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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/11 21:54:07
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
I know it's been debated extensively and interpreted in both ways.
I was playing with the SM digital codex army list builder. The force requisition page. I discovered that when you select certain items, other items may become un-checkable.
Example, you choose terminator armor, you cannot pick non terminator weapons.
What I did notice was. You are allowed to choose multiple relics.
When I pick terminator armor, I can't choose the Armor Indomitus. If I pick a relic and a regular weapon everything else greys out and I can't choose another item. If I pick two relics, it greys out everything else. If you only pick one relic and no regular weapon it doesn't grey out and allows me to pick a second relic. Essentially allowing me to discard two weapons for two relics. In fact, I can pick the burning blade and shield eternal and still pick the Armor Indomitus. But clearly I can't choose more than two relic weapons.
Could this be used as reference that more than one relic can be chosen by one model?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/11 21:55:51
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/12 00:26:23
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Never Forget Isstvan!
|
It can be used as a reference for some people. Others will not accept it however.
|
JOIN MY CRUSADE and gain 4000 RT points!
http://www.eternalcrusade.com/account/sign-up/?ref_code=EC-PLCIKYCABW8PG |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/12 00:36:00
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw
|
Still leaves the same problem.
"A model can replace one weapon with one of the following"
Taking two means you've replaced two weapons with two of the following. That you've done it one at a time doesn't change this.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/12 00:37:01
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
Minneapolis, MN
|
The GW list builders have known bugs, so I wouldn't consider them authoritative.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/12 00:38:58
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Legendary Master of the Chapter
|
Anything short of an actual FAQ will lead to endless circular arguments about what 1 + 1 is.
Just try to find the consensus around your area and house rule it.
|
Unit1126PLL wrote: Scott-S6 wrote:And yet another thread is hijacked for Unit to ask for the same advice, receive the same answers and make the same excuses.
Oh my god I'm becoming martel.
Send help!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/12 03:25:24
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Space Marine Scout with Sniper Rifle
|
To answer the OPs question about the builder, as to how the Armor Indomitus and two relic weapons can be taken, see the codex.
Specifically, the sub-note in the relics list that specifically states that taking the Armor Indomitus does not replace a weapon, and cannot be taken by models wearing terminator armor.
As for taking more than 2 relic weapons, it is theoretically possible (emphasis on theoretical). It would just require the model having more than 2 weapons to replace with relics. Which gives me an idea. Aren't grenades technically weapons and could thus be replaced with a relic?
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/12/12 03:28:55
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/13 16:23:41
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
lycio wrote:To answer the OPs question about the builder, as to how the Armor Indomitus and two relic weapons can be taken, see the codex.
Specifically, the sub-note in the relics list that specifically states that taking the Armor Indomitus does not replace a weapon, and cannot be taken by models wearing terminator armor.
As for taking more than 2 relic weapons, it is theoretically possible (emphasis on theoretical). It would just require the model having more than 2 weapons to replace with relics. Which gives me an idea. Aren't grenades technically weapons and could thus be replaced with a relic?
I think the force builder is working as intended. You cannot though, change out grenades for anything. Codex tells you what you can replace with.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/13 16:29:51
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Fresh-Faced New User
|
If you only pick one relic and no regular weapon it doesn't grey out and allows me to pick a second relic. why
|
game vs life
Alpha Legion (HH era) - 6000pts finished
Army of Mousillon - Bretonnian Black Knight army - 3000pts (66% painted)
Host of Xblanque - Lizardmen Army - 7000pts (50% painted)
Irrational negativity is the engine that drives the forums
Reserves: 534 (can be fielded, but wont, at least at the moment)
you'll be killed to a man.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/13 16:45:32
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
because the builder isnt a rulebook. its obvious a bug. it wouldnt be the first one. stick with the rules provided by the codex and the 7th edition rulebook and stop trying to find excuses to cheat for your own advantage... ...grenades...jesus... -.-
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/13 16:45:59
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/13 16:47:59
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
grendel083 wrote:Still leaves the same problem.
"A model can replace one weapon with one of the following"
Taking two means you've replaced two weapons with two of the following. That you've done it one at a time doesn't change this.
