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:

You do realize that "conflict" is not the same as "break", right?

By saying you can choose Caress and "break" the BRB rule, you have to generate a conflict with the BRB rule.
What rule is allowing you to use the abilities of multiple weapons? KoD isn't - it just dictates what happens if you attack and have a HK.

Fixed the underlined for you. So we agree I have a choice that requires multiple options. There are 2 in this case I choose caress what happens? If I can't choose caress what choice do I have other than the Kiss. Having 1 option is not a choice.

Wrong.
You have 2 choices. One breaks a rule. That doesn't mean it's not an option you can select - it's just a bad idea to break rules (because it's cheating).

 FlingitNow wrote:

You do realize that "conflict" is not the same as "break", right?

By saying you can choose Caress and "break" the BRB rule, you have to generate a conflict with the BRB rule.
What rule is allowing you to use the abilities of multiple weapons? KoD isn't - it just dictates what happens if you attack and have a HK.

Fixed the underlined for you. So we agree I have a choice that requires multiple options. There are 2 in this case I choose caress what happens? If I can't choose caress what choice do I have other than the Kiss. Having 1 option is not a choice.

If you choose Caress, your attacks gain the Caress of Death special rule, but do not gain the Kiss of Death special rule as that would violate the mixing and matching weapon abilities restriction. As neither the model nor the attacks have the Kiss of Death special rule, you have zero obligation to follow the rule.

This is how the rules are written.

You persistently fail to show permission to use the Kiss of Death special rule during a fight sub-phase where neither the model nor its attacks have the rule.

If you choose Caress, your attacks gain the Caress of Death special rule, but do not gain the Kiss of Death special rule as that would violate the mixing and matching weapon abilities restriction. As neither the model nor the attacks have the Kiss of Death special rule, you have zero obligation to follow the rule.

Well claiming you have zero obligation to follow rules is a bizarre statement in a RaW argument. You always have to follow you rules. Doing this breaks a codex rule.

This is how the rules are written.

No the rules aren't written with zero obligation to follow them.

You persistently fail to show permission to use the Kiss of Death special rule during a fight sub-phase where neither the model nor its attacks have the rule.

Page 91, column 2, paragraph 2 in the Harlequin Codex. Nothing in KoD cares about what special rules a model/weapon or attack has. Unless you can quote it? Why do you refuse to support your statements with rules, whilst ignoring rules posted and claiming they ddon't apply to you because you're special.

 FlingitNow wrote:

If you choose Caress, your attacks gain the Caress of Death special rule, but do not gain the Kiss of Death special rule as that would violate the mixing and matching weapon abilities restriction. As neither the model nor the attacks have the Kiss of Death special rule, you have zero obligation to follow the rule.

Well claiming you have zero obligation to follow rules is a bizarre statement in a RaW argument. You always have to follow you rules. Doing this breaks a codex rule.

This is how the rules are written.

No the rules aren't written with zero obligation to follow them.

You persistently fail to show permission to use the Kiss of Death special rule during a fight sub-phase where neither the model nor its attacks have the rule.

Page 91, column 2, paragraph 2 in the Harlequin Codex. Nothing in KoD cares about what special rules a model/weapon or attack has. Unless you can quote it? Why do you refuse to support your statements with rules, whilst ignoring rules posted and claiming they ddon't apply to you because you're special.

Whether your interpretation of that rule is correct or not, absolutely nothing in the rules for the Harlequin's Caress allows you to use if after you've been forced to use the rules for the Harlequin's Kiss.

The best you can argue is that the rules are broken. You can NOT argue that you are allowed to use the Caress and ALSO use the Kiss, because while you may be forced to use the Kiss (most people here seem to disagree with that interpretation) nothing in the rules for the Caress say that you are forced to use it - ergo, you can ONLY use the Kiss.

 NightHowler wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:

If you choose Caress, your attacks gain the Caress of Death special rule, but do not gain the Kiss of Death special rule as that would violate the mixing and matching weapon abilities restriction. As neither the model nor the attacks have the Kiss of Death special rule, you have zero obligation to follow the rule.

Well claiming you have zero obligation to follow rules is a bizarre statement in a RaW argument. You always have to follow you rules. Doing this breaks a codex rule.

