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.
2017/04/01 22:31:03
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
Audustum wrote: To be fair, everything you said about his argument can be applied to your own. That's kind of why you're going in circles.
I don't read Col_Ignored's posts anymore, as he is on Ignore for me, but it is actually quite common for him to completely ignore what is stated and repeat the exact same thing without ever acknowledging anything that was presented to counter in his argument. He has literally gone on for pages doing exactly that in several other threads. This leads to the people countering him to repeat themselves as he doesn't address the counters 90% of the time.
But yeah, you can consider any thread where he is the only one arguing after a page to be worth locking.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/01 23:13:53
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
2017/04/02 00:27:40
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
Fragile wrote: Already did, you ignored.
Others did, you ignore.
You hinge all your arguments on your interpretation of what words mean and not what the rules say. Then you repeat ad nauseam.
When shown arguments that show your wrong, you completely ignore. On this very page.
This thread became dead once you were the only person arguing for it as you will never admit your wrong and never just let it go.
They (and you) all got hung up on the actual rules citation part. I asked them (and you) to show the rules statement for "counts as a single weapon". Their (and your) arguments rely on a guess/assumption that the rule writers intended to say "counts as single weapon" but did not include it out of error. I have indicated in each case that they are welcome to their RAI arguments as I push forward with a RAW argument.
If you feel that I have somehow overlooked your properly rules supported argument, then by all means Fragile please re-post your argument. I am interested in any RAW argument you have to share.
My argument takes the rules as they are.
To summarize:
Spoiler:
The rules refer to "the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion" in the plural separably as "these weapons". Plural.
"Used together" does not mean that the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion count as a single weapon.
They are called out as "these weapons" and when they are used together they are still considered weapons and not as a single weapon. No rule designates them as counting as a single weapon so they remain two weapons.
"Used together" means simply that they are used at the same time in combat.
The profiles reference "this weapon" and so must reference the Emperor's Sword and Hand of Dominion separably since the Emperor's Sword and Hand of Dominion collectively are referred to as 'weapons' and as 'relics' and never as weapon or relic.
The rule statement refers to "these weapons". The BRB tells us "every weapon has a profile". The rule statement provides us with an unnamed profile. It is perfectly allowable in the rules to apply a single profile to more than one weapon. The only way to resolve the situation is to apply the unnamed profile such that "every weapon has a profile" for "these weapons".
Moreover, the Hand is explicitly discussed as being separably a 'weapon' and able to be used as both a melee and as a ranged weapon.
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.
Because the Hand of Dominion is itself a melee weapon, this proves that the melee profile on Robute's datasheet was applied individually to the Hand itself, and it disproves any argument that there is somehow a 'combined weapon profile'.
If there was some 'combined weapon' then the Hand of Dominion could not itself be a melee weapon. The melee profile provided would have been used to give the combined weapon the melee type and not the Hand of Dominion.
Since the Hand is definitively a melee weapon, this means that the melee profile on Robute's datasheet has been separably applied to both the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion.
This in turn means that both the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion are melee weapons.
This in turn means that we satisfy the rule that grants an a model an additional attack for having two or more melee weapons.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2017/04/02 02:49:38
2017/04/02 02:46:05
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
Your interpretation doesn't do anything. You cannot point to where it explicitly, VERBATIM, tells you to doubly apply the profile. You are drawing your own conclusion and applying it, which is an assumption. There is no precedence to apply a profile in this manner. You INVENTED this method simply to apply your argument and no one agrees with you.
Wrong is wrong.
2017/04/02 02:49:08
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
Ceann wrote: Your interpretation doesn't do anything. You cannot point to where it explicitly, VERBATIM, tells you to doubly apply the profile. You are drawing your own conclusion and applying it, which is an assumption. There is no precedence to apply a profile in this manner. You INVENTED this method simply to apply your argument and no one agrees with you.
Wrong is wrong.
You claim I make an assumption. Point out what assumption I am making . . .
The rule statement refers to "these weapons". The BRB tells us "every weapon has a profile". The rule statement provides us with an unnamed profile. It is perfectly allowable in the rules to apply a single profile to more than one weapon. The only way to resolve the situation is to apply the unnamed profile such that "every weapon has a profile" for "these weapons".
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/02 02:50:05
2017/04/02 11:56:05
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
Ok then, How does the Hand of Dominion have the Emperors Touch, Make Guilliman do a Spin-2-Win and Set People on Fire?