This is perfectly stated. There's no ambiguity here.
|
"'players must agree how they are going to select their armies, and if any restrictions apply to the number and type of models they can use."
This is an actual rule in the actual rulebook. Quit whining about how you can imagine someone's army touching you in a bad place and play by the actual rules.
Freelance Ontologist
When people ask, "What's the point in understanding everything?" they've just disqualified themselves from using questions and should disappear in a puff of paradox. But they don't understand and just continue existing, which are also their only two strategies for life. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/13 16:48:58
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Prescient Cryptek of Eternity
|
The Force Requisition page has several issues...
1. It's not a list builder. It was originally "marketed" as a way of keeping track of everything you own and how it is equipped for that Codex.
2. It doesn't always have the same options, or work the same way as the unit entries in the actual Codex.
3. It isn't always updated when the Codex is updated. A good example is that the Bike Squad in the Force Requisition tool doesn't have the option to swap Bolt Pistol for Chainsword, but the unit entry does.
In other words, it's not a list builder, wasn't intended to be a list builder and isn't accurate enough to be a list builder. Don't trust it to build lists.
Automatically Appended Next Post: DarknessEternal wrote: grendel083 wrote:Still leaves the same problem.
"A model can replace one weapon with one of the following"
Taking two means you've replaced two weapons with two of the following. That you've done it one at a time doesn't change this.
This is perfectly stated. There's no ambiguity here.
This argument will never end.
There is no ambiguity that when you choose a single item from the list that you replace one item with one relic. There is ambiguity as to how many times you can select from the list.
Your argument is predicated upon selecting everything at once. We don't do that. Ever.
Here's your proof.
Biker Squad... To be able to take Special Weapons, you must first choose the Option to swap Bolt Pistol for Chainsword. This creates a new state of being wherein the Biker has a Chainsword. Now, as a SECOND and SUBSEQUENT ACTION, you swap the Melee Weapon (Chainsword) for a Special Weapon.
Now, let's apply that to the Relic situation.
You replace ONE WEAPON for ONE RELIC. This creates a new state of being wherein the model has a Relic. Now, as a SECOND and SUBSEQUENT ACTION, you replace a DIFFERENT WEAPON with a DIFFERENT RELIC.
At NO POINT did I replace TWO WEAPONS with anything. Each discreet action involves a ONE FOR ONE replacement. Nobody arguing for the single Relic per model side of things has ever addressed this point. Refusal to address a point implies a weak argument.
We are told we can replace ONE FOR ONE and we are told we can take ITEMS from the list.
While totally irrelevant to this argument, other Codexes allow multiple "Relics" per model. This gives us enough insight into GW's rules writing mindset to understand that multiple "Relics" on one model is in fact a thing that can occur.
Ultimately, the side arguing for one Relic per model needs to demonstrate using rules text that a model can only select once from the list. Everyone agrees that replacements are done on a one for one basis, so the one for one wording is useless as proof that only one selection may be made.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/13 16:58:29
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/13 17:19:17
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Confessor Of Sins
|
Kriswall wrote:Your argument is predicated upon selecting everything at once. We don't do that. Ever.
Here's your proof.
Biker Squad... To be able to take Special Weapons, you must first choose the Option to swap Bolt Pistol for Chainsword. This creates a new state of being wherein the Biker has a Chainsword. Now, as a SECOND and SUBSEQUENT ACTION, you swap the Melee Weapon (Chainsword) for a Special Weapon.
Now, let's apply that to the Relic situation.
You replace ONE WEAPON for ONE RELIC. This creates a new state of being wherein the model has a Relic. Now, as a SECOND and SUBSEQUENT ACTION, you replace a DIFFERENT WEAPON with a DIFFERENT RELIC.
At NO POINT did I replace TWO WEAPONS with anything. Each discreet action involves a ONE FOR ONE replacement. Nobody arguing for the single Relic per model side of things has ever addressed this point. Refusal to address a point implies a weak argument.
We are told we can replace ONE FOR ONE and we are told we can take ITEMS from the list.
