The combat familiar - Page 3 - Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums
40k Rules Discussion Post any Warhammer 40k rules queries and discussions here.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #21 of 41 (permalink) Old 01-30-14, 08:34 AM
Herald of The Warp
 
Nordicus's Avatar
Nordicus's Flag is: Denmark
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Odense, Denmark
Posts: 2,752
Reputation: 143
Default

And here I thought the combat familiar was worth it all of a sudden - Dang it
Nordicus is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #22 of 41 (permalink) Old 02-05-14, 01:02 AM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 33
Reputation: 2
Default

Sorry about taking so long to reply, had a few days where my laptop wouldn't work with me. Angry machine spirit, I guess.

Anyways, guess I have a few things to address here. The yada yada part doesn't matter. It explains how a model with a familiar gets this second model that walks around with him, and has no bearing on (strictly) RAW, which is what this post is about. The fact that you have gollum following you doesn't stop the fact that it says the model itself makes two attacks. Also, summary pages are just that, summary. They aren't what you look at for RAW questions, they're for what you do when you totally forget what something does.

Now, do I think that, yeah, they intended it to be a P.O.S. upgrade? Totally. That doesn't stop it from doing something else R.A.W. And for the individuals that are saying "you just make two str 4 ap - attacks", my response is that as the rules go, models pick a weapon, modify their attacks with that weapon. They can't pick or choose which.
Oh, and things like chaos spawn are given a free CCW in close combat only, which is the weapon they use in close combat.

My LFGS 40k organizer sat and looked at everything, said that it was very compelling and that he'd let chaos players run it that way. Nobody here complains. I brought it up here mostly for interesting rules discussion.
koolkruse is offline  
post #23 of 41 (permalink) Old 02-05-14, 01:29 AM
ZOMGZOR CUSTOM USER TITLE
 
scscofield's Avatar
scscofield's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Finger Lakes Region of NY
Posts: 6,195
Reputation: 56
Default

It is not a weapon.

If we use your reasoning, Njal would be able to do all his attacks at I5 using his CotS.

http://i.imgur.com/aPfHUHy.gif?1





Last edited by scscofield; 02-05-14 at 01:31 AM.
scscofield is offline  
 
post #24 of 41 (permalink) Old 02-05-14, 02:09 AM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 33
Reputation: 2
Default

Forgive me, i don't know space wolves that well. Could i get the rules for that?

Also, i know it's not a weapon. Attacks are made with weapons, so it would be strange to make a weapon that says you make attacks. The CF not being a weapon doesn't break any part of this, as far as i'm aware.
koolkruse is offline  
post #25 of 41 (permalink) Old 02-05-14, 02:19 AM
ZOMGZOR CUSTOM USER TITLE
 
scscofield's Avatar
scscofield's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Finger Lakes Region of NY
Posts: 6,195
Reputation: 56
Default

You keep using the argument of choosing what weapon a model makes attacks with in melee. The CF is not a weapon, it is 2 str4 ap- attacks. If it was a weapon you could use the logic you are stating.

Edit: congratz that your local meta allows you to play it the way you want. Do not be shocked if you get refused outside of that local meta. If I was a part of it I would not allow it in any game with me.

http://i.imgur.com/aPfHUHy.gif?1




scscofield is offline  
post #26 of 41 (permalink) Old 02-05-14, 03:12 AM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 33
Reputation: 2
Default

I guess we're going to just drop Nyjal for now. Anyways, no, that's not my logic at all. My argument isn't that you... pick the CF, i guess is what you're saying?

My argument is that when it comes time for a model to strike blows, they make attacks (exact wording out of the brb in the close combat section). Because I am lacking a specific section regarding models with exactly one melee weapon and the rules for them having to pick them, let's assume they have two different ones, like huron. When it comes for huron's turn to strike blows, he has to pick a melee weapon. RAW on the "more then one weapon" sub section out of the weapon section of the base rule book.

