PDA

View Full Version : Force Weapons



Decaf_Wonk
08-08-2009, 12:54 AM
Greetings all!

My question revolves around Force Weapons; I have the assault on Black Reach Rulebook so it's particularly exhasutive in explanation(not!). However from reading the rules around Force Weapons:

1.) Which rules should I adhere to? The BRB or the Codex? As the codex entry does not say 'refer' to the Rulebook but the Codex definition is for the model to be 'slain outright'.

2.) If a Grey Knight Grand Master wounds a Carnifex once. Does he wait until the END of the assault phase to cast the Force Weapon for Instant Death? Or is it immediatly taken after the wounds are inflcted?

I have been playing with the rule that the test is taken immediately - as it seems likely the Grand Master would seek to destroy the beast before it is able to retaliate....

Cheers,

-Decaf

BuFFo
08-08-2009, 01:07 AM
1.) Which rules should I adhere to? The BRB or the Codex? As the codex entry does not say 'refer' to the Rulebook but the Codex definition is for the model to be 'slain outright'.

In 40k, the Codex always supersedes the MRB. Some armies have better versions of Force Weapons due to older rule wordage.


2.) If a Grey Knight Grand Master wounds a Carnifex once. Does he wait until the END of the assault phase to cast the Force Weapon for Instant Death? Or is it immediatly taken after the wounds are inflcted?

You take one test for each successful wound.


I have been playing with the rule that the test is taken immediately - as it seems likely the Grand Master would seek to destroy the beast before it is able to retaliate....

You've been playing it right.


Cheers

Not really... That show sucked.

Denzark
08-08-2009, 03:40 AM
Having read lots of faqs and GW house rules from Warhammer World recently, in preparation for UK Throne of Skulls, I have seen somewhere that your force weapon instant kill counts as one of your psychic powers so could only be used if you have the ability to use more than one or if you haven't used any.

And by that rational you would need to be able to use a psychic power more than once.

So not convinced by once per wound casued a la monsieur de la buffo.

StrikerFox
08-08-2009, 05:00 AM
okay so he hits, wounds, makes and inv. saves if possible.. okay.. now..

"the psyker may then take a psychic test to use the weapons power against any ONE opponenet that suffered an unsaved wound by the weapon in that player turn."

makes ref to the one per turn (unless duely noted)
if passed, causes instant death.

also in codex deamonhunters, its basically the same wording..

but also you do it at that initiative step.

hope it clears things up

Aegis
08-08-2009, 06:29 AM
I do not have my codex on hand, but I think the Daemonhunters book says 'slain outright' which is where a lot of the confusion with the new edition is coming in.

It would be a different story if the book said 'causes instant death', as that would mean GW offered some level of consistency.

Tarion
08-08-2009, 08:18 AM
I do not have my codex on hand, but I think the Daemonhunters book says 'slain outright' which is where a lot of the confusion with the new edition is coming in.

It would be a different story if the book said 'causes instant death', as that would mean GW offered some level of consistency.

That's exactly the issue for DH. Their version of the wording basically ignores the current rules for Force weapons. A bit of a balance for their other tech being so far behind. (Land Raiders being the obvious)

Lucky Moniker
08-08-2009, 12:58 PM
so basically Daemonhunters do have the ability to kill daemons outright, they aren't inflicting instant death, so therefore the Eternal Warrior rule has no effect...

mkerr
08-08-2009, 01:14 PM
Force Weapons purchased from the Daemonhunter's codex work a bit differetly than the ones from the main rulebook.

After making saves (if any), the Force Weapon wielder chooses one opponent that was wounded by the weapon and makes a Psychic Test. If it passes, then the target is "slain outright" (meaning that Synapse and Eternal Warrior are no help).

Your opponent can attempt to use a Psychic Hood to block the use of the Force Weapon (something that I always forget to do).

And to answer the OP's original questions:
1) For Daemonhunters, the codex superseeds the main rulebook (or other, newer codices) for many rules, including Force Weapons.
2) You test for the Force Weapon after your opponent makes his saves. You only make one Psychic Test no matter how many wounds were inflicted.

-- MKerr

Decaf_Wonk
08-09-2009, 12:41 AM
Wahooo!

An avalanche of answers and discussion!
Blimey with the ability to slay 'Eternal Warriors' is brilliant if a bit cheesy.
Nonetheless thanks all for clearing that debacle up!

Enjoy,

-Decaf

Kloud
08-09-2009, 01:51 PM
Force Weapons SHOULD be able to overide the "Eternal Warrior" USR. The fact that the BRB nerfed Force Weapons in that respect, was just plain Stupidity on GW's part.

