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.

 Stux wrote:
I don't think there's any reason to expect that the intention was to get an extra attack every time you fight. There's just nothing to suggest that for me. So I go with the RAW.

That FAQ doesn't look to me like it's intending to allow an ability that would otherwise only be allowed once per phase to function multiple times per phase. I read it as counting it as a new unit for all rule purposes within the scope of allowing it to Fight a second time. It doesn't reset limited use abilities like The Butcher's Nails.

I'm not aware of any one use melee weapons, but it's analogous to a model with a Hunter Killer missile that is given permission to shoot again being allowed to fire it's Hunter Killer twice, because it's being counted as a new unit.

Isn't it more like what the Hellfire Shell stratagem does?

Hellfire Shells
Use this Stratagem just before an Adeptus Astartes Infantry model attacks with a heavy bolter. You only make a single hit roll with the weapon this phase, however, if it hits, the target suffers D3 mortal wounds.

If you use the Cherub in a Devastator Squad you get to reuse the weapon, and the Stratagem still applies - which GW confirmed to be intended:

Q: How do the Flakk Missile and Hellfire Shells Stratagems interact with an Armorium Cherub? Are you able to ‘reload’ the weapon and fire again with the benefit of the Stratagem?
A: Yes.

I asked on facebook, and they answered this

Reading the question on Facebook, it sounds like you're confused about the difference between 'fight' and 'attack'.

When a unit is selected to 'fight', it piles in, makes its attacks, and then consolidates. Berzerkers can do this twice, or three times with the stratagem.

What's currently being debated is whether their extra attack from the Legion Trait applies to every fight activation or just once total in the phase.

I keep flipping between the two: on the one hand, the Trait does specify one attack during the phase; but on the other hand, the FAQ tells us to treat each fight activation as if it were a separate unit.

And if it's the former, then it's a contender for the worst Chapter/Legion/etc Trait in the game.

 Cheexsta wrote:
Reading the question on Facebook, it sounds like you're confused about the difference between 'fight' and 'attack'.

When a unit is selected to 'fight', it piles in, makes its attacks, and then consolidates. Berzerkers can do this twice, or three times with the stratagem.

What's currently being debated is whether their extra attack from the Legion Trait applies to every fight activation or just once total in the phase.

I keep flipping between the two: on the one hand, the Trait does specify one attack during the phase; but on the other hand, the FAQ tells us to treat each fight activation as if it were a separate unit.

And if it's the former, then it's a contender for the worst Chapter/Legion/etc Trait in the game.

The legion trait says that when a unit with this trait makes a successful charge the gain the extra attack, as you pointed, the GW FAQ says to treat units that have the ability to fight twice as a separate unit on the second activation. For the purpose of using the berzerker fight twice rule, as ridiculous as it sounds, even though they are the exact same models, Berzerker Unit "#1" fights on the first activation and Unit "#2" fights on the second.. as they are separate units, both are allowed to use the Butcher's Nails trait and gain the +1A in both activations. If a stratagem is used to fight a third time, then the FAQ says to treat this as a third separate unit and would get the benefit of the Butcher's Nails. This is how GW gets around the wording of only one unit benefiting from a trait/stratagem

The armor cherub example from above is essentially the same thing but in the shooting phase, basically creates a clone unit to fire again - and GW answered that even the hellfire shell/flakk missile strat can be used again in the case

So I can shoot my Hunter Killer missile twice? Thanks!

I'm being facetious of course. But I think all that's really been proven is that the consistency of wording is a mess.

I'm not convinced you can apply an FAQ from one part of the game to another part that uses a similar wording.

 Stux wrote:
So I can shoot my Hunter Killer missile twice? Thanks!

I'm being facetious of course. But I think all that's really been proven is that the consistency of wording is a mess.

I'm not convinced you can apply an FAQ from one part of the game to another part that uses a similar wording.

Well I can use hellfire shells twice if I am able to fire the gun a second time, which is possible as shown above. not sure what hk missiles have to do with that or how you'd manage to do that with them with an actual rule that exists in the game.
And the main difference is that if you "clone" a nonfunctional weapon, it's still not functional.

It's a weapon that says you can only fire it once. In the same as the attack from Butcher's Nails. If you count as a new unit on a second activation then the Hunter Killer hasn't been fired right?

 Stux wrote:
So I can shoot my Hunter Killer missile twice? Thanks!

I'm being facetious of course. But I think all that's really been proven is that the consistency of wording is a mess.

I'm not convinced you can apply an FAQ from one part of the game to another part that uses a similar wording.

and that of course is fine but you'd be hard pressed to find any chaos players who plays it that way. Hell, even Frontline is on the record for agreeing with the extra attack in the second activation and I'd believe that a majority of players out there play it this way and accept it because Berzerkers are supposed to be a monster combat unit.

