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.

I'll try to keep this brief and to the point - hopefully that'll also prevent it being a messy question.

Let's take the Space Marine Captain on Bike as an example.

As standard, he comes with a Chainsword for a melee weapon. As we know, the Chainsword has a special rule...

Space Marine Codex, page 141 wrote:Each time the bearer fights, it can make 1 additional attack with this weapon

So far, so straight forward. He's got no other 'native' melee weapons, so when fighting the Chainsword simply adds one attack.

With me so far? I hope so, otherwise I've really butchered this question.

However, the Captain on bike can also swap out his Master Crafted Boltgun with an item from the Pistols, Combi-Weapons or Melee Weapons list.

So I could happily have him revving about armed with Chainsword and Power Axe.

And here's where my question comes in. Given the wording above, can I make all my attacks with the Power Axe, and still get a bonus swing with the Chainsword. Or, do I have to reserve one attack for the Chainsword to get its bonus attack?

Clearer example? Both assume the same armament.

Is it 4 Power Axe 1 Chainsword in Melee....or 3 Power Axe 2 Chainsword in melee?

For me, it feels like it should be 3/2, because I can't normally get a weapons benefit without actually attacking with it. But, RAW, the Chainsword wording does kind of suggest it's 4/1

It says "Each time the bearer fights", not "Each time the bearer fights with the Chainsword".

You get all your normal attacks with the Power Axe, and one bonus with the Chainsword. This isn't "RaW shenanigans" or any other dumb sobriquet for following the rules, it's just how the rule works.

Of course, nothing is stopping you from using the Chainsword instead of the Power Axe (or even the Default baked in CCW everyone has now thanks to errata) if you really want to not kill the enemy as hard.

I'm in the '4 -1' camp on this one. If you have payed for the chainsword and have it about your person, then you get its benefit if you fight with it or not.

It is not as straight forward as anyone would like.

RAW: we have no written rules on how weapin abilities function. Our choices are:
1) Always on. Weapon abilities are always in effect whether or not those weapons are being used.

2) Only in use. Weapon abilities only have any effect when the weapon or profile is in use.

3) Something in between. Melee weapon abilities are always on, Ranged are by use.

4) Combined RAW and RAI with always on. Weapon abilities are always on, but use common sense in application.

For #1 multiple profile weapons make the different profiles meaningless as far as Abilities go(and some could even be contradictory, I have no immediate top-of-the head examples so this might be hypothetical).

For #2 there are some melee weapons that force the use of the weapon at least once per fight, if the ability doesn't take effect until use; then the must make an attack with it doesn't mean anything(Tyranids have a few of these) .

#3 deals with both of the above issues nicely, but there is absolutely no RAW support for it; it is just a decent HIWPI option that has not been fully researched.

#4 follows the designer's notes "between the lines"; 8th is the "calm-down, don't be a dick, and RAI can be more important than RAW" edition.

Yes, you get all your attacks with Power Axe plus one Chainsword attack just for being armed with it. That's it's purpose.

Ya know, I am not so sure anymore. How can we know for certain that it was intended to be this way? Kommissar Kel makes some very good points regarding whether rules are always on or not.

No there is no confusion it's clear. The Chainsword entry says "Each time the bearer fights..."

Is the bearer fighting? Yes? Then he gets to make 1 extra attack with the chainsword.

So it clearly tells you when it's "on" and when it's "off".

Wagguy80 wrote:
No there is no confusion it's clear. The Chainsword entry says "Each time the bearer fights..."

Is the bearer fighting? Yes? Then he gets to make 1 extra attack with the chainsword.

So it clearly tells you when it's "on" and when it's "off".

5

Ok, time to point out the flaw in this line of thinking:

"On a hit roll of 1, the bearer is slain after all of this weapons shots have been resolved."

The trigger is a hit roll of 1. So firing a plasma weapon when all weapon abilities are always in effect whether you use them or not will always result in a slain model on a hit roll of 1, even when not supercharging. Fun extra bit: firing a plasma weapon and another weapon, not supercharging the plasma, and rolling the 1 on the other weapon leads to a slain model.

Plasma pistols are even worse, they lack the timing caveat of "after all of this weapons shot have been resolved", so they will kill your model when he rolls a 1 attacking with the chainsword.

It is not clear cut.

But, then nu overheat really does seem to be more of the aberration than chainsword-like weapons what with nid melee weapons.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Ya know, I am not so sure anymore. How can we know for certain that it was intended to be this way? Kommissar Kel makes some very good points regarding whether rules are always on or not.

Because of armaments that don't actually get used to fight in combat. They just serve as stat buff sticks.

Examples?

