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.

I really did. I took 1 sweet for 1 dollar and then I took 1 sweet for 1 dollar. I can do this because I was told I can take sweets from the bowl. You have to prove to me that I can't take things sequentially.

My evidence that I can is the SM Biker FAQ allowing me to swap Pistol for Chainsword and then Chainsword for other weapons. The system HAS to work sequentially or the FAQ is false. And we all build lists the same way. It doesn't change from 'dex to 'dex.

Hmmm, I didn't think army list selection was sequential. That FAQ says you can swap a pistol for a chainsword but it doesn't say anything about then being able to swap that chainsword for something else.

 Kriswall wrote:
The permission on the bowl actually tells me that I can take a sweet by exchanging a dollar. I read this as "If you want a sweet, you must give the bowl a dollar". The larger permission tells me I can take sweets. I'm reading this as "you can take multiple sweets (it does say sweets and not sweet), so long as you are fulfilling the requirement for each sweet you take".

Nowhere does it say I can ONLY take one sweet from the red bowl. I'm just told that I can take one sweet by exchanging a one dollar. If I take multiple sweets, then I would be required to exchange one sweet for one dollar multiple times.

You're reading something entirely different from what's actually written though. And you're not applying that reading consistently.

If you have to restate the rule in a more permissive way to make your argument work, then your argument cannot be correct.

Zimko wrote:

"- May take items from the Melee Weapons, Ranged Weapons, Special Issue Wargear and/or Relics of the Fang lists."

You have permission to select items from the above lists. So from there we need restrictions or further instructions in order to limit the number of items we can take for a given model.

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

This gives further instructions on how to select items from the Relic of the Fang list. It says a model can replace 1 weapon with 1 relic. This is a restriction placed upon a model selecting wargear from this list. If you replace 2 weapons with 2 relics then you've broken the restriction no matter when or how you do it.

I disagree here. Based on the first line, it is pluralized. I take this to mean I may take items from the same category multiple times. The only stipulation is that when I do so, it is on a 1 for 1 basis. My interpretation is that each time I take an item from the above list, I do so following the restrictions laid out above. Can someone with the rulebook let me know what it says about how you swap out for the other categories? Is it worded the same? (What I am wondering is what is the wording for getting a pair of wolf claws? Does melee weapons have the one for one wording?)

 Green is Best! wrote:
I disagree here. Based on the first line, it is pluralized. I take this to mean I may take items from the same category multiple times. The only stipulation is that when I do so, it is on a 1 for 1 basis. My interpretation is that each time I take an item from the above list, I do so following the restrictions laid out above. Can someone with the rulebook let me know what it says about how you swap out for the other categories? Is it worded the same? (What I am wondering is what is the wording for getting a pair of wolf claws? Does melee weapons have the one for one wording?)

The underlined has no basis in fact. It's plural because there are multiple lists.
You have to abide by the restrictions of each list to use them. If you've already selected one item from the Relic table, cite permission to select another.

OK. How are the other categories worded for replacing weapons? (Codex is at home)

 Green is Best! wrote:

Zimko wrote:

"- May take items from the Melee Weapons, Ranged Weapons, Special Issue Wargear and/or Relics of the Fang lists."

You have permission to select items from the above lists. So from there we need restrictions or further instructions in order to limit the number of items we can take for a given model.

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

This gives further instructions on how to select items from the Relic of the Fang list. It says a model can replace 1 weapon with 1 relic. This is a restriction placed upon a model selecting wargear from this list. If you replace 2 weapons with 2 relics then you've broken the restriction no matter when or how you do it.

I disagree here. Based on the first line, it is pluralized. I take this to mean I may take items from the same category multiple times. The only stipulation is that when I do so, it is on a 1 for 1 basis. My interpretation is that each time I take an item from the above list, I do so following the restrictions laid out above. Can someone with the rulebook let me know what it says about how you swap out for the other categories? Is it worded the same? (What I am wondering is what is the wording for getting a pair of wolf claws? Does melee weapons have the one for one wording?)

its plural because saying "may take item from.."

is 1- improper english

2- would possibly mean you can only take 1 item total, but who knows?

 Kriswall wrote:
The permission on the bowl actually tells me that I can take a sweet by exchanging a dollar. I read this as "If you want a sweet, you must give the bowl a dollar". The larger permission tells me I can take sweets. I'm reading this as "you can take multiple sweets (it does say sweets and not sweet), so long as you are fulfilling the requirement for each sweet you take".

Nowhere does it say I can ONLY take one sweet from the red bowl. I'm just told that I can take one sweet by exchanging a one dollar. If I take multiple sweets, then I would be required to exchange one sweet for one dollar multiple times.

Your reading is totally different to what you're told though. It's the same as the rewrite of rules you're attempting with relics.

Have you taken two relics? Yes. Then you have broken th rules. Proven

Just checked the codex. It is pretty clear you can only take one relic. Otherwise, it would be written like the melee weapons:

A model may exchange his bolt pistol and/or chainsword for one of the following.

