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.

 FlingitNow wrote:
It is not my belief it is literally what the rules say. If you are equipped with a Harlequins kiss and you are attacking in close combat you must make a Kiss of Death attack. That is not my belief nor my opinion that is just what the rules say. So can we agree that the rules are correct when they say this? Or are the rules wrong?

If you are equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss and you are attacking in close combat AND you are using the Harlequin's kiss, you must make a Kiss of Death attack. THAT is actually what the rules say. We obviously can not agree that what you're saying is correct. The rules also aren't wrong. Again, you're asking us to choose between two incorrect choices. I believe the correct answer is option #3... your interpretation of the rules is flawed and you can't get past the text of the Kiss of Death rule to see that there is a 3rd requirement... using the Harlequin's Kiss.

We're not arguing intent. We're arguing rules as written.

You say...

The Kiss of Death rule does not care what special rules the user has (even itself) it only cares if someone is attacking in close combat and equipped with a Harlequins Kiss.

I want to understand this. It sounds like you're saying that you acknowledge that the model (or its attacks) does not gain the Kiss of Death special rule when not attacking with a Harlequin's Kiss, but that you don't care since you believe special rules don't necessarily need to be gained to be applied and you're going to apply it anyways? Have I missed something?

Can you step me through the exact process that allows the model's attacks to gain the Kiss of Death special rule when NOT attacking with a Harlequin's Kiss? Rules citations would be appreciated. At least one of those citations will have to specifically and unambiguously override the core restriction on gaining a weapon ability from a weapon when not using said weapon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

blaktoof wrote:

 Galef wrote:
What I find most hilarious about this whole debate is that it can only apply to 1 model. And a Unique model at that.

And given how may attacks the Caress has on the Solitare, the Kiss is almost not needed.

FYI, my opinion is that the Kiss "should" work even if using a different weapon b/c it is only 1 of your atx, however I cannot find a RAW argument that supports this. Even equipped, you are attacking with the Kiss, therefore precluding the ability to use a second weapon

*IF* this ever gets an FAQ, I fully expect it to go the way of the 5th ed Dreadknight, and allow all special rules to apply just because they are equipped. However, until then however, it is up to your opponent/TO to decide.

The thread is mostly about that but many of the codexs have one or two weapons that grants things for equipping them.

This thread is like saying force weapons do not work because force is listed with the weapon so the model cannot ever have the force power until the model strikes with the weapon and then only when striking, but since pyschic phase does not happen then the model may never use force.

Or.

Storm shields only give the 3++ at the models I step, any other time since the model is not using it to strike it may not get a 3++ because it is a weapon and they only get their special abilities when striking.

some people in this thread have invented a fictitious rule that states you may only gain the benefits of special rules that affect the model equipped with a piece of wargear when it strikes with the wargear (weaponit is wargear..), which does not exist anywhere in the rules. Some people have also invented the "you may only use the abilities of wargear when striking, if they are weapons"- which it does not say anywhere. There are many weapons that have special rules that require you to be striking with the weapon ie shred, caress- where the rule actually states something along the lines of "when making strikes with a weapon that has this special rule" as opposed to "when the model attacks in assault" one obviously is depenedent on striking with the weapon and falls under picking 1 weapon to strike with, 1 obviously is an ability of the model and not the weapon. Some people have a hard time dealing with that because the ability of the model, comes from having the weapon not striking with the weapon.

etc.

Force works fine.

"Force is ablessing psychic power that targets the psyker and his unit. All of the targets' weapons that have the Force special rule gain the Instant Death special rule until the start of your next Psychic phase."

In the Psychic phase, does a Force Sword have the Force special rule? Yes, it does. Does a model's attacks have the Force special rule? No, they don't. Resolve the psychic power successfully and your Force Sword has the Instant Death special rule. Again, the model's attacks won't gain the Instant Death special rule until the Force Sword is actually used (typically in the fight sub-phase).

Storm Shields work fine.

They aren't weapons, so the wording saying you gain the special rule when the weapon is used doesn't apply. Storm Shields are non-weapon pieces of wargear and so would have their rules "active" at all times. The rules DO tell us when a weapon confers its special rules. The rules DON'T tell us when a non-weapon piece of of wargear confers its special rules, so we rely on the wargear rules text as that is our only guidance.

Also, the rules clearly specify that a model's attacks gain special rules from a weapon when the weapon is being used. We are not told that the model or its attacks gain special rules from a weapon at any other times. This is in the What Rules Do I Have section and has been quoted numerous times.

