Iron Clad and Rules Lwayers

[Bung]

Yesterday i met a Rules Lawyer with an intersting point regarding to the Iron Clad Dread and the option to replace the hamer with the chainfist.
For all, im german so we use the german rules set and codex.

The problem is if u get the Iron Clad the chainfist, the chainfist is not stated as a dreadnaught close combat weapon.
Now here ist the rules lawyer, after it isnt stated as a dccw it works like a normal chainfist stadet in codex SM so the Iron Clad strikes with Initive 1 and loses one of his attacks, cause the rulebook states that only dccw get a bonus attack for the dread.

For myself it doesnt make any sense why why this chainfist shouldnt be a dccw but there are such who striktly go after rules as written.

Someone got the same problem and a solution without hitting those rules lawyers with a bat directly between the eyes or some text passages that may help?

[wittdooley]

Sweet Christmas... don't play with that guy. It's fairly obvious that a chainfist is a CCW. Heaven forbid common sense prevail on an issue such as this.

[N0rdicNinja]

I'd give it to yah, but just to forewarn yah, a lot of people on this forum are RAW only and would probably pull the same.

[Aldramelech]

Ok. Page 103 Space Marine Dex (Vehicle/Dread weapons) makes no mention of chain fists at all.
Page 65 Space Marine Codex (Dreadnoughts) makes no mention either.
Page 73 the main rules. Dreadnought Close Combat Weapons Walkers are often armed with huge close combat weapons - hammers, wrecking balls, claws etc. Now you could argue that chain fist DCCW's are part of the etc, which is RAI as far as I can tell. However the only rules that apply to chain fists are the ones on page 64 of the SM codex (Terminators).

So its the old RAW vs RAI again I'm afraid.

For what its worth I agree with Wittdooley on this.

[Old_Paladin]

That rules lawyer is partialy right.
A chainfist isn't a DCCW; why? Because each have seperate weapon entries in the rule book.

DCCW: doubles the walkers strength and is a powerweapon.
-if you look up the powerweapon rules: they ignore armour saves (and fight at init.)
Chainfist: is a powerfist, that rolls 2d6+S for armour pen.
-look up the powerfist, you also have to use those rules: strikes at init 1.
The rulebook says that a chainfist IS a powerfist; you arn't going to be able to find any rules that say otherwise.


The dreadnought shouldn't lose an attack though, it still has a type of close combat weapon (the arm wasn't replaced with a ranged weapon or destroyed); the dread isn't forced to try and step on people with its foot.

[MarshalAdamar]

Does the Iron clad rule specify that you REPLACE the DNCCW with a chain fist? OR that you add a chain fist to the DNCCW.

I guess if you wanted to rules lawyer yourself if it doesn't say that the chain fist replaces the dnccw then it’s in addition to not instead of.

[Bung]

In german dex it says it replaces the things hammer with a chainfist, but the hammer is stated as dccw.

Problem is the Box on Page 73 it stats that a Dreadnaught gets only another Attack if armes with dccw.
After the Iron Clad is not armed with a secound dccw he loses one attack.

My Problem is if u use that chanfist with Ini 4 u dont get a Bonus, the second dice for armourpenetration only affects Land Raider, after all close combat with vehicles the Dread hits rear armor which is 10 with some exceptions (Land Raider, some Russ variants).

The only real bunos is u can really wreak some Dreads with lower initative aka Ork Dreads and Björn of the Space Wolves.

Sure after rules as written those ppl are correct but that just make me feel to bring Mr Bat to some games.

[Old_Paladin]

I don't see why people are confussed.
Each weapon has totally seperate weapon entries.

Each is different, and that means you have to make a choice. Do you want to attack quicker and use the DCCW/seismic hammer; or do you want to attack slower and cleave through heavy armour (like dreads, raiders and buildings).


In regards to the number of attacks: in the english rulebook pg. 73; it talks about the rules of a DCCW, that the Bonus of a DCCW is lost (with mounted weapons) when it's destroyed, but gains attacks for each close combat weapon (at this point it stops using the term dreadnought weapon). The chainfist is still a close combat weapon and thus grants attacks for a dreadnought.

[DarkLink]

I don't see why people are confussed.
Each weapon has totally seperate weapon entries.

Each is different, and that means you have to make a choice. Do you want to attack quicker and use the DCCW/seismic hammer; or do you want to attack slower and cleave through heavy armour (like dreads, raiders and buildings).


In regards to the number of attacks: in the english rulebook pg. 73; it talks about the rules of a DCCW, that the Bonus of a DCCW is lost (with mounted weapons) when it's destroyed, but gains attacks for each close combat weapon (at this point it stops using the term dreadnought weapon). The chainfist is still a close combat weapon and thus grants attacks for a dreadnought.

I'd have to agree with this, by RAW. You still get +1 A, but only strike at I 1. Technically. But just like how I don't use PotMS after using smoke (there was a thread about this not too long ago), I'd be willing to let my opponent hit at I4.

[mstingray]

i think it just means it is a dreadnought close combat weapon with the extra D6 penetration roll, because surely a huge dreadnought would have enough power to swing one around. Thats how I would treat it (and I'm usually RAW)