This is how the rules are written.

No the rules aren't written with zero obligation to follow them.

You persistently fail to show permission to use the Kiss of Death special rule during a fight sub-phase where neither the model nor its attacks have the rule.

Page 91, column 2, paragraph 2 in the Harlequin Codex. Nothing in KoD cares about what special rules a model/weapon or attack has. Unless you can quote it? Why do you refuse to support your statements with rules, whilst ignoring rules posted and claiming they ddon't apply to you because you're special.

Whether your interpretation of that rule is correct or not, absolutely nothing in the rules for the Harlequin's Caress allows you to use if after you've been forced to use the rules for the Harlequin's Kiss.

The best you can argue is that the rules are broken. You can NOT argue that you are allowed to use the Caress and ALSO use the Kiss, because while you may be forced to use the Kiss (most people here seem to disagree with that interpretation) nothing in the rules for the Caress say that you are forced to use it - ergo, you can ONLY use the Kiss.

actually you can argue that you can choose to use the caress and also have kiss of death.

You choose to strike with the caress, and use the rules for striking with that weapon. No RaW anywhere says your other wargear that affects what the model does changes, and ignoring to follow the rules for Kiss of Death which affect the model when the model makes its close combat attacks and not the harlequin kiss weapon when striking is ignoring a specific, codex rule. There is no rules conflict preventing you from choosing caress, and there are no rules stating you may not benefit from kiss of death as it effects the models attacks, and not the attacks from that weapon. Ignoring kiss of death when a model makes its attacks with any weapon, or even if they model chooses not to select a weapon and attack using its profile- is breaking the rules for Kiss of Death.

Did the model make close combat attacks?

If the answer is yes then the model was eligible to make a Kiss of Death attack.

it is not like a model with a power weapon and a thunderhammer and claiming it can make sx2 attacks with concussive at initiative because all the weapons have those combined rules, because those rules state that they are specific to striking with those specific weapons, not to the model making its attacks. Such a model could pick 1 weapon to attack with and would have any ability/special rule that the model has that affects its attacks plus the abilities of the 1 weapon the model chooses to attack with. There is no actual rule that states it does not gain an abilities that affect the model from the other weapon, there is only a rule stating it does not gain the abilities of striking with that weapon. Kiss of death is not an ability based on striking with a harlequins kiss. Shred on lightning claws however would be.

This has gone on long enough.

FlingitNow... play this however you want. You obviously don't understand the core concepts surrounding how and when a model's attacks gain special rules from a model's weapons. You also obviously don't understand the core concepts surrounding a model with more than one weapon and how that relates to a model's attacks gaining special rules from weapons.

To any level-headed and open-minded readers of this thread...

A Solitaire may choose to attack with either his Harlequin's Caress or his Harlequin's Kiss during a Fight Sub-Phase.
If he chooses to attack with the Harlequin's Caress, his attacks gain the Caress of Death special rule, but do not gain the Kiss of Death special rule as that would be mixing and matching weapon abilities, which is strictly forbidden.
If he chooses to attack with the Harlequin's Kiss, his attacks gain the Kiss of Death special rule, but do not gain the Caress of Death special rule as that would be mixing and matching weapon abilities, which is strictly forbidden.
The restriction on mixing and matching weapon abilities can be found in the "More Than One Weapon" rules section.

The above is 100% fully supported by the rules as written, citations for which can be found throughout this thread, but which are mainly found in the "More Than One Weapon" and "What Special Rules Do I Have?" sections. If GW's true intent was to allow both abilities to work simultaneously, they have made a mistake. As written, a model's attacks can never gain both special rules. It is certainly possible that we'll see an FAQ or Errata at some point overriding the core restriction on using more than one weapon, but I'm inclined to doubt it. I see no compelling evidence that this was GW's intent. I see a combat oriented model with two weapons that give the choice between one guaranteed AP 2 attack at S 5 and multiple, but possibly zero, AP 2 attacks at S 3.

