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.

 grendel083 wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
Having said that, this is yet another example of how sloppy these rules are. I can't imagine GW expected their rules to limit the Rod of Covenant this way.

I don't know about that, the rod seems to fit perfectly with what the rule describes - a weapon that can be used for shooting and combat.
Ork Burnas and Eldar-shining-spear-lance-thingies have been effected by this for some time.
I can't think of any reason why the Rod wouldn't or shouldn't follow this rule.

Maybe because the rule doesn't actually work?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crevab wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
, however, you cannot roll to wound as you have no strength characteristic to roll to wound with, and (assuming you decide to use the model's Strength), there is no AP value to determine whether or not the enemy gets a save.
.

What? Now you're just being obtuse

So what AP value would you use? And where would you find that information?

 Crevab wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
, however, you cannot roll to wound as you have no strength characteristic to roll to wound with, and (assuming you decide to use the model's Strength), there is no AP value to determine whether or not the enemy gets a save.
.

What? Now you're just being obtuse

The problem isn't that you are required to have a weapon, but the game expects you to have a weapon. If you are in close combat without a weapon, there are holes in the RAW.

Where, might I ask?

 Crevab wrote:
Where, might I ask?

Like when the rules tell you to refer to your weapon's profile for S and AP values.

 extremefreak17 wrote:

 Crevab wrote:
Where, might I ask?

Like when the rules tell you to refer to your weapon's profile for S and AP values.

They don't really, though...

Small Rulebook, page 50, Roll to Wound section - "In most cases, when rolling To Wound in close combat, you use the Strength on the attacker's profile regardless of what weapon he is using." It goes on to say that if you have a melee weapon with a strength bonus to use that instead.

Furthermore, as a models base attacks have no inherent AP, you'd use AP-.

I can't find anything actually requiring you to have a usable melee weapon to make close combat attacks. In essence, the wording about every model without a melee weapon being assumed to have a CCW has no effect as the CCW doesn't appear to be needed to make attacks.

A rule that says 'In most cases do this...' is useless for determining whether you're supposed to do that in the specific situation in front of you...

 insaniak wrote:
A rule that says 'In most cases do this...' is useless for determining whether you're supposed to do that in the specific situation in front of you...

[sarcasm]Well then, I guess it's a useless rule and we can never, ever know how to roll To Wound. After all, how do I know that my case is one of the "most cases"?[/sarcam]

Realistically though, in the absence of something telling us to do something else, I think it's safe to say that you're good to follow the rules as written and just go ahead and use the model's strength characteristic.

 Kriswall wrote:
[sarcasm]Well then, I guess it's a useless rule and we can never, ever know how to roll To Wound. After all, how do I know that my case is one of the "most cases"?[/sarcam]

You don't need to know which cases are 'most cases' as we're generally given a S and AP for anything that is usable in melee anyway.

Realistically though, in the absence of something telling us to do something else, I think it's safe to say that you're good to follow the rules as written and just go ahead and use the model's strength characteristic.

Where is that in the rules?

 insaniak wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
[sarcasm]Well then, I guess it's a useless rule and we can never, ever know how to roll To Wound. After all, how do I know that my case is one of the "most cases"?[/sarcam]

You don't need to know which cases are 'most cases' as we're generally given a S and AP for anything that is usable in melee anyway.

Realistically though, in the absence of something telling us to do something else, I think it's safe to say that you're good to follow the rules as written and just go ahead and use the model's strength characteristic.

Where is that in the rules?

In the rule I quoted telling us that in most cases we use the model's strength. Is there anything telling us to use something else? Nope. In that case, it seems best to fall back on the "in most cases" rule.

A few sentences before?

"Consult the chart on the left, cross-referencing the attacker's Strength characteristic with the Defender's toughness."

While the To Wound chart in the Shooting section and Reference section use "Weapon's Strength" as the y-axis, the To Wound in the Close Combat section uses "Attacker's or Weapon's Strength


Besides adding " no weapon? you get a ccw" in 7th. Did something get changed in the wording or should we never have been able to attack with non-Assault units in previous editions?

Furthermore, as a models base attacks have no inherent AP, you'd use AP-.

Still looking for this in the rules as well.

which: asking for information specifying one or more people or things from a definite set.

 Tokhuah wrote:
which: asking for information specifying one or more people or things from a definite set.

Tenant #6...

"6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out."

While interesting, your definition has no bearing on this rules debate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 extremefreak17 wrote:

Furthermore, as a models base attacks have no inherent AP, you'd use AP-.

Still looking for this in the rules as well.

Jumpin' Jesus on a pogo stick.

Ok then, it's obviously not in there. We're dealing with a situation that isn't covered in the rules. You try to attack, the game breaks when you don't have a melee weapon with a listed AP and you both pack up and go home. I'm assuming that's what you're looking for?

Models don't have an AP value on their profile. If they're attacking and they're not using a melee weapon... what do you propose the AP value is? I propose it to be null or "-", i.e. the absence of an AP value. I propose this as I ALSO can't find an AP value for models in the rule. The most reasonable interpretation is that they don't have one.

Well, the AP is -.

Since the 'No Specified Melee Weapon' states that models are not specifically stated as having a weapon with the Melee Type, it is treated as being armed with a single close combat weapon.'

Right above that it shows the rules for Close Combat Weapons and shows the profile for it as :

Close Combat Weapon (R) - (S) User (AP) - (Type) Melee

Reference: BRB, pg 41.

Which ties in nicely to my next point regarding Rod of Covenant. If you state that it has a shooting profile this turn , then you've not specified it to have the Melee type. Which leads me to believe that since for the turn, it's not specified as having a Melee weapon, it would get the CCW as per standard rules and have AP- were it to get into CC.

'Some weapons can be used in shooting as well as in Close Combat'. Where this is the case, there will be seperate line in the weapon's profile for each and you can choose which to use each turn' (BRB, pg 41)

I don't see how you can pick and change the profile during each phase, since phases make up the turn. Once you select a profile, you will have chosen for that turn.

Second debate on the Triarchs...I think I might be done with them xD

You're all forgetting that if the rule that states "you can choose which to use each turn" is followed as RAI then all models with pistols and a melee weapon would no longer benefit from duel wielding in CC if they fired the pistol in the shooting phase as nowhere does it state that a pistol is allowed to be used as a pistol and a CCW in the same turn.

A pistols profile is essentially the following:

Range S AP Type
12" 4 5 Pistol
- User - Melee

So if used as stated then a model with a pistol must choose which profile to use and if the shooting profile is used the CC one is ignored.

Plus, unlike the Rod of the Covenant which would make the model no longer have a specified CCW if used in the shooting phase, a model with a pistol and CCW would still have a CCW and so it would not gain a second due to being unable to use the pistol in CC as the rule states:

"If a model is not specifically stated as having a weapon with the melee type, it is treated as being armed with a single close combat weapon"

and it still has its originally CCW.

If followed as stated it not only breaks any weapon like the Rod of the Covenant but also any model equipped with a pistol and CCW would lose its bonus attack if you choose to use the pistol to shoot as well.

Thankfully me and my entire meta have unanimously agree that the rule stating you have to choose which profile to use is in fact referring to weapons with multiple shooting profiles and that all weapons with a shooting and a melee profile can in fact use both in the same turn, unless it specifically states otherwise as with burnas, and that the rule is simply written all sorts of wonky.

We have chosen to reword the rule in our meta as the following:

"Some weapons can be used in different ways, representing different power settings or types of ammo. Where this is the case, there will be a separate line in the weapon's profile for each, and you can choose which to use each turn. Some weapons can be used in combat as well as shooting."

Mordaem wrote:
You're all forgetting that if the rule that states "you can choose which to use each turn" is followed as RAI then all models with pistols and a melee weapon would no longer benefit from duel wielding in CC if they fired the pistol in the shooting phase as nowhere does it state that a pistol is allowed to be used as a pistol and a CCW in the same turn.

From the main rulebook:

Some weapons can be used in combat as well as shooting. Where this is the case, there will be a separate line in the weapon’s profile for each, and you can choose which to use each turn.

Where is this 'separate line' for Pistols?

Mordaem wrote:
A pistols profile is essentially the following:

As soon as you have to make up a profile to prove your point, you should realize your argument is incorrect.

That's not the profile of a Pistol.

Pg 41 of the BRB

"Pistols as Close Combat Weapons
a pistol can be used as a close combat weapon. If this is done, use the profile given above - the Strength, AP and special rules of the pistol's shooting profile are ignored"

The profile it refers to is the one i posted. So it does in fact have 2 profiles as stated in the BRB and still does not state that it can be used as both in the same turn.

Please try to read your rulebooks before calling people liars or saying they are making things up.

Mordaem wrote:
Pg 41 of the BRB

"Pistols as Close Combat Weapons
a pistol can be used as a close combat weapon. If this is done, use the profile given above - the Strength, AP and special rules of the pistol's shooting profile are ignored"

The profile it refers to is the one i posted. So it does in fact have 2 profiles as stated in the BRB and still does not state that it can be used as both in the same turn.

Please try to read your rulebooks before calling people liars or saying they are making things up.

You did make it up.

The Pistol can be used as a CCW. That does not mean that all Pistols have 2 profiles.

Mordaem wrote:
Pg 41 of the BRB

"Pistols as Close Combat Weapons
a pistol can be used as a close combat weapon. If this is done, use the profile given above - the Strength, AP and special rules of the pistol's shooting profile are ignored"

The profile it refers to is the one i posted. So it does in fact have 2 profiles as stated in the BRB and still does not state that it can be used as both in the same turn.