Lastly, "comes to strike blows" isn't referring to a model's initiative step within the fight sub-phase. It's referring to the entire fight sub-phase.

Small Rulebook, Fight Sub-Phase section, page 48, literally the first paragraph... "With all the assaults launched, it's time to strike blows!" Same wording (strike blows) used in both instances, so I'm calling it the same.

So again, combine all the rules and we know that weapon special rules are gained when the weapon is used and that we can't gain special rules from more than one weapon in the fight sub-phase. Using weapon A and gaining a special rule from weapon B violates these basic rules. If you have not yet gained a special rule, you can't use its rules text to justify gaining it unless the rules text explicitly tells you to ignore the More Than One Weapon basic rule.

I think your comments are incorrect in some places, and in others misleading. I do not think it is intentional.

Finally, Sarah’s Psyker is equipped with a force weapon, so her Psyker also knows Force.

a model does not have the force power unless it is equipped with a force weapon.

oh look Sarah has a model that is equipped with a weapon and gains a psychic power by being simply equipped with it even before she has the chance to decide to use it or not use it, as this is before the game has even begun. You go Sarah!

The logic you are putting forth would then mean that a model does not gain the force power until it can strike with a weapon, because at the time psychic powers are determined (before the game) the model can not be said to be striking with or not with any weapon, as such it would not have force if you believe weapons do not give their abilities for being equipped with them, when it clearly says in the RAW for the ability from the weapon the model gets it for being equipped with it.


also storm shield is clearly listed as a "weapon" in the armoury of all the 7th edition codexes that can select a storm shield as a weapon.

it may not have a weapon profile, but it is clearly by the RAW a weapon.

Terminator Weapons
A model wearing Terminator armour may replace his storm bolter with one of the following:
Combi-flamer, -melta or -plasma… 5 pts
Wolf claw… 15 pts
Thunder hammer… 25 pts

A model wearing Terminator armour may replace his power weapon with one of the following:
Storm shield… free

If you are equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss and you are attacking in close combat AND you are using the Harlequin's kiss, you must make a Kiss of Death attack. THAT is actually what the rules say. We obviously can not agree that what you're saying is correct.

Please quote the part of KoD that states you need to be using the HK. I don't see it. I see an irrelevant rule about models gaining special rules when attacking with a weapon. I see another rule that states unequivocally that it is triggered whenever a model is striking blows and equipped with a Kiss.

I have a rule that states "whenever A & B then X". Thus if conditions A & B are met then X happens. I don't need another rule to say "yes really and you may now read the rule". Most Special rules only work if a model has that rule or is in a unit with a model that has that rule. Kiss of Death does not care whohas the KoD rule, ALL it cares about is if a model is attacking in CC and equipped with a Kiss. If those two conditions are met it forces an action on you.

blaktoof wrote:
I think your comments are incorrect in some places, and in others misleading. I do not think it is intentional.

Finally, Sarah’s Psyker is equipped with a force weapon, so her Psyker also knows Force.

a model does not have the force power unless it is equipped with a force weapon.

oh look Sarah has a model that is equipped with a weapon and gains a psychic power by being simply equipped with it even before she has the chance to decide to use it or not use it, as this is before the game has even begun. You go Sarah!

The logic you are putting forth would then mean that a model does not gain the force power until it can strike with a weapon, because at the time psychic powers are determined (before the game) the model can not be said to be striking with or not with any weapon, as such it would not have force if you believe weapons do not give their abilities for being equipped with them, when it clearly says in the RAW for the ability from the weapon the model gets it for being equipped with it.


also storm shield is clearly listed as a "weapon" in the armoury of all the 7th edition codexes that can select a storm shield as a weapon.

it may not have a weapon profile, but it is clearly by the RAW a weapon.

Terminator Weapons
A model wearing Terminator armour may replace his storm bolter with one of the following:
Combi-flamer, -melta or -plasma… 5 pts
Wolf claw… 15 pts
Thunder hammer… 25 pts

A model wearing Terminator armour may replace his power weapon with one of the following:
Storm shield… free

At best, you could argue that it's a "Terminator Weapon", which is not the same as a Melee Weapon or Ranged Weapon. If the Storm Shield is a Weapon, what is it's type? Melee, Assault, Rapid Fire? Hopefully you see my point. There is a difference between being a core rule set defined "WEAPON" and being listed on a "Insert name of wargear list here" codex list.

At best, you could argue that it's a "Terminator Weapon", which is not the same as a Melee Weapon or Ranged Weapon. If the Storm Shield is a Weapon, what is it's type? Melee, Assault, Rapid Fire? Hopefully you see my point. There is a difference between being a core rule set defined "WEAPON" and being listed on a "Insert name of wargear list here" codex list.

