Switch Theme:

CSM DP + Black Mace + Combat Familiar  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in gb
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare





There's no rule saying to use the DP STR for all attacks. There is a rule that says to use AP2 for all attacks. You're breaking the latter.


And you're breaking the CF rule by resolving the attacks at AP2. One way or another you have to break a rule. Neither rule is more specific than the other (unlike for the BM), so codex trumps rulebook comes into play.

Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.

Yes my Colour is Black but not for the reasons stated mainly just because it's slimming... http://imperiusdominatus.blogspot.com 
   
Made in us
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw




Stephens City, VA

 FlingitNow wrote:
There's no rule saying to use the DP STR for all attacks. There is a rule that says to use AP2 for all attacks. You're breaking the latter.


And you're breaking the CF rule by resolving the attacks at AP2. One way or another you have to break a rule. Neither rule is more specific than the other (unlike for the BM), so codex trumps rulebook comes into play.


Actually I'd say smash encompasses CF quite nicely. They're attacks, the MC is making them, ao ap2.

   
Made in gb
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare





Actually I'd say smash encompasses CF quite nicely. They're attacks, the MC is making them, ao ap2


But by being AP2 you're breaking the CF rule which states they are AP-. Do you agree if you have a rule that states you are AP- you are breaking that rule by making those attacks AP2?

Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.

Yes my Colour is Black but not for the reasons stated mainly just because it's slimming... http://imperiusdominatus.blogspot.com 
   
Made in us
The Hive Mind





 DeathReaper wrote:
The conflict of Smash Vs. the CF rules.

One says AP2, the codex Says AP-.

Guess which one wins...

How is that a conflict?


Could you clarify what part of the Combat Familiar rules override the DP's Str please. I seem to not understand exactly what you mean by this.

Where it specifies what STR to use. You can't have an attack with 2 STR values, so the CF wins.
You can have an attack with 2 AP values (as the Black Mace proves) so Smash wins.

My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
 
   
Made in gb
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare





You can have an attack with 2 AP values (as the Black Mace proves) so Smash wins.


Sorry what? How can you have 2 appears values and the black mace has 1 AP value so proves nothing. The mace is ap4 smash tells you that it over rules this to be AP2. Where are you getting your interpretation from?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also the strength thing is a misnomer. A models strength is irrelevant in CC in 6th end as you always use the weapons strength now. Granted most weapons reference the users strength. But there is nothing that makes you use a models strength in CC as a starting point anymore.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/06/18 12:24:35


Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.

Yes my Colour is Black but not for the reasons stated mainly just because it's slimming... http://imperiusdominatus.blogspot.com 
   
Made in im
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw





Liverpool

 FlingitNow wrote:
You can have an attack with 2 AP values (as the Black Mace proves) so Smash wins.


Sorry what? How can you have 2 appears values and the black mace has 1 AP value so proves nothing. The mace is ap4 smash tells you that it over rules this to be AP2. Where are you getting your interpretation from?

The Black Mace is an attack made by be model, so is resolved at AP2.
The Combat Familiar are attacks made by the model, why is it not AP2?

The Black Mace specifies AP4, but Smash makes it AP2.
The Combat Familiar specifies AP-, why does Smash not make it AP2?
   
Made in gb
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare





 grendel083 wrote:
 FlingitNow wrote:
You can have an attack with 2 AP values (as the Black Mace proves) so Smash wins.


Sorry what? How can you have 2 appears values and the black mace has 1 AP value so proves nothing. The mace is ap4 smash tells you that it over rules this to be AP2. Where are you getting your interpretation from?

The Black Mace is an attack made by be model, so is resolved at AP2.
The Combat Familiar are attacks made by the model, why is it not AP2?

The Black Mace specifies AP4, but Smash makes it AP2.
The Combat Familiar specifies AP-, why does Smash not make it AP2?


The black mace and smash are in conflict (ap4 vs ap2). Smash tells us it effects the ap of weapons. It is therefore the more specific rules as it specifies how to resolve this conflict, so it makes the mace ap2.

Likewise smash and CF are in conflict (ap2 vs ap-). Neither rule specifies how it interacts with the other rule thus neither rule is more specific. So we have to look to another way to resolve the conflict. The rulebook helpfully tells us in this situation Codex trumps Rulebook, thus the conflict is resolved in favour of the CF.

Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.