More over, it says that when a model picks its weapon, it has to stick with it for all of it's attacks. It can't pick and choose, or swap halfway through. (as an aside, i recall there being a space wolf character that gets to do that....)

Given these facts, the basis for my argument, strictly R.A.W., is that the combat familiar's rules say that the model who buys it makes the attacks. More over, it says he makes them, as opposed to getting hits resolved at X and Y, like hammer of wrath, vector strike, magma cutters, and all kinds of other instances. The combat familiar uses the same text that is used out of the BRB (make attacks) for when a model punches stuff in CC. Therefore, they abide by all the same rules, and by extension of that logic, they are modified by their weapon, because the attacks granted by the combat familiar don't clarify that they are resolved differently. They give you a start point (str 4, no ap), but they don't tell you to resolve it that way, unlike... approximately every other instance of hits in cc from abilities, like vector strike or hammer of wrath.
koolkruse is offline  
post #27 of 41 (permalink) Old 02-05-14, 03:27 AM
ZOMGZOR CUSTOM USER TITLE
 
scscofield's Avatar
scscofield's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Finger Lakes Region of NY
Posts: 6,195
Reputation: 56
Default

Again, the CF is not a weapon, the attacks are outside of what the model has. Huron would do his attacks with his axe or claw and also have 2 str4 ap- attacks.

Until you can give me a page and section stating otherwise that is my stance on it.

RAW so far has shown nothing to support what you say. Give us exact page and sections to support.

http://i.imgur.com/aPfHUHy.gif?1




scscofield is offline  
post #28 of 41 (permalink) Old 02-05-14, 05:24 AM
Senior Member
 
Fallen's Avatar
Fallen's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3,689
Reputation: 19
Default

NOTE:
words within parentheses () and are CYAN are for reference points; for example to point out page number

words that are underlined and are colored CYAN are for emphasis

any other words in CYAN are my thoughts, usually put in after a paragraph has been underlined or whatnot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by koolkruse View Post
...this is going to be a pretty big post pulling rules from multiple sections and with me trying to make clear, but well thought out arguments for everyone to follow along with.

let's start with the text on the combat familiar. " A model with a combat familiar makes two additional str 4, ap- attacks... Pretty clean cut, right? it's horrible. I thought so too, for a long time, until one day when I was furiously flipping through the close combat (Starts on Pg 23 of the BRB and weapons sections (Close Combat Weapons are on Pg 51 of the rulebook.

See, I was trying to find a way for my dp with the black mace to use a normal CCW on the turn he charges, swap to the mace on my opponents, sweep them on that turn, and hop scotch through the enemy army. I can almost do it, but he doesn't have a ccw to swap to. Models only get one for free if they don't have a melee weapon.

Ok, so lets start with CSM codex entry of the Demon Prince (pg 94), and get to the important parts.

1)
Quote:
Wargear:
  • Close Combat weapon
2)
Quote:
May take items from the Chaos Rewards and/or Chaos Artefacts sections of the wargear list.
(pg 91)

now lets skip to said list and look the item in particular: The Black Mace

Quote:
A model can replace one weapon with one of the following. Only one of each Chaos Artefact may be taken per army.
Ok, I see that I swap the one and only generic CCW that I have for the black mace. Gotcha. So far so good.

Now let's look at the Combat Familiar.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CSM Codex Page 67, Chaos Rewards
A model with a combat familiar makes two additional Strength 4 AP- Melee attacks. The combat familiar is always assumed to be on the same base as its master. If you wish to representit separately you can. However, the model itself plays no part in the game; if the model gets in the way, simply move it to one side.
Ok, so the Combat Familiar grants two Strength 4 AP- attacks, that the user can apply. It does not state anywhere that the combat familiar is a close combat weapon, or is to be applied in any sense is a weapon at all.

So let's all agree that the combat familiar is not a piece of "weaponry", either shooting or Melee, ok?