Yeah no weapon type means not a weapon. He's write on Force weapons though. Also Can we now finally agree that Kiss of Death is not wrong? That the rules in the Harlequin codex aren't to be ignored?

 NightHowler wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Sigh

No, that's not the situation. The actual wargear does not state you gain special rule when equipped. The special rule tells you when it activates.

Meaning you go back a step. The actual rules state you only get a special rule from on your sheet or when using a weapon

Show a conflict that doesn't involve your circular logic.

You don't have a special rule until told so by the rule book, or specifically otherwise. Not from within a special rule itself

This is proven. Page and grAoh proving otherwise, or desist.

Sigh

The wargear has a special rule. That special rule says that when the wargear is equipped and the model makes attacks it triggers a Kiss of Death attack. We do not need permission from the BRB to read the special rules on our wargear - we just need the rules from the wargear's description.

If it is equipped and tells us we get a special rule when it's equipped we get to use it's special rules when it's equipped.

So in order to gain permission to use your special rule, you're using your special rule. When you have no permission to do so

Gosh, it's almost like circular reasoning is circular. We have a rule telling you how models gain special rules from weapons. Specific override of this rule. Page and graph. By specific, it needs to contain a reference to the "what special rules..." Rule. Oh, and it can't be from a weapons special rule - we KNOW, for a fact, a model doesn't have that rule unless it is using it normally, so don't keep in with your circular logic.

 FlingitNow wrote:

At best, you could argue that it's a "Terminator Weapon", which is not the same as a Melee Weapon or Ranged Weapon. If the Storm Shield is a Weapon, what is it's type? Melee, Assault, Rapid Fire? Hopefully you see my point. There is a difference between being a core rule set defined "WEAPON" and being listed on a "Insert name of wargear list here" codex list.

Yeah no weapon type means not a weapon. He's write on Force weapons though. Also Can we now finally agree that Kiss of Death is not wrong? That the rules in the Harlequin codex aren't to be ignored?

Kiss of Death works fine... assuming your attacks have gained the rule... which they haven't if the model has not chosen to use the Harlequin's Kiss in the fight sub-phase.

Can we also agree that the rules in the core rule book aren't to be ignored? ...because you're ignoring them (Which Special Rules Do I Have and More Than One Weapon, to be specific).

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 NightHowler wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Sigh

No, that's not the situation. The actual wargear does not state you gain special rule when equipped. The special rule tells you when it activates.

Meaning you go back a step. The actual rules state you only get a special rule from on your sheet or when using a weapon

Show a conflict that doesn't involve your circular logic.

You don't have a special rule until told so by the rule book, or specifically otherwise. Not from within a special rule itself

This is proven. Page and grAoh proving otherwise, or desist.

Sigh

The wargear has a special rule. That special rule says that when the wargear is equipped and the model makes attacks it triggers a Kiss of Death attack. We do not need permission from the BRB to read the special rules on our wargear - we just need the rules from the wargear's description.

If it is equipped and tells us we get a special rule when it's equipped we get to use it's special rules when it's equipped.

So in order to gain permission to use your special rule, you're using your special rule. When you have no permission to do so

Gosh, it's almost like circular reasoning is circular. We have a rule telling you how models gain special rules from weapons. Specific override of this rule. Page and graph. By specific, it needs to contain a reference to the "what special rules..." Rule. Oh, and it can't be from a weapons special rule - we KNOW, for a fact, a model doesn't have that rule unless it is using it normally, so don't keep in with your circular logic.

It has also been repeatedly pointed out that the "most special rules" can include being from a weapon. And that the ONLY reason special rules don't function on a model when given from a weapon is your interpretation that the only way a weapon provides a special rule is when it is attacking.

yeah yeah....you didn't say attacking you said using, which has also been repeatedly pointed out that in the rules the only way to use a weapon is to attack with it.

We also KNOW for a fact that the rule only refers to attacks, so applying the logic to it's full extant, no model may use a special rule to attack with unless it is on a weapon, because the way it is written only attacks may benefit from a weapons special rule, and you can't reference a rule to find out if it can be used unless the What special rules do I have tells you, and the ONLY rules allowed specifically in that paragraph to work on an attack are on weapons. Remember, permissive rule set, and you don't have permission in that section.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 NightHowler wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Sigh

No, that's not the situation. The actual wargear does not state you gain special rule when equipped. The special rule tells you when it activates.