Yes my Colour is Black but not for the reasons stated mainly just because it's slimming... http://imperiusdominatus.blogspot.com 
   
Made in au
Tea-Kettle of Blood




Adelaide, South Australia

FlingitNow: Smash does not specify that it affects the AP of weapons, it affects the AP of "All of the close combat attacks, except Hammer of Wrath Attacks" and is affected by "an AP 1 weapon". You are either misreading or misrepresenting the rules to suit your own argument.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/06/18 13:23:01


 Ailaros wrote:
You know what really bugs me? When my opponent, before they show up at the FLGS smears themselves in peanut butter and then makes blood sacrifices to Ashterai by slitting the throat of three male chickens and then smears the spatter pattern into the peanut butter to engrave sacred symbols into their chest and upper arms.
I have a peanut allergy. It's really inconsiderate.

"Long ago in a distant land, I, M'kar, the shape-shifting Master of Chaos, unleashed an unspeakable evil! But a foolish Grey Knight warrior wielding a magic sword stepped forth to oppose me. Before the final blow was struck, I tore open a portal in space and flung him into the Warp, where my evil is law! Now the fool seeks to return to real-space, and undo the evil that is Chaos!" 
   
Made in gb
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare





It does indeed specify weapons. Also if it did not effect the AP of weapons it would effect nothing. It states that only weapons that are ap1 are not changed to ap2. Does it specify all other special rules? It does not so only attacks made with weapons are effected or attacks that don't specify AP or attacks that specify they are effected by smash. CF does not fall into any of these categories.

Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.

Yes my Colour is Black but not for the reasons stated mainly just because it's slimming... http://imperiusdominatus.blogspot.com 
   
Made in au
Tea-Kettle of Blood




Adelaide, South Australia

Please quote where it states that it only affects weapons.

 Ailaros wrote:
You know what really bugs me? When my opponent, before they show up at the FLGS smears themselves in peanut butter and then makes blood sacrifices to Ashterai by slitting the throat of three male chickens and then smears the spatter pattern into the peanut butter to engrave sacred symbols into their chest and upper arms.
I have a peanut allergy. It's really inconsiderate.

"Long ago in a distant land, I, M'kar, the shape-shifting Master of Chaos, unleashed an unspeakable evil! But a foolish Grey Knight warrior wielding a magic sword stepped forth to oppose me. Before the final blow was struck, I tore open a portal in space and flung him into the Warp, where my evil is law! Now the fool seeks to return to real-space, and undo the evil that is Chaos!" 
   
Made in gb
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare





It doesn't I've never said it does. It says all attacks and specified it over rules weapons AP. CF attacks are effected hence the conflict. Hence the need to resolve the conflict...

Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.

Yes my Colour is Black but not for the reasons stated mainly just because it's slimming... http://imperiusdominatus.blogspot.com 
   
Made in im
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw





Liverpool

 FlingitNow wrote:
 grendel083 wrote:
 FlingitNow wrote:
You can have an attack with 2 AP values (as the Black Mace proves) so Smash wins.


Sorry what? How can you have 2 appears values and the black mace has 1 AP value so proves nothing. The mace is ap4 smash tells you that it over rules this to be AP2. Where are you getting your interpretation from?

The Black Mace is an attack made by be model, so is resolved at AP2.
The Combat Familiar are attacks made by the model, why is it not AP2?

The Black Mace specifies AP4, but Smash makes it AP2.
The Combat Familiar specifies AP-, why does Smash not make it AP2?


The black mace and smash are in conflict (ap4 vs ap2). Smash tells us it effects the ap of weapons. It is therefore the more specific rules as it specifies how to resolve this conflict, so it makes the mace ap2.

Likewise smash and CF are in conflict (ap2 vs ap-). Neither rule specifies how it interacts with the other rule thus neither rule is more specific. So we have to look to another way to resolve the conflict. The rulebook helpfully tells us in this situation Codex trumps Rulebook, thus the conflict is resolved in favour of the CF.
What conflict? There is no conflict.
The Mace isn't Ap2 because of a conflict. The Smash rules state how this is handled.
The attacks are Ap2 no matter what the Ap of the weapon, with the exception of Ap1.
Following a rule that covers this situation does not cause a conflict.
   
Made in gb
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare





Grendel are you saying that 1 rule telling you that you are ap4 and another telling you that you are ap2 are not in conflict? Sorry but how on earth can you claim that?

So how are you both AP4 and AP2? Or are you saying AP4 and AP2 the same thing?

Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.