HIWPI: I would play this exactly as the rules dictate. Attack, pick one weapon and gain the rules from that weapon. No mixing and matching of weapon abilities.

blaktoof wrote:
Such a model could pick 1 weapon to attack with and would have any ability/special rule that the model has that affects its attacks plus the abilities of the 1 weapon the model chooses to attack with. There is no actual rule that states it does not gain an abilities that affect the model from the other weapon, there is only a rule stating it does not gain the abilities of striking with that weapon. Kiss of death is not an ability based on striking with a harlequins kiss. Shred on lightning claws however would be.

Are you using the special rules on Harlequin's Kiss while attacking with Harlequin's Caress?

Simple question.

The above is 100% fully supported by the rules as written, citations for which can be found throughout this thread, but which are mainly found in the "More Than One Weapon" and "What Special Rules Do I Have?" sections.

You obviously don't understand the concept of circular logic and how it is a logical fallacy. You clearly refuse to read the Kiss of Death rule and apply the rules there and believe you have the power to pick and choose which rules apply to you with literally no support.

RaW if you have a Harlequins Kiss and are attacking in close combat you make a Kiss of death attack. No ifs buts or maybes. This is undeniable RaW.

HIWPI: I would only apply KoD to model's who's Harlequins Kiss has the Kiss of Death rule. Whilst this is not the RaW it seems obvious the intent, as applying special rules from one vodex to units from another without explicit permission seems unlikely to be the intent.

 FlingitNow wrote:

The above is 100% fully supported by the rules as written, citations for which can be found throughout this thread, but which are mainly found in the "More Than One Weapon" and "What Special Rules Do I Have?" sections.

You obviously don't understand the concept of circular logic and how it is a logical fallacy. You clearly refuse to read the Kiss of Death rule and apply the rules there and believe you have the power to pick and choose which rules apply to you with literally no support.

Proven incorrect multiple times. Mark your post "HYWPI" as you are not discussing rules as written.

FlingitNow wrote:RaW if you have a Harlequins Kiss and are attacking in close combat you make a Kiss of death attack. No ifs buts or maybes. This is undeniable RaW.

Incorrect, as proven multiple times throughout the thread. This is undeniable by anyone able to read the "more than one weapon" rule and "hat special rules do I ahve" rule and actually apply them to this situation.

[quote=FlingitNowHIWPI: I would only apply KoD to model's who's Harlequins Kiss has the Kiss of Death rule. Whilst this is not the RaW it seems obvious the intent, as applying special rules from one vodex to units from another without explicit permission seems unlikely to be the intent.

 Kriswall wrote:
This has gone on long enough.

FlingitNow... play this however you want. You obviously don't understand the core concepts surrounding how and when a model's attacks gain special rules from a model's weapons. You also obviously don't understand the core concepts surrounding a model with more than one weapon and how that relates to a model's attacks gaining special rules from weapons.

To any level-headed and open-minded readers of this thread...

A Solitaire may choose to attack with either his Harlequin's Caress or his Harlequin's Kiss during a Fight Sub-Phase.
If he chooses to attack with the Harlequin's Caress, his attacks gain the Caress of Death special rule, but do not gain the Kiss of Death special rule as that would be mixing and matching weapon abilities, which is strictly forbidden.
If he chooses to attack with the Harlequin's Kiss, his attacks gain the Kiss of Death special rule, but do not gain the Caress of Death special rule as that would be mixing and matching weapon abilities, which is strictly forbidden.
The restriction on mixing and matching weapon abilities can be found in the "More Than One Weapon" rules section.

The above is 100% fully supported by the rules as written, citations for which can be found throughout this thread, but which are mainly found in the "More Than One Weapon" and "What Special Rules Do I Have?" sections. If GW's true intent was to allow both abilities to work simultaneously, they have made a mistake. As written, a model's attacks can never gain both special rules. It is certainly possible that we'll see an FAQ or Errata at some point overriding the core restriction on using more than one weapon, but I'm inclined to doubt it. I see no compelling evidence that this was GW's intent. I see a combat oriented model with two weapons that give the choice between one guaranteed AP 2 attack at S 5 and multiple, but possibly zero, AP 2 attacks at S 3.

HIWPI: I would play this exactly as the rules dictate. Attack, pick one weapon and gain the rules from that weapon. No mixing and matching of weapon abilities.

