Abaddon's Daemon Weapon - Page 11 - Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums
40k Rules Discussion Post any Warhammer 40k rules queries and discussions here.

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #101 of 176 (permalink) Old 06-19-11, 04:41 PM
Senior Member
 
Lord Pestilice's Avatar
Lord Pestilice's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: FT Benning, GA
Posts: 185
Reputation: 1
Default

You know, I remember this EXACT argument from about a year ago. It was just after the BA Codex came out and I remember 2 things.
1) The WD that had a battle report with Chaos vs BA specifically mentioned that in one round Abbadon rolled a 1 and wounded himself. I pointed this out then and the common sense people said, "Hey, good catch. If GW plays it that way that must be how it works." The people who refused to acknowledge that he is wounded on a 1 said, "But WD is not Erratta so I dont accept it as legit."
2) People like D-A-C start a troll thread like this by saying...Rule X seems to really say Y...prove me wrong. Then, every time someone posts their opinion or a fact or precedent that proves they are wrong, they shoot it down with their circular logic arguments trying to justify their point. In reality, they are not looking to have someone "prove them wrong" but are really trying to get a large mass of the gamer group to back them up in their decision that they want rule X to work the way they want.
In the end, you are not going to convince these people since they really wont accept anything short of MR GW himself personally calling them AND faxing them a hard copy of an official ruling telling them they are wrong.
Lord Pestilice is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #102 of 176 (permalink) Old 06-19-11, 06:22 PM Thread Starter
Well That Was Unexpected
 
D-A-C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,646
Reputation: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aramoro View Post
So he doesn't hurt himself on a 1, so I'm going to take the fact that it doesn't say it's a power weapon to mean that is an amendment to the Daemon Weapon Rules, Abbadon does not not have a power weapon then. Fair enough.
So ... your answer is that because there is no existing amendment which denys Abaddon's Deamon Weapon, power weapon status, that, that in fact, means that it isn't a power weapon.

Ok, well, there is no amendment explaining how Abaddon's Daemon Weapon grants him the ability to shoot laser beams out of his eyes, so, from now on, Abaddon gains + 10 D6 laser beam shots that ignore armour and cause instant death on a roll of +1 and always hit the intended target. The reason being, there is no amendment saying that that isn't an amendment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Pestilice View Post
You know, I remember this EXACT argument from about a year ago. It was just after the BA Codex came out and I remember 2 things.
1) The WD that had a battle report with Chaos vs BA specifically mentioned that in one round Abbadon rolled a 1 and wounded himself. I pointed this out then and the common sense people said, "Hey, good catch. If GW plays it that way that must be how it works." The people who refused to acknowledge that he is wounded on a 1 said, "But WD is not Erratta so I dont accept it as legit."
2) People like D-A-C start a troll thread like this by saying...Rule X seems to really say Y...prove me wrong. Then, every time someone posts their opinion or a fact or precedent that proves they are wrong, they shoot it down with their circular logic arguments trying to justify their point. In reality, they are not looking to have someone "prove them wrong" but are really trying to get a large mass of the gamer group to back them up in their decision that they want rule X to work the way they want.
In the end, you are not going to convince these people since they really wont accept anything short of MR GW himself personally calling them AND faxing them a hard copy of an official ruling telling them they are wrong.
In all that text, your argument is 'In an issue of White Dwarf ...'.

And no-one said 'if GW plays it that way that's how it works', we actually were all tired from arguing, and stated how those battle reports were all rigged, and we didn't have the energy to argue anything different.

I actually gave you +rep for taking the time to read up on it ... but at no point did I or anyone else really suggest a White Dwarf would ever be a source of rules clarity.

The FACT is no-one has posted a counter argument that isn't based on the two arguments of 'reminder' and 'weird font'.

I have stated I do not accept those arguments as neither takes into account any form of RAW ruling and are based on opinion, not facts.

Also, what is it with people using the buzzword of 'troll'.

I disagree with someone, so they are a 'troll', I have nothing useful to contribute to the discussion so its obviously a 'troll' thread.

I hate to break it to you all, I'm the farthest thing from a troll. So look up the definition of the word before throwing it around at anyone who disagrees with you.

