Power Weapons

[Baragash]

But if it says "brainfart Sword" in the wargear entry under the unit, and then under the weapon description says "treated as a power weapon." You cannot model it as a power axe, halberd, fish, etc. The codex has already stated that it is in fact a sword. Well actually you can model it however you want but it will still count as a sword.

This debate has not been resolved yet, now that the digital Necron Codex has apparently stealth-FAQ'd* Hyperphase Swords to be Power Swords, are there any examples that this could apply to?

*This is a good thing.

[Kaffis]

It is a good thing, Baragash. And not just because the stealth-FAQ came down on the side I was arguing for, lol.

Now the question is, when will the traditional FAQ get updated?

[PyroSikTh]

now that the digital Necron Codex has apparently stealth-FAQ'd* Hyperphase Swords to be Power Swords

Has it? Oh marvellous!

[Baragash]

Not owning a copy I can't confirm it, but that is what others have said.

[Baragash]

Has it? Oh marvellous!

Now the question is, when will the traditional FAQ get updated?

Dunno, but:

Here are the undocumented updates in the digital version of the Necron codex that to my knowledge aren't represented in the FAQ.

I will get a sticky up at some point to keep track of these things:

Pg 47 - Monolith Heavy: references Heavy type rules in the rulebook.

Pg 52 - Catacomb Command Barge: Sweep Attack special rule removed.

Pg 55 - Imotekh Staff of the Destroyer: changed last sentence to clarify that it only hits the actual number of models under the line (not every model in a unit crossed by the line).

Pg 59 - Trazyn's Surrogate Hosts rule: replace references to 'kill points' with 'victory points'.

Pg 81 - Hyperphase Sword: S of user, AP3, melee.

Pg 85 - Voltaic Staff: Haywire rule text now matches the version of Haywire in the rulebook.

[Baragash]

Has it? Oh marvellous!

Now the question is, when will the traditional FAQ get updated?

Dunno, but:

Here are the undocumented updates in the digital version of the Necron codex that to my knowledge aren't represented in the FAQ.

I will get a sticky up at some point to keep track of these things:

Pg 47 - Monolith Heavy: references Heavy type rules in the rulebook.

Pg 52 - Catacomb Command Barge: Sweep Attack special rule removed.

Pg 55 - Imotekh Staff of the Destroyer: changed last sentence to clarify that it only hits the actual number of models under the line (not every model in a unit crossed by the line).

Pg 59 - Trazyn's Surrogate Hosts rule: replace references to 'kill points' with 'victory points'.

Pg 81 - Hyperphase Sword: S of user, AP3, melee.

Pg 85 - Voltaic Staff: Haywire rule text now matches the version of Haywire in the rulebook.

[GKnight]

Well at lest they cleared that bit of mess up, it is also pretty interesting to see GW pour more work into keeping digital copys updated with FAQs... almost makes me want them... but Im not getting no Ipad...

[PyroSikTh]

almost makes me want them... but Im not getting no Ipad...

This...and This.

[Phail]

tbf it is an expensive codex if you haven't already got the ipad £424 haha

[edmundblack]

It's an expensive toy you know.

Odd that the Sweep Attack has gone. So we'll be getting those Necron players with even more money not use Sweep Attacks and those who have the paper book using them? Strange.

[SonsOfStalingrad]

It's an expensive toy you know.

Odd that the Sweep Attack has gone. So we'll be getting those Necron players with even more money not use Sweep Attacks and those who have the paper book using them? Strange.

Isn't the Sweep Attack the same thing that Chariot rules let you do now? Because that think is a chariot. So it still works the same, right?

[PyroSikTh]

Odd that the Sweep Attack has gone. So we'll be getting those Necron players with even more money not use Sweep Attacks and those who have the paper book using them? Strange.

Command Barges are Chariots. Chariots have the Sweep Attack.

[jettzypher]

This debate has not been resolved yet, now that the digital Necron Codex has apparently stealth-FAQ'd* Hyperphase Swords to be Power Swords, are there any examples that this could apply to?

*This is a good thing.

this debate should have been over days ago imo. the weapon is labeled as "such-and-such sword" (which tells you right away that it's a sword), then the description elaborates that it is a power weapon. because 5th edition did not have profiles for different power weapons it didnt have to specify, but only denote that it was a power weapon for the rules to apply to it. what i quoted above proves this as faq's are changing words in weapon profiles to specifically state that it is a power sword (or whatever it may be) instead of the vague term power weapon.

[edmundblack]

Command Barges are Chariots. Chariots have the Sweep Attack.

Well, learn something new every day.

[Tahaal]

this debate should have been over days ago imo. the weapon is labeled as "such-and-such sword" (which tells you right away that it's a sword), then the description elaborates that it is a power weapon. because 5th edition did not have profiles for different power weapons it didnt have to specify, but only denote that it was a power weapon for the rules to apply to it. what i quoted above proves this as faq's are changing words in weapon profiles to specifically state that it is a power sword (or whatever it may be) instead of the vague term power weapon.

But see, in this world were "Count-as" is perfectly acceptable, it seems absurd anyone would think fluff or the name of a weapon would dictate that you have to model it as a sword, even when the rule itself doesn't.

[jettzypher]

i could understand that being perfectly viable when there is literally NO model/piece that is specifically for that character, weapon, etc. or when you forget something at home and need to use the 'counts-as' clause. however when the weapon is called a sword, and the model with said weapon comes with ones you can put on it, theres no excuse imo.

[Tahaal]

i could understand that being perfectly viable when there is literally NO model/piece that is specifically for that character, weapon, etc. or when you forget something at home and need to use the 'counts-as' clause. however when the weapon is called a sword, and the model with said weapon comes with ones you can put on it, theres no excuse imo.

I'm not saying using "count as" to proxy something you don't have. If someone painstakingly converted a 40k lizardman army to use the Necron codex, and all their models have axes, it doesn't matter what the fluff for the necron weapon says, or what it's necron name is.

The other example would be Dante's Axe Mortalis. If you were playing a Night Lords army that "counts as" Blood Angels, and you converted your "count as" Dante with a sword, then by god, it's a sword.

Unless the rule states it is a specific type of power weapon, it isn't, and you have to go off of whatever it looks like. There is 0 precedent for having the name of a weapon dictate what is it, and no rule stating you have to model your minis to fit a name.

[Baragash]

The Axe Mortalis is an unusual power weapon anyway isn't it due to being power weapon + special rules? (As opposed to being listed as a power axe).

Other than that the bottom line is that if a weapon's rules designation is power weapon then it can be modelled however the owner wants regardless of what it's called.

[Tahaal]

The Axe Mortalis is an unusual power weapon anyway isn't it due to being power weapon + special rules? (As opposed to being listed as a power axe).

Yeah, I was just using it as an example =P

[jettzypher]

There is 0 precedent for having the name of a weapon dictate what is it, and no rule stating you have to model your minis to fit a name.

I disagree with this. If the name says its a sword, then its a damn sword unless the description of that weapon says it is anything else. The Titansword for Draigo doesn't say its a sword in the description, just that it is a force weapon. Should I assume that it could be any style of power weapon even though it is deliberately called a sword? No, its still a sword.

Honestly though, I could care less what your models look like. But if s weapon is called something specific, then by god that's what it is unless its description tells me otherwise. And like I said, old edition only had to label things as "power weapons" because that's all that mattered. If you can't figure out that something that's called a sword, probably looks likes a sword, and isn't described as being anything else then I don't know what to tell you.