Meaning you go back a step. The actual rules state you only get a special rule from on your sheet or when using a weapon

Show a conflict that doesn't involve your circular logic.

You don't have a special rule until told so by the rule book, or specifically otherwise. Not from within a special rule itself

This is proven. Page and grAoh proving otherwise, or desist.

Sigh

The wargear has a special rule. That special rule says that when the wargear is equipped and the model makes attacks it triggers a Kiss of Death attack. We do not need permission from the BRB to read the special rules on our wargear - we just need the rules from the wargear's description.

If it is equipped and tells us we get a special rule when it's equipped we get to use it's special rules when it's equipped.

So in order to gain permission to use your special rule, you're using your special rule. When you have no permission to do so

Gosh, it's almost like circular reasoning is circular. We have a rule telling you how models gain special rules from weapons. Specific override of this rule. Page and graph. By specific, it needs to contain a reference to the "what special rules..." Rule. Oh, and it can't be from a weapons special rule - we KNOW, for a fact, a model doesn't have that rule unless it is using it normally, so don't keep in with your circular logic.

We have a rule that states "whenever A & B then X" why would X not occur when you have A & B? The rule of weapons giving special rules when striking is a simple permission. It is not exclusive nor all inclusive so does not need to be over ridden as it can simply be added to. However none of that is relevant to Kiss of Death. Kiss of Death does not care about whether the model has the Kiss of Death rule or not. All it cares aboutis if a model is equipped with a Harlequins Kiss whilst making close combat attacks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kriswall wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

At best, you could argue that it's a "Terminator Weapon", which is not the same as a Melee Weapon or Ranged Weapon. If the Storm Shield is a Weapon, what is it's type? Melee, Assault, Rapid Fire? Hopefully you see my point. There is a difference between being a core rule set defined "WEAPON" and being listed on a "Insert name of wargear list here" codex list.

Yeah no weapon type means not a weapon. He's write on Force weapons though. Also Can we now finally agree that Kiss of Death is not wrong? That the rules in the Harlequin codex aren't to be ignored?

Kiss of Death works fine... assuming your attacks have gained the rule... which they haven't if the model has not chosen to use the Harlequin's Kiss in the fight sub-phase.

Can we also agree that the rules in the core rule book aren't to be ignored? ...because you're ignoring them (Which Special Rules Do I Have and More Than One Weapon, to be specific).

I'm not ignoring any rules. My attacks don't need the Kiss of Death rule, neither does my weapon nor my model. I'm not ignoring the what special rules do I have rule it is irrelevant. It is a rule that tells us a few ways models can gain special rules. Kiss of Death doesn't care about that. I'm not addressing More than one weapon yet, that comes later.

Can we agree that the kiss of death rule states that when a model equipped with a Harlequins kiss makes close combat attack it must make a Kiss of Death attack?

 FlingitNow wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 NightHowler wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Sigh

No, that's not the situation. The actual wargear does not state you gain special rule when equipped. The special rule tells you when it activates.

Meaning you go back a step. The actual rules state you only get a special rule from on your sheet or when using a weapon

Show a conflict that doesn't involve your circular logic.

You don't have a special rule until told so by the rule book, or specifically otherwise. Not from within a special rule itself

This is proven. Page and grAoh proving otherwise, or desist.

Sigh

The wargear has a special rule. That special rule says that when the wargear is equipped and the model makes attacks it triggers a Kiss of Death attack. We do not need permission from the BRB to read the special rules on our wargear - we just need the rules from the wargear's description.

If it is equipped and tells us we get a special rule when it's equipped we get to use it's special rules when it's equipped.

So in order to gain permission to use your special rule, you're using your special rule. When you have no permission to do so

Gosh, it's almost like circular reasoning is circular. We have a rule telling you how models gain special rules from weapons. Specific override of this rule. Page and graph. By specific, it needs to contain a reference to the "what special rules..." Rule. Oh, and it can't be from a weapons special rule - we KNOW, for a fact, a model doesn't have that rule unless it is using it normally, so don't keep in with your circular logic.

We have a rule that states "whenever A & B then X" why would X not occur when you have A & B? The rule of weapons giving special rules when striking is a simple permission. It is not exclusive nor all inclusive so does not need to be over ridden as it can simply be added to. However none of that is relevant to Kiss of Death. Kiss of Death does not care about whether the model has the Kiss of Death rule or not. All it cares aboutis if a model is equipped with a Harlequins Kiss whilst making close combat attacks.

You're ignoring a rule. We actually have two rules that interact to say...