If Force Weapons Cannot outright kill an "Eternal Warrior", then what the hell is the point in even having Force weapons? The Eternal Warrior Rule is being handed out like Candy now in the new codex's.

BuFFo
08-09-2009, 02:38 PM
so basically Daemonhunters do have the ability to kill daemons outright, they aren't inflicting instant death, so therefore the Eternal Warrior rule has no effect...

Yes, exactly.

Khestra the Unbeheld
08-09-2009, 03:18 PM
Force Weapons SHOULD be able to overide the "Eternal Warrior" USR. The fact that the BRB nerfed Force Weapons in that respect, was just plain Stupidity on GW's part.

If Force Weapons Cannot outright kill an "Eternal Warrior", then what the hell is the point in even having Force weapons? The Eternal Warrior Rule is being handed out like Candy now in the new codex's.

Hardly. The CSM Codex has two. The IG have one. The SMs have, like, two I think. You'll find more things immune to Instant Death in the Tyranid Codex than you will anything since Chaos 3.5 was put to sleep.

Kloud
08-09-2009, 03:34 PM
All I'm sayin is that it's not like Force Weapons were overpowered to begin with. A Libby swings one at Strength 4. scary stuff.

The Eternal Warrior protects against Powerfists. There was no need to effectivly lump Force Weapons with Powerfist with the Eternal Warrior Rule.

Aegis
08-09-2009, 04:22 PM
It seems like, from my understanding, that most things in the new codexs that EW are special characters/upgrade characters. It seems like that is just GW's way of protecting their fluff.

However, Colonial No-Name is still nice and squishy to a FW, or even some of the larger beasties that run around the game (does 'fexes have eternal warrior?).

My only beef with the FW's from WH and DH is the cost. I understand they have a great ability, but 40 points for something that is tailored, essentially, for killing individual models is a bit steep... I have yet to encounter a situation where I thought "if only I had taken the FW over the Master crafted PW..."

Starion
08-10-2009, 04:09 AM
For those that say the DH codex take precedence - I say wrong. (Go read my thread "Codex over rulebook...When?" before flaming me here...).
I can't see anywhere in the special CCW section that gives codices precedence, ergo a Force Weapon, be it wielded by a Marine Librarian, WH/DH Inq, or whoever, uses the rules laid down on pg50 of the rulebook.
Yes, I fully agree a Force Weapon, especially one wielded by a DH Inq or GK, should be able to one-hit a demon. But I just can't see it in the rules.

BuFFo
08-10-2009, 09:57 AM
For those that say the DH codex take precedence - I say wrong. (Go read my thread "Codex over rulebook...When?" before flaming me here...).
I can't see anywhere in the special CCW section that gives codices precedence, ergo a Force Weapon, be it wielded by a Marine Librarian, WH/DH Inq, or whoever, uses the rules laid down on pg50 of the rulebook.
Yes, I fully agree a Force Weapon, especially one wielded by a DH Inq or GK, should be able to one-hit a demon. But I just can't see it in the rules.

Witch Hunters Codex, page 21. Under Force Weapons.

Thats where codex > mrb.

Starion
08-10-2009, 12:07 PM
Witch Hunters Codex, page 21. Under Force Weapons.

Thats where codex > mrb.

It also says the same under p17 C:DH.
What I'm getting at though is that those codices were written for 3rd ed, when there was no definition of a Force Weapon contained within the main body of rules, so rules for them had to be placed in the codices. Now, under 5th ed, Force weapons have a definition within the rules, on pages 42 + 50. Nowhere within either of those two relevant sections does it state that rules found in a codex supercede those written in the rulebook, unlike the USR section. If by some miracle GW published an FAQ tomorrow, or, Emperor be praised a new codex, that says "blahblah...slays outright...blah...supercedes rules set out in main rulebook", then fine, all's square. No argument. The codices are written to interact with the rulebook - not vice versa.
I know it even makes sense that the rules given in WH/DH work fluff-wise, but then if the codices were written with a fluff bias, Marines would be nigh on unstoppable, even though a single squad would most likely weigh in around the 1000 point mark...

Nabterayl
08-10-2009, 12:37 PM
True enough, and speaking personally I think the best way to play is to update things as seems sensible to the players (yes yes tournament scene etc.). But as Tarion points out, according to page 62 of the rulebook,


As normal, the rules in the Codex take precedence. (emphasis added)

As a historical matter you are of course probably correct as to why the WH and DH codices were drafted the way they were, but it is apparently true (and not just a widely held player base delusion) that Codex rules take precedence over the main rulebook.

BuFFo
08-10-2009, 08:30 PM
Just because a codex is old doesn't mean you can pick and choose whatever rules you wish to follow.

Simple fact is, the old Force Weapons do not cause instant death. Nothing more to it than that. Enjoy them while they last.

Decaf_Wonk
08-11-2009, 07:01 AM
All I'm sayin is that it's not like Force Weapons were overpowered to begin with. A Libby swings one at Strength 4. scary stuff.

Hmm...

Ok, ill put this forward: from my interpretation can you upgrade a Librarian to a 'Epistolary' and take 'Might of the Ancients' = S6 Force Weapon attacks?
Just from the Daemon Hunters codex, for example, 'Hammerhand' you doubled your strength but lost the ability of your weapons - meanwhile Might merely states that "..Librarian has Strength 6 and rolls..."; there fore you can still retain your Force Weapon of Death and smack the be-jebus out of... well alot of warhammery stuff.... :)

Denzark
08-11-2009, 08:26 AM
Hello chaps.

The following is a direct lift from the GW Throne of Skulls House rules document, accessed from the Warhammer World Blog on the GW Website. The highlight is on all force weapons, so eternal warrior works against all. No exemption for Daemonhunters.

Hope this helps.

"Does a Force Weapon kill Eternal Warriors outright or does the instant kill rule apply (which
Eternal Warriors are immune to)? No, Under 5th edition ALL Force Weapons cause instant
death therefore do not kill Eternal Warriors outright"

BuFFo
08-11-2009, 08:33 AM
Hello chaps.

The following is a direct lift from the GW Throne of Skulls House rules document, accessed from the Warhammer World Blog on the GW Website. The highlight is on all force weapons, so eternal warrior works against all. No exemption for Daemonhunters.

Hope this helps.

"Does a Force Weapon kill Eternal Warriors outright or does the instant kill rule apply (which
Eternal Warriors are immune to)? No, Under 5th edition ALL Force Weapons cause instant
death therefore do not kill Eternal Warriors outright"

Thats a nice house rule for that gaming group.

Until an errata comes out for the older codexes, the older Force Weapons ignore eternal warrior.

Denzark
08-11-2009, 08:51 AM
Throne of Skulls is the GAMES WORKSHOP UK 40K tournament not any old poxy gaming group.

BuFFo
08-11-2009, 08:54 AM
Throne of Skulls is the GAMES WORKSHOP UK 40K tournament not any old poxy gaming group.

And? I fail to see your point between a tourney and a group of players house rules?

Both are house rules.

If the change is not on the GW site for either codex in the form of an errata / faq, it doesn't apply across the globe.

Denzark
08-11-2009, 09:11 AM
And? I fail to see your point between a tourney and a group of players house rules?

Both are house rules.

If the change is not on the GW site for either codex in the form of an errata / faq, it doesn't apply across the globe.


Now you're going RAW versus RAI - you have selected RAW (Codex versus FAQ). THis intepretation is RAI from the frigging company itself. Why have they not FAQ'd in line with this? For the same reason that DE, Tau, Necrons etc are always *****ing. Coz they're too busy with the armies that sell - their eternal priority.

Knowing how GW themselves actually want it to be played is good enough for me if not for our antipodean comrades.

Tarion
08-11-2009, 09:16 AM
Now you're going RAW versus RAI - you have selected RAW (Codex versus FAQ). THis intepretation is RAI from the frigging company itself. Why have they not FAQ'd in line with this? For the same reason that DE, Tau, Necrons etc are always *****ing. Coz they're too busy with the armies that sell - their eternal priority.

Knowing how GW themselves actually want it to be played is good enough for me if not for our antipodean comrades.

You know how one guy in GW wants it played - The guy who wrote that book. Funnily enough, not everyone shares the same opinion. This is the company that you call for rules advice and get a different answer depending on who you get through to

Besides, the other argument is that they want it played the way they said it would in the rulebook, where they say that older things, even those with the same name, don't necessarily work in the same way. So, we have two positions from GW. Congratulations, you narrowed it down... Oh, wait. No.

BuFFo
08-11-2009, 09:57 AM
Now you're going RAW versus RAI - you have selected RAW (Codex versus FAQ). THis intepretation is RAI from the frigging company itself. Why have they not FAQ'd in line with this? For the same reason that DE, Tau, Necrons etc are always *****ing. Coz they're too busy with the armies that sell - their eternal priority.

Knowing how GW themselves actually want it to be played is good enough for me if not for our antipodean comrades.

You fail to see the obvious point here...

If GW wanted the ruling to be fixed, guess what? They would have updated the rules for Force Weapons in older codexes in their OFFICIAL way of disseminating new rules; their FAQ and Errata section!

This isn't a RAW v RAI argument, because like most of these arguments, RAI is ASSUMED.

I could easily argue that since GW doesn't update the Force Weapon rules, as per RAW and their own RAI, they don't want it updated.