I don't think i'd agree with your HIWPI.

Sure, the RaW has been discussed, and you have a good conclusion of it, but for HIWPI i think that the "equipped" terminology, versus the more common "when making attacks with this weapon" would point to at least a significant intent for the weapon to grant a Rule as a constant (As the wording is so very similar to Storm shields and other).
The single-handed nature of the weapons would even further my belief that whoever wrote the Rules thought both should apply, but (as usual really) forgot to dust up his / her knowledge of the RaW and how Special Rules on weapons cannot mix and match.

I dont think its even that clear cut an intent argument; remember the broohahah over the NGS giving its bonus to a doomfist when it was FAQ'd?

If GW wanted to make it that no matter what, you got a KoD attack, they would have been *much* more explicit about it.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
I dont think its even that clear cut an intent argument; remember the broohahah over the NGS giving its bonus to a doomfist when it was FAQ'd?

If GW wanted to make it that no matter what, you got a KoD attack, they would have been *much* more explicit about it.

I don't see many ways of doing it, apart from:
A) referencing the Caress ("may also do this attack while attacking with caress" / "with other weapons")
B) separating the rule from the item (making "Harlequin's Kiss" equipment rather than a weapon)

because unless you do the above, however you might write the rules for the Kiss of Death, it will always be a weapon ability. As such it would be too convoluted to make it work (completely). Which leads me to think the the current wording is probably as close as it will get (just as the NGS was never changed, just FAQed)

There is more than those two

C) Special rule "Kiss of Death" - if a harlequin is equipped with a Harlequins Kiss, then in addition to their normal attacks they make... (insert KoD SR text here)

This explicitly means it is nothing to do with using the weapon, and as it is part of the dataslate the unit always has the special rule. Easy.

There are many ways their intention could have been made more explicit. I do not believe that a difference in terminologyu used (equipped vs making attacks with) is sufficient.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
There is more than those two

C) Special rule "Kiss of Death" - if a harlequin is equipped with a Harlequins Kiss, then in addition to their normal attacks they make... (insert KoD SR text here)

This explicitly means it is nothing to do with using the weapon, and as it is part of the dataslate the unit always has the special rule. Easy.

There are many ways their intention could have been made more explicit. I do not believe that a difference in terminologyu used (equipped vs making attacks with) is sufficient.

Keep in mind that would require the entire Troupe and the Solitaire to have those rules (all 3 Kisses), when only models with the weapons are making use of them.
To that extent: when has GW ever given Units rules that are Equipment (Weapons) specific?

So for that RaI, keeping the rules associated with the Weapons (allowing any model to equip a Harlequin's Kiss to get the Special Rule) is what is limiting the rule-writing.

As such, I don't think there are "many ways" to do this, even if i agree that it should have been more explicit if that was the intent.

Proven incorrect multiple times. Mark your post "HYWPI" as you are not discussing rules as written. 

It has not been proven incorrect, your circular logical fallacies prove nothing. The rules are very clear.

Incorrect, as proven multiple times throughout the thread. This is undeniable by anyone able to read the "more than one weapon" rule and "hat special rules do I ahve" rule and actually apply them to this situation. 

What special do I have is irrelevant as proven so why deliberately say that when you know it is untrue? As for more than 1 weapon rule we have 1 rule that says I can't use KoD and 1 rule that says I must. One is in the BrB the other in the codex so which wins?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
There is more than those two

C) Special rule "Kiss of Death" - if a harlequin is equipped with a Harlequins Kiss, then in addition to their normal attacks they make... (insert KoD SR text here)

This explicitly means it is nothing to do with using the weapon, and as it is part of the dataslate the unit always has the special rule. Easy.

There are many ways their intention could have been made more explicit. I do not believe that a difference in terminologyu used (equipped vs making attacks with) is sufficient.

That wording would give them an extra attack. So if you changed it to make one of their attacks KoD oh yes you're back at the original wording...

Yes, the rules are clear. Youre using a special rule you dont even have as a model, just because the special rule says you can use it. Totally ignoring that the rulebook doesnt let you mix and match from two different weapons, youre prooposing exactly that this is allowed. The mind boggles at how you can ignore such a simple rule.