Whenever A then (Whenever B & C then X)

A = Attacking with a Harlequin's Kiss
B = Model is equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss
C = Model is attacking
X = Kiss of Death attack occurs

Strictly speaking, B & C are redundant. If a model is attacking with a Harlequin's Kiss, then he MUST be both attacking and equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss. This wouldn't be the first time GW included redundant rules text. There is no practical need for Kiss of Death to require that a model by attacking and be equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss. By the very nature of the core rules, the only way for a model's attacks to gain the Kiss of Death rule is by using a weapon having the rule in a fight sub-phase. Don't use the weapon? Your attacks don't gain the special rule.

Cool please point to the part of Kiss of Death that states A.

 FlingitNow wrote:
Can we agree that the kiss of death rule states that when a model equipped with a Harlequins kiss makes close combat attack it must make a Kiss of Death attack?

There is no must at all. You are adding that. If you're not adding 'must', feel free to highlight the word in the below citation.

"When a model equipped with a Harlequin’s Kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of its Attacks will be a Kiss of Death Attack (roll this Attack separately). A Kiss of Death Attack is always resolved at Strength 6 AP2. If a 6 is rolled To Wound with a Kiss of Death Attack, that attack has the Instant Death special rule."

And as we've said quite a few times, unless you're using a Harlequin's Kiss during the fight sub-phase, you will never gain the above rule and the rules text for Kiss of Death will never apply to your attacks.

Also, your position seems to be that your attacks don't need the Kiss of Death rule for it to work. Nor does the weapon. Nor does the model. Your words.

"My attacks don't need the Kiss of Death rule, neither does my weapon nor my model."

If the model doesn't have the rule, and the weapon you're using doesn't have the rule and your attacks don't have the rule... what is your justification for invoking the rule? This is the critical flaw in your position. You have yet to provide a reason for invoking a rule that you seem willing to admit neither model nor weapon nor attacks have.

Remembering I am making no claim that the model gains the Kiss of Death rule so any rule about models gaining rules is irrelevant.

 FlingitNow wrote:
Cool please point to the part of Kiss of Death that states A.

As you well know, it's in the core rule book. You know, the book that you're ignoring? It's in the What Special Weapons Do I Have section and is further restricted in the More Than One Weapon section.

Assuming that the rules text of a single, isolated weapon in a single, isolated Codex has all of the necessary rules to actually use it in combat is... well, I don't know the word, but it shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the rule set.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 FlingitNow wrote:
Remembering I am making no claim that the model gains the Kiss of Death rule so any rule about models gaining rules is irrelevant.

Agreed. You brought it up. I was quoting your words and wanted to quote them completely.

The fact that you have paid for a Kiss and have modeled your mini that way (equipped, as in part of that model's equipment) modifies one of your attacks to be S6 AP2. This is regardless of what weapon you are attacking with. That is how we have been playing it around here, trying to decipher RAI.

For example when my Solitare uses Blitz on the charge, he gets 1 attack, rolled separately at S6 AP2, and 11 more with the Caress.

In the context of the rest of the codex this is my best guess. I may be wrong, but until those FAQs start flowing all we have to go on is our interpretations.

Edit: I will be bringing up the relevant rules eluded to many times in this thread to make the case for one or the other. In our discussion we got bogged down with minute details like "equipped vs attacking with" blahbobloblaw. We totally omitted a core rule section "more than one weapon". I think one weapon/special rule or the other is the correct way RAI & RAW.

For example For example when my Solitare uses Blitz on the charge, he either gets:
A)1 attack, rolled separately at S6 AP2, and 11 more S user AP- or,
B)12 attacks using the caress of death special rule.

I guess sometimes RAI can stand for rules as interpreted as well, which can be wrong from time to time. Thanks for setting us straight Dakka!

The rules, however, on how a model's attacks gain special rules is extremely relevant.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 IVII wrote:
The fact that you have paid for a Kiss and have modeled your mini that way (equipped, as in part of that model's equipment) modifies one of your attacks to be S6 AP2. This is regardless of what weapon you are attacking with. That is how we have been playing it around here, trying to decipher RAI.

For example when my Solitare uses Blitz on the charge, he gets 1 attack, rolled separately at S6 AP2, and 11 more with the Caress.

In the context of the rest of the codex this is my best guess. I may be wrong, but until those FAQs start flowing all we have to go on is our interpretations.

Your HIWPI and attempt to guess at RAI is appreciated, but not relevant to a discussion on how the rules are actually written.

My group, by contrast, sticks to the More Than One Weapon rule and only allows a model's attacks to gain a weapon special rule if said model is using said weapon.