Please try to read your rulebooks before calling people liars or saying they are making things up.

It doesn't have two profiles, it has one.
As per Pistol rules (BRB; pg 42) It also counts as a CCW, not that it also has the profile of a CCW

rigeld2 wrote:

You did make it up.

The Pistol can be used as a CCW. That does not mean that all Pistols have 2 profiles.

No I didn't, the rules on page 41 of the BRB give all weapons with the pistol type a second profile for CC. Read your rulebook man, its right there. I even gave you the page number and quoted it verbatim.

No it doesn't. It says if they're used as a close combat weapon it uses the profile listed above. It never actually gives that profile to the weapon.

As per the rule you posted, you also ignore the shooting profile. So it would only ever have one profile at any given time.

Torquar wrote:
As a matter of interest, I put together a list of units and weapons that would be affected by this rule.

Spoiler:

Adeptus Sororitas
St Celestine's Ardent Blade

Chaos Space Marines
Abaddon's Talon of Horus
Huron Blackheart's The Tyrant's Claw

Eldar
Avatar's Wailing Doom
Jain Zar's Silent Death
Maugan Ra's Maugetar
Triskele
Chainsabres (fluff text indicates these are supposed to be used in shooting then melee)
Laser Lance
Scorpion's Claw
Singing Spear
Star Lance

Iyanden
Celestial Lance
Spear of Teuthlas

Necrons
Rod of the Covenant

Space Marines
Marneus Calgar's Gauntlets of Utramar

Farsight Enclaves
Fusion Blade

Grey Knights
Dreadnought Power Fists with built in Storm Bolter

Orks
Burna (specifically mentions may only use one profile)

Space Wolves
Bjorn the Fel Handed's Trueclaw
Dreadnought Power Fists with built in Storm Bolter
Dreadnought Wolf Claw with built in Storm Bolter
Murderfang's Murderclaws
Arjac Rockfist's Foehammer

Blood Angels
Librarian Dreadnought Power Fists with built in Storm Bolter
Dreadnought Power Fists with built in Storm Bolter
Dreadnought Power Fists with built in Heavy Flamer
Death Company Dreadnought Power Fists with built in Storm Bolter
Death Company Dreadnought Power Fists with built in Meltagun
Death Company Dreadnought Power Fists with built in Heavy Flamer
Death Company Dreadnought Blood Claws with built in Storm Bolter
Death Company Dreadnought Blood Claws with built in Meltagun
Death Company Dreadnought Blood Claws with built in Heavy Flamer
Furioso Dreadnought Power Fists with built in Storm Bolter
Furioso Dreadnought Power Fists with built in Meltagun
Furioso Dreadnought Power Fists with built in Heavy Flamer
Furioso Dreadnought Blood Claws with built in Storm Bolter
Furioso Dreadnought Blood Claws with built in Meltagun
Furioso Dreadnought Blood Claws with built in Heavy Flamer

Dread weapons not applying, did anyone seriously look at this list? It's pretty important to note.

 Frozocrone wrote:
As per the rule you posted, you also ignore the shooting profile. So it would only ever have one profile at any given time.

yes, you "ignore" it, you do not "remove" it. the profile is still there it just cannot be used for CC.

Mordaem wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

You did make it up.

The Pistol can be used as a CCW. That does not mean that all Pistols have 2 profiles.

No I didn't, the rules on page 41 of the BRB give all weapons with the pistol type a second profile for CC. Read your rulebook man, its right there. I even gave you the page number and quoted it verbatim.

The underlined is false - and you didn't quote a rule that says that.

rigeld2 wrote:
The underlined is false - and you didn't quote a rule that says that.

So a rule stating a weapon has a specific profile doesn't mean that weapon has that profile? please explain how that can be as well as showing me where it states specifically that a pistol can used as both a shooting weapon and a CCW in the same turn.

Mordaem wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
The underlined is false - and you didn't quote a rule that says that.

So a rule stating a weapon has a specific profile doesn't mean that weapon has that profile? please explain how that can be as well as showing me where it states specifically that a pistol can used as both a shooting weapon and a CCW in the same turn.

The rule does not say it "has a specific profile".

The rule says that if it's used in CC, use the profile above. Meaning it doesn't always have that profile - only when it's used in CC. Meaning all of your statements so far have no basis in fact and you have, as I said, made things up.

rigeld2 wrote:
The rule does not say it "has a specific profile".

The rule says that if it's used in CC, use the profile above. Meaning it doesn't always have that profile - only when it's used in CC. Meaning all of your statements so far have no basis in fact and you have, as I said, made things up.

I'm sorry, I was unaware that there was a rule that allowed weapons to use profiles they don't have. My bad.

The rule that let's a Pistol use a profile it doesn't have is right there in the Pistol rules.