Oh wait it Cannot, The Sword does that
The Hand and Sword are used as ONE WEAPON, no ifs, no Buts
"Oh but it says these WEAPONS"
Yeah, it also says "Are used TOGETHER"
If GW wanted and INTENDED Guilliman to be able to use Both Weapons, they would have...
A. GIVEN HIM WEAPON MASTERY
B. Made the Sword as a Seperate profile to the Hand (E.G S:User AP2, Melee, Touch of the Emperor, Soul Blaze, Whirling Flame)
2017/04/02 16:22:17
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
AndrewC wrote: And even more entertainment, cos when the FaQ comes out, if it rules that it's only one weapon, somebody will be on here saying that they were right all along and that GW changed the rules.
Cheers
Andrew
The "GW just ignored the RAW" or "GW just changed the rules" has been the age old last defiance to those on the losing end of a debate here for as long as I can remember.
2017/04/02 19:13:44
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
Yes. Melta bombs are grenades. Grenades that have a profile are Melee weapons by virtue of being grenades.
Spoiler:
A model can use such a grenade as a Melee weapon, but can only ever make one attack, regardless of the number of Attacks on its profile or any bonuses.
Further,
Spoiler:
If the weapon’s range contains a ‘-’, it is (unless otherwise stated) a Melee weapon.
Grenades without profiles are not necessarily Melee weapons.
Spoiler:
Some grenades do not have a profile. Any effects that they have will be covered in their special rules. Unless specifically stated otherwise, these grenades cannot be thrown or used as a Melee weapon.
So if a model has a chainsword and melta bombs (and no other melee weapons) does it get a bonus attack?
No. It would except the grenade rule specifically overrides and makes it so the model can only ever make one attack if the melee profile for the grenade is chosen. So however many normal attacks + 1 bonus attack becomes one attack per grenade rule.
Spoiler:
A model can use such a grenade as a Melee weapon, but can only ever make one attack, regardless of the number of Attacks on its profile or any bonuses.
Are we dealing with grenades in the case of Robute? If not, then why would you think the grenade rule applies?
I'm talking about models in general. If a model has a chainsword (a weapon with the Melee type), and a melta bomb (which according to your interpretation of the rules is a melee weapon), and attacks with the chainsword why would he not get an extra attack? After all, he has two Melee weapons, that are neither Specialist weapons nor Two-handed weapons.
I'm just trying to figure out whether or not Roboute has two Melee weapons or not. I am neither for one side nor the other. The one point you've made that I disagree with is that both the Hand and the Sword have the profile listed in Gathering Storm. This is what your argument hinges on. This is what I've asked you to prove to me. Since you seem reluctant to do so, I figured I would try and reason out your argument, starting with the basic rules. I asked what is a Melee weapon? You replied "A weapon with a profile such as this", which is a fine example, but I want a written rule that tells me how to determine if weapon A, B or C is a Melee weapon.
BTW, if you are wondering why it takes me so long to respond, I have more important things then lurking on dakka (such as work and watching NLL games).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/02 19:14:33
Greebo had spent an irritating two minutes in that box. Technically, a cat locked in a box may be alive or it may be dead. You never know until you look. In fact, the mere act of opening the box will determine the state of the cat, although in this case there were three determinate states the cat could be in: these being Alive, Dead, and Bloody Furious.
Orks always ride in single file to hide their strength and numbers.
Gozer the Gozerian, Gozer the Destructor, Volguus Zildrohar, Gozer the Traveler, and Lord of the Sebouillia
2017/04/02 20:15:27
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
I'm talking about models in general. If a model has a chainsword (a weapon with the Melee type), and a melta bomb (which according to your interpretation of the rules is a melee weapon), and attacks with the chainsword why would he not get an extra attack? After all, he has two Melee weapons, that are neither Specialist weapons nor Two-handed weapons.
Grenades are a special case - when they are used in assault they have a melee profile chosen. When they are not used in assault they don't have a melee profile chosen. So if I am using a melta bomb in assault then I am using the melta bomb as the weapon I am attacking with (and not the chainsword). This would normally result in the normal number of attacks plus the bonus attack, but the grenade rule turns those attacks into one attack. If I am attacking with the chainsword then I am not assaulting with the melta bomb and so do not have that profile chosen.
Happyjew wrote: I'm just trying to figure out whether or not Roboute has two Melee weapons or not. I am neither for one side nor the other. The one point you've made that I disagree with is that both the Hand and the Sword have the profile listed in Gathering Storm. This is what your argument hinges on. This is what I've asked you to prove to me. Since you seem reluctant to do so . . .