The fact that they are written so plainly within the same codex implies that is what they meant.

 Green is Best! wrote:
Just checked the codex. It is pretty clear you can only take one relic. Otherwise, it would be written like the melee weapons:

A model may exchange his bolt pistol and/or chainsword for one of the following.

The fact that they are written so plainly within the same codex implies that is what they meant.

If it was written that way Then a Wolf lord couldn't take terminator armor and a relic, because he doesn't have a chainsword or bolt pistol. A wolf lord in terminator armor has weapons just like one with out terminator armor has weapons.

Well theoretically you could take items from the Relics list.

It depends on whether or not you think taking more than 1 Relic is legal as long as you abide by the 1 Weapon swap rule. So for example,
Swap Weapon A for "Super Cool Relic Weapon A"
Take "Super Awesome Relic Armour B" (no swap)
Take "Relic Shield That is Pretty Sweet But not as Awesome as The Super Awesome Relic Armour But Still Makes Your Character Look Really Sweet C" (no swap)

As you can see I'm not very good with Relic names. However, the model in question has indeed taken items from the Relics list and has followed the rule of 1 Weapon for 1 Relic.


And personally I think this is the intent as it is how every tournament (not RAW and tourneys do get things wrong) has ruled it (the taking multiple no swap relics).

Nothing changes the fact that One = 1, as in singular. You get to this step in the sequence of outfitting your HQ. You choose 1 weapon to swap, then 1 relic. Now in the case of armour or equipment, there is a sub-rule that tells you you get the weapon back. There is no sub-rule that tells you that you can then go back and repeat this step as many times as you like.
If you are arguing that you may repeat a step like this as many times as you want then you reopen the ork discussion allowing a warboss to do the same (and possibly the heavy weapon thing mentioned earlier). You cannot be 'for' one and 'against' the other. It's either for both, or against both since both use the exact same wording, organization & layout.
I would personally love to be able to apply as many of the ork codex relics as I wanted on a boss since many of them seem fun but can't compare to the few really good ones but One, is singular.
If it's any consolation, it's quite likely wolves will be able to take multiple relics from the list in the supplement (I am assuming there is another list in that book like the Ghaz one for orks) if the ork one is any indication (which I'm inclined to believe it is since the codices are the exact same format and use the same wording). Anyone have that book yet?

Seems like everyone's best bet is just come to an agreement with your gaming group. I don't care what someone from England or wherever thinks. I understand finding out a rule meaning here but any debate that has lasted for 5 pages isn't going to be solved. Good luck people.

Yellowfever,
It is also a debate that occurs with every Edition, so I too don't think an answer will be forth coming this time...

However it was only ever a debate with Relics. Despite the situations being functionally identical, no one has ever tried to claim that all their Tac marines can get a free flamer.

Personally, I think the way the special issue wargear is worded (making it very clear you can take multiple items) is decisive. If they had meant to allow multiple relics per character the relics could have been worded the same way.

 Happyjew wrote:
Well theoretically you could take items from the Relics list.

It depends on whether or not you think taking more than 1 Relic is legal as long as you abide by the 1 Weapon swap rule. So for example,
Swap Weapon A for "Super Cool Relic Weapon A"
Take "Super Awesome Relic Armour B" (no swap)
Take "Relic Shield That is Pretty Sweet But not as Awesome as The Super Awesome Relic Armour But Still Makes Your Character Look Really Sweet C" (no swap)

As you can see I'm not very good with Relic names. However, the model in question has indeed taken items from the Relics list and has followed the rule of 1 Weapon for 1 Relic.


And personally I think this is the intent as it is how every tournament (not RAW and tourneys do get things wrong) has ruled it (the taking multiple no swap relics).

I'm on this side: Indeed, "A model can replace one weapon with one of the following:"
Single model, single "one weapon with one": can't take The Bite with Black Death

Note 6: "Does not replace one of the character's weapons" - ie disregard the second line.
Black Death + Wulfen stone + Helm is perfectly legal as you only have One per army and that is the single requirement.

Mavnas wrote:
Personally, I think the way the special issue wargear is worded (making it very clear you can take multiple items) is decisive. If they had meant to allow multiple relics per character the relics could have been worded the same way.

This is what sold me. Also, if you want to cross compare with other codexes, the only one that I am aware of where you can take multiple relics is Crimson Slaughter. The relics portion is worded as:

"Any character in your Crimson Slaughter detachment....can instead select from the Relics of the Crimson Slaughter...."

*Additionally, they even reference Kranon having multiple relics earlier in the book.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
No, I am not. You are ignoring that you can select items, plural, from all the lists mentioned. One from each is still plural.