Yes my Colour is Black but not for the reasons stated mainly just because it's slimming... http://imperiusdominatus.blogspot.com 
   
Made in im
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw





Liverpool

 FlingitNow wrote:
Grendel are you saying that 1 rule telling you that you are ap4 and another telling you that you are ap2 are not in conflict? Sorry but how on earth can you claim that?

So how are you both AP4 and AP2? Or are you saying AP4 and AP2 the same thing?

How is a model with BS5 Snap Shooting at BS1. Are you saying snap shots are a rules conflict?
The Mace is AP4, attacks made with it are AP2 thanks to smash. A rule covers this, just as a rule covers Snap Shots. Neither are a conflict, as we have rules that tell us how to cover it.
   
Made in us
Captain of the Forlorn Hope





Chicago, IL

 PrinceRaven wrote:
FlingitNow: Smash does not specify that it affects the AP of weapons,


All attacks are made with weapons, so in context the Smash rule applies to weapons.

"Did you notice a sign out in front of my chapel that said "Land Raider Storage"?" -High Chaplain Astorath the Grim Redeemer of the Lost.

I sold my soul to the devil and now the bastard is demanding a refund!

We do not have an attorney-client relationship. I am not your lawyer. The statements I make do not constitute legal advice. Any statements made by me are based upon the limited facts you have presented, and under the premise that you will consult with a local attorney. This is not an attempt to solicit business. This disclaimer is in addition to any disclaimers that this website has made.
 
   
Made in us
The Hive Mind





 DeathReaper wrote:
 PrinceRaven wrote:
FlingitNow: Smash does not specify that it affects the AP of weapons,


All attacks are made with weapons, so in context the Smash rule applies to weapons.

Which means that the Combat Familiar attacks are made with weapons meaning that the Smash rule applies.

My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
 
   
Made in us
Captain of the Forlorn Hope





Chicago, IL

rigeld2 wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
The conflict of Smash Vs. the CF rules.

One says AP2, the codex Says AP-.

Guess which one wins...

How is that a conflict?


Umm...

AP2 AP-

and the fact that Codex (AP-) trumps Rulebook.

"Did you notice a sign out in front of my chapel that said "Land Raider Storage"?" -High Chaplain Astorath the Grim Redeemer of the Lost.

I sold my soul to the devil and now the bastard is demanding a refund!

We do not have an attorney-client relationship. I am not your lawyer. The statements I make do not constitute legal advice. Any statements made by me are based upon the limited facts you have presented, and under the premise that you will consult with a local attorney. This is not an attempt to solicit business. This disclaimer is in addition to any disclaimers that this website has made.
 
   
Made in us
The Hive Mind





 DeathReaper wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
The conflict of Smash Vs. the CF rules.

One says AP2, the codex Says AP-.

Guess which one wins...

How is that a conflict?


Umm...

AP2 AP-

and the fact that Codex (AP-) trumps Rulebook.

Again - how is that a conflict? Is there a rule that says an attack can only have one AP value?
And why is Smash allowed to override a codex rule in one place (Black Mace) but not another (Combat Familiar)? You've already presented an argument that both attacks are made with weapons.

My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
 
   
Made in gb
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare





How is a model with BS5 Snap Shooting at BS1. Are you saying snap shots are a rules conflict?


Yes they are a conflict. One rule is saying bs5 the other Bs1. Snap shot is the more specific rule and therefore it wins the conflict.

The Mace is AP4, attacks made with it are AP2 thanks to smash. A rule covers this, just as a rule covers Snap Shots. Neither are a conflict, as we have rules that tell us how to cover it.


Yes there is a conflict one rule says Ap4 the other Ap2. Fortunately smash tells us how to resolve this conflict just as the snap shot rule does.

Pretty much every special rule creates a conflict as it changes an existing rule.

Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.

Yes my Colour is Black but not for the reasons stated mainly just because it's slimming... http://imperiusdominatus.blogspot.com 
   
Made in im
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw





Liverpool

 FlingitNow wrote:
How is a model with BS5 Snap Shooting at BS1. Are you saying snap shots are a rules conflict?


Yes they are a conflict. One rule is saying bs5 the other Bs1. Snap shot is the more specific rule and therefore it wins the conflict.
Then by your logic no model selected from a Codex is ever reduced to Bs1 due to Snap Shots.
Since the Codex Bs would trump the BRB Bs1.
This is completely false.
Following a rule is not a conflict. We are told how to handle this, thus creating no conflict.
The game wold be broken beyond repair following your conflict logic.
   