I have been more than forthcoming with my RAW argument. Everything in my argument is substantiated by and proven by rules and makes no assumptions, and it has been posted several times.
In short . . .
The rule statement refers to "these weapons". The BRB tells us "every weapon has a profile". The rule statement provides us with an unnamed profile. It is perfectly allowable in the rules to apply a single profile to more than one weapon. The only way to resolve the situation is to apply the unnamed profile such that "every weapon has a profile" for "these weapons".
Longer form of argument . . .
Spoiler:
The rules refer to "the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion" in the plural separably as "these weapons". Plural.
"Used together" does not mean that the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion count as a single weapon.
They are called out as "these weapons" and when they are used together they are still considered weapons and not as a single weapon. No rule designates them as counting as a single weapon so they remain two weapons.
"Used together" means simply that they are used at the same time in combat.
The profiles reference "this weapon" and so must reference the Emperor's Sword and Hand of Dominion separably since the Emperor's Sword and Hand of Dominion collectively are referred to as 'weapons' and as 'relics' and never as weapon or relic.
The rule statement refers to "these weapons". The BRB tells us "every weapon has a profile". The rule statement provides us with an unnamed profile. It is perfectly allowable in the rules to apply a single profile to more than one weapon. The only way to resolve the situation is to apply the unnamed profile such that "every weapon has a profile" for "these weapons".
Moreover, the Hand is explicitly discussed as being separably a 'weapon' and able to be used as both a melee and as a ranged weapon.
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.
Because the Hand of Dominion is itself a melee weapon, this proves that the melee profile on Robute's datasheet was applied individually to the Hand itself, and it disproves any argument that there is somehow a 'combined weapon profile'.
If there was some 'combined weapon' then the Hand of Dominion could not itself be a melee weapon. The melee profile provided would have been used to give the combined weapon the melee type and not the Hand of Dominion.
Since the Hand is definitively a melee weapon, this means that the melee profile on Robute's datasheet has been separably applied to both the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion.
This in turn means that both the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion are melee weapons.
This in turn means that we satisfy the rule that grants an a model an additional attack for having two or more melee weapons.
The key thing for you to focus on is if the rules at any point actually say "count as a single weapon" or anything along those lines. If you cannot find such a statement then you have to accept what the rules actually tell us, which is that we are dealing with "weapons" in the plural. The omission of a line to the effect of "count as a single weapon" could be a mistake on the part of the rule writers, but arguing that there is a mistake in the rules is of course a RAI argument. So, press yourself to accept the omission as is and answer what do the rules standing entirely on their own tell us about the number of melee weapons and therewith whether or not Robute gets a bonus attack.
AndrewC wrote: And even more entertainment, cos when the FaQ comes out, if it rules that it's only one weapon, somebody will be on here saying that they were right all along and that GW changed the rules.
Cheers
Andrew
The "GW just ignored the RAW" or "GW just changed the rules" has been the age old last defiance to those on the losing end of a debate here for as long as I can remember.
Actually, I think the RAI argument that GW just made a mistake and forgot to add the critical line that these weapons "count as a single weapon" is a perfectly reasonable one. If they FAQ later that the weapons are 'a combined pair' then they are adding a line to the rules statement that they forgot to originally add.
The RAW argument that I am discussing has to accept the rules as they are. So until a FAQ comes later to clean up any errors, the rules in this case are dealing with "weapons".
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2017/04/02 20:53:51
2017/04/02 21:09:49
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
Happyjew wrote: I'm talking about models in general. If a model has a chainsword (a weapon with the Melee type), and a melta bomb (which according to your interpretation of the rules is a melee weapon), and attacks with the chainsword why would he not get an extra attack? After all, he has two Melee weapons, that are neither Specialist weapons nor Two-handed weapons.
To make it more common, what about a Bolt Pistol and Krak Grenade? This is standard kit for a Tactical Squad Marine.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
2017/04/02 21:16:40
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
Happyjew wrote: I'm talking about models in general. If a model has a chainsword (a weapon with the Melee type), and a melta bomb (which according to your interpretation of the rules is a melee weapon), and attacks with the chainsword why would he not get an extra attack? After all, he has two Melee weapons, that are neither Specialist weapons nor Two-handed weapons.
To make it more common, what about a Bolt Pistol and Krak Grenade? This is standard kit for a Tactical Squad Marine.