Please cite permission to exchange such items sequentially, neatly loop holing the rules to avoid triggering the restriction imposed on you. Not at all Easter egging

Obvious Troll is obvious

pg 35 has an example of "Wolf Guard with Thunder Hammer and Storm Shield"
but the "Melee Weapons" list says "one of the following"

pg43 has an example of a TWC wielding a Thunder Hammer and Storm Shield
but the "Melee Weapons" list says "one of the following"

pg68 again shows a Wolf Guard wielding a Thunder Hammer and Storm Shield
but the "Melee Weapons" list says "one of the following"

None of these units have access to a single (TH & SS) option, like WG Terminators do

So are you saying that no Space Wolf model other than Wolf Guard Terminators may simultaneously wield a Thunder Hammer and Storm Shield, on the basis that the Melee Weapons entry says
"A model may replace his bolt pistol and/or Melee weapon with one of the following:" ????

Because I don't think you'll find much support for that argument

GW themselves have shown many models with what you would argue is an illegal wargear combination

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kriswall wrote:My permission to take items from the list is in the unit entry where it says I may take items from the list.

The fact that there are other lists present in the same sentence in no way, shape or form changes the fact that items is used. It potentially adds an element of ambiguity, but that's the best you have.

QFT

1) reported for rule 1
2) yes, that's what "and / or" means. Wording that the relics list does not have.

Meaning your argument fails

If you think someone is trolling it is best to click the Yellow Triangle to alert moderators rather than directly accusing them in the thread.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
1) reported for rule 1
2) yes, that's what "and / or" means. Wording that the relics list does not have.

Meaning your argument fails

Sorry... what?!?!

What do you mean by "2) yes" ?!?!!

Are you trying to say a Wolf Lord can't have both a Frost Sword AND Storm Shield because he can only replace his weapons with *one* optional choice?!?!?!?!

Because accusing someone of trolling is not a way to have a discussion. A mod already said something of it, so drop it.

As for 2).
That entry clearly says you swap a bolt pistol AND/OR a melee weapon, which allows you to swap the bolt pistol and allows you to swap the melee weapon.

Mate I hadn't made any further mention of the trolling thing (which was only ever a casual comment in the first place)

As far as your comment on the so-called "2)"....

yes, it allows you to swap either one, the other, or both -

but only for "one of the following"

If you even TRY to say that's somehow different from the wording on the relics...... well I wouldn't know how to respond.... but certainly there's no way I could ever take you seriously

It doesn't matter if you swap "one weapon", "bolt pistol", "and/or", "melee weapon"....
BOTH rules clearly say you get the same thing in return

"one of the following"


Automatically Appended Next Post:
so if that's how you interpret it.....
let's just say there aren't any valid lists in the Army List forum

Edited by insaniak. Stick to the topic.

I am afraid that you are confused by the definition of the word "Troll", and should probably look up "Lurker" instead. One is always negative, the other can be a bit of both.

As to the difference your are talking about, one says:
"may replace his bolt pistol and/or Melee weapon with one of the following"
the other "A model can replace one weapon with one of the following"

If you take the "and" from the first you get "replace bolt pistol with XxxX and replace Melee weapon with YyyY"
so 2 from the list.

For relics, you can only trade 1 weapon. Never 2.

As Wulfen stone, Helm, etc don't replace anything, you can have as many of those (1 per army).

Again, reported for rule 1

2 yes, the fact the written rule is very different, means the result is different.

 BlackTalos wrote:
I am afraid that you are confused by the definition of the word "Troll", and should probably look up "Lurker" instead. One is always negative, the other can be a bit of both.

As to the difference your are talking about, one says:
"may replace his bolt pistol and/or Melee weapon with one of the following"
the other "A model can replace one weapon with one of the following"

If you take the "and" from the first you get "replace bolt pistol with XxxX and replace Melee weapon with YyyY"
so 2 from the list.

For relics, you can only trade 1 weapon. Never 2.

As Wulfen stone, Helm, etc don't replace anything, you can have as many of those (1 per army).

I think his point is that the and/or is saying that you can replace both weapons or 1 of the weapons for one of the following.

There is no reason you would, but that is the way it is technically worded.

The sentence is set up to give you two chances to replace, giving:

replace bolt pistol with... AND
replace chainsword with

So no, theyre not right, at all.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Again, reported for rule 1

2 yes, the fact the written rule is very different, means the result is different.

So what you're saying is...
"A model may replace his bolt pistol and/or Melee weapon with ONE of the following:"
"A model can replace ONE weapon with ONE of the following"
[What a model can replace] / [what the model gets in return]

I see.... so the definition of ONE all depends upon which side of the equation it's written in!!!

so if it's ONE then it means one thing, but if it's ONE then it means another?

It's all so clear now
....
....
except.... why then is the "what the model gets in return" exactly the same in both cases?

Well, it's actually quite simple.

What can he replace?
1) ONE weapon
2) Bolt Pistol and/or Melee Weapon.

So how many can he replace?
1) One weapon.
2) One or two weapons.