In fact, lets just call it 'playing the troll card' from now on, cause its a lame way to try and end a discussion you cannot contribute to meaningfully.
D-A-C is offline  
post #103 of 176 (permalink) Old 06-19-11, 06:32 PM
Senior Member
 
Salahaldin's Avatar
Salahaldin's Flag is: Canada
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Georgetown, ON
Posts: 584
Reputation: 2
Default

To clarify Aramoro's argument:

You say that because the asterisk "ammendment" only says "+D6 attacks" and does not mention that on a 1 the weapon rebels, the weapon does not rebel. Aramoro says that, by that logic, since it also does not say in asterisked "ammendment" to the Daemon Weapon rules that it's a power weapon, nor two-handed, it is no longer a two handed power weapon. I have more to say, but I have to go, so expect me back in about 5 hours.

"Trying to make some sense of it all,
When I can see it makes no sense at all"

"Fools to the left of me,
Jokers to the right,
Here I am,
Stuck in the middle with you."
Salahaldin is offline  
 
post #104 of 176 (permalink) Old 06-19-11, 06:39 PM Thread Starter
Well That Was Unexpected
 
D-A-C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,646
Reputation: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Salahaldin View Post
To clarify Aramoro's argument:

You say that because the asterisk "ammendment" only says "+D6 attacks" and does not mention that on a 1 the weapon rebels, the weapon does not rebel. Aramoro says that, by that logic, since it also does not say in asterisked "ammendment" to the Daemon Weapon rules that it's a power weapon, nor two-handed, it is no longer a two handed power weapon. I have more to say, but I have to go, so expect me back in about 5 hours.
I understand what he was saying. Thanks.

And I say to both you and Aramoro that that is clearly stupid and based on no other ruling than 'la, la, la, he won't listen, la, la, la, I won't listen'.

There is one universally agreed upon amendment, instead of getting +1 Strength he gets Double Strength (8).

That amendment doesn't negate, power weapon, roll of 1 or two handed.

So why does a second amendment to the D6 ruling suddenly rule out the other two.

Its a childish argument against the RAW 2 D6 argument, which no-one said was logically, but merely agreed was the most extreme version of RAW.

Again, there is a line of text, people are ignoring it, explain to me why you are ignoring it that doesn't involve the words, 'reminder' or 'different font'.
D-A-C is offline  
post #105 of 176 (permalink) Old 06-19-11, 08:50 PM
Senior Member
 
KhainiteAssassin's Avatar
KhainiteAssassin's Flag is: Canada
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,083
Reputation: 1
Default

all we hear from YOU, D-A-C is "la, la, la, I wont listen because I think Abbadon should not get hit on a roll of a 1 la, la ,la"

the Atrisk is clearly on the profile to make us view the profile of abbadon as 4(d6) as we would for a chaos lord with a daemon weapon.

if you read the rule, it states:

"Abbadon counts as equipped with a Daemon weapon that doubles his strength (to strength 8 as shown on his profile) instead of the normal +1, and he may reroll any failed roll to wound in close combat"

he is equipped with a daemon weapon, he follows the rules of a daemon weapon.

WIPS: CHECK THEM OUT!
Space wolves - https://www.heresy-online.net/forums/...ad.php?t=54246
Warriors of chaos - https://www.heresy-online.net/forums/...ad.php?t=60813
Dark Eldar - https://www.heresy-online.net/forums/...ad.php?t=75375
DE FLUFF - https://www.heresy-online.net/forums/...ad.php?t=86956
My armies.


the key to every good DE army makeup. Always have a backup plan, try to take everything in multiples, and use everything you can to your advantage, being a sneaky bastard within the rules, as it were.
KhainiteAssassin is offline  
post #106 of 176 (permalink) Old 06-20-11, 12:03 AM
Senior Member
 
jfvz's Avatar
jfvz's Flag is: Australia
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Qld, Australia
Posts: 322
Reputation: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aramoro View Post
So he doesn't hurt himself on a 1, so I'm going to take the fact that it doesn't say it's a power weapon to mean that is an amendment to the Daemon Weapon Rules, Abbadon does not not have a power weapon then. Fair enough.
It also says he has a lightning claw mate = powerweapon

I could also say since he has 2 cc weapons he has an extra attack for using 2 weapon in cc, but that would just be silly, hence why im not going to try and push that point.