Grenades have special rules that specifically reduce the normal attacks and any bonus attack to one.
Spoiler:
A model can use such a grenade as a Melee weapon, but can only ever make one attack, regardless of the number of Attacks on its profile or any bonuses.
Are you claiming that one of RG's weapons is somehow a grenade?
2017/04/02 21:28:00
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
Just as important, how many Weapons does a Tactical Marine have?
Their Wargear list is:
Boltgun
Bolt Pistol
Krak Grenade
Frag Grenade
All four of these provide Weapon profiles. Three of them are conditional upon what Phase the game is. Indeed, both the Bolt Pistol and Krak Grenades both carry or use a Ranged and Melee profile during the course of a game. Should we separate out those two different profiles as two different Weapons?
And yes, I still have you on Ignore, Col_Ignored. I'll only see a response if someone else quotes you on it.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
2017/04/02 21:57:05
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
Wishing I was back at the South Atlantic, closer to ice than the sun
Charistoph, if I could avail of your good will. I remember seeing something in one of the Space Marine Codecii (past or present) that said all marines were armed with the following, and then listed the usual, as opposed to listing it in the relevant entries. Does that still exist?
Cheers
Andrew
I don't care what the flag says, I'm SCOTTISH!!!
Best definition of the word Battleship?
Mr Nobody wrote:
Does a canoe with a machine gun count?
2017/04/02 21:58:19
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
AndrewC wrote: And how does it tell us that it is two weapons?
I quoted the relevant rule proving "weapons".
Spoiler:
The Emperor’s Sword and the Hand of Dominion: These weapons are used together, using the profile below.
Since the Hand of Dominion is later discussed as a "weapon" . . .
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.
. . . we know for a fact that we are dealing with two weapons.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/02 22:02:08
2017/04/02 22:02:59
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
Wishing I was back at the South Atlantic, closer to ice than the sun
But where does it say two weapons? I see a header name for a relic and a reference to these weapons, but nothing that says two weapons. Where does it say two weapons?
I don't care what the flag says, I'm SCOTTISH!!!
Best definition of the word Battleship?
Mr Nobody wrote:
Does a canoe with a machine gun count?
2017/04/02 22:13:49
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
AndrewC wrote: But where does it say two weapons? I see a header name for a relic and a reference to these weapons, but nothing that says two weapons. Where does it say two weapons?
You see an entry name for two items that may be a relic or relics. You see a mention of "these weapons" after the entry listing of two items. You see a later description that indicates one of those items in the listing is "a weapon".
The rule statements prove that we are dealing with 2 weapons.
2017/04/02 22:17:46
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
AndrewC wrote: Does it? I see a ranged weapon, a power fist, and a sword, so it could actually be referring to 3 weapons?
Incorrect. The 'ranged weapon' is not a separate item as it is identified as a profile for The Hand of Dominion which is a weapon. So "these weapons" can only refer to two weapons.
I should point out that your argument is moot here in addition to being incorrect, since claiming it says "2 or more weapons" will still end up with a bonus attack. You have to prove "1 weapon" to dismiss the bonus attack.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/02 22:31:23
2017/04/02 22:31:20
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
The Emperor’s Sword and the Hand of Dominion: These weapons are used together, using the profile below.
The rules tell us two weapons.
Spoiler:
The Emperor’s Sword and the Hand of Dominion: These weapons are used together, using the profile below.
The rules state they are used together using a single profile - precedence for such a thing already exists in Lash Whips and Boneswords, The Blades of Reason and The Whips of Agony.
They also do not state that they count as a pair of melee weapons nor is there any rule in the profile that grants +1 Attack.
If your entire argument is based on a description then I'd point you to the Chaos Daemons updates and ask you to read the description for The Whips of Agony. Thanks.
Now only a CSM player.
2017/04/02 22:34:02
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
DarkStarSabre wrote: Lash Whips and Boneswords, The Blades of Reason and The Whips of Agony.
In each of these cases they are referred to as "one", "combined pair", "this weapon", or "counts as a single weapon".
For example, the Whips of Agony are referred to as "one", "pair", and "this weapon".
In the case of the Sword of the Emperor and the Hand of Dominion we are dealing with two weapons.
We are dealing with a case that DOES NOT follow precedence.
Futher, I should point out that precedence can only be used to make a RAI argument, not a RAW argument, so talking about precedence doesn't factor in to a RAW discussion.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2017/04/02 22:55:24
2017/04/02 22:54:25
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
AndrewC wrote: Does it? I see a ranged weapon, a power fist, and a sword, so it could actually be referring to 3 weapons?