While totally irrelevant to this argument, other Codexes allow multiple "Relics" per model. This gives us enough insight into GW's rules writing mindset to understand that multiple "Relics" on one model is in fact a thing that can occur.
Ultimately, the side arguing for one Relic per model needs to demonstrate using rules text that a model can only select once from the list. Everyone agrees that replacements are done on a one for one basis, so the one for one wording is useless as proof that only one selection may be made.
Using the same analogy you have just used: I would argue that each "action" is still only done once.
Biker with chainsword can only take a special weapon ONCE. You can't repeat an Option more than once.
Each option in a model's (Unit's) entry can only be followed once.
You select ONE RHINO for ONE SQUAD. This creates a new state of being wherein the squad has a rhino. Now, as a SECOND and SUBSEQUENT ACTION, you take a DIFFERENT RAZORBACK for the squad.
See the issue?
|
DA:80-S+G+M+B++I-Pw40k01++D+++A+++WD100R++T(T)DM+
Roronoa Zoro wrote:When the world shoves you around, you just gotta stand up and shove back. It's not like somebody's gonna save you if you start babbling excuses. - Bring on the hardship. It's preferred in a path of carnage. Manchu wrote:
It's like you take a Space Marine and say "what could make him cooler?" Instead of adding more super-genetic-psycho-organic modification, you take it all away. You have a regular human left in power armor and all the armies of hell at the gates. And she doesn't even flinch. Pure. Badass. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/13 17:32:06
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Prescient Cryptek of Eternity
|
BlackTalos wrote: Kriswall wrote:Your argument is predicated upon selecting everything at once. We don't do that. Ever.
Here's your proof.
Biker Squad... To be able to take Special Weapons, you must first choose the Option to swap Bolt Pistol for Chainsword. This creates a new state of being wherein the Biker has a Chainsword. Now, as a SECOND and SUBSEQUENT ACTION, you swap the Melee Weapon (Chainsword) for a Special Weapon.
Now, let's apply that to the Relic situation.
You replace ONE WEAPON for ONE RELIC. This creates a new state of being wherein the model has a Relic. Now, as a SECOND and SUBSEQUENT ACTION, you replace a DIFFERENT WEAPON with a DIFFERENT RELIC.
At NO POINT did I replace TWO WEAPONS with anything. Each discreet action involves a ONE FOR ONE replacement. Nobody arguing for the single Relic per model side of things has ever addressed this point. Refusal to address a point implies a weak argument.
We are told we can replace ONE FOR ONE and we are told we can take ITEMS from the list.
While totally irrelevant to this argument, other Codexes allow multiple "Relics" per model. This gives us enough insight into GW's rules writing mindset to understand that multiple "Relics" on one model is in fact a thing that can occur.
Ultimately, the side arguing for one Relic per model needs to demonstrate using rules text that a model can only select once from the list. Everyone agrees that replacements are done on a one for one basis, so the one for one wording is useless as proof that only one selection may be made.
Using the same analogy you have just used: I would argue that each "action" is still only done once.
Biker with chainsword can only take a special weapon ONCE. You can't repeat an Option more than once.
Each option in a model's (Unit's) entry can only be followed once.
You select ONE RHINO for ONE SQUAD. This creates a new state of being wherein the squad has a rhino. Now, as a SECOND and SUBSEQUENT ACTION, you take a DIFFERENT RAZORBACK for the squad.
See the issue?
Let me quote the actual options, since you didn't.
From the Bike Squad entry... "Up to two Space Marine Bikers may each take one item from the Special Weapons list." ONE item. This specifically is why you can't take multiple items from the list. The unit entry restricts you to one.
Now let's look at the Chapter Master entry... "A Chapter Master in power armour or artificer armour may take items from the Melee Weapons, Ranged Weapons, Special Issue Wargear and/or Chapter Relics lists." There is no restriction listed as to how many items I can take from each list. If you think there is one in this sentence, please, please, please point it out to me. All I see is the word ITEMS, which is a plural word. The "s" on the end lets me know that I can take more than one ITEM. The actual lists tell me HOW to make a selection, but do not, in and of themselves, tell me HOW MANY selections I can make. Blowing the sentence up gives us...
