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.

Looking for opinions on the following rules conundrums.



Seen a bit of debate recently about whether the Dark Angels Stormwing rule affects combi-weapons or not.

The rule states that...


To me this seems pretty cut and dry in that in only affects combi-bolters and not combi-weapons. But i've seen people argue that a combi-weapons bolter component does benefit from the +1 to hit as it is listed as a bolter under the weapon profile that it does as evidences here...



How do people read this as working?



Secondly, the Excindio battle-automata, glorious schizoid AI murderbot that it is, has a number of rather nasty weapon options. Under the options section it says that "an Excindio may exchange both an Extinctor Power Claw and a manipulator arm for one of the following"



Do people read this to mean that you may only swap ONE power claw & manipulator arm for a listed weapon or that you can swap BOTH power claws & manipulator arms for weapons?


I thank you for your input.

It would help to see the other rules and not just the combi weapon page

Link broke it seems.

I interpret the bolter component of a combi-weapon as a bolter for purposes of special rules that affect bolters. I agree that the wording is awkward on the Excindo's weapon options, but I'd tend to assume that the intent is that you can replace either arm rather than just one, given that I can't think of any other unit that is restricted in that way in HH.

Seems clear only combi-bolters that are affected. A combi-weapon is not a bolter. If it was intended to affect a wider range of weapons it would say ‘bolt weapons’.

Also seems clear that you lose both of the arms mentioned in order to get one upgrade. It even says that you lose an attack (which comes from 2 power claws) in the process - if you could just swap out the manipulator arm then you wouldn’t automatically lose an attack.

Combi weapons have two interpretations:

The first, and one you're saying, is that the weapons are 'divided' ergo. One part is 'bolter' and is affected by rules which effect bolter while the other is 'flamer' and is effected by rules which effect flamer, with neither side overlapping I'd call this the RAI interpretation.

The other is that the entire setup is "Combi-weapon", in which case it is effected only by rules which effect Combi-weapons in particular. Ergo it's entirely uneffected by Ironwing because it's not a bolter, it's a Combi-weapon.

As for the second question, it means BOTH can be exchanged for ONE option. Ergo you can't keep your claw or arm and get one of the options, you trade them BOTH in.

This is clearly demonstrated by most other options in the codexes. For example, the humble Assault Squad Sergeant:

"The Legionary Assault Squad Sergeant may exchange a bolt pistol and / or chainsword for one of the following options"

Coupled with the next line in the entry:

The Legionary Assault Squad Sergeant may exchange a bolt pistol and chainsword for"

The rules are actually much clearer here than with the combi weapon, in that you trade both weapons for one of the provided options. No ifs, ands, or buts.

 Snord wrote:
Seems clear only combi-bolters that are affected. A combi-weapon is not a bolter. If it was intended to affect a wider range of weapons it would say ‘bolt weapons’.

Also seems clear that you lose both of the arms mentioned in order to get one upgrade. It even says that you lose an attack (which comes from 2 power claws) in the process - if you could just swap out the manipulator arm then you wouldn’t automatically lose an attack.

I would agree on the combi-bolter. For a comparison IW's shrapnel upgrades have been FAQ'd to say that they can't be applied to the bolter half of a combi-weapon. The entire combi-weapon is considered one thing that is not a bolter, flamer, plasma, etc.

From the FAQ

Q. Do the primary and secondary components of a combi-weapon count as a weapon of the same type as their standard version (e.g., do the bolter (Primary) and meltagun (Secondary) components of a Combimelta count as a ‘Bolt’ weapon and a ‘Melta’ weapon respectively in the same manner as a standard bolter and
a standard meltagun)?
A. Yes.

So maybe it affects.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
From the FAQ

Q. Do the primary and secondary components of a combi-weapon count as a weapon of the same type as their standard version (e.g., do the bolter (Primary) and meltagun (Secondary) components of a Combimelta count as a ‘Bolt’ weapon and a ‘Melta’ weapon respectively in the same manner as a standard bolter and
a standard meltagun)?
A. Yes.

So maybe it affects.

But that says they're a bolt weapon and a melta weapon, not that they're a Bolter and Meltagun

The profile under the Combi-Weapon specifically calls it a Bolter though.

Like I said, maybe it affects.

If I was making the ruling, I'd say it does and allow it.

I would agree that it would be more consistent if the rule did extend to the bolter 'half' of a combi-weapon.

It does specify combi-bolter rather than magna combi-weapon or minor. And a Combi-bolter is a specific profile so imma say it wouldn't work on the non-bolter portion. But it would

As for the Battle Automata, it does feel like it's reffering to singular in both cases so I'd say no.

For the Combi-Weapon, it's not a Bolter so no. Breaking things down into sub-components doesn't make the whole into those sub-components.
You aren't firing a Combi-Flamer as a Bolter and Flamer as separate weapons, it's the one weapon with multiple firing profiles. You just get to use both.

For the Automata, it's a weird one. I can see the point of view where because it doesn't say anything like "May exchange both sets/pairs" or "May exchanged one set" it looks like you could double up guns.
However, it can also see the argument that because its "an Extinctor Claw and a arm" because they are both singular, you can only replace one set with a gun.
I would err on the side of caution and swap one set for a gun.

Are there any Excindio models?

Currently no, however they are essentially domesticated Men of Iron which gives you loads of modelling freedom.

Thank you everyone for the answers! They're all much appreciated.
It's most interesting to see people's interpretations of things that are unclearly worded.


I'm somewhat tempted to contact GW and see if they'll give an official ruling on the Excindio wording, as I must confess i'm rather keen to run one with duel Induction Shredders.