Hell, youre even proposing that a unit from an entirely different codex would gain KoD. Because "Fling logic" says so.

Your argument is done. If you hadnt spotted, the conclusions have been made, we're now discussing whether this was their likely intent. And, in case it wasnt abundantly clear, my "C" was a quick paraphrase of how they may wanted to word it and note the positioning, whcih your response shows you totally missed, is different to where the rule currently is. Because these things matter.

blaktoof wrote:
actually you can argue that you can choose to use the caress and also have kiss of death.

You choose to strike with the caress, and use the rules for striking with that weapon. No RaW anywhere says your other wargear that affects what the model does changes, and ignoring to follow the rules for Kiss of Death which affect the model when the model makes its close combat attacks and not the harlequin kiss weapon when striking is ignoring a specific, codex rule. There is no rules conflict preventing you from choosing caress, and there are no rules stating you may not benefit from kiss of death as it effects the models attacks, and not the attacks from that weapon. Ignoring kiss of death when a model makes its attacks with any weapon, or even if they model chooses not to select a weapon and attack using its profile- is breaking the rules for Kiss of Death.

Did the model make close combat attacks?

If the answer is yes then the model was eligible to make a Kiss of Death attack.

it is not like a model with a power weapon and a thunderhammer and claiming it can make sx2 attacks with concussive at initiative because all the weapons have those combined rules, because those rules state that they are specific to striking with those specific weapons, not to the model making its attacks. Such a model could pick 1 weapon to attack with and would have any ability/special rule that the model has that affects its attacks plus the abilities of the 1 weapon the model chooses to attack with. There is no actual rule that states it does not gain an abilities that affect the model from the other weapon, there is only a rule stating it does not gain the abilities of striking with that weapon. Kiss of death is not an ability based on striking with a harlequins kiss. Shred on lightning claws however would be.

Let me ask you this: if the Kiss had +1S and the Caress had +2S, would you get +3S?

What if the Kiss had Shred and the Caress had Armorbane? Would you get both Shred AND Armorbane?

The reason I ask is because that is exactly what you are claiming you can do when you claim you can use the special rules from both weapons together.

If not, then where do you draw the line? Do you only allow the Kiss' Kiss of Death special rule and not Shred? How does that work, and what rules would you use to justify it?

Edited to explain that I understand you're saying you wouldn't get the bonuses to S, but "shred" and "armorbane" are both found under TYPE under the weapon's description, the same place "kiss of death" is found.

Well, just look at the Command Benefits Rule for a moment.

Done?

Do you see that Command benefits gives itself permission to provide rules to models in a formation?


Okay, so using the "circular rules argument" Formations/detachments can not gain rules through the "command benefits rule" because go back to the door/key analogy, or the ad infintum thing.

How does wargear provide a rule to models? The wargear doesn't have a rule allowing it anywhere in the main rulebook, and it is not part of the listed ways for a model to gain a special rule.

Next, how does a model's attacks gain special rules, without referencing a special rule? There are no rules granting a special rule to an attack aside from the route of weapons.

 megatrons2nd wrote:
Well, just look at the Command Benefits Rule for a moment.

Done?

Do you see that Command benefits gives itself permission to provide rules to models in a formation?


Okay, so using the "circular rules argument" Formations/detachments can not gain rules through the "command benefits rule" because go back to the door/key analogy, or the ad infintum thing.

No. Seriously.
Creating your army shows you have permission to use Formations/Detachments.
When investigating those rules, it shows you have permission to use Command benefits.

There's no circle there. "Why do you get to use Command Benefits?" "Because the Formation rules say so." "Where is your permission to use the Formation rules?" "In the Build Your Army section." Done.
See? No loop.

How does wargear provide a rule to models? The wargear doesn't have a rule allowing it anywhere in the main rulebook, and it is not part of the listed ways for a model to gain a special rule.

It's part of the Army List, so your statement is false.
Because it's part of the Army List, we see what that wargear does.

Next, how does a model's attacks gain special rules, without referencing a special rule? There are no rules granting a special rule to an attack aside from the route of weapons.

What? This doesn't make any sense at all.

 megatrons2nd wrote:
Well, just look at the Command Benefits Rule for a moment.

Done?

Do you see that Command benefits gives itself permission to provide rules to models in a formation?


Okay, so using the "circular rules argument" Formations/detachments can not gain rules through the "command benefits rule" because go back to the door/key analogy, or the ad infintum thing.

How does wargear provide a rule to models? The wargear doesn't have a rule allowing it anywhere in the main rulebook, and it is not part of the listed ways for a model to gain a special rule.

Next, how does a model's attacks gain special rules, without referencing a special rule? There are no rules granting a special rule to an attack aside from the route of weapons.

No, the first example is incorrect, the second not supported enough.

Command benefits are gained because the Rulebook says so:

COMMAND BENEFITS
This section of the Detachment lists any special rules or benefits that apply to some or all
of the models in that Detachment.

As to how Wargear provides a rule, sure, you have to read the Wargear "Rule" to apply them.

This does not work for weapons (even though they are Wargear).
Why?
Because weapons have their own rules, defined in the Rulebook. How they work, what their profile means, and specifically:

Special Rules
The type section of a weapon’s profile also includes any special rules that apply to the weapon in question.

If you followed the thread entirely, and you are aware of the "More Than One Weapon" and "What Special Rules Do I Have?" rules, then you would know that any special rules listed on a weapon will only "be active" if the weapon is being used.

Otherwise:

 NightHowler wrote:
Let me ask you this: if the Kiss had +1S and the Caress had +2S, would you get +3S?

What if the Kiss had Shred and the Caress had Armorbane? Would you get both Shred AND Armorbane?

The reason I ask is because that is exactly what you are claiming you can do when you claim you can use the special rules from both weapons together.

If not, then where do you draw the line? Do you only allow the Kiss' Kiss of Death special rule and not Shred? How does that work, and what rules would you use to justify it?

Edited to explain that I understand you're saying you wouldn't get the bonuses to S, but "shred" and "armorbane" are both found under TYPE under the weapon's description, the same place "kiss of death" is found.

To answer Night - I can see Fling supporting +3S. Its still less out there than a unit in a codex gaining a special rule found only in another codex

I'm still struggling to grasp the concept of the rule still applying (by RaW) outside of combat (like the Runic Staff).

For which, just as has been said for using any piece of Wargear: You must follow the Wargear's rules at all times, even though nothing in the BrB gives permission to, correct?
IE: You must follow the "Storm Shield" Rules because they say "when equipped"

Similarly, you must follow the "Kiss of Death" or "Adamantium Will" simply because the Weapon is mentioning "when equipped".
This is then negated by the "use" of the weapon while in combat.

Miles off, or pretty much the consensus?

Well by RAW it doesnt apply; thats the problem here.

You dont have the special rule until you use the weapon. Whether that is a rule that is strictly close combat only, or is wider like AW or the Blizzard Shield, is irrelevant.

No, i think the argument was quite convincing (for me anyway):

If you disagree, then where is the permission to follow the Rules for the "Storm Shield" piece of Wargear?
Why would a Runic Staff or Harlequin's Kiss not follow the same permission?

 Kriswall wrote:

 NightHowler wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:

 NightHowler wrote:


Permission to ignore requirement D is in the wording of the Harlequin's Kiss. It says that if the wargear is equipped you use it's special rule. That wording for the wargear is more specific than the rule from the BRB stating when you can benefit from a special rule and so it trumps it. I have said this before and it is how I address the issue you're saying I haven't addressed.

I agree that it is a permissive rule set. I disagree that a specific rule (Harlequin's Kiss) is not allowed to break a general rule (What Special Rules Do I Have). Because the Harlequin's Kiss is more specific and because it tells us to trigger the special rule when the weapon is equipped and when the model makes close combat attacks, it trumps the requirement that the model attack with the weapon.

Instead of saying I haven't addressed this issue, please say you disagree with (part X) of how I have addressed it.

Fair.

I disagree with this part...

The core rulebook tells you that your attacks don't gain the Kiss of Death special rule. Your permission to ignore this restriction requires a special rule you don't have. At the point when you try to decide whether or not your attack gains the Kiss of Death rule, you don't have access to the Kiss of Death rule... so you can't use having it as justification to gaining it.