And when do we apply abilities?

It isn't even just a slight melee vs ranged, any multiple profile weapon with at least 1 ability first tells us that "when attacking with this weapon, choose 1 (sometimes "or both") of the profiles below"; the ability will then say something akin to "attacks with this weapon" or "when attacking with this weapon". "This weapon" is not the profile used, it is the weapon itself per the option for profile. So, for example, a deathwatch fragcannon always hits automatically and becomes s9, Ap -3 at half range no matter which profile you use; that is, if you are going with the abilities always apply.

Examples of weapons that don't function unless their ability is allowed to trigger without allocating attacks to them?

Here are a couple of fun ones.

1.
Necron Wraiths can take Whip Coils (several other factions have weapons with the same ability).
Whip coils have the following ability:
If the bearer is slain in the Fight phase before it has made its attacks, leave the model where it is. When its unit is chosen to fight in that phase, it can do so as normal. Once it has done so, remove the model from the battlefield.

So the weapon only does anything if the model dies before getting to make any attacks with it.


2.
Tyranid tail weapons.
There are several of them, such as the Bone Mace, which have the following ability:
Each time the bearer fights, one (and only one) of its attacks must be made with this weapon.

If that ability doesn't trigger unless you allocate an attack to the weapon, then you... aren't forced to allocate an attack to the weapon.


3.
Grey Knights have the Nemesis Warding Stave.
It has the following ability:
A model armed with this weapon has a 5+ invulnerable save against attacks made in the Fight phase. If it already has an invulnerable save, add 1 to invulnerable saving throws you make for it in the Fight phase instead.

Does it not get the invul save until it has attacked with the stave?

Thank you.

This helps muddy the waters(this is not a bad thing).

Now we can start a poll with detailed explanation on how everything would interact to get a nice solid "How Dakka Views everything".

All lovely stuff, guys, and worthy of your own thread I'm sure. However, the Chainsword gives a bonus Chainsword attack, and the answer to the OP's Q is 4 Power Axe attacks plus 1 bonus Chainsword attack. Them's the rules.

The only question left would be... how does he steer?!?

 JohnnyHell wrote:
All lovely stuff, guys, and worthy of your own thread I'm sure. However, the Chainsword gives a bonus Chainsword attack, and the answer to the OP's Q is 4 Power Axe attacks plus 1 bonus Chainsword attack. Them's the rules.

The only question left would be... how does he steer?!?

Stated with such commanding authority!

I presume you can back this up with rules?

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
All lovely stuff, guys, and worthy of your own thread I'm sure. However, the Chainsword gives a bonus Chainsword attack, and the answer to the OP's Q is 4 Power Axe attacks plus 1 bonus Chainsword attack. Them's the rules.

The only question left would be... how does he steer?!?

Stated with such commanding authority!

I presume you can back this up with rules?

No need for the attitude. The rules state this, as covered upthread. Read them and apply them. It's already been walked through so I shan't repeat it.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
All lovely stuff, guys, and worthy of your own thread I'm sure. However, the Chainsword gives a bonus Chainsword attack, and the answer to the OP's Q is 4 Power Axe attacks plus 1 bonus Chainsword attack. Them's the rules.

The only question left would be... how does he steer?!?

Stated with such commanding authority!

I presume you can back this up with rules?

Not Rules, as such, but if you take a read of "STEPPING INTO A NEW EDITION OF WARHAMMER 40,000" published by GW:



As you can see, the model makes ALL of it's attacks with the thunder hammer, but still gets the additional attacks of the Thunderwolf.

I would expect chainswords to work the same way?

Ok. I never clearly stated my stance on the situation: I actually do feel that weapon abilities are almost always in effect, but with quite a bit of RAI; in the case of chainswordesque weapons you can make 1 additional attack with each of those weapons that you have no matter which weapon you actually used for your normal attacks. Or in the case of this question: 4 power axe and 1 chainsword.

For the mounts q&a: that is much more indicated in the unit size and wargear; "each model is equipped with... <mount> that attacks with <mount weapon>". So it is still not the same thing because there are written implications that we have need to look to those rules.

I have been active in this thread for the exact same reason as my earlier snarky remark: we do not have any rules on how weapon abilities function, and any attempt to make a sweeping claim has far worse consequences than any single function.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
For the mounts q&a: that is much more indicated in the unit size and wargear; "each model is equipped with... <mount> that attacks with <mount weapon>". So it is still not the same thing because there are written implications that we have need to look to those rules.

But when citing passages, try to actually cite what they say. The passage does not say that being equipped with a mount means attacking with mount weapons. It literally states:

"Each weapon profile is treated as a separate weapon the model is equipped with."

