Scorpion powerfist: str 6 right? - Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums
40k Rules Discussion Post any Warhammer 40k rules queries and discussions here.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 33 (permalink) Old 02-16-08, 03:23 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Culler's Avatar
Culler's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,372
Reputation: 1
Default Scorpion powerfist: str 6 right?

Just so I can point somewhere besides the codex to show someone that the eldar striking scorpion strikes at str 6 because you can't use both the benefit of the chainsword with the powerfist. He argues that the chainsword is wargear and so adds to the fist. I explain that the sword is a weapon and thus doesn't stack just like it says on p. 46 in the second paragraph. Can anyone back me up?
Culler is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 33 (permalink) Old 02-16-08, 03:28 AM
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 25
Default

Culler under my current understanding of the rules all the chainsword would do is grant an extra 1 attack with the str 6 power fist or vice versus. You can not stack two weapons benefits unless it specifically states so and I don't think there are weapons out there that allow it currently.
Apokra is offline  
post #3 of 33 (permalink) Old 02-16-08, 03:30 AM
Executive Nitpicker
 
Galahad's Avatar
Galahad's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Tacoma, WA
Posts: 8,276
Reputation: 15
Default

Even if you have two weapons, you may only use one in a given phase of combat.

So even though he can count the chainsword as a second CCW and gain an attack form it, he has to choose whether to use it (and gain the +1 str) or the claw (and gain x2 str, ignore saves, but strike last)

The sword is good to have in case you want to take advantage of your initiave advantage, but you cannot use it to magically make a power claw stronger.

The only weapons I know of that explicitly combine their effects are Abbadon's daemon weapons, but those are a special case and are called out specifically in his entry.

-=============]xxxxo Galahad oxxxx[=============-
Check out the Heresy Combat Calculator -- MathHammer Made Easy!



Codex: Angels Errant. Read it, please.
Heresy Forum Rules -- Read them, damnit!
Reporting: When/How/Why -- Read that too!
"...remember the Golden Rule: Chill out, they're only plastic spacemen!" -Brother Jazzman
"Galahad is 100% correct in his explanation. Anyone who says otherwise to [him] is vastly mistaken." -The Wraithlord
"You know what? Fuck DC comics." -Robert Downey Junior




Last edited by Galahad; 02-16-08 at 03:40 AM.
Galahad is offline  
 
post #4 of 33 (permalink) Old 02-16-08, 04:23 AM
Senior Member
 
bobinatorect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 135
Reputation: 1
Default

Unfortunately for you I do believe that it makes the powerfist strength 7.

The Chain sword entry states: This is a one-handed weapon that adds +1 S to the model's attacks.

It does not say "adds +1 strength to attacks made with this weapon." It just says +1 strength to attacks. So if he attacks in CC he is at +1 strength, and remember that you double strength then add the +1.

I'm watching you.
bobinatorect is offline  
post #5 of 33 (permalink) Old 02-16-08, 04:31 AM
Executive Nitpicker
 
Galahad's Avatar
Galahad's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Tacoma, WA
Posts: 8,276
Reputation: 15
Default

yes, but a Power Fist also says it doubles the user's Str (without saying that it;s limited to attacks made with it) then goes on to say that attacks made with it are at init 1

Does that mean you can use a powerfist and a knife and strike at your full initiative and double strength by using the knife?

By the same wording logic, the powerfist doubles your str and lets you ignore armor saves with no strings attached. Only the init limitation is specifically tied to the fist, so theoretically you can use your combat knife or bolt pistol and strike at full initiative and double strength.

But the rules specifically call out (paragraph 2 p46) that if you have multiple special close combat attacks you have to pick one and uses the power fist as an example. The powerfist's strength enhancement has the same wording as the scorpion chainsword, but the paragraph clearly shows that if you want its benefits you have to commit to it in the assault phase.

Bottom line is, if a weapon grants you a bonus in the assault phase you have to use that weapon for it to be effective.

-=============]xxxxo Galahad oxxxx[=============-
Check out the Heresy Combat Calculator -- MathHammer Made Easy!



Codex: Angels Errant. Read it, please.
Heresy Forum Rules -- Read them, damnit!
Reporting: When/How/Why -- Read that too!
"...remember the Golden Rule: Chill out, they're only plastic spacemen!" -Brother Jazzman
"Galahad is 100% correct in his explanation. Anyone who says otherwise to [him] is vastly mistaken." -The Wraithlord
"You know what? Fuck DC comics." -Robert Downey Junior




Last edited by Galahad; 02-16-08 at 04:43 AM.
Galahad is offline  
post #6 of 33 (permalink) Old 02-16-08, 05:24 AM
Senior Member
 
bobinatorect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 135
Reputation: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Galahad View Post
yes, but a Power Fist also says it doubles the user's Str (without saying that it;s limited to attacks made with it) then goes on to say that attacks made with it are at init 1

Does that mean you can use a powerfist and a knife and strike at your full initiative and double strength by using the knife?

By the same wording logic, the powerfist doubles your str and lets you ignore armor saves with no strings attached. Only the init limitation is specifically tied to the fist, so theoretically you can use your combat knife or bolt pistol and strike at full initiative and double strength.

But the rules specifically call out (paragraph 2 p46) that if you have multiple special close combat attacks you have to pick one and uses the power fist as an example. The powerfist's strength enhancement has the same wording as the scorpion chainsword, but the paragraph clearly shows that if you want its benefits you have to commit to it in the assault phase.