Incorrect. The 'ranged weapon' is not a separate item as it is identified as a profile for The Hand of Dominion which is a weapon. So "these weapons" can only refer to two weapons.
I should point out that your argument is moot here in addition to being incorrect, since claiming it says "2 or more weapons" will still end up with a bonus attack. You have to prove "1 weapon" to dismiss the bonus attack.
No and this is what you're missing, I don't have to prove anything here, because you're the one claiming something. The point is this, at no point does the rules ever state that they are two weapons, what I was trying to illustrate to you is that we don't know what number 'these weapons' could be referring to. Any inference that there are two weapons is a deduction of your own. It doesn't matter how logical that deduction is, it is still a deduction. From that point on you are not arguing rules as written, but a deduced set of rules, a rules as inferred by you.
As I have pointed out earlier, 40k is a permissive rule set, if it doesn't say you can then you can't. Please point out where it states that it is acceptable to double entry a single profile to two (unique) weapons? Can't provide references? Then you can't do it. Also, all weapons have a profile. You have stated this repeatedly as justification for the double entry, well the reverse is also true. If you don't have a profile then its not a weapon.
So your argument isn't RaW as you've claimed. The rules as written doesn't provide enough evidence to provide a decision on either side and as such we can only go on what is written in his entry. No mention of two weapons meeting the criteria to merit +1 attacks and as such we do not, cannot add it.
Cheers
Andrew
I don't care what the flag says, I'm SCOTTISH!!!
Best definition of the word Battleship?
Mr Nobody wrote:
Does a canoe with a machine gun count?
2017/04/02 23:05:40
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
No and this is what you're missing, I don't have to prove anything here, because you're the one claiming something. The point is this, at no point does the rules ever state that they are two weapons, what I was trying to illustrate to you is that we don't know what number 'these weapons' could be referring to. Any inference that there are two weapons is a deduction of your own. It doesn't matter how logical that deduction is, it is still a deduction. From that point on you are not arguing rules as written, but a deduced set of rules, a rules as inferred by you.
As I have pointed out, your criticism is moot. Your saying that it says non-deductively "2 or more weapons" instead of "2 weapons" still ends up supporting the result of my argument. My argument can easily swap "2 weapons" for "2 or more weapons".
Spoiler:
if a model has two or more Melee weapons he gains +1 attack in close combat.
You need to assert that we are dealing with just 1 weapon to counter my argument.
Summarized here:
Spoiler:
The rules refer to "the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion" in the plural separably as "these weapons". Plural.
"Used together" does not mean that the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion count as a single weapon.
They are called out as "these weapons" and when they are used together they are still considered weapons and not as a single weapon. No rule designates them as counting as a single weapon so they remain at least two weapons.
"Used together" means simply that they are used at the same time in combat.
The profiles reference "this weapon" and so must reference the Emperor's Sword and Hand of Dominion separably since the Emperor's Sword and Hand of Dominion collectively are referred to as 'weapons' and as 'relics' and never as weapon or relic.
The rule statement refers to "these weapons". The BRB tells us "every weapon has a profile". The rule statement provides us with an unnamed profile. It is perfectly allowable in the rules to apply a single profile to more than one weapon. The only way to resolve the situation is to apply the unnamed profile such that "every weapon has a profile" for "these weapons".
Moreover, the Hand is explicitly discussed as being separably a 'weapon' and able to be used as both a melee and as a ranged weapon.
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.
Because the Hand of Dominion is itself a melee weapon, this proves that the melee profile on Robute's datasheet was applied individually to the Hand itself, and it disproves any argument that there is somehow a 'combined weapon profile'.
If there was some 'combined weapon' then the Hand of Dominion could not itself be a melee weapon. The melee profile provided would have been used to give the combined weapon the melee type and not the Hand of Dominion.
Since the Hand is definitively a melee weapon, this means that the melee profile on Robute's datasheet has been separably applied to both the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion.
This in turn means that both the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion are melee weapons.
This in turn means that we satisfy the rule that grants an a model an additional attack for having two or more melee weapons.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/04/02 23:19:10
2017/04/02 23:18:13
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
DarkStarSabre wrote: Lash Whips and Boneswords, The Blades of Reason and The Whips of Agony.
In each of these cases they are referred to as "one", "combined pair", "this weapon", or "counts as a single weapon".
