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.

Which Necron weapons are you referring to? The only thing I can think of are Whip Coils but those aren't weapons.

Zimko wrote:
Which Necron weapons are you referring to? The only thing I can think of are Whip Coils but those aren't weapons.

Whip Coils totally ARE weapons. From Codex: Necrons...

Whip Coils Range: - S: User AP: - Type: Melee, Swiftstrike

Swiftstrike: A model attacking with this weapon adds 3 to its Initiative during the Fight Sub-Phase.

Also from Codex: Tyranids...

Lash Whips Range: - S: User AP: - Type: Melee, Swiftstrike

Swiftstrike: A model attacking with this weapon has a +3 bonus to its Initiative during the Fight Sub-Phase.

The only way this works is if the model is asked to select weapons at the Fight Sub-Phase. If you wait until the actual Initiative Step you think the model should be attacking at, i.e. its native Initiative, you'll have missed your opportunity.

Also, fun fact. Whip Coils and Lash Whips are the same thing. I never actually realized this.

 Kriswall wrote:

Zimko wrote:
Which Necron weapons are you referring to? The only thing I can think of are Whip Coils but those aren't weapons.

Whip Coils totally ARE weapons. From Codex: Necrons...

Whip Coils Range: - S: User AP: - Type: Melee, Swiftstrike

Swiftstrike: A model attacking with this weapon adds 3 to its Initiative during the Fight Sub-Phase.

Also from Codex: Tyranids...

Lash Whips Range: - S: User AP: - Type: Melee, Swiftstrike

Swiftstrike: A model attacking with this weapon has a +3 bonus to its Initiative during the Fight Sub-Phase.

The only way this works is if the model is asked to select weapons at the Fight Sub-Phase. If you wait until the actual Initiative Step you think the model should be attacking at, i.e. its native Initiative, you'll have missed your opportunity.

Also, fun fact. Whip Coils and Lash Whips are the same thing. I never actually realized this.

NVM

The only way this works is if the model is asked to select weapons at the Fight Sub-Phase. If you wait until the actual Initiative Step you think the model should be attacking at, i.e. its native Initiative, you'll have missed your opportunity.

But we are not told to select weapons. The only point where we are told to act is when it is our initiative step. I have assumed this discussion is about RAW and how the D thirster works, but you guys are coming up wih your own rules and interpretations without rules support.

Please create a new thread about the Whip Coils and we can continue this discussion there.

RAW, it is quite obvious that just by having the weapon on the model makes them act at initiative step 1.

Naw wrote:

The only way this works is if the model is asked to select weapons at the Fight Sub-Phase. If you wait until the actual Initiative Step you think the model should be attacking at, i.e. its native Initiative, you'll have missed your opportunity.

But we are not told to select weapons. The only point where we are told to act is when it is our initiative step. I have assumed this discussion is about RAW and how the D thirster works, but you guys are coming up wih your own rules and interpretations without rules support.

Please create a new thread about the Whip Coils and we can continue this discussion there.

RAW, it is quite obvious that just by having the weapon on the model makes them act at initiative step 1.

No, it's really not obvious. I read the rules and based on the Fight Sub-Phase intro, there is a heavy implication that the entire Fight Sub-Phase is considered "striking blows". I read weapon profiles like Whip Coils and Lash Whips and realize that weapon choice MUST occur before Initiative Step 10 begins. I read the More Than One Weapon rules and realize that if I'm attacking with Weapon A, none of Weapon B's abilities are in play. I don't think it's fair to say it's obvious that just having the weapon on the model makes them act at Initiative Step 1. Doing so would force me to ignore everything I just listed.

Might be obvious to you, but methinks you're ignoring everything I just listed out.

There is no need to create a new thread about Whip Coils. It's extremely relevant to this discussion as it pretty much proves that weapon selection happens before Initiative Step 10 starts... which would void out the Colossal weapon ability per the More Than One Weapon rules.

 Kriswall wrote:

There is no need to create a new thread about Whip Coils. It's extremely relevant to this discussion as it pretty much proves that weapon selection happens before Initiative Step 10 starts... which would void out the Colossal weapon ability per the More Than One Weapon rules.

I agree it is relevant to this topic. But I'd also like to point out that the 'SwiftStrike' rule also says "A model attacking with..." whereas 'Colossal' says "A model with..."