Weapon, not mount, and:

"Note that typically these WEAPON PROFILES (notice a missing mount word here?) have abilities that mean they can be used to make additional attacks"

Having multiple weapon profiles often means your other weapons have extra attack options, regardless of where the attack came from. The cavalry explanation clarifies the original question but the rule clarification and established doctrine of Da Rules refers only to weapon profiles. Anything after For Example text is a specific show of a sample case.

After all, even within the game itself there's no distinction between mount weapons and non-mount weapons. They're simply added weapon profiles.

----

Multiple citations and rules have been provided at this point clearly establishing that yes we do have rules on how such weapon abilities function. Whether or not you agree is irrelevant as the rules don't ask that you understand them, they simply state what they are and it's up to the individual to accept or deny them. Some individuals are more obstinate about rules or find specific wordings complicated to comprehend but regardless the rules remain as written despite how they may choose to see them. Posts like this can serve as a breeding ground for clarifications and discrepancy points but ultimately you may not be able to convince everyone of your own interpretation, especially if it's flawed.

I think it's been adequately stated so far and unless anyone else has a differing viewpoint to come at it from, there's little more to be said that won't simply be fruitless repetition on both sides. Though with only one person on the opposing side, I'm not going to hold my breath over the possibility of a breakthrough until it becomes a more widespread controversy.

Ok, actual citations.

Rough Riders: "Each model is armed with a laspistol, chainsword, hunting lance and frag grenades, and rides a purebred steed which attacks with trampling hooves"

Thunderwolf cavalry: "Each model is armed with a chainsword, bolt pistol, frag grenades and krak grenades, and rides to battle atop a fearsome Thunderwolf who attack with crushing teeth and claws.,

Chaos Lord on a Disc of Tzeench: "He rides a Disc of Tzeench that attacks with its blades"

Herald of Slaanesh on exalted seeker chariot: "They ride on Steeds of Slaanesh and attack with their lashing tongues"

They are all written like this but I am not going to write them all out. That is why I used the similar keyword tags.

You also seem to not understand what a rules citation is. Let me give you an example of a rules citation: Brb, datasheets, #6 Wargear: "This covers the basic weapons and equipment that the models are armed with."

We have seen no citation of rules that tells us exactly how, nor in what instances Weapon profile Abilities work.

We have been given examples of weapons where the abilities must work at all times. We have also been given examples of weapons where the abilities working at all times does not function properly(nu gets hot, multiple profile weapons). Most weapons are fairly clear, they can be in affect at all times without ever displaying any quirks in the game. Some, however, run into issues where those abilities clearly need to only affect the specific use. There would never be a reason for Logan Grimnar to use the axe of morekai in the +2s, -3ap d3dam profile if he always makes attacks with it suffering the -1 to hit of the x2s set 3dam profile.

What do any of these have to do with the question about Chainswords, when has been answered by BCB in the first reply?

Because it wasn't?

It was answered with a very much HIWPI; but there are just as many cases for weapon abilities to require use of the weapon or profile as there is cases where the weapon abilities have to always be in effect.

No actual rules on how weapon abilities apply have been given in this, or any of the other threads on the situation.

You're missing the point. Regardless of how other weapon abilities apply, this one is clear. Weapon abilities don't need to all work the same way this edition. I'm sorry you don't agree with consensus, backed up by GW's own FAQ about 2 Chainswords, but the way to play this was covered in the first reply to this thread. I'll leave it at that as there are several threads on this subject already.

Warhammer 40,000 Rulebook FAQ wrote:Q: If a model is equipped with two chainswords, do they get to make 2 extra close combat attacks?
A: Yes (though both must be made with a chainsword).

Note that lack of a qualifier that the model need to have more than one attack to gain two attacks for being armed with 2 chainswords.
This means a model with one attack and 2 chainswords gains two attacks even though he has only allocated an attack to one of them.
The only logical conclusion is that the act of fighting itself activates the ability of both chainswords to gain 1 attack for each.
Therefore you need not attack with a Chainsword (or any other of the many weapons with this ability) to gain an attack with the weapon.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
What do any of these have to do with the question about Chainswords, when has been answered by BCB in the first reply?

He's trying to take a general rule with global permission and a clear FAQ answer and turn it into a specific rule that decides what does and does not apply according to him with no text backing for it other than examples of exceptions to the general rule, like plasma guns, as well as willfully disregarding the difference between the special abilities of a weapon and its stats in an effort to claim you can stack stats when attacks are specifically assigned to a single weapon profile at a time and exceptions to the rule like the plasma guns that don't apply their effects to all fight phases will clearly point out that it's on attacks made by the weapon in question only.