This is what we mean by circular reasoning.

"You don't have Kiss of Death."
"I do."
"What is telling you that you do?"
"The Kiss of Death rule."
"But you don't have the Kiss of Death rule."
"I do."
"What is telling you that you do?"
"The Kiss of Death rule."
"But you don't have the Kiss of Death rule."
etc, etc

Since the BRB is restricting you from having access to the Kiss of Death rule when not attacking with a Harlequin's Kiss, you'd need specific wording saying "this weapon ability/special rule may be used even when not attacking with a Harlequin's Kiss". Without specific wording like that, there is no real conflict. It doesn't matter what the rule says, because your attacks don't gain the rule unless you're using the Harlequin's Kiss... which you aren't when attacking with the Harlequin's Caress.

This is my core disagreement. Your permission to gain the rule requires that you already have the rule. If you don't have the rule, the rules text doesn't mean anything.

Kriswall, this is why I like debating with you. You actually read what other people write and reply thoughtfully.

I understand the basis of your argument to be that you cannot use the special rules from more than one weapon because of the more than one weapon rule on page 41 which says, "if a model has more than one melee weapon, he must choose which one to attack with when he comes to strike blows - he cannot mix and match the abilities of several different melee weapons." and since the Kiss of Death is one of the Harlequin's Kiss' special abilities, you are not allowed to use it if you have used any other weapon's abilities.

You have a very strong argument and I will admit that you are probably correct. The reason I joined this discussion is because the claim was made earlier in the thread that "you must use the weapon to gain it's abilities", but there are other weapons where this is not the case. Examples have been mentioned earlier but the only one that concerns me is the Rune Priest's Runic Weapon which grant's adamantium will if the model is equipped with the weapon. Adamantium will is not an attack ability, and if the statement "you must use the weapon to gain it's abilities" is true then pieces of wargear like the Runic Weapon would cease to grant their special rules except in the combat phase when using the weapon to strike blows, rendering it useless.

I don't play Eldar and have little interest in whether or not the wargear works this way or not, but I thought that debating it would help me understand whether or not this statement is true: "you must use a weapon to gain it's abilities".

Since you're basing your argument on the More Than One Weapon rule and not on the What Special Rules Do I Have rule, I think I can safely concede that the Harlequin's Kiss will not grant the Kiss of Death special rule if you have used the special rules from a different weapon while maintaining that Runic Weapons grant Ward outside of the assault phase - no need to use the Runic Weapon to gain Adamantium Will since you are not using a different weapon in your opponent's psychic phase and thus not breaking the More Than One Weapon rule.

Please believe me when I say that I haven't been trolling, I've been playing devil's advocate to help me get a grasp on how this argument affects my army.

Fair, again.

And I think you have it exactly as I think of it. In the case of the Runic Weapon, you would benefit from Adamantium Will at all times EXCEPT when you come to strike blows (fight sub-phase) and are using a different weapon to attack. There is no restriction in the Psychic phase to prevent you from mixing and matching weapon abilities, so you're free to use the Runic Weapon at that point.

 BlackTalos wrote:
No, i think the argument was quite convincing (for me anyway):

If you disagree, then where is the permission to follow the Rules for the "Storm Shield" piece of Wargear?
Why would a Runic Staff or Harlequin's Kiss not follow the same permission?

A Storm Shield isn't a weapon, it's wargear. Simply by having it in your Army List you have permission to use its rules (What Special Rules Do I Have).
Runic Staff/HK are weapons. Weapons have a specific requirement to use their special rules (What Special Rules Do I Have) which is over and above normal Wargear.

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
No, i think the argument was quite convincing (for me anyway):

If you disagree, then where is the permission to follow the Rules for the "Storm Shield" piece of Wargear?
Why would a Runic Staff or Harlequin's Kiss not follow the same permission?

A Storm Shield isn't a weapon, it's wargear. Simply by having it in your Army List you have permission to use its rules (What Special Rules Do I Have).
Runic Staff/HK are weapons. Weapons have a specific requirement to use their special rules (What Special Rules Do I Have) which is over and above normal Wargear.