AND ROUND AND ROUND WE GO!!!!!

Nice coincidence about Whip Coils & Lash Whips, btw, Kriswall

--

And I believe everything has been said on this matter, time to move on.

Naw wrote:
And I believe everything has been said on this matter, time to move on.

Feel free to move on then. Nobody is stopping you.

I actually think the Swiftstrike rule is what clinches it for me. Combining Swiftstrike's unwritten requirement that weapon selection occurs before Initiative Step 10 starts with the heavy implication in the Fight Sub-Phase introduction that the entire Sub-Phase is to be considered "striking blows", I find it impossible not to conclude that any attempt to resolve Colossal when using a different weapon in the Fight Sub-Phase would be a violation of the More Than One Weapon rules.

Now, if people want to house rule it and allow certain weapon abilities to mix and match using some criteria that I don't fully understand, that's cool. I don't really care what people do in the privacy of their own homes (or gaming tables). You Make Da Call tends to be more about a "pure" game of Warhammer 40k that sticks as close to the written rules as possible and not how you're local group plays things..

'Colossal' says "A model with..."

So if the model simply possesses the weapon, it has its effect.

even if you are attacking with another weapon.

 DeathReaper wrote:
'Colossal' says "A model with..."

So if the model simply possesses the weapon, it has its effect.

even if you are attacking with another weapon.

Rules don't exist in a void. There are core rules that tell us when we're allowed to apply a weapon's abilities. To summarize those rules, weapon abilities are pretty much always applied EXCEPT when another weapon is being used in a fight. If a model is fighting with a different weapon, applying Colossal is a core rules violation.

Really you need to amend your sentence to say "if a model simply possesses the weapon AND is currently allowed to use its abilities, it has this effect".

Kriswall, I've stepped out of this argument in light of discussion, but I'm just curious as to what you think the RAI is in this specific circumstance.

What I mean is, do you think they intended it to work this way or that the intent is for the effect to take place even though the RAW doesn't allow it?

Edit: Reread the thread and realized you actually stated it quite early on. Derp.

 Kriswall wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
'Colossal' says "A model with..."

So if the model simply possesses the weapon, it has its effect.

even if you are attacking with another weapon.

Rules don't exist in a void. There are core rules that tell us when we're allowed to apply a weapon's abilities. To summarize those rules, weapon abilities are pretty much always applied EXCEPT when another weapon is being used in a fight. If a model is fighting with a different weapon, applying Colossal is a core rules violation.

Really you need to amend your sentence to say "if a model simply possesses the weapon AND is currently allowed to use its abilities, it has this effect".

and BRB is trumped by codex rules, since there is a conflict. Colossal trumps brb rules.

The model strikes at I1 just for having a Colossal weapon.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
'Colossal' says "A model with..."

So if the model simply possesses the weapon, it has its effect.

even if you are attacking with another weapon.

Rules don't exist in a void. There are core rules that tell us when we're allowed to apply a weapon's abilities. To summarize those rules, weapon abilities are pretty much always applied EXCEPT when another weapon is being used in a fight. If a model is fighting with a different weapon, applying Colossal is a core rules violation.

Really you need to amend your sentence to say "if a model simply possesses the weapon AND is currently allowed to use its abilities, it has this effect".

and BRB is trumped by codex rules, since there is a conflict. Colossal trumps brb rules.

The model strikes at I1 just for having a Colossal weapon.

There is no conflict. The BRB says 'don't use this rule'. The Colossal weapon says 'do something'. If you obey the BRB, there is no conflict because you're not actually using or resolving Colossal.

A conflict would look like 'make attacks at the Initiative Step equal to the model's Initiative' versus 'make attacks at Initiative Step 1'. That's a conflict. The above is not.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
'Colossal' says "A model with..."

So if the model simply possesses the weapon, it has its effect.

even if you are attacking with another weapon.

Rules don't exist in a void. There are core rules that tell us when we're allowed to apply a weapon's abilities. To summarize those rules, weapon abilities are pretty much always applied EXCEPT when another weapon is being used in a fight. If a model is fighting with a different weapon, applying Colossal is a core rules violation.