In short, it's the same sort of nonsense logic that Magic players once tried to pull by claiming that cards in your hand can't activate their special abilities even if they say they can do so while in your hand because they aren't in play and so are not active. Yet as the devs made abundantly clear, exceptions to a rule that specifically state they may do such things, such as the now two sources of allowance for chainswords, are not barred from using their effects simply because you think they're not active unless you choose for them to be. They're always active, they simply don't always apply to the current situation.

Arkaine: that is an aweful lot of words you are putting in my mouth.

Am I trying to get a codified when the abilities should and should not apply? Yes.

Is it for some nefarious purpose or just general dickery? No.

Most of the weapons that need to always be in effect to function at all are melee weapons, while most of the "by profile use" application are ranged. But we cannot even blanket that distinction due to the axe of morkai and similar melee weapons with multiple prifiles.

You may notice that my very first post gave 4 options for applying weapon abilities, I truely do believe that #4 is the correct application, it is the only one that allows what is Clear RAI for multiple profiles and follows the gist of the designer's notes: If applying it always on doesn't work correctly, then it only applys in use and if it only works when applied at all times we do that.

This discussion should also help to break old-timers(like myself) from a strict adherence to RAW: if the RAW seems silly, what then, must the intention have been.

Alextroy: the lack of any declaration of use or non-use in both the question and answer does not help this discussion. The model armed with 2 chainswords could have been assumed to only have those melee weapons(that q&a was writen before all models had the base ccw added) and therefore gained the attack from both by using 1. It just isn't clear enough for using another melee weapon and gaining the bonus attack(s). I know this statement is at odds with what I wrote above; but it is to show that the subject of that q&a is different from this question.

I think it can be safely said that the Abilities for any weapon only apply when the weapon is used unless the Ability says otherwise. Can you name any instances where this is not the case?

All of the "must always apply" abilities on the weapons Arson Fire cited(and the others that are out there) do not state that those abilities apply regardless of use.

Some abilities demand use, some simply offer buffs that will apply even when they cannot be used(the nemesis force staff absolutely cannot be used at the time its ability applies with the way the fight phase works now).

The other side of this coin is that some weapons abilities can only be applied in use without specifying such(or rather the individual prifiles have disperate abilities). Most weapin abilities actually specifically require use; which is the opposite of your view. Most state "attacks with this weapon" or similar. The multiple profile issue does come up with this as you are always "attacking with this weapon" no matter which profile you are using.

It really seems like all weapon abilities are to be applied differently on a case-by-case basis, with a base-line abilities are always active, except when there are choices in profile; then the abilities only apply to the chosen profile.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
It really seems like all weapon abilities are to be applied differently on a case-by-case basis

YES. Very much yes.

 alextroy wrote:

Warhammer 40,000 Rulebook FAQ wrote:Q: If a model is equipped with two chainswords, do they get to make 2 extra close combat attacks?
A: Yes (though both must be made with a chainsword).

Note that lack of a qualifier that the model need to have more than one attack to gain two attacks for being armed with 2 chainswords.
This means a model with one attack and 2 chainswords gains two attacks even though he has only allocated an attack to one of them.
The only logical conclusion is that the act of fighting itself activates the ability of both chainswords to gain 1 attack for each.
Therefore you need not attack with a Chainsword (or any other of the many weapons with this ability) to gain an attack with the weapon.

So, a model with 3 chainswords would get 3 bonus attacks (all with chainswords), but should probably be modeled as juggling the chainswords.

I've been wondering about this same topic - and I'm not sure how I would come down on it either. The rules aren't clear to me in either direction.

Logically, it would seem to me that in order to benefit from the extra attack of a chain sword, the model would need to use at least one of its basic attacks with the chainsword in order to get the benefit of using said chainsword.

In the OP's example, if I have a power axe and a chainsword and make 4 attacks all with the power axe, I haven't used the chainsword - it's sitting in the scabbard for all intents and purposes.

The weapon entry says: "Each time the bearer fights, it can make 1 additional attack with this weapon."

The question is: does the model count as "bearing" the weapon if it doesn't allocate any attacks to it?

Secondly, it says one ADDITIONAL attack with THIS weapon ... implying to me that for their to be an "additional attack" there would have already needed to be a "previous attack with THIS weapon."

Of course, it's confusing because other CCW weapons like powerfists say "When attacking with this weapon ..." And if they wanted chainswords to only provide an extra attack when using chainswords it could've been worded the same way (e.g. When attacking with a chainsword, make one additional attack with the chainsword). Logically, I feel like that's how it should be and that the difference in wording was an oversight.