So enjoy killing Eternal Warrior and Synapse creatures all you like fellow Inquisitors :)

Aegis
08-11-2009, 10:04 AM
Of course, we could all be ignoring the more sinister plot of this whole discussion, that they are not making a FAQ or errata for DH/WH because they do not plan on continuing them... But then, paranoia runs deep...

BuFFo
08-11-2009, 10:09 AM
Of course, we could all be ignoring the more sinister plot of this whole discussion, that they are not making a FAQ or errata for DH/WH because they do not plan on continuing them... But then, paranoia runs deep...

GW has made an errata for both armies. They just didn't update Force Weapons. Thats the point.

Aegis
08-11-2009, 10:17 AM
GW has made an errata for both armies. They just didn't update Force Weapons. Thats the point.

I know. Meager attempt at humour. Though, the errata is a weak substitute for an actual codex update.

The main issue I am seeing with this particular discussion, though, is the idea that if DH/WH players give you their good Force Weapons, but are forced to continue using many outdated rules for various entries in their book, the codex itself becomes even further unbalanced.

With that in mind, is it not viable to believe, as BuFFo has been saying, that the Force Weapons have been left specifically so not all of the teeth are removed from the armory?

Disclaimer: As an Inquisition player, I know full well that each army does have it strengths... Especially sisters, and it would be foolish to make an army based around one piece of wargear... But, damnit, it is the principle of the matter!

Lucky Moniker
08-11-2009, 12:16 PM
the codex ALWAYS beats the rulebook. always. look at the Feel No Pain rule under Grotesques in the Dark Eldar codex, it is very different then the one in the USR section, and the FAQ clearly states that you use the old one stated in the book, it simply has the same name, i see no difference here

SeattleDV8
08-12-2009, 06:52 AM
The BRB tells us how Force weapons work.
The DH Codex tells us how Nemesis Force weapons work.
The two have simular names but behave differently.
Like the smoke launchers , storm shields , Assault cannons although having the same names behave differently.
The DH force weapons 'slay outright' unlike the BRB force weapons that cause ID.

Aegis
08-12-2009, 10:49 AM
The BRB tells us how Force weapons work.
The DH Codex tells us how Nemesis Force weapons work.
The two have simular names but behave differently.
Like the smoke launchers , storm shields , Assault cannons although having the same names behave differently.
The DH force weapons 'slay outright' unlike the BRB force weapons that cause ID.
Actually, there is more to this discussion than just the Nemesis Force Weapons, as the regular Force Weapon in the armoury also has the text 'slain outright'. If it were just the NFW, I do not think there would be much issue with it. However, due to the fact it also the regular FW, available to both DH and WH characters, that is where the contention is coming in.

Trinity
08-12-2009, 04:05 PM
I have to say that I agree that the codex trumps the BRB.

It doesnt matter if GW's main tournement decides to treat force weapons differently then the rules say they should. Thats the choice of the organizers on the matter. Not a rules change from the development team.

So in short the people who decide the rules have already stated what the rule is. Until they release something else; it hasnt changed. ;)

Now if a local event decides differently thats cool too. Just as long as people are aware before the games start. :)

T.

Inquisitor Malak
08-12-2009, 08:10 PM
Here's how it works guys;

- If you codex entry for force weapons says 'refer to the BRB', you do that. In said BRB, it states that force weapons go through the following steps.
1. Inflict an unsaved wound
2. Make a psychic test (this can be blocked by a successful psychic hood attempt from your opponent).
3. If successful, target suffers 'Instant Death'
4. If the target has the 'Eternal Warrior' USR, or 'Synapse', or some other form of immunity to ID, then the force weapon has no effect. The target simply takes a wound (ie the original wound you inflicted).

- If you play Daemonhunters/Witch-hunters, there is an armoury entry for 'force weapons'. The steps it takes are slightly different;
1. Inflict an unsaved wound
2. Make a psychic test (furthermore, you can't use any other psychic powers when doing this, not even if you have 'Consecrated Scrolls' etc. Like the BRB version, it can be blocked by a psychic hood).
3. If successful, target is 'slain outright', meaning your opponent removes the model from the table as a casualty.


Thats pretty much it. As a foot-note, there are only two DH characters that get much mileage out of their force weapons; Brother-Captain Stern (who can't be allied, and can't be taken below 1,500pts), and the generic GK Grandmaster. Both are over 140pts (in the case of the GM, he has less wargear than Stern to begin with), and both are 0-1 (although you can take both in the same DH army if you want). Also, both are T4 and have no immunity to ID; thus a powerfist, force weapon etc can easily remove them.
Inquisitors (the only other characters that can take force weapons) are T3 S3 weaklings, and thus present almost no threat to enemy characters.