Unusual Power Weapons Discussion

[Sinistermind]

sorry if this was mentioned in the thread so far but, ive been wondering about the unusual power weapons, if say your talking about an older codex(eldar) and say for instance eldrads staff just says ignores armour saves, and doesnt mention power weapon at all, and is not in the FAQ then for all intents does ignore all armour and is NOT ap3 correct???

[SacredChao]

sorry if this was mentioned in the thread so far but, ive been wondering about the unusual power weapons, if say your talking about an older codex(eldar) and say for instance eldrads staff just says ignores armour saves, and doesnt mention power weapon at all, and is not in the FAQ then for all intents does ignore all armour and is NOT ap3 correct???

That is correct, If it says ignore armor saves and was not FAQ'd to change it, armor saves cannot be taken.

Back to Burna's: The rules on "Power Weapon" and Unusual Power Weapon are very vague. But from what I can gather from the BRB and the FAQ's (Specifically where they specify different equipment AP's and errata Power Axes and stuff to just Power Weapon, i think in Space Marine FAQ), The rule goes like this:

1. If the model may take a generic "Power Weapon" you may model it however you wish for what you want.
2. If it is an Special Character, you must remain with what the model has per GW.
3. If the Power Weapon is not called a "Power Weapon" in Wargear, it is an Unusual Power Weapon.

All these apply to force weapons as an extension. Since "Burna" is not "Power Weapon", it is Unusual and thus S:X,AP3.

[Akaiyou]

Akaiyou could have saved himself a lot of time by just saying that. That argument actually kind of makes sense.

The problem with treating it as a lance or ax or whatever is that there is an official model for the burna. You can't model a burna as you please to gain a special advantage. You can't model it as a lance or an ax or whatever, and it isn't currently an ax or lance or whatever, so you can't claim the bonuses for being modeled as a lance or ax or whatever.

Below I've attached a picture of a burna, and a picture of a lance. These are not the same things. So while you could conceivably argue it is a generic power weapon as per Melon-neko's point, you still run into the fact that it is not modeled as a lance, and therefore you don't get to claim the benefits of a lance.

Are you serious dude? Go back to the first page and see how I quoted the entry in the very first sentence!!!...it is YOU guys that kept referencing something else other than what I consistently quoted and focused on. I even agreed that I can't categorize the weapon myself...I kept stating over and over however that it does not fit into the unusual weapon category based on the close combat special rule requirement not being met.

the lance thing is a theory better explained by my post from dakka below.

Repost from Dakka. It applies here aswell
Oh lord you people are a piece of work...let me clarify a few things for you.

1. Posting the same thread in multiple forums is not a call for attention. It is raising an issue/question and wanting to get input from multiple sources not just one potentially biased source.

I could've simply posted this at "The-Waagh" which is a forum comprised of only Ork players yet I went out of my way to inquire the opinions of 'other' players in the community because it is VALUABLE.

Yet so many of you act like morons and belittle this as something evil/bad. Apparently when you have a question on something you ask just 1 person and go with whatever they say...goodbye Critical Thinking who needs ya!

2. Another very idiotic thing that has been brought up over and over is this apparent theory that i'm trying to 'cheat' or abuse the rules by using the Burna as a lance.

This is where I have to agree fullheartedly with Viti's assessment that some of you have a complete utter lack of reading comprehension.

My post was extremely clear...I mean i really went out of my way to state that I am unsure about how the weapon classifies because I myself cannot categorize it.

All I know for sure is that it does NOT fit into the 'unusual weapon' category based on the fact that it does not have a special close combat rule on the power weapon itself. Which is the same thing Viti has also stated but apparently nobody else seems to agree with...

But that aside, my theory that it would most likely be a Lance is just a theory/opinion based on the basic concept that it's a friggin blow man sized torch that would be protruding a pointy flame at the tip. It is COMMON SENSE being used here to formulate the opinion nothing else, and even then I once again state that i am not 100% sure on it.

With that said...these same people argue the following 2 points

A) It cannot be a lance/spear because the nozzle would break on impact.

B) Being a lance/spear would make it significantly worst in CC, the OP must've not thought about this when coming up with his 'cheat' scheme.

To which I respon...again using common sense and everything I previously stated that apparently people could not understand from simple reading...

A) Fine and using the weapon as a 'sword' type unusual power weapon would suddenly make the nozzle unbreakable? Does it require less force to strike holding the burnas a sword than it would as a lance? The argument is ridiculous...obviously the weapon is strong enough to be used effectively in close combat. Regardless of how the Burna Boy chooses to 'attack' with it, the nozzle will always be in the same position and making contact with the enemy unless he flips it around and holds the weapon by the nozzle itself and uses the Burna to 'club' people...but then the power weapon aspect would make no sense.

This is common sense. This is logic. This is your argument being invalidated. The nozzle is clearly strong enough to be used effectively in close combat in the SCIENCE FICTION UNIVERSE OF 40K. Apparently Orks can built sturdy crap...who would've thought.