Really you need to amend your sentence to say "if a model simply possesses the weapon AND is currently allowed to use its abilities, it has this effect".

and BRB is trumped by codex rules, since there is a conflict. Colossal trumps brb rules.

The model strikes at I1 just for having a Colossal weapon.

Already covered. You cannot mix and match, so the "colossal" rule simply doesn't exist if you aren't using the weapon because you're using another.

Except Codex Trumps BRB. So colossal trumps brb

 DeathReaper wrote:
Except Codex Trumps BRB. So colossal trumps brb

Codex only trumps BRB when there is a conflict. Explain the conflict. None of the rest of us sees one.

 Kriswall wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Except Codex Trumps BRB. So colossal trumps brb

Codex only trumps BRB when there is a conflict. Explain the conflict. None of the rest of us sees one.

Colossal says you strike at I1. Other weapon does not have this rule and strikes at initiative.

There is the conflict.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Except Codex Trumps BRB. So colossal trumps brb

Codex only trumps BRB when there is a conflict. Explain the conflict. None of the rest of us sees one.

Colossal says you strike at I1. Other weapon does not have this rule and strikes at initiative.

There is the conflict.

No, no. I get that. Everyone agrees that would be a conflict and that Colossal would win. My point is that you don't have access to Colossal if you aren't using a weapon with the Colossal weapon ability.

The BRB says that if you attack with Weapon A, you're not allowed to mix and match in any of the weapon abilities of Weapon B. Colossal is effectively a weapon ability of Weapon B. So... the BRB tells us we don't have access to the Colossal weapon ability at all. Does the Colossal weapon ability have any wording saying that it can be used even if the weapon it's on isn't being used? Nope. Ergo, no conflict.

I think you're assuming that you have access to the weapon abilities just by having the weapon equipped. This is where your understanding seems flawed. This is not how the BRB actually works during the Fight Sub-Phase. You actually only have access to the abilities on the active weapon you're using.

From my perspective what Kriswall said is where the conflict occurs. BRB says you don't access the rule when using another weapon, but Colossal says it is always active. Thus a conflict in which one is actually takes precedent. Your interpretation puts the BRB rule that you don't mix abilities over the "always" in the Colossal rule, which I don't think is right. Codex should trump. Actually this seems to me as a textbook example of why that rule exists.

As a side note, I don't think special rules on a weapon that assign rules to the model (such as this axe or Blade of Blood) are what they mean in BRB by weapon abilities. However given that they did a terrible job of explaing that in the rules I can't defend that well as anything more than my interpretation of RAI.

Fhionnuisce wrote:
From my perspective what Kriswall said is where the conflict occurs. BRB says you don't access the rule when using another weapon, but Colossal says it is always active. Thus a conflict in which one is actually takes precedent. Your interpretation puts the BRB rule that you don't mix abilities over the "always" in the Colossal rule, which I don't think is right. Codex should trump. Actually this seems to me as a textbook example of why that rule exists.

The problem lies in access. You do not have permission to even access that rule when using another Weapon. No access, no 'always'. Simple.

If it stated it worked on Attacks not made by this Weapon (or similar), than it would be conflicting.

Fhionnuisce wrote:
As a side note, I don't think special rules on a weapon that assign rules to the model (such as this axe or Blade of Blood) are what they mean in BRB by weapon abilities. However given that they did a terrible job of explaing that in the rules I can't defend that well as anything more than my interpretation of RAI.

So Unwieldy is not an ability? Specialist as well? So a model using a Pistol while carrying a Power Fist will strike at I1, even though not using the Power Fist?

Both Unwieldy and Specialist affect the wielding model, not the Attacks or the target. This standard is unsupportable based on the other evidence that we are reviewing, especially since we do not have any exception to the "mix and match" rule for rules and abilities that affect the wielding model.

If it is intended for the Weapon to have a Wargear effect that is not tied to its Weapon abilities, the ability/effect will not by listed under the Type, and precedes the Weapon profile. The only one who has offered any stats (which have not been refuted) have not indicated Colossal to be in this case, but tied to the Weapon's profile. Since it is tied to the profile, see the above.

Charistoph wrote:The problem lies in access. You do not have permission to even access that rule when using another Weapon. No access, no 'always'. Simple.

If it stated it worked on Attacks not made by this Weapon (or similar), than it would be conflicting.