Bottom line is, if a weapon grants you a bonus in the assault phase you have to use that weapon for it to be effective.
The Power fist entry says that "it doubles the user's strength, ignoring armour saves. That means IT must be used to double the strength.

The Scorpion Chainsword says (and I quote again) This is a one-handed weapon that adds +1 S to the model's attacks. It is a one-handed weapon so it adds an extra attack for the 2 CCW. Then it says IT adds +1 S to the model's attacks. It says nothing about having to use IT for the +1 bonus like the powerfist says that IT (the powerfist) doubles the user's strength.

If you have a Scorpion Chainsword your CC attacks are at +1 S.

I'm watching you.
bobinatorect is offline  
post #7 of 33 (permalink) Old 02-16-08, 07:56 AM
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 280
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobinatorect View Post
The Power fist entry says that "it doubles the user's strength, ignoring armour saves. That means IT must be used to double the strength.

The Scorpion Chainsword says (and I quote again) This is a one-handed weapon that adds +1 S to the model's attacks. It is a one-handed weapon so it adds an extra attack for the 2 CCW. Then it says IT adds +1 S to the model's attacks. It says nothing about having to use IT for the +1 bonus like the powerfist says that IT (the powerfist) doubles the user's strength.

If you have a Scorpion Chainsword your CC attacks are at +1 S.
And this, kiddies, is a type of rules justification that leaves you at risk of having "bludgeoned with a 200 page rulebook" listed as your cause of death.

We here at the Institution of Rational Gamers (IRG) recommend against such practices for your own safety.
Triumph Of Man is offline  
post #8 of 33 (permalink) Old 02-16-08, 08:16 AM
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 25
Default

I don't know about you guys but things like said response would be justification of finding out what your opponents ld was via Tank shock in the parking lot ;)
Apokra is offline  
post #9 of 33 (permalink) Old 02-16-08, 09:33 AM
Senior Member
 
bobinatorect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 135
Reputation: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Triumph Of Man View Post
And this, kiddies, is a type of rules justification that leaves you at risk of having "bludgeoned with a 200 page rulebook" listed as your cause of death.

We here at the Institution of Rational Gamers (IRG) recommend against such practices for your own safety.
Firstly, the book is closer to 300 pages than 200.

Second, your Institution of Rational Gamers remark I agree with. I try to rationalize the rules every time, however every time I do try to use my rationalization, I get RAW thrown into my face. I believe this is the first time I am even on the side of RAW. I was just stating the wording and why technically you get the bonus. If you don't want to play RAW, fine. I don't really care what you do. I was just showing that the Scorpion Chainsword's rules state that it adds a +1 bonus to strength on attacks, and because it doesn't state that it only adds the +1 bonus to strength on attacks made with the Chainsword like all the other CCW state that they only provide the benefit when using them (such as double strength for powerfists, or power weapons ignoring armour saves, or poisoned weapons wounding at worst on a +4), it (the +1 strength bonus) counts towards all attacks (in close combat.)

Even though I do agree that it shouldn't provide the +1 bonus, I didn't write the book, I just try to follow the rules. Thats why most of my posts are under the rules section.

Triumph Of Man, Apokra, instead of threatening me like children why don't you take a lesson from Galahad and instead try to prove me wrong with the rules. In fact I would be thrilled if you can, because I have to face those stupid things fairly often and 1 less strength would be a great help to me, especially when they are fighting one of my Daemon Princes.

I'm watching you.
bobinatorect is offline  
post #10 of 33 (permalink) Old 02-16-08, 01:39 PM
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 280
Default

Quote:
Triumph Of Man, Apokra, instead of threatening me like children why don't you take a lesson from Galahad and instead try to prove me wrong with the rules. In fact I would be thrilled if you can, because I have to face those stupid things fairly often and 1 less strength would be a great help to me, especially when they are fighting one of my Daemon Princes.
I'm not threatening you, just giving you a humorous warning. There's a difference, however slight.

As for arguing with you? Well there's little point as you're interpreting the rules to a silly degree, but I'll humour you. I think most other people apply some common sense. And look at the rules found in your codex/errata/chapter approved/rulebook as such:

Special Stabby Close Combat Weapon: This is a description of what the Special Stabby Close Combat Weapon (SSCCW) does when you use it, namely stabbing in a fashion more special than your average chainsword.

This Special Close Combat Attack is governed by a base set of rules, found in the first few paragraphs under Special Close Combat Attacks on p.46. And in there you'll find that it implies that special effects in close combat are tied to their respective special weapons, of which you've got to pick one to attack with, and you can't combine effects. Galahad has already pointed this out and you've ignored it.

However you've gone and interpreted to a silly degree where you've decided that each weapon individually across every single bloody codex, chapter approved, and errata entry has it's own set of rules that govern it, not those printed in the first paragraphs of p.46, and thus they must all be spelt out in that one single sentence in your codex/errata/rulebook what have you.

Because of course if it was meant to pack its own entire set of rules different from those found under Special Close Combat Attacks on page 46, it makes perfect bloody sense to cram them into exactly one sentence that is 13 words long, yes indeedy it does.

Logical approach using common sense? I think not. But, as I said, I doubt you'll pay any heed to this and continue with your interpretations attempting to take it beyond the Nth degree anyway, so... meh. Your loss.

Last edited by Triumph Of Man; 02-16-08 at 02:39 PM.
Triumph Of Man 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