Really comes down to if you agree or not that the second activation is treated as a separate unit action (which shares all the same traits) - If you do, then the rule applies, if not, well GW says otherwise.

Agree that it could have been completely cleared up if there is one line in the Berzerker codex entry that says they benefit from the legion strat in both fights or not but this is what we are left with


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Stux wrote:
It's a weapon that says you can only fire it once. In the same as the attack from Butcher's Nails. If you count as a new unit on a second activation then the Hunter Killer hasn't been fired right?

I believe the double shoot/attack rule/strat will come into play after all the first actions have been completed. If a one shot weapon was used in the first attack sequence, it's gone when the 2nd attack sequence begins and can't be fired again

Ok, so you had an ability with a restriction on how many times it could be used. You used it up on the first action, so even though you count it as a new unit for the second action you have used up the ability so you can't use it again.

That is exactly what is happening with the Butcher's Nails.

 Stux wrote:
Ok, so you had an ability with a restriction on how many times it could be used. You used it up on the first action, so even though you count it as a new unit for the second action you have used up the ability so you can't use it again.

That is exactly what is happening with the Butcher's Nails.

One Shot weapons have specific wording limiting the amount of times they can be fired. There are (almost?) no one shot infantry weapons in the game and most double shot stratagems/traits only affect infantry units anyways. I don't know if you can put HK missiles on Leman Russ' but you can double fire their battle-cannons but only that. Plus, almost all players will universally agree that once a one shot weapon is fired, its done.

As I think about it, this separate unit thing has no bearing on the shooting phase because you can't interrupt shooting unlike combat - technically, a player could interrupt between the first and second attacks on the berzerker unit but likely just throwing CP into the trash.

The only restriction on the Butcher's Nails is that a unit needs to make a successful charge, there is no one shot wording. The "new" unit for the second action also has the butcher's nails trait which hasn't been activated yet because it's a new unit, GW is telling us this.

The chaos codex has been around since the fall of 2017 and no errata or FAQ on the Butcher's Nails has ever appeared so I think people have been playing the way it was intended to (bonus attack in both sequences) or GW doesn't care.

They also haven't errata'd Pistols so they actually work, to borrow one of BCB's old standbys. Lack of an errata is not evidence of anything.

As is common with a lot of GW rules, they lack all the information to fully understand what to do. Especially with regards to scope, we could do with a lot more clarity. Treating something as a "new unit" is just such an instance. If it's a new unit, if we're taking the full implications of that at face value, would mean that if they had a psychic power cast on them it would not be affecting them, because new unit. Heck, if they had lost wounds they wouldn't any more, because new unit.

So we have to put some restrictions on that scope, clearly.

In my opinion, butcher's nails is not included in the scope of treating it as a new unit. It is a specific rule and I would therefore give it's restrictions priority over the general rule of treating them as a new unit.

 Stux wrote:
They also haven't errata'd Pistols so they actually work, to borrow one of BCB's old standbys. Lack of an errata is not evidence of anything.

As is common with a lot of GW rules, they lack all the information to fully understand what to do. Especially with regards to scope, we could do with a lot more clarity. Treating something as a "new unit" is just such an instance. If it's a new unit, if we're taking the full implications of that at face value, would mean that if they had a psychic power cast on them it would not be affecting them, because new unit. Heck, if they had lost wounds they wouldn't any more, because new unit.

So we have to put some restrictions on that scope, clearly.

In my opinion, butcher's nails is not included in the scope of treating it as a new unit. It is a specific rule and I would therefore give it's restrictions priority over the general rule of treating them as a new unit.

Fair enough, thats not how I play the rule and people in my area (who run and go against berzerkers) will give no pause to allowing the extra attack in the second phase as it makes sense to those of us involved

 Stux wrote:
Ok, so you had an ability with a restriction on how many times it could be used. You used it up on the first action, so even though you count it as a new unit for the second action you have used up the ability so you can't use it again.

That is exactly what is happening with the Butcher's Nails.

It's not exactly the same. It's not "a new unit". It's a "separate" unit, but the same. And if the weapon is spent, it is spend.

What about Hellfire Shell? You keep ignoring me bringing it up - it's literally "you only make a single hit roll with the weapon this phase" - and yet GW confirmed that yes, you CAN apply a cherub and get the effect of the stratagem again.

Then why stick with the HK Missile - just because it's convenient to your argument? The HK missile has an explicit special rule that says it can only ever be used "once per battle", and ALL the shooting phases are part of the SAME battle, so even if you COULD fire it again via a stratagem, you CAN'T - because it's still the same battle. that's very much different from a rule that says "you make one additional attack in the fight phase", which is clearly reusable on a basic level - at the very least in every fight phase where you meet the conditions given.