Well, yes that would be conflicting, but that does not preclude the word always being conflicting as well. Always in fact includes that situation because always is at all times, including when other weapons are being used. I get the you don't have access to the rule argument, I just think the always overrules it

Charistoph wrote:So Unwieldy is not an ability? Specialist as well? So a model using a Pistol while carrying a Power Fist will strike at I1, even though not using the Power Fist?

Both Unwieldy and Specialist affect the wielding model, not the Attacks or the target. This standard is unsupportable based on the other evidence that we are reviewing, especially since we do not have any exception to the "mix and match" rule for rules and abilities that affect the wielding model.

They affect the model, but explicitly state only when using the weapon. They don't add rules text to the model separately. Also I already noted that this is my interpretation and not completely defensible RAW.

Charistoph wrote:If it is intended for the Weapon to have a Wargear effect that is not tied to its Weapon abilities, the ability/effect will not by listed under the Type, and precedes the Weapon profile. The only one who has offered any stats (which have not been refuted) have not indicated Colossal to be in this case, but tied to the Weapon's profile. Since it is tied to the profile, see the above.

Is there any precedence for this interpretation or is this your opinion on how it should work?

Fhionnuisce wrote:

Both Unwieldy and Specialist affect the wielding model, not the Attacks or the target. This standard is unsupportable based on the other evidence that we are reviewing, especially since we do not have any exception to the "mix and match" rule for rules and abilities that affect the wielding model.

They affect the model, but explicitly state only when using the weapon. They don't add rules text to the model separately. Also I already noted that this is my interpretation and not completely defensible RAW.

That wasn't the point. Review what I was responding to. You were saying that rules that were adding rules and abilities to the models don't count as Weapon Abilities. Both of these still qualify as fitting that category.

Fhionnuisce wrote:

Charistoph wrote:If it is intended for the Weapon to have a Wargear effect that is not tied to its Weapon abilities, the ability/effect will not by listed under the Type, and precedes the Weapon profile. The only one who has offered any stats (which have not been refuted) have not indicated Colossal to be in this case, but tied to the Weapon's profile. Since it is tied to the profile, see the above.

Is there any precedence for this interpretation or is this your opinion on how it should work?

You mean like Grenades? Space Marine Servo-Harness?

Admittedly, as I review what codices I am familiar with, this practice has been falling by the way-side. It was quite prevalent in 5th Edition, and not uncommon for the Relics in 6th Edition. It seems to be falling out with the 7th Edition codices, however.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
Except Codex Trumps BRB. So colossal trumps brb

Codex only trumps BRB when there is a conflict. Explain the conflict. None of the rest of us sees one.

Colossal says you strike at I1. Other weapon does not have this rule and strikes at initiative.

There is the conflict.

Please provide permission to mix and match abilities of two different weapons.

I have. Codex > BRB

 DeathReaper wrote:
I have. Codex > BRB

When there is a conflict

The rule doesn't even exist until you prove you can read the rule. Which you can't do as you claim permission to do that comes from the rule itself.

So your argument fails

Try another one. Another repetition simply proves you lack understanding.

We might as well call this. There is a fundamental lack of understanding on the opposition side of how the core rules work. They don't understand that it doesn't really matter how a rule is worded if you don't have basic permission to resolve that rule.

At this point, a vocal minority is contesting how this works. From a RaW standpoint, Colossal is not resolved during the Fight Sub-Phase when attacking with a different weapon. RaI might be otherwise, but short of a conversation with the authors, we will never know.

A quick scenario to ensure I understand your position. Even if the rule explicitly stated "this rule applies even when using another weapon in close combat" you would still not apply it because BRB says you do not have permission to read that rule?

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
I have. Codex > BRB

When there is a conflict

and there is a conflict.

The rule doesn't even exist until you prove you can read the rule. Which you can't do as you claim permission to do that comes from the rule itself.

The rule most definitely exists. it says so right in the entry.

So despite there being no conflict, you're claiming there is a conflict, and despite there being no permission to read the rule, as the brb tells you explicitly you cannot read the rule, you're claiming permission.

Your argument is refuted.

I'm rather new but I have to agree that RAW he only attacks at i1 if using the axe. Its not how I see RAI and that's not how my group would play it but if you're going purely by the rules its how its worded.