If one set of arguements does not work then try to find other points, if you can not think of any others then let it go at an impass untill some one else can.

Just saying the same points over and over again and telling someone he is a troll will not convince them. Use your mind, try to think of a cleaver way of saying it. Bezerkers may get the job done eventually, but they leave one hell of a bloody mess behind.

I REJECT YOUR REALITY AND SUBSTITUTE MY OWN
jfvz is offline  
post #107 of 176 (permalink) Old 06-20-11, 12:18 AM
Senior Member
 
KhainiteAssassin's Avatar
KhainiteAssassin's Flag is: Canada
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,083
Reputation: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfvz View Post
It also says he has a lightning claw mate = powerweapon

I could also say since he has 2 cc weapons he has an extra attack for using 2 weapon in cc, but that would just be silly, hence why im not going to try and push that point.

If one set of arguements does not work then try to find other points, if you can not think of any others then let it go at an impass untill some one else can.

Just saying the same points over and over again and telling someone he is a troll will not convince them. Use your mind, try to think of a cleaver way of saying it. Bezerkers may get the job done eventually, but they leave one hell of a bloody mess behind.
he does have a 'lightning claw' but as it counts as a 'special weapon' not a CCW or a Power weapon, it can only give an extra +1 attack if its another lightning claw, which it is not.

WIPS: CHECK THEM OUT!
Space wolves - https://www.heresy-online.net/forums/...ad.php?t=54246
Warriors of chaos - https://www.heresy-online.net/forums/...ad.php?t=60813
Dark Eldar - https://www.heresy-online.net/forums/...ad.php?t=75375
DE FLUFF - https://www.heresy-online.net/forums/...ad.php?t=86956
My armies.


the key to every good DE army makeup. Always have a backup plan, try to take everything in multiples, and use everything you can to your advantage, being a sneaky bastard within the rules, as it were.
KhainiteAssassin is offline  
post #108 of 176 (permalink) Old 06-20-11, 12:42 AM
Senior Member
 
Salahaldin's Avatar
Salahaldin's Flag is: Canada
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Georgetown, ON
Posts: 584
Reputation: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by D-A-C View Post
I understand what he was saying. Thanks.

And I say to both you and Aramoro that that is clearly stupid and based on no other ruling than 'la, la, la, he won't listen, la, la, la, I won't listen'.

There is one universally agreed upon amendment, instead of getting +1 Strength he gets Double Strength (8).

That amendment doesn't negate, power weapon, roll of 1 or two handed.

So why does a second amendment to the D6 ruling suddenly rule out the other two..
Because it ISN'T an amendment. It says "Abaddon gets +D6 attacks from his Daemon Weapon." As I've said before, this does not, in ANY WAY, contradict the entry on Daemon Weapons, where it says that a Daemon Weapon grants the bearer +D6 attacks. Which means it isn't an amendment, as it doesn't change anything, meaning it could only be there as a reminder. (As an aside, the reason I keep bringing up the fact that it's a reminder is because a reminder is NOT a rule, which means you can RAW it all you want, it doesn't have an effect on the rules; it's simply reminding you of the rules already written down.) The only reason you believe that reminder negates the Daemon Weapon rule of rolling ones is because it doesn't mention that a roll of one will result in a wound on the bearer. As we've been saying, using your logic, it does not mention it being a power weapon or two-handed, so it isn't those either. I don't know why you claim that we should be ignoring the negative "roll of 1 results in no attacks and a wound on yourself" but we shouldn't ignore the positive "power weapon" - oh wait, yes I do, it's because you want Abaddon to be better, not worse. They're both rules regarding Daemon Weapons.