 Stux wrote:
They also haven't errata'd Pistols so they actually work, to borrow one of BCB's old standbys. Lack of an errata is not evidence of anything.

While you're right - lack of errata is not proof of anything - it's obvious how it's meant to work with pistols. GW doesn't usually errata things where it's incredibly obvious how it's supposed to work, and noone in their right mind would go "sure, Pistols are simply not meant to work - just like Assault weapons are not meant to be usable when advancing".

Hellfire/Cherub FAQ is about Hellfire and Cherub. They don't tell us how to handle other situations, even if they are similar.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Malfurious wrote:

 Stux wrote:
They also haven't errata'd Pistols so they actually work, to borrow one of BCB's old standbys. Lack of an errata is not evidence of anything.

As is common with a lot of GW rules, they lack all the information to fully understand what to do. Especially with regards to scope, we could do with a lot more clarity. Treating something as a "new unit" is just such an instance. If it's a new unit, if we're taking the full implications of that at face value, would mean that if they had a psychic power cast on them it would not be affecting them, because new unit. Heck, if they had lost wounds they wouldn't any more, because new unit.

So we have to put some restrictions on that scope, clearly.

In my opinion, butcher's nails is not included in the scope of treating it as a new unit. It is a specific rule and I would therefore give it's restrictions priority over the general rule of treating them as a new unit.

Fair enough, thats not how I play the rule and people in my area (who run and go against berzerkers) will give no pause to allowing the extra attack in the second phase as it makes sense to those of us involved

That is also fair enough. If your group is all agreed on how to play it and are happy with that then that's totally cool!

I'm curious to know why "Pistols don't work" - where is this coming from?

 Stux wrote:
Hellfire/Cherub FAQ is about Hellfire and Cherub. They don't tell us how to handle other situations, even if they are similar.

But they set a pretty good precedence. A way better one than comparing it to something that can only be used once per battle.

Malfurious wrote:
I'm curious to know why "Pistols don't work" - where is this coming from?

You can't select a unit to Shoot in the Shooting phase if they are within 1" of enemy units. So you never get to the point of choosing to shoot with the pistol at all!

Yes, it's silly. Yes, we all know what they were going for and communally agree to ignore that bit, subconsciously for many people even.

But by RAW you can't shoot pistols while in melee.

 Stux wrote:

Malfurious wrote:
I'm curious to know why "Pistols don't work" - where is this coming from?

You can't select a unit to Shoot in the Shooting phase if they are within 1" of enemy units. So you never get to the point of choosing to shoot with the pistol at all!

Yes, it's silly. Yes, we all know what they were going for and communally agree to ignore that bit, subconsciously for many people even.

But by RAW you can't shoot pistols while in melee.

Thought pistols were an exception to this? don't remember what the brb says

Malfurious wrote:

 Stux wrote:

Malfurious wrote:
I'm curious to know why "Pistols don't work" - where is this coming from?

You can't select a unit to Shoot in the Shooting phase if they are within 1" of enemy units. So you never get to the point of choosing to shoot with the pistol at all!

Yes, it's silly. Yes, we all know what they were going for and communally agree to ignore that bit, subconsciously for many people even.

But by RAW you can't shoot pistols while in melee.

Thought pistols were an exception to this? don't remember what the brb says

They just didn't write it properly. A pistol can be shot within 1" of an enemy, but the unit can't be selected to shoot so that's irrelevant.

Same for Assault weapons. You can't be selected to shoot in the first place if you Advance.

Malfurious wrote:

 Stux wrote:

Malfurious wrote:
I'm curious to know why "Pistols don't work" - where is this coming from?

You can't select a unit to Shoot in the Shooting phase if they are within 1" of enemy units. So you never get to the point of choosing to shoot with the pistol at all!

Yes, it's silly. Yes, we all know what they were going for and communally agree to ignore that bit, subconsciously for many people even.

But by RAW you can't shoot pistols while in melee.

Thought pistols were an exception to this? don't remember what the brb says

Pistol rules say a model with a pistol can shoot. You have to go through the step to select a unit to shoot before you get to the point where the models can shoot, and since the pistol rules didn't say that the unit can shoot pistols while in melee, the unit isn't eligible to be selected to shoot, so you never get to the models actually shooting (despite the models having permission to shoot). As Stux points out, it's silly RAW and we all know how pistols are supposed to work, though.

Oh god people... 18months on and people are still dragging this non-problem up for intellectual points? Aiiieeee.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Oh god people... 18months on and people are still dragging this non-problem up for intellectual points? Aiiieeee.

Stux drug it out as an example of lack of FAQ on something not necessarily proof of anything, so it's a reasonable example why to illustrate the point. When trying to illustrate the point I imagine you're better off using an example that's a non-problem because the RAI is so obvious compared to the RAW as opposed to something more questionable.

I know... it just gets sooooo tedious.