Has your group looked at the rules, or were you just offering input on how your group has house ruled this?

There is no must at all. You are adding that. If you're not adding 'must', feel free to highlight the word in the below citation.

"When a model equipped with a Harlequin’s Kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of its Attacks will be a Kiss of Death Attack (roll this Attack separately). A Kiss of Death Attack is always resolved at Strength 6 AP2. If a 6 is rolled To Wound with a Kiss of Death Attack, that attack has the Instant Death special rule."

And as we've said quite a few times, unless you're using a Harlequin's Kiss during the fight sub-phase, you will never gain the above rule and the rules text for Kiss of Death will never apply to your attacks.

So is Kiss of Death optional or must one of my attacks be a KoD attack? So while the word must is not present what I said was indeed correct.

Do my model's attacks gain the Kiss of Death rule? No as you've stated they only gain that special rule when using a Harlequins kiss.

Cool so my attacks don't have the rule my model doesn't have the rule. Does the rule care if my model or attacks have the KoD rule? If you believe it does please highlight the part of the rule that states this. All I see is:

When a model equipped with a Harlequin’s Kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of its Attacks will be a Kiss of Death Attack (roll this Attack separately).

So if I have a model equipped with a kiss and making close combat attacks one of those attacks has to be a KoD attack or I am breaking that rule.

 FlingitNow wrote:

There is no must at all. You are adding that. If you're not adding 'must', feel free to highlight the word in the below citation.

"When a model equipped with a Harlequin’s Kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of its Attacks will be a Kiss of Death Attack (roll this Attack separately). A Kiss of Death Attack is always resolved at Strength 6 AP2. If a 6 is rolled To Wound with a Kiss of Death Attack, that attack has the Instant Death special rule."

And as we've said quite a few times, unless you're using a Harlequin's Kiss during the fight sub-phase, you will never gain the above rule and the rules text for Kiss of Death will never apply to your attacks.

So is Kiss of Death optional or must one of my attacks be a KoD attack? So while the word must is not present what I said was indeed correct.

Do my model's attacks gain the Kiss of Death rule? No as you've stated they only gain that special rule when using a Harlequins kiss.

Cool so my attacks don't have the rule my model doesn't have the rule. Does the rule care if my model or attacks have the KoD rule? If you believe it does please highlight the part of the rule that states this. All I see is:

When a model equipped with a Harlequin’s Kiss makes its close combat attacks, one of its Attacks will be a Kiss of Death Attack (roll this Attack separately).

So if I have a model equipped with a kiss and making close combat attacks one of those attacks has to be a KoD attack or I am breaking that rule.

Kiss of Death is mandatory IF your model's attacks have gained the Kiss of Death special rule. Choosing to attack with a model's Harlequin's Kiss is optional.

And of course Kiss of Death cares whether or not the attacks have gained the Kiss of Death special rule. If the attacks haven't, Kiss of Death never comes into play.

You aren't breaking the Kiss of Death rule. The Kiss of Death rule has zero wording on what to do when you have more than one weapon.

You're breaking the More Than One Weapon Rule.

I admire your resolve. You're tenacious. I'd love to have you in my corner in a fight. I appreciate that you doggedly refuse to address the More Than One Weapon rule, but it is what it is. Ignoring a thing doesn't make it go away.

 megatrons2nd wrote:
"Please stop saying wargear - it's a weapon.
Weapons have specific rules on how their special rules work, correct? "

All weapons are wargear. If you don't believe me, go look at your army list on how you buy them.

Also stop saying a weapon only gets special rules when it is used, as the attack, and yes it is the attack, gets a special rule from a weapon being used. So every weapon in the game using your interpretation does not provide any special rule to anything except the attack, thus fearless, fnp and every other non attack special rule does literally nothing.

Oh my gosh. You've accused me of saying something I've a outright stated in this thread multiple times.
How embarrassing!

rigeld2 wrote:

 megatrons2nd wrote:
"Please stop saying wargear - it's a weapon.
Weapons have specific rules on how their special rules work, correct? "

All weapons are wargear. If you don't believe me, go look at your army list on how you buy them.

Also stop saying a weapon only gets special rules when it is used, as the attack, and yes it is the attack, gets a special rule from a weapon being used. So every weapon in the game using your interpretation does not provide any special rule to anything except the attack, thus fearless, fnp and every other non attack special rule does literally nothing.

Oh my gosh. You've accused me of saying something I've a outright stated in this thread multiple times.
How embarrassing!

Oh, good, so you then see that the interpretation you present that ONLY allows a weapon to provide a special rule when it is attacking, sorry being used (even though attacking is a weapons only use in this game) MUST be wrong.

Now that that is covered, how can we proceed?

Obviously, if a rule is simply put on the weapon, and it doesn't state something to the effect of "when attacking with this weapon" or "when a wound is suffered by this weapon", must always function, just like special rules on other pieces of wargear.

 megatrons2nd wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 megatrons2nd wrote:
"Please stop saying wargear - it's a weapon.
Weapons have specific rules on how their special rules work, correct? "

All weapons are wargear. If you don't believe me, go look at your army list on how you buy them.

Also stop saying a weapon only gets special rules when it is used, as the attack, and yes it is the attack, gets a special rule from a weapon being used. So every weapon in the game using your interpretation does not provide any special rule to anything except the attack, thus fearless, fnp and every other non attack special rule does literally nothing.

Oh my gosh. You've accused me of saying something I've a outright stated in this thread multiple times.
How embarrassing!

Oh, good, so you then see that the interpretation you present that ONLY allows a weapon to provide a special rule when it is attacking, sorry being used (even though attacking is a weapons only use in this game) MUST be wrong.

Nope. Please don't put words in my mouth. It's not wrong - it's what the rules literally say. It's obvious, however, that you've not been reading the thread as this has been covered numerous times. It shouldn't be some revelation.

Obviously, if a rule is simply put on the weapon, and it doesn't state something to the effect of "when attacking with this weapon" or "when a wound is suffered by this weapon", must always function, just like special rules on other pieces of wargear.

It must? What rule permits it? Or are you attempting to discuss intent?

rigeld2 wrote:

 megatrons2nd wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 megatrons2nd wrote:
"Please stop saying wargear - it's a weapon.
Weapons have specific rules on how their special rules work, correct? "

All weapons are wargear. If you don't believe me, go look at your army list on how you buy them.

Also stop saying a weapon only gets special rules when it is used, as the attack, and yes it is the attack, gets a special rule from a weapon being used. So every weapon in the game using your interpretation does not provide any special rule to anything except the attack, thus fearless, fnp and every other non attack special rule does literally nothing.

Oh my gosh. You've accused me of saying something I've a outright stated in this thread multiple times.
How embarrassing!

Oh, good, so you then see that the interpretation you present that ONLY allows a weapon to provide a special rule when it is attacking, sorry being used (even though attacking is a weapons only use in this game) MUST be wrong.

Nope. Please don't put words in my mouth. It's not wrong - it's what the rules literally say. It's obvious, however, that you've not been reading the thread as this has been covered numerous times. It shouldn't be some revelation.

Obviously, if a rule is simply put on the weapon, and it doesn't state something to the effect of "when attacking with this weapon" or "when a wound is suffered by this weapon", must always function, just like special rules on other pieces of wargear.

It must? What rule permits it? Or are you attempting to discuss intent?

The rule that says what rules does my model have. You see that first sentence? Do you see that most? Do you know what most means? It means it is not the only way, it is just the most common way, and there are other ways to give a model a special rule. You see that second sentence? You see it says attacks, yes. Do you see anything saying that the weapon can only ever give a special rule when it is attacking? Do you see a restriction banning weapons from providing a special rule under the auspices of the first sentence? That first sentence is all inclusive, and allows for me to get a special rule from the pinky of a rat if the special rule tells me I can do it. Though it does not allow me to write rules in on my own.

We can revisit the literal writing again if you like. The literal writing, does not allow for formations, detachments, or any wargear to give a model a special rule. Yep, the Command benefit rule does give a model a special rule, but only when you reference the special rule, so again your interpretation does not allow it to give itself the rules available under it, because you have to reference the rule to get the rule. It's obvious that you are not paying attention to anything but the last half of a single sentence. The literal writing of the second sentence means that attacks can only benefit from special rules attached to a weapon.

Do you see permission in the What Special Rules Do I have section that allows a model to attack with a special rule that effects attacks that is NOT on a weapon? Remember, you can't reference a special rule to get it's effect unless you are given permission to, and none has been given.

 megatrons2nd wrote:

The rule that says what rules does my model have. You see that first sentence? Do you see that most? Do you know what most means? It means it is not the only way, it is just the most common way, and there are other ways to give a model a special rule.

Agreed, if you have permission.

You see that second sentence? You see it says attacks, yes. Do you see anything saying that the weapon can only ever give a special rule when it is attacking?

No. I also don't see permission for a weapon to give a special rule other than when it's being used.