Here's the thing, D-A-C; the above scenario is pointless, because the asterisked text is NOT a rule that negates anything. As I've already pointed out, as have many people, this is most likely a reminder. That's why, as I've said before, the asterisk draws your attention to this when you're looking at how many attacks Abaddon has, not what special rules he has regarding Daemon Weapons. I've already given you an example of how GW can be inconsistent, which might explain why the reminder appears on Abaddon's page and not Typhus'; in retrospect, I shouldn't have had to give you an example, there are thousands all over this rules discussion forum. In fact, it would be fair to say the Rules Discussion page wouldn't exist if GW wasn't so inconsistent, vague and just-plain-daft with their rules.

You may have noticed that "As I've already said" is a kind of motif in my last two paragraphs. It's because all these points have already been brought up before, you've simply refused to give them credence, instead dumbing them down to "I don't like the font" and "lalala, I'm not listening". You have no idea how frustrating it is to be told that you're not listening by someone who keeps asking the same questions and refusing to acknowledge the same answers for over 10 forum pages. I realize there have been some stupid "counter-arguments" like insulting your intelligence and calling you a troll. Kindly rise above it and stop belittling everyone else's arguments.

I claim, as does most everyone else, that it's a reminder. But there's no real way to prove if it's a reminder or not, short of asking GW yourself. (I've already done.) So we must go with the most likely scenario:

A) One of the writers placed that asterisked rule next to Abaddon's attacks to remind readers to factor in that he gets +D6 attacks from his Daemon Weapon, then either another one did Typhus' page and didn't bother with the reminder, or the same one did and they just forgot that they had included a reminder on the other page, and the editors missed this inconsistency.

B) One of the writers, when considering what "The effect of these two powerful artefacts" was, tallied up the differences between Abaddon's and a regular Lord's Daemon Weapon: doubles his strength instead of usual +1, re-rolls failed rolls to wound, and the weapon doesn't rebel on a one. Then he thought, "Alright, I'll write down those first two differences as "The effect of these two powerful artefacts means that Abaddon counts as Strength 8 (to Strength 8, as shown in his profile) instead of the normal +1, and he may re-roll any failed roll to wound in close combat." and then he decided to write the last rule in a different font, and seperate it from the others, and use an asterisk to draw the reader's attention to it when he's figuring out how many attacks Abaddon has, and instead of writing "Abaddon's Daemon Weapon does not rebel on a roll of 1." he wrote "Abaddon has +D6 Attacks from his Daemon Weapon." so that it sounded like a reminder of how many attacks Abaddon has, and not a special rule. And then the editors missed this retardedness.

I don't know about you, but I'm going with option A.

"Trying to make some sense of it all,
When I can see it makes no sense at all"

"Fools to the left of me,
Jokers to the right,
Here I am,
Stuck in the middle with you."

Last edited by Salahaldin; 06-20-11 at 12:52 AM.
Salahaldin is offline  
post #109 of 176 (permalink) Old 06-20-11, 12:43 AM
Senior Member
 
jfvz's Avatar
jfvz's Flag is: Australia
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Qld, Australia
Posts: 322
Reputation: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KhainiteAssassin View Post
he does have a 'lightning claw' but as it counts as a 'special weapon' not a CCW or a Power weapon, it can only give an extra +1 attack if its another lightning claw, which it is not.
I was just using that as another example, but i also said that i wouldnt even try for it. I thought the reasons would be practically self explentory. It was more a you can argue that and ill argue that the sky is green

I REJECT YOUR REALITY AND SUBSTITUTE MY OWN
jfvz is offline  
post #110 of 176 (permalink) Old 06-20-11, 12:51 AM
Senior Member
 
Salahaldin's Avatar
Salahaldin's Flag is: Canada
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Georgetown, ON
Posts: 584
Reputation: 2
Default

"Its obvious what the rule is, but you are asking the writers to go into an insane amount of detail to stop the kind of silly argument your putting forward." This is a quote from D-A-C regarding another thread regarding Abaddon's Daemon Weapon, though focusing on a different rule. The reason I'm not quoting it properly is because the thread is locked, and the option is not available. I just found this so deeply ironic that I had to post it here. I mean, really, D-A-C? Really?!

"Trying to make some sense of it all,
When I can see it makes no sense at all"

"Fools to the left of me,
Jokers to the right,
Here I am,
Stuck in the middle with you."
Salahaldin is offline  
Closed Thread

  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