A Chapter Master in power armour or artificer armour may take items from the Melee Weapons list and/or may take items from the Ranged Weapons list and/or may take items from the Special Issue Wargear list and/or may take items from the Chapter Relics list. I bolded the relevant part. Explain to me how that limits me to taking one item in the same way that the Bike Squad entry limits me to taking one item.
And as to your straw man Dedicated Transport argument...
From the Tactical Squad entry as an example... "The unit may select a Drop Pod, Rhino or Razorback as a Dedicated Transport." This is pretty clear. You can select from one of three Transports. I agree you can only select the option once. It's not like I'm being told I can take ITEMS from a Dedicated Transport list. Using this as a debate point was poorly thought out. It's comparing apples and oranges.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/13 17:52:20
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Confessor Of Sins
|
Kriswall wrote:"A Chapter Master in power armour or artificer armour may take items from the Melee Weapons, Ranged Weapons, Special Issue Wargear and/or Chapter Relics lists."
Even if the transport example was probably not the best, the point (and you got it) still stands: You can only select that option ONCE. Same for the above.
Now the way you blowed up the rule is where you are making the mistake. It's not "and/or may take items from the Chapter Relics list".
It is: "A Chapter Master in power armour or artificer armour may take an item from the Melee Weapons list and/or may take an item from the Ranged Weapons list and/or may take an item from the Special Issue Wargear list and/or may take an item from the Chapter Relics list."
This can be shortened: "A Chapter Master in power armour or artificer armour may take items from the Melee Weapons, Ranged Weapons, Special Issue Wargear and/or Chapter Relics lists."
I have highlighted the 2 linked terms: Multiple Lists = Multiple items.
|
DA:80-S+G+M+B++I-Pw40k01++D+++A+++WD100R++T(T)DM+
Roronoa Zoro wrote:When the world shoves you around, you just gotta stand up and shove back. It's not like somebody's gonna save you if you start babbling excuses. - Bring on the hardship. It's preferred in a path of carnage. Manchu wrote:
It's like you take a Space Marine and say "what could make him cooler?" Instead of adding more super-genetic-psycho-organic modification, you take it all away. You have a regular human left in power armor and all the armies of hell at the gates. And she doesn't even flinch. Pure. Badass. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/13 17:54:24
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Kriswall wrote: BlackTalos wrote: Kriswall wrote:Your argument is predicated upon selecting everything at once. We don't do that. Ever.
Here's your proof.
Biker Squad... To be able to take Special Weapons, you must first choose the Option to swap Bolt Pistol for Chainsword. This creates a new state of being wherein the Biker has a Chainsword. Now, as a SECOND and SUBSEQUENT ACTION, you swap the Melee Weapon (Chainsword) for a Special Weapon.
Now, let's apply that to the Relic situation.
You replace ONE WEAPON for ONE RELIC. This creates a new state of being wherein the model has a Relic. Now, as a SECOND and SUBSEQUENT ACTION, you replace a DIFFERENT WEAPON with a DIFFERENT RELIC.
At NO POINT did I replace TWO WEAPONS with anything. Each discreet action involves a ONE FOR ONE replacement. Nobody arguing for the single Relic per model side of things has ever addressed this point. Refusal to address a point implies a weak argument.
We are told we can replace ONE FOR ONE and we are told we can take ITEMS from the list.
While totally irrelevant to this argument, other Codexes allow multiple "Relics" per model. This gives us enough insight into GW's rules writing mindset to understand that multiple "Relics" on one model is in fact a thing that can occur.
Ultimately, the side arguing for one Relic per model needs to demonstrate using rules text that a model can only select once from the list. Everyone agrees that replacements are done on a one for one basis, so the one for one wording is useless as proof that only one selection may be made.
Using the same analogy you have just used: I would argue that each "action" is still only done once.
Biker with chainsword can only take a special weapon ONCE. You can't repeat an Option more than once.
Each option in a model's (Unit's) entry can only be followed once.