...The BRB says that in the close combat section, when it comes for a models turn to strike blows, they MAKE attacks, which roll to wound using their own strength, but may be modified by the weapon they are wielding. In addition, the "more then one weapon" section in weapons (Pg 51) out of the BRB describes that models with more then one melee weapon must pick one weapon, and use it for all of their attacks. They can't mix and match weapons, not use it for some, whatever. They have to go all in with it.

Ok...besides the fact that I have already completely read the whole thread I am starting to wonder where the hell you have started to go; since the Demon Prince only has one "close Combat Weapon" (Rules found two paragraphs higher than the "more than one weapon" sectiion on page 51) and we have already concluded that the combat familiar is NOT a close combat weapon, since it does not decree any such thing in its item entry.

And now, the cheese unveiling. Combat Familiars are basically +2 attacks on most of our models. The combat familiar text says that the model with the familiar makes these extra attacks. And unlike hammer of wrath, or vector strike, or magma cutters, or terror from the deeps, or any other rule that gives free hits, it doesn't tell you how to resolve it. On top, they aren't hits. They're attacks. And, it uses the same wording that the basic rulebook uses for models in cc (make attacks)...

Sorry, have to interrupt here, where the hell is this area that "uses the same wording that the basic rulebook uses for models in cc (make attacks)" the only reference are that makes any sense in the "number of attacks" area on page 24; which then just continues on to teach how to use the Weapon Skill (WS) chart, of which I assume we all know how to use by now.

..Grounding the argument with models with multiple melee weapons (I couldn't find a section that said models with one melee weapon have to use the weapon. It seems it's inferred, so let's not go there for now, and keep things rules grounded), they have to pick a weapon and modify all of their attacks with it.

So we've got huron...he makes 3 str 4 attacks that move up to strength 6, ap3, shred armorbane whatever. The two attacks the familiar grants have to be modified the same way. The rules say so; it's actually illegal to not modify them that way.

What do you all think?

Honestly, you answer your own answer two paragraphs above;
Quote:
they have to pick a weapon
. Demon Princes with the Black Mace only have one weapon in their wargear slot - The Black Mace.


Note: if your answer is "it's not rules as intended, they intended for it to be str 4 and ap -", my answer to you is maybe that phil kelley intended for there to be a way for chaos lords and the like to get two more attacks, but couldn't find a good price because demon princes can get them too. So he wrote an upgrade at a flat price, and worded it so that a model like a chaos lord makes two attacks at his printed strength which then get modified like his base attacks, and made sure the wording matched the basic rulebook so they could function like a printed +2 attacks, but it's also worded ingeniously so that demon princes don't get the same free +2, so you can't smash and still get 5 attacks all the time, or 7 at str 6. Either is just as plausible, and mine actually suggests that the writer knows what they are doing. Because arguing that the writers don't know what they are doing and you do is silly, and only viable in cases of game breakdown, let's keep this to rules as written
The demon prince makes his attacks, then afterwards he makes two additional attacks at S4 AP-. So far nothing that you have presented to me has been able to change my mind

Quote:
Originally Posted by koolkruse View Post
Edited edit: it pays to read I guess, thought you agreed. Attacks being additional is also covered under the BRB in the cc section. The combat familiar, in this scenario, ends up getting placed in extra bonuses. There's nothing that suggests this stats on these attacks are fixed (you aren't told to resolve them). There isn't actually anything to suggest they don't benefit from weapons, other then a straight read. And I think straight reads are what chaos players have been doing for way too long.
You resolve them as you would with anything that is WS9 and I8 that makes 2 S4 AP- attacks. You are correct in that it does not tell you how to resolve them, so obviously the combat familiar is part of the "other bonuses" part of number of attacks, that has its own special rules (that it is 2 attacks that are S4 and AP-). Everything else must then follow the rest of standard rules; so it still happens at I8, is to be considered to be WS9.

Quote:
Originally Posted by scscofield View Post
Again, the Combat Familir is not a weapon, the attacks are outside of what the model has. Huron would do his attacks with his axe or claw and also have 2 str4 ap- attacks.

