Unusual Power Weapons Discussion

[Akaiyou]

Let's get this cleared up once and for all.

RAW -
If a power weapon has its own unique close combat rules, treat it as an AP 3 Melee weapon with the additional rules and characteristics presented in its entry.

Let's not distort the actual definition. Accept it for what it is.

When reading unusual power weapons it is clearly defined to ONLY apply to weapons that have special rules for close combat if it does NOT have any special rules affecting close combat then it does NOT count as 'unusual' and follows the standard rules for power/force weapons. There are many examples of weapons that have extra benefits in close combat that follow this rule.

So this brings me to my next subject.

The Ork Burna is a FLAMER first and foremost with a special rule allowing it to be used as a power weapon. There is no special rules for close combat, there are no additional rules to the power weapon or characteristics as such it is a normal power weapon by RAW.

The debate would reside in 'what type of power weapon does it count as' being that it IS a flamer is what makes it unusual but this again has no bearing on the "Unusual Power Weapons" rule because it clearly states it only affects those with special rules for close combat.

So again what does the Burna count as?

Do we all agree that the RAW definition of unusual power weapons ONLY affects weapons with special close combat rules and not just any weapon that has a special rule as it seems a lot of people seem to be interpreting it.

Given the way the Burna is built I am inclined to call it a Lance type power weapon. Though I can potentially see it being swung around like an axe or sword as well (kind of like a light saber made from an extended beam of hot fire) but it mostly screams lance to me if we assume that it has a pointy fire thing at the tip and it's used to pierce rather than to slash which makes a lot of sense to me.

This would indicate that a unit of Burna Boyz initiating an assault have S5 AP3 weapons on the charge. What do the rest of you think? And again let's stick to the RAW definition enough with the assumptions and misinterpretations, address the rule as written.

[antennafarm]

if it doesn't say 'lance,' and doesn't look in any way like a lance, then it's not a lance.

you would use whatever close combat profile is provided, and if one isn't (don't have my ork codex handy, and am not familiar enough with it), you'd just plain use the Sx,AP3, where x=strength of the model.

[Akaiyou]

if it doesn't say 'lance,' and doesn't look in any way like a lance, then it's not a lance.

you would use whatever close combat profile is provided, and if one isn't (don't have my ork codex handy, and am not familiar enough with it), you'd just plain use the Sx,AP3, where x=strength of the model.

This is not true for several reasons.

"Burnas are ideal for slicing up scrap metal and enemy warriors alike"

What is a burna? It's a friggin giant blow torch. Google the word BLOW TORCH and look at images of what it actually is...I assure you that it can be used as a weapon. I've used blow torches before and they are dangerous and CAN slice/cut right through you like a hot knife through butter.

The FLUFF behind them as well clearly states what it does it slices through metal/enemies. Just like a blow torch would...hell i've even seen blow torches used as a weapon in movies, so a giant blow torch could EASILY be used as a spear to pierce right through enemies or an axe to cleave enemies. It just seems too big/ackward to use as a sword given how blow torches work and the actual model being very long and requiring two hands to wield.

Just because the 'fire' spitting out of it is not physically modeled on the gun it doesnt mean that it's not there.

The RAI/Fluff supports me
The RAW is in 100% support of me in regards to the unusual weapons rule not applying.

And to further support my claim there IS another weapon that is 'similar' not exactly the same but definetly similar in practice, the Eldar Laser Lance. It can be shot and it can be used to pierce through enemies. A burna would be such a type of weapon so there is precedent

The 'Types of Power Weapons' has examples listed, doesn't mean they are the only ones. And a giant blow torch could easily fit into what a lance would be. If you do not believe so go to a shop buy a blow torch and set it to max output then poke something with it and let me know what happens.

Anyone that has actually used a blow torch before knows that they are dangerous and can be easily be used as weapons or cause severe damage to anyone that doesn't handle them carefully. If it can be used to cut through metal it will also CUT through you.

[DarkLink]

The idea that 'blowtorch is obviously the same thing as a spear, or maybe an ax, or something, so obviously the rules indicate that I get X stats' seems like a pretty shaky argument, especially since it's not actually modeled as a sword or an ax or a lance or a maul, no matter how you look at it.

[sangrail777]

The way I've been using my burna boyz since 6th came out is as a power sword. I have no rles to back up the reason why. It just made the most sense to me due to the fact that currently there is no refrence to say it should be classed as anything else. and as far as imagery goes it makes enough since. So to avoid any confusion I just treat it as Sx, AP3.
Works well enough.

[Houghten]

if it doesn't say 'lance,' and doesn't look in any way like a lance, then it's not a lance.

Ah, but it does look like a lance. It's long with a tiny tip's worth of actual harm-causing bit.

---

However, it also looks Unwieldy as all get-out.

[Quaade]

This is not true for several reasons.

The FLUFF behind them as well clearly states what it does it slices through metal/enemies. Just like a blow torch would...hell i've even seen blow torches used as a weapon in movies, so a giant blow torch could EASILY be used as a spear to pierce right through enemies or an axe to cleave enemies. It just seems too big/ackward to use as a sword given how blow torches work and the actual model being very long and requiring two hands to wield.

A spear works because you can put force via momemtum behind it, you cannot put force via momentum behind a flame in order to get it to cut faster/deeper so neither fluff, real life or RAI can in any way justify burnas as having power lances.

[Lucian Kain]

A Burner is a Flamer that can be used as a Power Weapon in close combat.
-------------------------^--------------------Special Rule--------------------------^
then also-

A Burner is a Power Weapon that can be used as a flamer in the shooting phase.
--------------------------------- ^--------------------Special Rule--------------------------^

To me it dosn't matter which way you read the equation the answer is the same.

Strength(x) Ap3 Close combat weapon,the argument is a bit average.

The hottest "flame" known to man is the flame from an Oxy-Accetelene plant at 3600 degrees Celcius,I've used them for 10 years and if you were to stab that at some one it would instantly burn you for sure but you would also block the injectors and put out the flame straight away.I've been burnt with one befor you don't even feel it,but you smell it though lol.

[Bean]

I agree with Lucian on this one.

Also, a blowtorch is nothing at all like a spear. I could maybe--maybe--see an argument for axe, but, frankly, the rules seem pretty clear on this one.

[Akaiyou]

Ah, but it does look like a lance. It's long with a tiny tip's worth of actual harm-causing bit.

---

However, it also looks Unwieldy as all get-out.

What he said ^

How could you not put momentum or force behind a burna?? It's not made from plastic it wont snap in two if you stab the flame bit at someone. Just like a spear ....and look at the way the models hold the weapon, it makes perfect sense that they would hold it in both hands and either stab or try to chop at someone considering it's length makes sense for it to be unwieldy' and have pretty good reach....like a spear or axe.

Just saying it does make sense.

What comes first is important.

Why?

The 6th ed rulebook is redefining all weapons in the game and classifying everything, we all agree on this right?
Burna is classified as a flamer in the rulebook. Thus, Burna is a flamer with a special rule that allows it to be used as a normal power weapon (since it has no further rules to it), with the exception being that you cannot use it as both in the same turn.

This does NOT make it a UPW it doesn't fit the definition. Reading it the other way around...

A power weapon with a special rule that allows you to use it as a flamer...but oh wait...then it's NOT a power weapon in the first place if u chose to use ti as a flamer.

You run into a chicken and the egg argument there, it cannot be a power weapon to start with if it is shot as a flamer. So it's literally NOT a power weapon until you decide what you want to do in the shooting phase. In which case...

A close combat weapon with a special rule that allows you to use it as a power weapon if not used as a flamer. Would be a proper way of putting it...but this also misses the mark for the same reason as the first argument.

The deciding factor of wether or not it is a unusual power weapon is the close combat rule. But you are trying to tell me that this close combat rule actually works in the shooting phase. If shooting is what decides it then how is it a close combat rule?? I've never seen a close combat rule that activates in the shooting phase before.

Honestly i'm not even concerned about the Burnas, i'm just using it as an example to dispute this claim that a weapon with ANY special rule counts as UNUSUAL. Because that rule to me looks very clear that it only applies if there's a close combat rule applying if there isn't then it does not apply period.