You select ONE RHINO for ONE SQUAD. This creates a new state of being wherein the squad has a rhino. Now, as a SECOND and SUBSEQUENT ACTION, you take a DIFFERENT RAZORBACK for the squad.
See the issue?
Let me quote the actual options, since you didn't.
From the Bike Squad entry... "Up to two Space Marine Bikers may each take one item from the Special Weapons list." ONE item. This specifically is why you can't take multiple items from the list. The unit entry restricts you to one.
Now let's look at the Chapter Master entry... "A Chapter Master in power armour or artificer armour may take items from the Melee Weapons, Ranged Weapons, Special Issue Wargear and/or Chapter Relics lists." There is no restriction listed as to how many items I can take from each list. If you think there is one in this sentence, please, please, please point it out to me. All I see is the word ITEMS, which is a plural word. The "s" on the end lets me know that I can take more than one ITEM. The actual lists tell me HOW to make a selection, but do not, in and of themselves, tell me HOW MANY selections I can make. Blowing the sentence up gives us...
A Chapter Master in power armour or artificer armour may take items from the Melee Weapons list and/or may take items from the Ranged Weapons list and/or may take items from the Special Issue Wargear list and/or may take items from the Chapter Relics list. I bolded the relevant part. Explain to me how that limits me to taking one item in the same way that the Bike Squad entry limits me to taking one item.
And as to your straw man Dedicated Transport argument...
From the Tactical Squad entry as an example... "The unit may select a Drop Pod, Rhino or Razorback as a Dedicated Transport." This is pretty clear. You can select from one of three Transports. I agree you can only select the option once. It's not like I'm being told I can take ITEMS from a Dedicated Transport list. Using this as a debate point was poorly thought out. It's comparing apples and oranges.
Bravo. I have never been involved in any of these debates but how anyone could think swapping one for one means you are limited to one, despite having multiple weapons to swap is beardy rules lawyering.
It reminds me of when the Tau codex was released and you could take up a crisis suit hard point for a single, non twin linked weapon, two hard points for two single, non twin linked weapons, or two hard points for one, twin linked weapon. People were trying to imply "two of the same weapon automatically become one twin linked version", until GW FAQ'd the obvious that anyone that wasn't trying to rules lawyer would of came too.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/13 17:55:13
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/13 19:35:54
Subject: Re:Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Land Raider Pilot on Cruise Control
|
I've not really read the debates on this topic before, but would this help at all? Reading it, I feel it leans more towards one relic per model. It could be my interpretation, but I'll post it for what it is worth. Codex Space Marines, Page 158 (Physical version, under "The Emperor's Sword") wrote: 8 Options: This section lists all of the upgrades you may add to the unit if you wish to, alongside the associated points cost for each. [b]Where an option states that you may exchange one weapons 'and/or' another, you may replace either or both, provided you pay the points cost for each. So, reading the Chapter Relics on the next page (page 159): Chapter Relics (page 159) wrote:Only one of each Chapter Relic may be taken per army. A model can replace one weapon with one of the following. So why didn't the author just use the and/or wording for the relic section? Edit:fixed my quote
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/13 20:15:14
If I sound like I'm being a condescending butthole, I'm not. Read my reply as neutrally as possible, please and thank you. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/13 19:40:23
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Prescient Cryptek of Eternity
|
It is what it is. In previous threads I've been willing to admit that "items from lists A, B and/or C" is ambiguous and could mean only one item from each list. If GW did in fact mean one item only from the Relics list, they should have used the exact same wording they used elsewhere in the Codex for other lists (such as One item from the Special Weapons list).
At the end of the day, my opposition wants ITEMS to mean ITEMS when applied to the first several lists but then wants ITEMS to mean ITEM when applied to the last list. It's inconsistent and therefore a generally poor way to read the rules.
BlackTalos even explodes the sentence to say "an item from the Special Issue Wargear list". I assume he would argue that a Chapter Master can't have an Auspex AND Melta bombs. That would be TWO items from the list and per his own words, the option only allows us to take AN ITEM. I'm being somewhat sarcastic here to point out how flawed his reading of the rules is. Automatically Appended Next Post: Ond Angel wrote:I've not really read the debates on this topic before, but would this help at all?