Made in us
Captain of the Forlorn Hope





Chicago, IL

rigeld2 wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:

Umm...

AP2 AP-

and the fact that Codex (AP-) trumps Rulebook.

Again - how is that a conflict? Is there a rule that says an attack can only have one AP value?
And why is Smash allowed to override a codex rule in one place (Black Mace) but not another (Combat Familiar)? You've already presented an argument that both attacks are made with weapons.


It is a conflict because you are told to resolve at 2 different AP values, which you can not do. You have to pick one.

"Did you notice a sign out in front of my chapel that said "Land Raider Storage"?" -High Chaplain Astorath the Grim Redeemer of the Lost.

I sold my soul to the devil and now the bastard is demanding a refund!

We do not have an attorney-client relationship. I am not your lawyer. The statements I make do not constitute legal advice. Any statements made by me are based upon the limited facts you have presented, and under the premise that you will consult with a local attorney. This is not an attempt to solicit business. This disclaimer is in addition to any disclaimers that this website has made.
 
   
Made in gb
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare





I think you miss understand how a permissive ruleset works. I've covered how the conflict is first resolved (specific over rides general). In the case of smash vs CF I've illustrated why this isn't the case and why it is the case for the black mace vs smash. Do you have any rules that support your side of the argument other than you wanting to ignore parts of the CF rule because you don't like them?

Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.

Yes my Colour is Black but not for the reasons stated mainly just because it's slimming... http://imperiusdominatus.blogspot.com 
   
Made in us
The Hive Mind





 DeathReaper wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:

Umm...

AP2 AP-

and the fact that Codex (AP-) trumps Rulebook.

Again - how is that a conflict? Is there a rule that says an attack can only have one AP value?
And why is Smash allowed to override a codex rule in one place (Black Mace) but not another (Combat Familiar)? You've already presented an argument that both attacks are made with weapons.


It is a conflict because you are told to resolve at 2 different AP values, which you can not do. You have to pick one.

Please answer the bolded question.
And no - the CF rules do not say to "resolve" the attacks at a specific AP value. Smash does.

My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
 
   
Made in im
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw





Liverpool

 FlingitNow wrote:
I think you miss understand how a permissive ruleset works. I've covered how the conflict is first resolved (specific over rides general). In the case of smash vs CF I've illustrated why this isn't the case and why it is the case for the black mace vs smash. Do you have any rules that support your side of the argument other than you wanting to ignore parts of the CF rule because you don't like them?
Permissive has nothing to do with this. And you've illustrated nothing with any rules support.
Both the Mace and the Familiar have an Ap. 4 and - respectively.
Both are close combat attacks made by the model.
Both come from a codex not a rulebook.

Yet you claim one gains the Ap2 from smash but not other, with nothing to justify the difference.
You're presenting a double standard without support.

If its a conflict as you claim then the mace must also be Ap4 and gain no benefit from Smash.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/06/18 15:01:54


 
   
Made in gb
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare





Grendel read my posts again there is no double standard. Your questions have been answered with rules.

Do you have a rules argument that means either:

1) Smash wins the conflict with CF
Or
2) You have permission to ignore part of the CF rule.

Your mace straw man has been debunked. Do you have an actual rules argument?

Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.

Yes my Colour is Black but not for the reasons stated mainly just because it's slimming... http://imperiusdominatus.blogspot.com 
   
Made in us
Captain of the Forlorn Hope





Chicago, IL

rigeld2 wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:

Umm...

AP2 AP-

and the fact that Codex (AP-) trumps Rulebook.

Again - how is that a conflict? Is there a rule that says an attack can only have one AP value?
And why is Smash allowed to override a codex rule in one place (Black Mace) but not another (Combat Familiar)? You've already presented an argument that both attacks are made with weapons.


It is a conflict because you are told to resolve at 2 different AP values, which you can not do. You have to pick one.

Please answer the bolded question.
And no - the CF rules do not say to "resolve" the attacks at a specific AP value. Smash does.
Because the Black Mace is a weapon, that is why the codex does not trump the BRB because smash deals specifically with attacking with weapons.

I never said the CF was a weapon, in fact I said it was not a weapon so smash does not apply.

Here is what I said.
DeathReaper wrote:A model makes attacks with a weapon, in context, the Smash rules affect the models attacks with whatever weapon he is using to make attacks. Proven by the following quotes.