The statement, "weapons have a specific requirement to use their special rules... ...which is over and above normal wargear" is inaccurate, or rather, it is incomplete.

The What Special Rules Do I Have paragraph says, and I quote,

That said, a model's attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using.

Emphasis added to draw your attention to the fact that only attacks require the weapon to be used to gain special rules.

Any other benefits that the weapon grants have no such requirement.

 NightHowler wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
No, i think the argument was quite convincing (for me anyway):

If you disagree, then where is the permission to follow the Rules for the "Storm Shield" piece of Wargear?
Why would a Runic Staff or Harlequin's Kiss not follow the same permission?

A Storm Shield isn't a weapon, it's wargear. Simply by having it in your Army List you have permission to use its rules (What Special Rules Do I Have).
Runic Staff/HK are weapons. Weapons have a specific requirement to use their special rules (What Special Rules Do I Have) which is over and above normal Wargear.

The statement, "weapons have a specific requirement to use their special rules... ...which is over and above normal wargear" is inaccurate, or rather, it is incomplete.

The What Special Rules Do I Have paragraph says, and I quote,

That said, a model's attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using.

Emphasis added to draw your attention to the fact that only attacks require the weapon to be used to gain special rules.

Any other benefits that the weapon grants have no such requirement.

I would agree with this also, but where does:
"Simply by having it in your Army List you have permission to use its rules (What Special Rules Do I Have)"
say so specifically?

This?

Most special rules are given to a model by the relevant Army List Entry or its unit type.

The Storm shield is just as much part of the Army List Entry as the Runic Staff or the Harlequin's Kiss...

All 3 are "Wargear", and the second part of the rule "a model's attacks" does not exclude this?

It's not inaccurate - the only time a weapon bestowing special rules is mentioned is to a model's attacks. It's not mentioned that a weapon (again, different from normal wargear) can bestow special rules like normal wargear.

rigeld2 wrote:
It's not inaccurate - the only time a weapon bestowing special rules is mentioned is to a model's attacks. It's not mentioned that a weapon (again, different from normal wargear) can bestow special rules like normal wargear.

You're assuming that the description of how to acquire special rules given in the What Special Rules Do I Have paragraphs are exhaustive. You're assuming that they are also exclusive. It's actually a loosely written guide to help you understand special rules, not a precisely written, exhaustive, and exclusive ruleset for how to tell what you have. Look at how it's written:

What Special Rules Do I Have
It may seem obvious, but unless stated otherwise, a model does not have a special rule.

From the opening sentence, we are told that you have a special rule if you are told you have it: ie - it's listed on your wargear, it's in your detachment special rules, your codex or FAQ tells you you have it. But for the sake of understanding better, let's read on...

Most special rules are given to a model by the relevant army list Entry or its unit type. That said, a model's attacks can gain special rules because of the weapon it is using.

Nothing here says "these are the only ways to get rules". In fact it starts with "MOST special rules..." letting us know right from the very start that there are other ways to get rules as well. But again, let's continue reading...

Similarly a model might get special rules as the result of psychic powers, scenario special rules or being hunkered down in a particular type of terrain. Where this is the case, the rule that governs the psychic power, scenario or terrain type in question will make this abundantly clear.

Again, does this sound like an all exclusive, totally exhaustive ruleset for how to acquire special rules to you? It sure doesn't to me. Especially with the use of words like "Might" it sounds like a loose guide explaining that the special rules, and how I get them, should be explained in more detail elsewhere.

So to BOLDLY claim that the ONLY time a model EVER gets special rules from its weapon is when it uses it to attack is inaccurate.

Let's look at the opening sentence one last time. I think it's the most informative sentence in the whole section:

It may seem obvious, but unless stated otherwise, a model does not have a special rule.

Where is it stated otherwise? On the weapon. Do I have to attack for it to state otherwise? No. Are there any restrictions on it? Yes, but only when using more than one weapon.

Just out of interest - assuming the weapon rules only apply when in use - how do people play the shield on the SW dread? It has a combat profile along with the invul save.

Does that mean you don't get the save unless you use the weapon in combat and cant use it outside of combat?