For example, the Whips of Agony are referred to as "one", "pair", and "this weapon".
In the case of the Sword of the Emperor and the Hand of Dominion we are dealing with two weapons.
We are dealing with a case that DOES NOT follow precedence.
Futher, I should point out that precedence can only be used to make a RAI argument, not a RAW argument, so talking about precedence doesn't factor in to a RAW discussion.
Yes we are dealing with two weapons, only one of which could possibly be a Melee weapon. There is no profile for the sword, and no profile for the Fist. There is a profile for using the weapons together, but if you are not using hte weapons together, you do not have permission to use the profile.
Greebo had spent an irritating two minutes in that box. Technically, a cat locked in a box may be alive or it may be dead. You never know until you look. In fact, the mere act of opening the box will determine the state of the cat, although in this case there were three determinate states the cat could be in: these being Alive, Dead, and Bloody Furious.
Orks always ride in single file to hide their strength and numbers.
Gozer the Gozerian, Gozer the Destructor, Volguus Zildrohar, Gozer the Traveler, and Lord of the Sebouillia
2017/04/02 23:25:18
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
Yes we are dealing with two weapons, only one of which could possibly be a Melee weapon. There is no profile for the sword, and no profile for the Fist. There is a profile for using the weapons together, but if you are not using hte weapons together, you do not have permission to use the profile.
Where does it say that "only one of which could possibly be a Melee weapon"?
Since, as you admit, we are dealing with two weapons, we are still dealing with two weapons even while they are being "used together".
The rule statement refers to "these weapons". The BRB tells us "every weapon has a profile". The rule statement provides us with an unnamed profile. It is perfectly allowable in the rules to apply a single profile to more than one weapon. The only way to resolve the situation is to apply the unnamed profile such that "every weapon has a profile" for "these weapons".
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/02 23:27:49
2017/04/02 23:55:24
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
AndrewC wrote:Charistoph, if I could avail of your good will. I remember seeing something in one of the Space Marine Codecii (past or present) that said all marines were armed with the following, and then listed the usual, as opposed to listing it in the relevant entries. Does that still exist?
Cheers
Andrew
In terms of fluff or rules? Fluff can vary and means nothing for a rules-question forum, but the rules will be based on the current version.
In terms of rules, models only have what is listed in their unit entry list. This may be part of the force group in 6th Edition codices, or Datasheets for 7th Edition codices.
From there, Options can then allow for some of them to be changed or added on to.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
2017/04/03 00:03:11
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
Yes we are dealing with two weapons, only one of which could possibly be a Melee weapon. There is no profile for the sword, and no profile for the Fist. There is a profile for using the weapons together, but if you are not using hte weapons together, you do not have permission to use the profile.
Where does it say that "only one of which could possibly be a Melee weapon"?
Since, as you admit, we are dealing with two weapons, we are still dealing with two weapons even while they are being "used together".
The rule statement refers to "these weapons". The BRB tells us "every weapon has a profile". The rule statement provides us with an unnamed profile. It is perfectly allowable in the rules to apply a single profile to more than one weapon. The only way to resolve the situation is to apply the unnamed profile such that "every weapon has a profile" for "these weapons".
But what rule tells you to apply the profile listed to both weapons? Unless you have permission to apply it to "these weapons" you may not.
Greebo had spent an irritating two minutes in that box. Technically, a cat locked in a box may be alive or it may be dead. You never know until you look. In fact, the mere act of opening the box will determine the state of the cat, although in this case there were three determinate states the cat could be in: these being Alive, Dead, and Bloody Furious.
Orks always ride in single file to hide their strength and numbers.
Gozer the Gozerian, Gozer the Destructor, Volguus Zildrohar, Gozer the Traveler, and Lord of the Sebouillia
2017/04/03 00:06:55
Subject: Does Robute Guilliman have two close combat weapons for counting attacks in CC?
But what rule tells you to apply the profile listed to both weapons? Unless you have permission to apply it to "these weapons" you may not.
I am not applying the single profile to "these weapons" collectively. The rules only allow for applying it to a weapon. So I apply it to each weapon in "these weapons." The rules have no problem with that.
The BRB tells us "every weapon has a profile". The rule statement provides us with an unnamed profile. It is perfectly allowable in the rules to apply a single profile to more than one weapon. The only way to resolve the situation is to apply the unnamed profile such that "every weapon has a profile" for "these weapons".
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/04/03 00:19:49