Reading it, I feel it leans more towards one relic per model. It could be my interpretation, but I'll post it for what it is worth.
Codex Space Marines, Page 158 (Physical version, under "The Emperor's Sword") wrote:
8 Options: [i] This section lists all of the upgrades you may add to the unit if you wish to, alongside the associated points cost for each. [b]Where an option states that you may exchange one weapons 'and/or' another, you may replace either or both, provided you pay the points cost for each.
So, reading the Chapter Relics on the next page (page 159):
Chapter Relics (page 159) wrote:Only one of each Chapter Relic may be taken per army. A model can replace one weapon with one of the following.
So why didn't the author just use the and/or wording for the relic section?
Poor writing, no community play testing and no copy editors? A first year law student could have pointed out all these issues in a single day of work. "This bit here is ambiguous. Clean up the wording."
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/13 19:47:47
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/13 20:59:12
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Courageous Space Marine Captain
|
Considering that other codices allow multiple relics, and same wording as with SM relics is used for regular melee weapons in the DA book, I believe the intent is to allow multiple swaps (otherwise DA characters would be unable to take a pair of lightning claws.) However, this is not what the rule actually says, the wording suggest just one weapon swap, though it is a bit vague.
In any case, multiple relics is hardly overpowered, most of the time it would just be a point sink, so I really wouldn't have anything against someone doing so. However, personally I would not equip characters with multiple relics before checking the opponent is okay with it.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/13 21:06:26
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Prescient Cryptek of Eternity
|
Crimson wrote:Considering that other codices allow multiple relics, and same wording as with SM relics is used for regular melee weapons in the DA book, I believe the intent is to allow multiple swaps (otherwise DA characters would be unable to take a pair of lightning claws.) However, this is not what the rule actually says, the wording suggest just one weapon swap, though it is a bit vague.
In any case, multiple relics is hardly overpowered, most of the time it would just be a point sink, so I really wouldn't have anything against someone doing so. However, personally I would not equip characters with multiple relics before checking the opponent is okay with it.
The rule DOES actually say ITEMS. It's plural. It's not vague at all. Potentially ambiguous, but as written, we are explicitly told we can take ITEMS from the list... at a cost of ONE weapon per ONE Relic.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/13 21:15:47
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Courageous Space Marine Captain
|
Kriswall wrote:
The rule DOES actually say ITEMS. It's plural. It's not vague at all. Potentially ambiguous, but as written, we are explicitly told we can take ITEMS from the list... at a cost of ONE weapon per ONE Relic.
Multiple lists, so multiple items, but maybe still just one relic. Besides, you could have a relic weapon and the armour that does not replace a weapon. Automatically Appended Next Post: Ond Angel wrote:
So why didn't the author just use the and/or wording for the relic section?
Could be to allow Master of the Forge to take multiple items, as he doesn't have a melee weapon.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/13 21:18:09
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/13 21:22:15
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Powerful Phoenix Lord
|
I've just gone through all the codicies (except the new BA codex). Here are my findings.
Adepta Sororitas, Dark Eldar, Grey Knights, Inquisition, and Orks, all have a specified limit of one relic per model.
Astra Militarum, and Tau Empires have no restrictions on the number of relics a model can take.
It is impossible for Chaos Daemons to take more than one relic per model, and Legion of the Damned/Imperial Knights do not have a relics list.
Chaos Space Marines, Dark Angels, and Space Marines are all worded the same.
Tyranids can replace any set of scything talons.
Eldar while worded the same as Space Marines, implies that models can take multiple items.
As such, only 2 codices definitely allow 2+ relics, one is possible based on interpretation (Tyranids), and one implies it is legal with the same wording as most other 6th edition codices.
|
Greebo had spent an irritating two minutes in that box. Technically, a cat locked in a box may be alive or it may be dead. You never know until you look. In fact, the mere act of opening the box will determine the state of the cat, although in this case there were three determinate states the cat could be in: these being Alive, Dead, and Bloody Furious.
Orks always ride in single file to hide their strength and numbers.
Gozer the Gozerian, Gozer the Destructor, Volguus Zildrohar, Gozer the Traveler, and Lord of the Sebouillia |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/13 21:26:31
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Prescient Cryptek of Eternity
|
Crimson wrote: Kriswall wrote:
The rule DOES actually say ITEMS. It's plural. It's not vague at all. Potentially ambiguous, but as written, we are explicitly told we can take ITEMS from the list... at a cost of ONE weapon per ONE Relic.
Multiple lists, so multiple items, but maybe still just one relic. Besides, you could have a relic weapon and the armour that does not replace a weapon.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ond Angel wrote:
So why didn't the author just use the and/or wording for the relic section?
Could be to allow Master of the Forge to take multiple items, as he doesn't have a melee weapon.
Your use of maybe is the critical point. As written the rules might either refer to one item only or multiple items. It's ambiguous. One valid reading allows multiple items. Automatically Appended Next Post: Happyjew wrote:
I've just gone through all the codicies (except the new BA codex). Here are my findings.
Adepta Sororitas, Dark Eldar, Grey Knights, Inquisition, and Orks, all have a specified limit of one relic per model.
Astra Militarum, and Tau Empires have no restrictions on the number of relics a model can take.
It is impossible for Chaos Daemons to take more than one relic per model, and Legion of the Damned/Imperial Knights do not have a relics list.
Chaos Space Marines, Dark Angels, and Space Marines are all worded the same.
Tyranids can replace any set of scything talons.
Eldar while worded the same as Space Marines, implies that models can take multiple items.
As such, only 2 codices definitely allow 2+ relics, one is possible based on interpretation (Tyranids), and one implies it is legal with the same wording as most other 6th edition codices.
So... your point is that GW could have meant one only OR more than one because they've gone both ways in other books?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/13 21:27:50
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/13 21:39:49
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Courageous Space Marine Captain
|
I think RAW case for only one weapon is pretty strong. It is not crystal clear, but if it were, we would not be having this discussion. RAI is more debatable. Personally I'd prefer multiple relics option, because then people might actually use relics other than the Shield Eternal...
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/13 22:00:10
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Prescient Cryptek of Eternity
|
Yeah, ultimately RaW is ambiguous and this requires an errata or FAQ to clarify.
I'm also very tired of playing against cookie cutter loadouts. Then again, I play Tau. One turn of shooting and his fancypants dude is dead.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/14 01:14:23
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Land Raider Pilot on Cruise Control
|
Space Marine book says only one of each relic per army. CM entry says can take items from the Relic list. Where is there scope in that to deny someone a Burning Blade + Shield Eternal or Teeth of Terra + Primarch's Wrath combo in that? Am I missing something?
It's totally unambiguous. The most you could rules lawyer out of that is that he has to keep his bolt pistol and chainsword, but you can't prevent the taking of multiple weapons from the Relics list.
|
"If you don't have Funzo, you're nothin'!"
"I'm cancelling you out of shame, like my subscription to white dwarf"
Never use a long word where a short one will do. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/14 01:22:35
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Davylove21 wrote:Space Marine book says only one of each relic per army. CM entry says can take items from the Relic list. Where is there scope in that to deny someone a Burning Blade + Shield Eternal or Teeth of Terra + Primarch's Wrath combo in that? Am I missing something?
It's totally unambiguous. The most you could rules lawyer out of that is that he has to keep his bolt pistol and chainsword, but you can't prevent the taking of multiple weapons from the Relics list.
your points are utterly correct.
However above the section of the relics in the wargear list it also states
A model can replace one weapon with one of the following.
being able to get "one of the following" shows that you can get 1 of the following, not more than 1 of the following.
some of the following have an additional rule where you do not have to replace a weapon, however none of them change that you can only take one of the following.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/14 02:11:17
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Prescient Cryptek of Eternity
|
blaktoof wrote: Davylove21 wrote:Space Marine book says only one of each relic per army. CM entry says can take items from the Relic list. Where is there scope in that to deny someone a Burning Blade + Shield Eternal or Teeth of Terra + Primarch's Wrath combo in that? Am I missing something?
