. I have rule a. If i add rule b i have a further rule. After b i have no further rules.

Now if i add c to a and b i have a further rule that i added.

A + B = AB
AB+ C = ABC

this is not normal math because order in logic matters. So ABC IS NOT CBA.

That the issue that people argue. AB is not equal to BA because B depends on whether A is first or second.

Can you build a house before you build the foundation? See order matters.

Let's break down the FAQ answer in detail:

Glaive Encarmines follow the rules as described in the Types of Power Weapon section on page 61 of the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook...

This would mean that they follow the rules that require you to look at the weapon to determine what kind of power weapon the model is armed with.

... but also have the Master-crafted and Two-handed special rules.

Despite being 'standard' power weapons, Glaive Encarmines do have further special rules (Master-crafted and Two-handed).

They would therefore have the following profiles.

The only two profiles listed are for a sword or an axe. In order to satisfy the FAQ that Glaive Encarmines have "the following profiles" then they must be modeled as either a sword or an axe. Otherwise you've not followed "...the rules as described in the Types of Power Weapon section...". And if you model Glaive Encarmines as something other than a sword or axe, then it no longer has "...the following profiles."

Literally the only way you can apply the FAQ without ignoring some part of the FAQ is to model the Glaive Encarmine as either a sword or an axe and use the appropriate profile for how it is modeled.

nkelsch wrote:
I read the whole thread. I saw 1 person arguing from a position of "it doesn't say I can't so I can' with no other rules support, and I see dozens of other people making extremely valid points.

The only two ways you may look at the 'types' of power weapon section on page 61 is:

1. You have a weapon with an explicit Power Weapon Type.

2. You have a "power weapon" with 'no further special rules' which allow you to look at the model to determine the type.

Glaive Encarmines have 'further special rules' which is an undenyable fact which cannot be argued away under any circumstances. So you may never look at the model to determine the type.

The FAQ has allowed us to look at the rules for 'TYPES' of power weapons (not all the rules for power weapons) and choose two of the types... Axes and swords. Just like dozens of weapons across dozens of FAQs who have had their type explicitly FAQed in the same way by specifying a type of power weapon to use which means no need to look at the 'power weapon' rules.

No one anywhere is going to allow anyone to play with lances or mauls. It is clear and if you are going to ruin your models to try to exploit some gamemanship attitude then no one will play you. It is pretty clear and there is no valid argument against it which has been presented because if you fall back to it being a 'power weapon' you still don't have any permission to 'look at the model' for the type due to having 'further special rules' and nothing in the FAQ clarifies that two-handed or Master Crafted don't count for 'special rules'... just that you don't need to check for special rules because the type has been explicitly defined.

Further does matter since order of rules matter. The FAQ sets a precedence for rulings. You are trying to state that the FAQ limits the eglaives to 2 weapon types which it does not. It gives us access to the power weapon rules and how rule book special rules interact with them and how we apply the wording of further from the rulebook.

rogueeyes wrote:
Can you build a house before you build the foundation?

Yes. But it sank into the swamp. So I built a second one. That sank into the swamp. So I built a third. That burned down, fell over, then sank into the swamp. But the fourth one stayed up.

rogueeyes wrote:You are trying to state that the FAQ limits the eglaives to 2 weapon types which it does not.

It does indeed by restricting you to the profiles of those two weapon types which you are conveniently ignoring.

rogueeyes wrote:


Can you show me where they can only be swords and axes? It states they follow the rules for power weapons. Power weapons allow for swords axes lances and staffs. Precedence has been given by the FAQs. The argument is quite clear between codex and main rulebook. Grey knight force weapons are all unique force weapons. They have codex special rules.

Show me where they can?

If you follow all the rules for power weapons, then you lose the ability to look at the model to determine the type. There is no distinguishing between the source of the special rules int he FAQ or the rulebook. You are making up a house rule to arbitrarily draw a distinction... GW has had to explicitly FAQ types due to there being no clear line of which special rules they feel are 'special rules'. Right now *ALL* special rules are special rules and there is zero ability to distinguish between BRB or codex or USR or whatever.

Raw i can have a glaive encarmine that is two handed master crafted and a power weapon.

yeah, an axe or sword... not generic power weapon.

Every thing is defined. Nothing else is further defined once we hit power weapon. Argue as you wish this is what the codex and faq states. The weapon profiles given are what happens when you put these rules in place. I havent ignored any part of the faq or original rule.

Page 61: "If a model's wargear says it has a power weapon which has no further special rules, look at the model to tell which type of power weapon it has:"

Do you have further special rules? Yes. Now you may never look at the model to determine the type.

Do you have an explicit weapon type? Yes? now you have the type defined so no need to look at the model.

By defining further in a setting of time we see further must be more than what is tthere at a certain point in time. I have rule a. If i add rule b i have a further rule. After b i have no further rules.

Now putting rules in front of the word somehow make them not apply to the weapon? HA! that is a new one. it is of course not supported by rules... you say "doesn't say I can't for your version... It doesn't say the 'order' in the rules so how about that for arguing?

Now if i add c to a and b i have a further rule that i added.

A + B = AB
AB+ C = ABC

this is not normal math because order in logic matters. So ABC IS NOT CBA.

Not supported by the FAQ or Rulebook. Please page number where this order of operations is defined as GW defines order of operations when they have valid in-game effects.

That the issue that people argue. AB is not equal to BA because B depends on whether A is first or second.

Can you build a house before you build the foundation? See order matters.

Your order of operations has no support in the rules and is absurd. It is basically making up rules...

 Ghaz wrote:
The only two profiles listed are for a sword or an axe. In order to satisfy the FAQ that Glaive Encarmines have "the following profiles" then they must be modeled as either a sword or an axe. Otherwise you've not followed "...the rules as described in the Types of Power Weapon section...". And if you model Glaive Encarmines as something other than a sword or axe, then it no longer has "...the following profiles."

Literally the only way you can apply the FAQ without ignoring some part of the FAQ is to model the Glaive Encarmine as either a sword or an axe and use the appropriate profile for how it is modeled.

I'm not ignoring part of it, perhaps I'm getting more understanding from part of it than you.

Wouldn't they also follow these profiles for Types of Power Weapons?

Name____________Range___S_____AP_____Type
Glaive Encarmine_____-_____+2_____4______Melee, Concussive, Master-Crafted, Two-handed
(Maul)

Glaive Encarmine_____-___+1/User*__3/4*____Melee, Master-Crafted, Two-Handed
(Lance)

Is it really that scary? This is breaking the rules? What's provided in the codex FAQ are examples of how a Glaive Encarmine would work, right?

Look at other FAQs, no other power weapons like this say they follow the rules for types of power weapons but also have special rules.

@Ghaz you ignore the fact that the question was in response to swords and axes so the example profiles were given in those terms.

ianj253 wrote:
@Ghaz you ignore the fact that the question was in response to swords and axes so the example profiles were given in those terms.

The question was in regards to the further special rules making it unusual... Which is why to avoid the unusual from further special rules they have it explicit types like dozens of other power weapons with further special rules across all the codexes.

The rules for power weapons mean glance encarmines don't work at all based upon looks... The FAQ gives explicit types to make them work. You can't fall back on the default rules for power weapons because those rules won't work due to further special rules and the FAQ did not make them work. Instead of defining if master crafted counts as a further special rule or not, they said "doesn't matter because you have these explicit types."

Honestly, it is clear as crystal. Any attempt to ignore the FAQ is cheating because you still have to follow the rules in the rulebook if you ignore the FAQ which leads us back to them being unusual PW or non working Pw. Nothing allows us to look at the model because we have further special rules still. Only by having explicit types may we ever have a master crafted power axe.

Where did the debate resurface about further special rules making them unusual? Glaive Encarmine are NOT unusual power weapons and therefor you ARE to look at the model to determine what kind of power weapon they are wielding.

"Glaive Encarmine follow the rules as described in the Types of Power Weapon section of the Warhammer 40k ruleboook, but also have the master-crafted..."

The section in bold is where this tells you it is a regular (non-unusual) power that also follows special rules. I could see how it would be restrictive to only a sword or an axe if the profile were changed to "Sword Encarmine" or "Axe Encarmine" like all other power weapons in other codices, but they don't.

Happyjew wrote:

Yes. But it sank into the swamp. So I built a second one. That sank into the swamp. So I built a third. That burned down, fell over, then sank into the swamp. But the fourth one stayed up.

But I don't want any of that. I'd rather... just...sing.

Just got off the phone with GW. Apparently I'm not ignoring any part of it and The Sanguinor with a Power Lance would work just fine in tournaments.

Dandruff wrote:
Just got off the phone with GW. Apparently I'm not ignoring any part of it and The Sanguinor with a Power Lance would work just fine in tournaments.

Yeah, GW phone support is about as useful as a poopie-flavored lollipop. GW support can be called three different times and will give you five different answers.

So you're saying call them again?

No I'm saying that they are not reliable and it all depends on the opinion of the Red Shirt who answers the phone.

It was joke. Failed, bad joke...

I think what they said has some merit though not only because he agreed with me. Nothing specifically limits you to an axe or a sword, what's in the FAQ are two of the four examples of what this weapon can potentially be.