Do you see a restriction banning weapons from providing a special rule under the auspices of the first sentence? That first sentence is all inclusive, and allows for me to get a special rule from the pinky of a rat if the special rule tells me I can do it. Though it does not allow me to write rules in on my own.

So, again, how do you know you have the special rule? You use the special rule. How do you know to use the special rule? You use the special rule. Repeat ad infinitum.

We can revisit the literal writing again if you like. The literal writing, does not allow for formations, detachments, or any wargear to give a model a special rule. Yep, the Command benefit rule does give a model a special rule, but only when you reference the special rule, so again your interpretation does not allow it to give itself the rules available under it, because you have to reference the rule to get the rule.

Nope. I quoted the relevant rules for you earlier in the thread. Perhaps you could read them?

It's obvious that you are not paying attention to anything but the last half of a single sentence. The literal writing of the second sentence is that attacks can only benefit from special rules attached to a weapon.

Incorrect. The second sentence does not say that.

Do you see permission in the What Special Rules Do I have section that allows a model to attack with a special rule that effects attacks that is NOT on a weapon? Remember, you can't reference a special rule to get it's effect unless you are given permission to, and none has been given.

We know if a model has a special rule, agreed?
Which means we know what the special rule does, agreed?
We then have permission to apply that model's special rule, agreed?
And there's nothing removing that special rule, correct?

Now, are you arguing intent or not? You have t cited anything other than misrepresentations of what the rules say or put words in my mouth, so I'm just checking.

Kiss of Death is mandatory IF your model's attacks have gained the Kiss of Death special rule.

What rule says this?

Fling - if my model has permission to use the kiss of death rule, the special attack becomes non optional.

However, nothing allows me to invoke the special rule KoD UNLESS I am using the weapon. This is a known truth. This is because we are told only two ways to gain special rules, and neither is 'the special rule tells you'

You lack permission, this is proven. As such you may not continue to read the rule and invoke it. This is proven. Your entire argument is unfounded. This is proven

Your continued, dogged refusal to admit your circular reasoning is admirable, but no less flawed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 FlingitNow wrote:

Kiss of Death is mandatory IF your model's attacks have gained the Kiss of Death special rule.

What rule says this?

The rule book, which states you only have special rules under certain conditions.

Again, show permission to invoke kiss of death. Page and graph. Cannot be within the special rule, that's circular permission, so do not reference it. Do not dissemble, deflect or fail to answer this simple query. If you do, again, you will accept you have no argument.

The rule book, which states you only have special rules under certain conditions.

Again, show permission to invoke kiss of death. Page and graph. Cannot be within the special rule, that's circular permission, so do not reference it. Do not dissemble, deflect or fail to answer this simple query. If you do, again, you will accept you have no argument.

Can you answer the actual question? I didn't ask how you get special rules I asked the question of what rule requires you to have Kiss if Death before you and read/invoke it?

No, answer how you are referencing a special rule, and invoking it, without referencing the special rule itself. Page and graph.

This is the initial permission you must show. Failure to do so, again, is sufficient to show you have no argument.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
No, answer how you are referencing a special rule, and invoking it, without referencing the special rule itself. Page and graph.

This is the initial permission you must show. Failure to do so, again, is sufficient to show you have no argument.

Show that I must have permission from out side a rule to reference that rule. I am referencing the rule because the situation in which the rule becomes active has occurred. Page 91 of the Harlequin codex, 2nd column, 2nd paragraph. Why must I show any other permission to invoke that rule?

Why do you insist on the circular logic of "you can't prove you invoke the rule as long as we ignore the rules that allow you to invoke the rule". For instance how does know there is and how to follow the Turn Sequence without following the Turns rules? Quote me the rule that allows me to invoke the Turns rules.

So you don't think this is a permissive set? And "what special rules do I have" is a meaningless rule?

You have to have permission to do anything. Show permission to use the rule you quote, not within the rule. That is an actual example of circular logic , unless your poor attempt

Really, you're going back to the debunked Turns argument? That was referenced already, and shown that the game rules reference turns?

So, answer it. Permission to use a special rule your model does not have. Now. No more of your dissembling.

Nope I have permission I've quoted permission. What special rules I have is not a joke title it is about what special rules you have. Does Kiss of Death care about who has it as a special rule? Surely you're claiming a model can not gain a benefit from a special rule it doesn't have? Otherwise PE, tank hunters, stealth etc don't work the way everyone plays them...

As for turns the only reference was from the Turns rules, which according to you we can't use.

As for the last point page 91 Harlequin codex, 2nd column, 2nd paragraph. Got any rules support for your baseless statements yet?