B) Again what part of opinion/theory escapes you? If you claim that the weapon is inferior by being a lance...this is your best example of showing how I am attempting to cheat the system? "Oh he wants to make the weapon worst! He's clearly trying to cheat!" that is your logic?

Irregardless of wether the weapon is made better or worst I am simply stating my common sense opinion that "Hey the closest thing I can think of for this odd weapon is for it to be used as a spear given how it's held and how I imagine someone fighting with it would have to attack with it"

I could care less if the weapon gave a -3 Strength if it were a lance. The thread is meant to get your opinions on the matter and have a healthy discussion, instead you come about as a lynch mob, without caring to bring facts into your arguments, and making erroneous assumptions about everything I post that you clearly didn't bother reading.

3. I truly do believe this is a legitimate question regarding the burna and more so because of the precedent it sets if we allow any weapon with a special rule to count as an unusual weapon instead of sticking to the RAW that states only 'close combat special rules' apply.

So many and i do mean SOOOOO many people here keep posting 'is it a power weapon? does it have a special rule? UNUSUAL POWER WEAPON! case closed'

This is wrong. Not all special rules are close combat special rules, yet close combat special rules are special rules by nature. Notice there is a distinction...

Same distinction can be made in our every day lives.

All toothpastes are toothpastes, but NOT all toothpastes have "WHITENING".

So if your Dentist prescribes TOOTHPASTE WITH WHITENING to get your teeth up to standard, just going and buying any ol toothpaste wont do you any good.

Will you sue your dentist for your laziness in not reading the label before you grabbed a random toothpaste? "Oh he said toothpaste will make my teeth shiny as pearls"

This is the argument me and Viti are making regarding the UPW rule. It specifies a specific type of special rule....but people are just choosing to ignore what's right there infront of their face for some reason.

Any how can a mod please lock this thread already? It's not getting anyone anywhere I had already submitted this question to the INAT FAQ as I will abide by whatever is ruled on it.

And again you 'witch hunters' out there before you go out of your way to judge someone raising a question, perhaps you could take a moment to leave the hate at the door. And don't assume that anyone asking a question is just trying to 'cheat', it is through asking questions and discussing them with people that reach understanding. Not by blindly replying and taking stuff out of context or mocking irrelevant things (ie: OMG THE OP POSTED THIS IN OTHER FORUMS AND GOT THRASHED! IM SO AWESOME)...Unnecessary.

And yes I was annoyed/pissed at this whole thing enough that I had decided to drop it and believe it should be dropped for the sake of our collective sanity.

[Jwolf]

Simply put since Burnas are not Power Weapons, they cannot be model to be specific types (axes, swords, etc.). So when we get to the point of treating them as Power Weapons, they are unusual.

[Tynskel]

wait, what?
Jwolf, I thought you only speaketh if I have spoketh.

well, uh, uh...

No, Burnas are not 'axes, lances, swords, or pickles'.
Burnas have special rules.

Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time.

[DarkLink]

Are you serious dude? Go back to the first page and see how I quoted the entry in the very first sentence!!!

/shrug/ It got lost somewhere in your tangle of irrelevant tangents. Brevity is the soul of wit. Make your point, and stick to it, so that the point doesn't get lost in the shuffle.

[Tynskel]

/shrug/ It got lost somewhere in your tangle of irrelevant tangents. Brevity is the soul of wit. Make your point, and stick to it, so that the point doesn't get lost in the shuffle.

Why do you think I repeat myself so much!

[Akaiyou]

-facepalm-

[DarkLink]

No, literally, I missed that part while I was trying to figure out what you were even trying to argue by going on about how Run isn't a close combat rule and how blowtorches are basically lances except totally not even remotely similar but yet they kinda are.

I'm not insulting you. I'm saying that you have presented your argument in such an unclear, convoluted manner that I literally don't know what exactly your augment is, other than something about blowtorches and lances.

Melon-neko, on the other hand, presented your entire argument in a few clear and concise sentences. No unrelated tangents about toothpaste, no openly aggressive accusations of witch hunts, just a rules quote and a simple explaination.




And, by the way, posting things like this:

Oh lord you people are a piece of work...let me clarify a few things for you.

... Posting the same thread in multiple forums is not a call for attention... (yeah, it kinda is)

...Yet so many of you act like morons and belittle this as something evil/bad...

..Another very idiotic thing that has been brought up ...

...will not win you any points with the people you're insulting. Not only is it hypocritical, nor conductive to a friendly, reasoned discussion, but it shuts people down. People who would otherwise be perfectly friendly become hostile. It doesn't matter who started it. It costs you nothing to be the bigger man. So, seriously, chill out. What people say on the internet is not that big of a deal.

It's easy to sound aggressive and angry on the internet. Nothing that I've posted is intended to insult you. In general, nothing that I post is intended to be insulting*, even when I'm making fun of someone for not reading the rules or for misusing you're/your or whatever. Tone just doesn't carry well over the internet. I just think your argument was poorly presented.



*There are a few cases where I've used genuine fighting words, but those were situations wherein certain individuals professed certain views that no decent human being should hold. Luckily these are few and far between, and easily solved with the Ignore List feature.