Until you can give me a page and section stating otherwise that is my stance on it.

RAW so far has shown nothing to support what you say. Give us exact page and sections to support.
sccofield is pretty much telling you the same thing that I am, it is a nice theory that COULD work, if either a local Errata/FAQ is made (which has been done in your area) or if GW releases an errata/FAQ and then it can be applied worldwide. Seeing how the later is not likely to ever happen and that the former has, then consider yourself lucky.

Personally I hope that your local "Rules Guy" sees this thread and reverses his decision; since there is nothing that you have provided, nor anything so far that is in either the BRB or CSM Codex is able to back yourself up on and would be able to stand up in "internet court".

Quote:
Originally Posted by neilbatte
if you squint the Sigmar stuff doesn't all look like the love children from a Necron and Blood Angel orgy.
Fallen is offline  
post #29 of 41 (permalink) Old 02-05-14, 07:37 AM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 33
Reputation: 2
Default

My, quite the response. In order to give you the respect that's due for something that well thought out (no sarcasm intended), im going to respond to your personal thoughts one by one. I'll quote a small section of them first to make sure everything lines up for you, just so there's no confusion.

1 "okay...besides the fact..." You're right, it's not a weapon at all. I had to constantly address that point because others were mentioning it for some reason. Not sure why.

2. "Sorry, have to...." That's the exact section I'm referencing. It's worth noting that, again, I actually can't find an entry anywhere in the rulebook regarding models with one melee weapon (dp with mace, for example). It's quite obvious that they're supposed to use that weapon and nothing else, but because I can't point out a section in the BRB, let's use something that we can ground, which is models with multiple weapons.
On page 51, it says models with more then one weapon have to pick one, and use it for every attack they make. Specifically, it says when it's his turn to strike blows. I'm going to referencing that section quite a bit for this, it's the grounding for a large part of my arguments.

From here, I'm going to break off a bit and actually address something that you said. Succinctly, near the end of your post, you say that you resolve them the same way as you would any other attack, except at str 4 and ap-. My point there is that if we really want to resolve these attacks the same way as any other attack, then they are modified by the weapon the model picks.

We already know that people with more then one weapon (from here on, im going to say huron. In all instances, assume a power axe for simplicity). have to pick a weapon and swing with it for every attack they make. It's pretty clear that they have to do that from the more then one weapon section on page 51 of the BRB.
Therefore, if we can agree that those attacks should be resolved as standard attacks, then it follows they get modified by the same weapon. They're still made by Huron, and huron is still bound by his power axe. He doesn't have the choice to not use his axe for those two attacks, in fact. It would go against the more then one weapon sub section.

In summary, we know attacks are made with melee weapons (in cc). We know that models with more then one weapon have to pick a weapon and swing with it for every attack that they make. We know that the combat familiar says they make two additional strength 4 attacks. Therefore, the attacks the combat familiar grants are resolved the same way as any other close combat attack, including weapon modification. You can't just "make" str 4 ap - attacks without a weapon. The combat familiar doesn't say you can, and the wording is the same that the BRB uses to describe models swinging naturally.
koolkruse is offline  
post #30 of 41 (permalink) Old 02-05-14, 08:06 AM
ZOMGZOR CUSTOM USER TITLE
 
scscofield's Avatar
scscofield's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Finger Lakes Region of NY
Posts: 6,195
Reputation: 56
Default

You keep grounding all you responses off multiple melee weapon rules. The CF is not a weapon so this rule does not apply. End of debate end of argument.

The ruled of multiple melee weapons apply to multiple melee weapons, this is not a weapon it is simply 2 str4 ap- attacks.

With that I done going in circles, again gratz that your meta is allowing you to do this.

http://i.imgur.com/aPfHUHy.gif?1




scscofield is offline  
Reply

  Lower Navigation
Go Back   Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums > Warhammer 40K > 40k Rules Discussion

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome