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.

Except that it's used in conjunction with the Sword, as one profile.

Edit: Show me the hand's SOLO profile.

I think the argument is kind of silly. If you look at his datasheet it says that he has 1 weapon.

The weapon is named "The Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion" it does not have a seperate entry for each, so where do you get that he even has two melee weapons?

If you want to do RAW he has ONE weapon named ""The Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion". There is no other entry under the Relics of Ultramar section that lists any other second melee weapon. It just has one melee weapon with a really really long name. In order to assume he has two weapons you have to make an assumption that the title of the weapon including the "and" states he has two weapons but that is just an interpretation of the title the name of the weapon is irrelevant.

It says "The Hand of Dominion can ALSO be used as a ranged weapon using the profile below. However RAW it does not actually have a profile for "The Hand of Dominon" as a melee weapon, one doesnt exist, just one melee weapon profile for some weapon with a really long name and then a profile for his ranged weapon.

The argument has been made that you have to make a RAI assumption to extrapolate that he has two weapons used together, but you also have to make a RAI assumption to think he has two in the first place.

Therefore RAW he only has one melee weapon with a misleading name and a profile that says "these weapons" for some strange reason.

If for example you flip over to Cyphers page in the same book, his profile for his pistols states he has "carry's a bolt pistol and a plasma pistol" and THEN goes on to provide a profile for each. I do not think any precedent has been set that would allow us to construe that the profile provided for RG is two weapons there is nothing worded in such a degree that designates that using RAW. Using RAI to make a RAW argument is baseless.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Except that it's used in conjunction with the Sword, as one profile.

Edit: Show me the hand's SOLO profile.

No mention is made of the Sword when the Hand of Dominion is definitively called a melee weapon that can also be used as a ranged weapon.



The burden of proving that the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion counts as a single weapon is on you. sir!

My argument has been proved.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ceann wrote:
I think the argument is kind of silly. If you look at his datasheet it says that he has 1 weapon.

The weapon is named "The Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion" it does not have a seperate entry for each, so where do you get that he even has two melee weapons?

If you want to do RAW he has ONE weapon named ""The Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion". There is no other entry under the Relics of Ultramar section that lists any other second melee weapon. It just has one melee weapon with a really really long name. In order to assume he has two weapons you have to make an assumption that the title of the weapon including the "and" states he has two weapons but that is just an interpretation of the title the name of the weapon is irrelevant.

It says "The Hand of Dominion can also be used as a ranged weapon using the profile below. However RAW it does not actually have a profile, one doesnt exist, just one melee weapon profile for some weapon with a really long name and then a profile for his ranged weapon.

The argument has been made that you have to make a RAI assumption to extrapolate that he has two weapons used together, but you also have to make a RAI assumption to think he has two in the first place.

Therefore RAW he only has one melee weapon with a misleading name and a profile that says "these weapons" for some strange reason.

The "Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion" are referred to as weapons and as relics.

How can you possibly argue that RAW it is one weapon when there is no mention at all that the two weapons count as one weapon?

The burden of proof is on you.

You can't say your argument has been proved without providing proof.

There is one-count it, one-melee profile, and one ranged profile. That would indicate that there is one melee weapon and one ranged weapon.

So I ask again-what is the Hand's melee profile? It has to have one, if they are, in fact, two weapons.

 JNAProductions wrote:
You can't say your argument has been proved without providing proof.

There is one-count it, one-melee profile, and one ranged profile. That would indicate that there is one melee weapon and one ranged weapon.

So I ask again-what is the Hand's melee profile? It has to have one, if they are, in fact, two weapons.

At this point I need to check reading comprehension.

Read this . . .



Is the Hand of Dominion a melee weapon?

How can I argue RAW? I have the datasheet in front of me that comes with the Triumvirate. It in fact doesn't even have a list of wargear for RG.

It has 3 entrys.

One for his armor.

One for a ranged weapon called "The Hand of Dominon"

One for a melee weapon called "The Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion"

You have to make an RAI assumption that he has a melee weapon called "The Hand of Dominion" in order to even make an argument that he has two melee weapons in the first place. You can only read the entry for "The Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion" and reverse extrapolate he has two weapons based on the wording. AGAIN if you flip over to Cyphers page there is an example of his pistols where it says he has "weapon 1 AND weapon 2" and then provides a profile for both.

Please provide an example of precedence that you can use to construe he has two weapons one from profile, RAW.

If you read the abilities, whirling flame says THIS weapon, not THESE weapons, it would be required to say THESE in order for the ability to apply to two weapons.
You have to read it, get to the part where it says "these are used together" in order to come to assumption he has two, but then you use the fact that "used together" is an assumption as the argument.

col_impact wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
You can't say your argument has been proved without providing proof.

There is one-count it, one-melee profile, and one ranged profile. That would indicate that there is one melee weapon and one ranged weapon.

So I ask again-what is the Hand's melee profile? It has to have one, if they are, in fact, two weapons.

At this point I need to check reading comprehension.

Read this . . .

Spoiler:

The Hand of Dominion can also be used as a ranged weapon, using the profile below. It may be used as both a melee weapon and a ranged weapon in the same turn.

Is the Hand of Dominion a melee weapon?

When used in conjunction with the Sword, yes, it is. It uses the single melee profile listed in the datasheet.

Edit: If you want to prove me wrong, show me the Hand's melee profile.

Ceann wrote:
How can I argue RAW? I have the datasheet in front of me that comes with the Triumvirate. It in fact doesn't even have a list of wargear for RG.

It has 3 entrys.

One for his armor.

One for a ranged weapon called "The Hand of Dominon"

One for a melee weapon called "The Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion"

You have to make an RAI assumption that he has a melee weapon called "The Hand of Dominion" in order to even make an argument that he has two melee weapons in the first place. You can only read the entry for "The Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion" and reverse extrapolate he has two weapons based on the wording.

Reading comprehension time.



Is the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion one weapon or two?

They are, according to fluff, two weapons. They are, according to the rules, one weapon with one profile.

 JNAProductions wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
You can't say your argument has been proved without providing proof.

There is one-count it, one-melee profile, and one ranged profile. That would indicate that there is one melee weapon and one ranged weapon.

So I ask again-what is the Hand's melee profile? It has to have one, if they are, in fact, two weapons.

At this point I need to check reading comprehension.

Read this . . .

Spoiler:

The Hand of Dominion can also be used as a ranged weapon, using the profile below. It may be used as both a melee weapon and a ranged weapon in the same turn.

Is the Hand of Dominion a melee weapon?

When used in conjunction with the Sword, yes, it is. It uses the single melee profile listed in the datasheet.

Edit: If you want to prove me wrong, show me the Hand's melee profile.

That statement makes no mention of being used in conjunction with the Sword. It states clearly that the Hand of Dominion may be used as a melee weapon.

So is the Hand of Dominion a melee weapon or not?

Then what's the Hand's profile? It's that easy-show me the profile it uses. Is it SX2, AP2 like a Powerfist? Or what?

 JNAProductions wrote:
They are, according to fluff, two weapons. They are, according to the rules, one weapon with one profile.

Check again. "These weapons" is not in the fluff but in the actual rule section.

Yes, so please comprehend.

You have one profile with a name that leads you to believe there are two weapons.

I don't have to prove whether its one weapon or two, you have to prove a melee profile for a second weapon exists.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Then what's the Hand's profile? It's that easy-show me the profile it uses. Is it SX2, AP2 like a Powerfist? Or what?

Answer the question.

The statement makes no mention of being used in conjunction with the Sword. It states clearly that the Hand of Dominion may be used as a melee weapon.

So is the Hand of Dominion a melee weapon or not?

col_impact wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
They are, according to fluff, two weapons. They are, according to the rules, one weapon with one profile.

Check again. "These weapons" is not in the fluff but in the actual rule section.

Yes and the rules for Whirling Flame says THIS weapon, NOT these weapons.
Touch of the Emperor also says THIS weapon.

col_impact wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
They are, according to fluff, two weapons. They are, according to the rules, one weapon with one profile.

Check again. "These weapons" is not in the fluff but in the actual rule section.

Show me its profile, then.

Ceann wrote:

Yes, so please comprehend.

You have one profile with a name that leads you to believe there are two weapons.

I don't have to prove whether its one weapon or two, you have to prove a melee profile for a second weapon exists.

Answer the question. Is it one weapon or two? I have shown you proof enough to answer that question.

col_impact wrote:

Ceann wrote:

Yes, so please comprehend.

You have one profile with a name that leads you to believe there are two weapons.

I don't have to prove whether its one weapon or two, you have to prove a melee profile for a second weapon exists.

Answer the question. Is it one weapon or two? I have shown you proof enough to answer that question.

It is two-a melee weapon and a ranged weapon.

You might not LIKE that answer, but there it is.

Now, answer me-what's the Hand's melee profile, if it exists?

You have not shown any proof. There is ONE WEAPON profile.

You want to claim that the "these" part says that there are two. But you want to simultaneously ignore the part that says used together.

Either there is ONE weapon or two weapons used together as ONE weapon. There is no extra attack and no other way to read it.

Both of the special rules for it say THIS weapon, not THESE weapons. Which entirely validates "used together" contextually.

Ceann wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
They are, according to fluff, two weapons. They are, according to the rules, one weapon with one profile.

Check again. "These weapons" is not in the fluff but in the actual rule section.

Yes and the rules for Whirling Flame says THIS weapon, NOT these weapons.
Touch of the Emperor also says THIS weapon.

Correct.

The Emperor’s Sword and the Hand of Dominion are "these weapons"(plural).

The profile refers to "This weapon" (singular) which can only mean that the profile is separably applied to both the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion.

Furthermore, the Hand of Dominion is explicitly called out as a melee weapon which can only mean that the profile is separably applied to both the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion.

This in turn means that we have two melee weapons.

This in turn means Robute gets +1A.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JNAProductions wrote:

col_impact wrote:

Ceann wrote:

Yes, so please comprehend.

You have one profile with a name that leads you to believe there are two weapons.

I don't have to prove whether its one weapon or two, you have to prove a melee profile for a second weapon exists.

Answer the question. Is it one weapon or two? I have shown you proof enough to answer that question.

It is two-a melee weapon and a ranged weapon.

You might not LIKE that answer, but there it is.

Now, answer me-what's the Hand's melee profile, if it exists?

First you need to provide a serious answer.

I did. You didn't like it, but it's perfectly serious. You don't get to define my answer.

Ceann wrote:
You have not shown any proof. There is ONE WEAPON profile.

You want to claim that the "these" part says that there are two. But you want to simultaneously ignore the part that says used together.

Either there is ONE weapon or two weapons used together as ONE weapon. There is no extra attack and no other way to read it.

Both of the special rules for it say THIS weapon, not THESE weapons. Which entirely validates "used together" contextually.

There are two weapons.

There is one profile.

Nothing says that the two weapons count as one weapon. One profile does not mean "counts as one weapon".

The profile is the same for both weapons and is applied to both.

The rules affirm this when it explicitly calls out the Hand of Dominion as a melee weapon.

No there are not two weapons.

Why are there not two weapons?

Because there is no oxford comma.

It would have to be written as "The Emperor’s Sword, and the Hand of Dominion" with a comma after sword in order to be considered two separate entities.

Again, BOTH special rules say THIS weapon.
You want to use "THESE" as a way to extrapolate that one profile is two weapons but the rest of that same statement says "are used together, using the below profile.

So YOU need to answer the question.

Do we have one weapon? Or two weapons that count as one weapon? You cannot cherry pick part of the sentence and use "these" to justify an extra attack while disregarding that it says to use them as one.

So you're saying it doesn't have its own profile?

 JNAProductions wrote:
So you're saying it doesn't have its own profile?

Already answered page 1 of this thread.


https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/721816.page#9276580


the profile for the Emperor's Sword (which is one of the weapons) is . . .



and the Hand of Dominion (which is the other weapon) is . . .

Hand of Domion does have a profile.

Its a ranged weapon WITHOUT the pistol rule that shoots 24" at AP2.

Ceann wrote:
No there are not two weapons.

Why are there not two weapons?

Because there is no oxford comma.

It would have to be written as "The Emperor’s Sword, and the Hand of Dominion" with a comma after sword in order to be considered two separate entities.

Again, BOTH special rules say THIS weapon.
You want to use "THESE" as a way to extrapolate that one profile is two weapons but the rest of that same statement says "are used together, using the below profile.

So YOU need to answer the question.

Do we have one weapon? Or two weapons that count as one weapon? You cannot cherry pick part of the sentence and use "these" to justify an extra attack while disregarding that it says to use them as one.

Seriously? Oxford comma?!

So "Bert and Ernie" should be "Bert, and Ernie?"

Are you joking?

col_impact wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
So you're saying it doesn't have its own profile?

Already answered page 1 of this thread.


https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/721816.page#9276580


the profile for the Emperor's Sword (which is one of the weapons) is . . .

Spoiler:

Range (-) S (10) AP (1) Type (Melee, Armourbane, Concussion, Soul Blaze, Touch of the Emperor, Whirling Flame)

and the Hand of Dominion (which is the other weapon) is . . .

Spoiler:

Range (-) S (10) AP (1) Type (Melee, Armourbane, Concussion, Soul Blaze, Touch of the Emperor, Whirling Flame)

Ranged Weapon Profile
Range (24") S 6 AP 2 Type (Assault 3, Rending)

You answered nothing.

There is ONE profile with the name "The Emperor's Sword and Hand of Dominion"

Again, Cypher has a profile in the same document, and it has two profiles for each of the two weapons he is using under one entry. You have no wargear list for RG to prove his gear is listed as two separate items.

You cannot quote the "these" part to justify two weapons then ignore the rest of the sentence that says "used together using the below profile".

Ceann wrote:
Hand of Domion does have a profile.

Its a ranged weapon WITHOUT the pistol rule that shoots 24" at AP2.

The Hand of Dominion is explicitly called out as a melee weapon as well.

Yup. It gets to use the profile, along with the Sword, as one weapon mechanically.