It's totally unambiguous. The most you could rules lawyer out of that is that he has to keep his bolt pistol and chainsword, but you can't prevent the taking of multiple weapons from the Relics list.
your points are utterly correct.
However above the section of the relics in the wargear list it also states
A model can replace one weapon with one of the following.
being able to get "one of the following" shows that you can get 1 of the following, not more than 1 of the following.
some of the following have an additional rule where you do not have to replace a weapon, however none of them change that you can only take one of the following.
I completely agree with you that you can't get more than one of the following by replacing one weapon. Fortunately, that's not what I'm trying to do. I'm trying to select ITEMS from the list. Obviously, that will require following the selection process once for each item I select. Typically, this involves replacing one weapon (although in the case of a couple of Relics, it does not).
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/14 11:48:59
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Confessor Of Sins
|
Kriswall wrote: Crimson wrote:Considering that other codices allow multiple relics, and same wording as with SM relics is used for regular melee weapons in the DA book, I believe the intent is to allow multiple swaps (otherwise DA characters would be unable to take a pair of lightning claws.) However, this is not what the rule actually says, the wording suggest just one weapon swap, though it is a bit vague.
In any case, multiple relics is hardly overpowered, most of the time it would just be a point sink, so I really wouldn't have anything against someone doing so. However, personally I would not equip characters with multiple relics before checking the opponent is okay with it.
The rule DOES actually say ITEMS. It's plural. It's not vague at all. Potentially ambiguous, but as written, we are explicitly told we can take ITEMS from the list... at a cost of ONE weapon per ONE Relic.
I've got another point in your favour (possibly):
SM Codex,Vanguard Vet Squad.
- Any model may take items from the Melee Weapons list.
Same wording, single list and item S. It may point to, as you say, multiple items to be taken from each list.
The same wording can be found in the DA dreadnought dataslate.
ED: Oh, and no idea why i had missed this one, which might actually just prove the entire thing:
Codex:Adepta Sororitas, which, by happyjew:
Happyjew wrote:Adepta Sororitas, Dark Eldar, Grey Knights, Inquisition, and Orks, all have a specified limit of one relic per model.
"A model can take one of the following. Only one of each Ecclesiarchy Relic can be taken per army."
"- The Dialogus may take itemS from the Ecclesiarchy Relics list"
I mean, that is either a very very clear contradiction and mistake, or it just proves that "model can take one/swap one" is intended to be repeated.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/12/14 11:57:08
DA:80-S+G+M+B++I-Pw40k01++D+++A+++WD100R++T(T)DM+
Roronoa Zoro wrote:When the world shoves you around, you just gotta stand up and shove back. It's not like somebody's gonna save you if you start babbling excuses. - Bring on the hardship. It's preferred in a path of carnage. Manchu wrote:
It's like you take a Space Marine and say "what could make him cooler?" Instead of adding more super-genetic-psycho-organic modification, you take it all away. You have a regular human left in power armor and all the armies of hell at the gates. And she doesn't even flinch. Pure. Badass. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/14 13:05:36
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Prescient Cryptek of Eternity
|
Yeah, I think the intention is for the selection to be repeated. As per normal, the wording is terrible.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/12/14 13:10:21
Subject: Multiple relics in SM codex
|
 |
Confessor Of Sins
|
Well for the Dialogus above, the wording is quite clear.
A) may take multiple items
B) can take 1 of
Trying to figure out the intent (Error or not?) is the terrible part...
|
DA:80-S+G+M+B++I-Pw40k01++D+++A+++WD100R++T(T)DM+
Roronoa Zoro wrote:When the world shoves you around, you just gotta stand up and shove back. It's not like somebody's gonna save you if you start babbling excuses. - Bring on the hardship. It's preferred in a path of carnage. Manchu wrote:
It's like you take a Space Marine and say "what could make him cooler?" Instead of adding more super-genetic-psycho-organic modification, you take it all away. You have a regular human left in power armor and all the armies of hell at the gates. And she doesn't even flinch. Pure. Badass. |
|
 |
 |
|