"If a model is not specifically stated as having a weapon with the Melee type, it is treated as being armed with a single close combat weapon." (51)
"I a model has more than one Melee weapon, he must choose which one to attack with when he comes to strike blows" (51)

So a model either has a weapon, is treated as if he has a weapon or has more than one weapon. This is the basis in which the Close Combat, and consequently Smash, rules were written.

However the familiar is not a weapon so this does not apply because the Codex specifically states what AP the attacks are made at (AP-).

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/06/18 15:17:09


"Did you notice a sign out in front of my chapel that said "Land Raider Storage"?" -High Chaplain Astorath the Grim Redeemer of the Lost.

I sold my soul to the devil and now the bastard is demanding a refund!

We do not have an attorney-client relationship. I am not your lawyer. The statements I make do not constitute legal advice. Any statements made by me are based upon the limited facts you have presented, and under the premise that you will consult with a local attorney. This is not an attempt to solicit business. This disclaimer is in addition to any disclaimers that this website has made.
 
   
Made in im
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw





Liverpool

 FlingitNow wrote:
Grendel read my posts again there is no double standard. Your questions have been answered with rules.

Do you have a rules argument that means either:

1) Smash wins the conflict with CF
Or
2) You have permission to ignore part of the CF rule.

Your mace straw man has been debunked. Do you have an actual rules argument?
Looking back over your posts, I see you've cited rules with no relevance.
You've failed to prove there's a conflict.
You've failed to give reason why the Mace is not also Ap4

But to answer your questions:
1) there is no rules conflict. And if there is the mace is also Ap4
2) nothing's been ignored, the CF is an attack made by the model, all attacks made by the model are Ap2, all rules satisfied, no conflicts.
   
Made in us
The Hive Mind





 DeathReaper wrote:
Because the Black Mace is a weapon, that is why the codex does not trump the BRB because smash deals specifically with attacking with weapons.

But it's a conflict, according to you, and codex trumps BRB in all cases where there's a conflict. Correct?

The CF is additional attacks the model makes. Agreed?
All attacks are made with weapons. Agreed?

My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
 
   
Made in gb
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare





 grendel083 wrote:
 FlingitNow wrote:
Grendel read my posts again there is no double standard. Your questions have been answered with rules.

Do you have a rules argument that means either:

1) Smash wins the conflict with CF
Or
2) You have permission to ignore part of the CF rule.

Your mace straw man has been debunked. Do you have an actual rules argument?
Looking back over your posts, I see you've cited rules with no relevance.
You've failed to prove there's a conflict.
You've failed to give reason why the Mace is not also Ap4

But to answer your questions:
1) there is no rules conflict. And if there is the mace is also Ap4
2) nothing's been ignored, the CF is an attack made by the model, all attacks made by the model are Ap2, all rules satisfied, no conflicts.


1) So you've posted no rules that smash wins the conflict. As for the mace straw man that has been debunked I'll take any further mention of that without new evidence as you conceding.
2) So you're ignoring that CF says the attacks are AP- with no rules allowing you to do so...

Please actually make a rules argument as you why you are ignoring CF or why smash over rules it or concede.

Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.

Yes my Colour is Black but not for the reasons stated mainly just because it's slimming... http://imperiusdominatus.blogspot.com 
   
Made in us
Captain of the Forlorn Hope





Chicago, IL

rigeld2 wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
Because the Black Mace is a weapon, that is why the codex does not trump the BRB because smash deals specifically with attacking with weapons.

But it's a conflict, according to you, and codex trumps BRB in all cases where there's a conflict. Correct?

It is a conflict, but one that the BRB specifically addresses so the BRB has the more specific rule in the case of Smash Vs. a weapons AP.

The CF is additional attacks the model makes. Agreed?
It seems that way, I have not the Chaos codex at hand, but from what I have read in this thread it seems that way.

All attacks are made with weapons. Agreed?

Clearly not.

The CF is not a weapon and the models makes attacks because of it.

The model does not get the benefit of fleshbane on these attacks because of the black mace, is that correct?

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2013/06/18 15:36:24


"Did you notice a sign out in front of my chapel that said "Land Raider Storage"?" -High Chaplain Astorath the Grim Redeemer of the Lost.

I sold my soul to the devil and now the bastard is demanding a refund!

We do not have an attorney-client relationship. I am not your lawyer. The statements I make do not constitute legal advice. Any statements made by me are based upon the limited facts you have presented, and under the premise that you will consult with a local attorney. This is not an attempt to solicit business. This disclaimer is in addition to any disclaimers that this website has made.
 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K You Make Da Call
Go to: