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.

 Kriswall wrote:
I respectfully disagree. Swapping one for one two times is not the same as swapping two for two once. Unless you can provide some new rules wording that hasn't been seen yet, the best I'm willing to concede is that GW may possibly have intended us to only have one Relic per model, but worded the ruling ambiguously by using the word items. Had they just said something like "may select from" instead of "may select items from" I would agree... but they didn't. They said items. A perfectly legitimate reading of the words presented could allow me to choose more than one Relic.

I know we don't care about fluff, but I'm also factoring in that other codexes allows more than one "Relic" and that it's strange to think a marine can't wear a helmet AND armour due to an ambiguous rules wording.

codex orks model can take one of the following, no weapon swap specified. ghazz supplement no restriction on how many a model can take; so going on that the sw book would be 1 per and there supplement would be as many as you wanted; going off other books may not be the bast way to interpret anything that is army specific
as to may take items from (means open to take any item from)and replace 1 weapon with 1 relic (means you can choose which weapon you replace but you must replace 1 for the relic), i interpret as allowing you to take 1 relic as the amount of weapons you have does not have an affect on the amount of relics

I've read this thread as I'm still waiting on my codex to come in, and when it does I'll read through it and play the game accordingly.

A relic is suppose to be a super strong item so I kinda doubt it's legit to have a wolf lord on a TWM running around with multiple relics, but hey if I'm wrong then so be it and good luck to whoever I charge into!

Relics are supposed to be super strong. But in the same vein, they are super expensive (compared to most wargear). If you actually equipped a Wolf Lord on TWC with 5 Relics, he'd be super expensive and not particularly effective. I'd just avoid and shoot. Then again, as a Tau player, I love when people field expensive close combat units. They die to massed fire and achieve little to nothing.

 Kriswall wrote:
Relics are supposed to be super strong. But in the same vein, they are super expensive (compared to most wargear). If you actually equipped a Wolf Lord on TWC with 5 Relics, he'd be super expensive and not particularly effective. I'd just avoid and shoot. Then again, as a Tau player, I love when people field expensive close combat units. They die to massed fire and achieve little to nothing.

No offense to you but the idea of a Wolf Lord with 5 relics is just so comical to me that I'm not really even giving it much thought.

But hey, like I said, if its in the codex in a CLEAR manner where I do not have to argue to the moon and back with someone to allow me to play it that way then maybe I'll try it for the "lolz". I don't imagine it would be remotely cost efficient as you have stated but it may be fun.

Still - a wolf lord with two relics - let's say - black death and a helm is a good and affoedable combo. Question is - is it legit?

Is it legit?

Ultimately depends on how you and your opponent decide to play it, or how a TO rules it. To be safe, only taking one relic per model keeps everyone happy. Taking multiple on one model makes one side unhappy.

Only one of each Relic of the Fang may be taken per army. A model can replace one weapon
with one of the following:

is no tthe same as

"Only one of each Relic of the Fang may be taken per army. A model can replace one or more weapon(s) with any of the following"

or

"Only one of each Relic of the Fang may be taken per army. A model can replace a weapon with any of the following"

there is obviously the restriction of "one of the following"

additionally the items that do not replace a weapon are also restricted, as they do not ignore the "one of the following" but just allow you to not have to replace a weapon.

A TO, you and your opponent may rule it differently but that is the RAW.

 Kriswall wrote:
Relics are supposed to be super strong. But in the same vein, they are super expensive (compared to most wargear). If you actually equipped a Wolf Lord on TWC with 5 Relics, he'd be super expensive and not particularly effective. I'd just avoid and shoot. Then again, as a Tau player, I love when people field expensive close combat units. They die to massed fire and achieve little to nothing.

You mean until someone deep strikes/drop pods on top of them? lol.

To the OP- One of each Relic may be taken per army. Would hardly be rare if everyone in your army was armed with say, The Teeth of Terra.

blaktoof wrote:

Only one of each Relic of the Fang may be taken per army. A model can replace one weapon
with one of the following:

is no tthe same as

"Only one of each Relic of the Fang may be taken per army. A model can replace one or more weapon(s) with any of the following"

or

"Only one of each Relic of the Fang may be taken per army. A model can replace a weapon with any of the following"

there is obviously the restriction of "one of the following"

additionally the items that do not replace a weapon are also restricted, as they do not ignore the "one of the following" but just allow you to not have to replace a weapon.

A TO, you and your opponent may rule it differently but that is the RAW.

I've never contested that the swap occurs on a one for one basis. The wording is pretty clear that one weapon gets you one Relic. I'm contesting the wording in the unit entry that says I'm allowed to take items (plural) from the various lists. I'm interpreting that as being able to select multiple times from the lists so long as I am able to abide by any restrictions imposed in the various lists (specifically having to trade in existing pieces of wargear).

I'm saying that items allows me to pick an item from the Relics list and replace a weapon and then pick a second items from the Relics list and replace another weapon. Given that I have explicit permission to select ITEMS from the lists, I should be able to do this so long as I can meet the restrictions for each selection.

 Kriswall wrote:
Given that I have explicit permission to select ITEMS from the lists, I should be able to do this so long as I can meet the restrictions for each selection.

a) Items (plural) from lists (plural). Selecting one item from the Relic list and one item from the Ranged Weapon list satisfies this statement - so your "explicit" permission isn't.
b) You cannot meet the restriction of one weapon for one relic if you attempt to take swap two weapons for two relics.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
Given that I have explicit permission to select ITEMS from the lists, I should be able to do this so long as I can meet the restrictions for each selection.

a) Items (plural) from lists (plural). Selecting one item from the Relic list and one item from the Ranged Weapon list satisfies this statement - so your "explicit" permission isn't.
b) You cannot meet the restriction of one weapon for one relic if you attempt to take swap two weapons for two relics.

I would say it means that in exchange for one weapon you get one relic. So exchanging 2 weapons for 2 relics is legal. 1 weapon for 2 relics is not. Assuming you need to exchange anything for the relic in question.

pm713 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
Given that I have explicit permission to select ITEMS from the lists, I should be able to do this so long as I can meet the restrictions for each selection.

a) Items (plural) from lists (plural). Selecting one item from the Relic list and one item from the Ranged Weapon list satisfies this statement - so your "explicit" permission isn't.
b) You cannot meet the restriction of one weapon for one relic if you attempt to take swap two weapons for two relics.

I would say it means that in exchange for one weapon you get one relic. So exchanging 2 weapons for 2 relics is legal. 1 weapon for 2 relics is not. Assuming you need to exchange anything for the relic in question.

Let's apply that thinking to, say, Codex: Blood Angels (the closest one to hand).
Tactical Squad:

If the squad numbers ten models, one Space Marine can replace his boltgun with one of the following:

So all 9 Space Marines can wander around with Flamers - for free - because you're only swapping one for one.
Or are you selectively applying your logic? It's crazy how this argument literally only appeared with Relics and was never even considered with Tac Squads, etc.

No because one space marine gets a flamer therefore only one gets it.

pm713 wrote:
No because one space marine gets a flamer therefore only one gets it.

And you can swap one weapon. Not two.

The wording is the same and you're being inconsistent with your application of your argument. If that doesn't show that you should re-examine your argument I'm not sure what will.

rigeld2 wrote:

pm713 wrote:
No because one space marine gets a flamer therefore only one gets it.

And you can swap one weapon. Not two.

The wording is the same and you're being inconsistent with your application of your argument. If that doesn't show that you should re-examine your argument I'm not sure what will.

I can swap ONE weapon for ONE relic. If I lose 2 weapons and take 2 relics I'm still exchanging 1 weapon for 1 relic.
I'm not explaining myself well I'll admit.

pm713 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

pm713 wrote:
No because one space marine gets a flamer therefore only one gets it.

And you can swap one weapon. Not two.

The wording is the same and you're being inconsistent with your application of your argument. If that doesn't show that you should re-examine your argument I'm not sure what will.

I can swap ONE weapon for ONE relic. If I lose 2 weapons and take 2 relics I'm still exchanging 1 weapon for 1 relic.
I'm not explaining myself well I'll admit.

Correct, and if I have 2 Tac Marines take flamers, I'm still exchanging 1 Bolter for 1 Flamer.

 Happyjew wrote:

pm713 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

pm713 wrote:
No because one space marine gets a flamer therefore only one gets it.

And you can swap one weapon. Not two.

The wording is the same and you're being inconsistent with your application of your argument. If that doesn't show that you should re-examine your argument I'm not sure what will.

I can swap ONE weapon for ONE relic. If I lose 2 weapons and take 2 relics I'm still exchanging 1 weapon for 1 relic.
I'm not explaining myself well I'll admit.

Correct, and if I have 2 Tac Marines take flamers, I'm still exchanging 1 Bolter for 1 Flamer.

True but it says one space marine can replace his boltgun not a space marine therefore only one can exchange his bolter. If it said A space marine can exchange his boltgun for..... I would admit you are correct RAW.

And how is that different from saying a model may swap one weapon for one relic?

 Ghaz wrote:
And how is that different from saying a model may swap one weapon for one relic?

Apart from the bit where it says "one space marine may" it isn't. Unless I'm getting confused.

pm713 wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
And how is that different from saying a model may swap one weapon for one relic?

Apart from the bit where it says "one space marine may" it isn't. Unless I'm getting confused.

You're saying that one doesn't mean it's restricted to one. (You're allowed to swap one weapon twice).
And yet you're restricting Blood Angels to only making the swap one time.

They're the same usage of language. In one occurrence you're applying a restriction. In the other you're not.
Are you saying you believe your argument to be entirely consistent?

pm73, you see the relic list as follows.

I swap Weapon A for Relic A (1:1)
I swap Weapon b for Relic B (1:1)

Using that logic, I could take a 10-man Tac squad and

Upgrade Space Marine A with Special Weapon A (1:1)
Upgrade Space Marine B with Special Weapon B (1:1)

It is the same ratio, 1 for 1.

ONE SPACE MARINE CAN replace his boltgun with one of the following:

The part in capitals is why only 1 Blood Angel gets the flamer.

If it said "A space marine can replace his boltgun with one of the following" or anything that implies they can all take flamers then they could all take the flamers.

And ONE WEAPON can be exchanged for one relic.

So again, what's the difference?

The flamer exchange is limited to one marine exchanging his weapon.

so one means just one marine out of the models in a squad

but one just doesn't mean one weapon out of the weapons a model has.

got it.

No

One model = One model can make this exchange.

One weapon for one relic = You lose a single weapon and gain a single relic.
You can then lose another SINGLE weapon and gain another SINGLE relic.

And the relic swap is limited to one weapon can be swapped for one relic. If you swap two for two you have cheated.

No because I still swapped ONE weapon for ONE relic.

It would be illegal if I swapped ONE weapon for TWO relics or TWO weapons for ONE relic.

No, you swapped TWO weapons for TWO relics. Absolutely. You have permission to swap one and you swapped two. This is cheating.

I swapped one. This is legal.