Dandruff wrote:
Just got off the phone with GW. Apparently I'm not ignoring any part of it and The Sanguinor with a Power Lance would work just fine in tournaments.

Just got off the phone with Chuck Norris. He said you can only use the two in the FAQ.

Funny, he just told me it could be a maul or lance. That two-faced rat bastard!

Come on now... GW is "supposed" to be the one that settles all debates over rules. If their opinion has no merit then why the hell are we even playing their game or giving them our money?

I don't see anyone else giving the answer to the question they called in and asked for.

If the people who made the game answer is not good enough for you, then I think I shouldn't be on DakkaDakka anymore and you guys are just as worse as the Lawyers at my FLGS.

Chuck Norris told me it doesn't matter. All four weapon types fail against a round house kick.

Happyjew wrote:
Chuck Norris told me it doesn't matter. All four weapon types fail against a round house kick.

Can we bring some seriousness back to my thread please?

Dandruff wrote:
If the people who made the game answer is not good enough for you, then I think I shouldn't be on DakkaDakka anymore and you guys are just as worse as the Lawyers at my FLGS.

The red shirt you talked to on the phone did not make the game.
The game designers have a way to state what they meant - it's in the FAQs.

I never said the person I talked to wrote the game. I would just like to think that they, like any other employee at any other company, is informed well enough to answer any questions or concerns I may have.

rigeld2, I don't believe this is explicit in the FAQ. They provided two of the four examples of what a Glaive can be and didn't specify whether or not the other two options are even an option. Just because they didn't say, doens't mean you can, and just because they didn't say doesnt mean you can't either.

Logic dictates that if they are non-unusual Power Weapons, which they are, they follow ALL the rules for types of power weapons, not just two of them.

Dandruff wrote:
I never said the person I talked to wrote the game. I would just like to think that they, like any other employee at any other company, is informed well enough to answer any questions or concerns I may have.

And there's another poor assumption - someone you talk to on a phone knowing the "right" answer to any question you might ask?

rigeld2, I don't believe this is explicit in the FAQ. They provided two of the four examples of what a Glaive can be and didn't specify whether or not the other two options are even an option. Just because they didn't say, doens't mean you can, and just because they didn't say doesnt mean you can't either.

I'm not forming an opinion on this specific ruling, I was just commenting on why a GW phone call isn't really "admissible" in YMDC. It's even in the tenets.

Dandruff wrote:
I never said the person I talked to wrote the game. I would just like to think that they, like any other employee at any other company, is informed well enough to answer any questions or concerns I may have.

rigeld2, I don't believe this is explicit in the FAQ. They provided two of the four examples of what a Glaive can be and didn't specify whether or not the other two options are even an option. Just because they didn't say, doens't mean you can, and just because they didn't say doesnt mean you can't either.

Logic dictates that if they are non-unusual Power Weapons, which they are, they follow ALL the rules for types of power weapons, not just two of them.

I remember the former manager of my old local GW store, he cheated every time he played the game..... not everyone in GW is a tome of knowledge when it comes to the game.

Secondly the FAQ for says

They would therefore have the following profiles.

this line limits you to the following profiles an exclusive list of what profiles a glaive encarmine can have.
So firstly the name glaive refers to pollaxe or sword.
The models come with pollaxes and swords.
Finally the FAQ lists them as axes and swords...
Guess what? They are axes and swords.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Secondly the FAQ for says

They would therefore have the following profiles.

this line limits you to the following profiles an exclusive list of what profiles a glaive encarmine can have.
So firstly the name glaive refers to pollaxe or sword.
The models come with pollaxes and swords.
Finally the FAQ lists them as axes and swords...
Guess what? They are axes and swords.

Totally agree with this.
If they wanted the other two as an option, they would have added them.

Logic dictates that they are power weapons that also have the master crafted and two handed rules assoviated with them but we must identify what type of power weapon they are by looking at them.

Logic also dictates the order in which I do something will change the outcome of what happens in the end. If I satart with power weapon then add two handed and master crafted the weapon has further rules. But the FAQ is stating for us to use the rules for power weapons which states we must look st the model and determine thw type of weapon.

The question is also in reference to axes and swords. For axes and swords we are given the profiles. This does not limit otherwise we would be given the rule that you may only have axes and swords.

The FAQ gives me permission to use any type of power weapon. The profiles given are in direct response to the faq about swords and axes but do not limit the glaives to swords and axes. It limits it to being power weapons and the weapon types identified within power weapons. Master crafted and two handed are given as rules but not additional rules as clarified in the faq. Therefore the weapons do not follow under unique because we we do not haave additional unique rules but only the rules specifying we must follow the profile in the rule book and add two handed and master crafted to those profiles.