PDA

View Full Version : Magic hand weapon + shield???



][nquist0r
23-06-2008, 23:06
So do you get the +1 parry bonus with a magic hand weapon and shield?

Doctor Know
23-06-2008, 23:47
[nquist0r;2723973']So do you get the +1 parry bonus with a magic hand weapon and shield?

No; see the "Magic Weapon" definition under "Types of Magic Item" (page 121 BfSP book).

"Magic weapons always ignore any rules that apply to an ordinary weapon of the same type unless otherwise specified on the description of the weapon."

Gazak Blacktoof
23-06-2008, 23:51
Yes. However the weapon must specifically state within its rules that it is in fact a hand weapon.

For example Tomb Guard have magic hand weapons and so gain the parry bonus because they also have shields.

Single handed magic items must specify they are hand weapons to gain the bonus and I'm not sure if there are any unique magic hand weapons.

Doctor Know
24-06-2008, 00:48
Yes. However the weapon must specifically state within its rules that it is in fact a hand weapon.

For example Tomb Guard have magic hand weapons and so gain the parry bonus because they also have shields.

Single handed magic items must specify they are hand weapons to gain the bonus and I'm not sure if there are any unique magic hand weapons.

That's somewhat misleading; Tomb Guard's Tomb Blades (as well as the Wight Blade special rule of Wight Kings, Black Knights and Grave Guards) specify that the weapons are actually "normal weapons" which make magical attacks but all "normal rules for that weapon still apply". This would be similar to weapons making magical attacks due to the Banner of Hellfire (Vampire Counts).

][nquist0r
24-06-2008, 00:59
Thats odd... I assumed that single handed weapons were by default hand weapons. I was in an epic arguement a while ago about the dreadlance whereas the Vampire players assured me that after the character is dismounted the lance becomes "just a magic hand weapon..." Hmmm

Doctor Know
24-06-2008, 01:43
[nquist0r;2724177']Thats odd... I assumed that single handed weapons were by default hand weapons. I was in an epic arguement a while ago about the dreadlance whereas the Vampire players assured me that after the character is dismounted the lance becomes "just a magic hand weapon..." Hmmm

Hmmm indeed. A general magic weapon is simply a "magic weapon", without characteristics of a hand weapon, great weapon or what-not. The Dreadlance, however, is explicitly a "lance", and thus subject to the rules of lances given on page 56. One of which is "Mounted Only".

][nquist0r
24-06-2008, 02:50
lol you have no idea what you have just done...

The Red Scourge
24-06-2008, 04:31
This was just meaningless babble proved wrong by me checking my BRB.

Sorry for having you read such a sorry excuse for a post.

Now I shall go punish myself by poking myself with cuddly teddy bears :P

][nquist0r
24-06-2008, 05:42
Thats cause they cant be used on foot... D=

Lord of Skulls
24-06-2008, 06:55
[nquist0r;2724588']Thats cause they cant be used on foot... D=
That's a bit of an assumption, isn't it? The book only shows that using a normal lance while on foot does not give you any bonuses, it does not say that it cannot be used while on foot...

Condottiere
24-06-2008, 07:33
That's a bit of an assumption, isn't it? The book only shows that using a normal lance while on foot does not give you any bonuses, it does not say that it cannot be used while on foot...You'd think with their pointy end and length, they'd qualify as spears.:)

Dark_Mage99
24-06-2008, 07:49
You can use a magical shield and mundane weapon for the +1 bonus, but not a magical weapon and mundane or magical shield (FAQ, GW website.)

Weapons can make magical attacks without being magical weapons. Magic weapons are magic items, and can be destroyed by spells such as Vauls Unmaking; whilst a Wight Blade is a mundane weapon that just happens to cause magical attacks (for the purpose of fighting ethereals, etc) - but cannot be destroyed by such spells, because it's not a magic weapon.

Braad
24-06-2008, 07:59
@ Dark_Mage
Yes, mostly, indeed. But that's mainly because they say that a magic weapon follows the rules given in its description. If its own rules say "hand weapon" it gains the parry bonus since they are part of the rules for hand weapon. But there are only a very limited amount (if any) of magic weapons that have the "hand weapon" rule. I do know a few that say "spear" though, so it provides a +1S bonus when used while mounted, next to the bonus described in the rest of the magic weapons rules.

---EDIT---

I look it up in the errata, and it says "...because the magical weapon loses the normal rules for hand weapons", but by stating them to be "hand weapons" in the magic weapons own rules, they give them these rules back.

WLBjork
24-06-2008, 08:03
The only one I am aware of is the Sword of The Quest, which can be used as a hand weapon.

Dark_Mage99
24-06-2008, 08:13
Ah yes, Braad you're right. I managed to overlook the possibility of a magical weapon being a magical hand weapon.. I guess because I haven't come across one before. Even though it's the title of the thread... I'm a fool!

The Red Scourge
25-06-2008, 05:36
That's a bit of an assumption, isn't it? The book only shows that using a normal lance while on foot does not give you any bonuses, it does not say that it cannot be used while on foot...

Thats not true. The BRB doesn't say that lances have no bonuses on foot. It completely leaves them without an "on foot" rule – unlike great weapons and spears. In fact looking at page 56 i see the words "(MOUNTED ONLY)" written in big, bold, and friendly capital letters next to the lances entry, and underneath it says something about being "used exclusively by mounted warriors".

In fact page 56 really sums it all up if you need rules for weapons. You should have a look at it sometime :angel:

WLBjork
25-06-2008, 08:29
So should you Red Scourge ;)

If a character has a magic melee weapon he has to use it.

So, a character with the Dreadlance must use it, even if they are no longer mounted (e.g monster mount killed).

The only way to ratify this is if a lance can be used on foot, offering no benefits whatsoever.

Eternus
25-06-2008, 08:39
The descriptions of the various magical lances in the Bretonninan list state MOUNTED CHARACTER ONLY - But does this mean they can only be taken by a mounted character, or only used by a mounted character? I don't think it is actually specified, but my interpretation would be that they can be used on foot, as the lance, if magical, MUST be used by the character, even in subsequent rounds when he gains no charge associated benefits.

It doesn't sound quite right, but I can imagine a Knight, unhorsed (or unpegasused or whatever) standing his ground waving a magic lace at the enemy. Strange, but believable.

Gazak Blacktoof
25-06-2008, 12:19
The only way to ratify this is if a lance can be used on foot, offering no benefits whatsoever.

Not the only way.

Two alternatives are that they just can't use the lance (my favourite) or they can't attack at all as they have to use a weapon they can't use.

Specifics should take precedence over generalities as far as I'm concerned. The army books and rule book do it all the time, I don't see why this shouldn't be one of those cases.

Clearly the general rule in this case is that you always have to use a magic weapon. The specific rule for lances is they are "MOUNTED ONLY".

This is one of those contentious issues that'll go round and round so I wont say any more on it in this thread as its off topic.

The Red Scourge
25-06-2008, 12:37
So should you Red Scourge ;)

If a character has a magic melee weapon he has to use it.

So, a character with the Dreadlance must use it, even if they are no longer mounted (e.g monster mount killed).

The only way to ratify this is if a lance can be used on foot, offering no benefits whatsoever.

Oh no. The only way to ratify this is catch 22, where you have the vampire looking disappointed at his dead dragon and ûberlance of doom and then decides to use harsh language in hope of scaring the enemy away, as he is now forced to use a weapon he can't use.

In order to keep the game running and every body happy, any sane person will allow the vampire (or anyone else with a magic lance) to draw his sword (e.g. normal hand weapon) and start bashing heads – just like you aren't forced into smacking people over the head with your magic bow.

BTW: Page 56 says nothing about magical weapons. You got to go to the magic section to read some tidbits about that topic WLBjork :p

Malorian
25-06-2008, 14:22
Best solution to this? Put him on a barded nightmare and avoid this whole silly debate...

(Lords with big lances on even bigger mounts just get shot up anyway...)

Templar_Victorious
27-06-2008, 10:55
I usually avoid this by giving my char a magic weapon with +2 Str. (Still give him shield of he's getting shot at) Oh, and giving him a barded warhorse. But then again I play Empire. If he is going into combat, he's gonna be a Captain or a Grand Master. Never liked the limitations of General of the Empire... either you give him a runefang and no protection or you give up the best weapon your lord can have and grab some less pointconsuming items.
Why aren't other armies punished by such unattendance and poorly thought out new edition pestilence? They didn't even bother remove playtesting rule names in the entries.

vantage360
25-07-2008, 20:49
how do you equip a magic weapon?

Lord Dan
25-07-2008, 20:59
Lances cannot be used on foot, because there are no rules specifically stating that they can. Using the logic "It doesn't say they can't be used on foot" is terribly flawed, because I could equally say: "My Tyrant is going to throw his great weapon and simply treat it as a thrown weapon." After all, it doesn't say he can't.

Magical hand weapons cannot use the parry combination with shields.

reign beaux
27-07-2008, 03:31
what about the dagger of hotek it says that it may be combined with other hand weapons for extra attacks does that mean it would give the parrying bonus????

WLBjork
27-07-2008, 08:06
No.

It specifies extra attack. It does not specify extra bonus for carrying a shield, nor does it say it counts as a hand weapon.

smileyface
27-07-2008, 11:58
how do you equip a magic weapon?

Press B to open the item menu. Press up and/or down to get to the weapons ring, and then left and/or right to get to the weapon you want, before selecting with A. Use L/R again to highlight the character you need to equip (only one character will appear in colour, the others will be greyed out), and press A again. Press B at any time to cancel.

... or is that the wrong system? :angel:

To be serious for a second, there's no equipping necessary. When choosing your army you may buy magic weapons for characters subject to the restrictions in the rulebook and army book and your points limit. If you buy them a weapon then they must use it when they are involved in whatever kind of combat is appropriate for the weapon. You don't need to go through an "equip" phase or anything.

MildlyAbrasive
28-07-2008, 20:16
Hmm... in regard to the subject, what of the magical beastmaster's scourge? This is the weapon that is always strength 5 and armor piercing. The actual name of the weapon eludes me and I don't have the book with me. However, if I correctly recall, in the rules it's categorized as a beastmaster's scourge and I believe the beastmaster's scourge rules categorize it as a hand weapon. So then, does the magical version qualify as a hand weapon? Assuming my recollection is accurate anyways...

Gazak Blacktoof
28-07-2008, 21:56
Beastmaster's Scourge Xpts

Fluff Text.

Hand Weapon. Remaining Rules.

++++++++++++++++++

If the magic weapon entry is along those lines then yes.

The rule hand weapon must be included within the rules text.

Nurgling Chieftain
28-07-2008, 22:09
Gazak, the magical scourge counts as a normal scourge, which in turn can be used as a hand weapon and combined with another hand weapon. So, the magical item "inherits" hand weapon status indirectly. Which is kind of weird, but I think it still works.

Gazak Blacktoof
28-07-2008, 22:22
Yeah sounds fine to me. If a scourge can be used as a hand weapon and it says it counts as a scourge it should work.

Carrus Thrace
30-07-2008, 06:09
So does this mean all runic dwarf weapons benefit from the parry rule?

I'm pretty sure that it says that your weapon counts as a magic hand weapon with whatever runes you put on it (with the exception of the Kragg the Grimm one) I don't have my army book with me at the moment but I believe that's what it says.

The Red Scourge
30-07-2008, 07:04
It is very simple really.

If you use a hand weapon and shield, you get the hand weapon and shield bonus.

If you use a magical weapon, you get the magical weapon bonus (which will be very individual).

If your magical weapon has the hand weapon/lance/spear/flail/pistol rules listed under their rules, you get those bonuses too.

Nurgling Chieftain
30-07-2008, 07:36
So does this mean all runic dwarf weapons benefit from the parry rule?

I'm pretty sure that it says that your weapon counts as a magic hand weapon with whatever runes you put on it (with the exception of the Kragg the Grimm one) I don't have my army book with me at the moment but I believe that's what it says.Actually, it states the opposite: the weapon loses any normal rules it may otherwise possess when it becomes a runic weapon. The exception you noted allows the weapon to still be a great weapon, but won't allow you to take a runic hand weapon.

Palatine Katinka
30-07-2008, 08:48
The Dagger of Hotek is a hand weapon. Dark Elf book p101 "The Dagger of Hotek is an additional hand weapon."

The magic scourge is the Whip of Agony.

DeathlessDraich
30-07-2008, 09:45
Lances cannot be used on foot, because there are no rules specifically stating that they can. Using the logic "It doesn't say they can't be used on foot" is terribly flawed, because I could equally say: "My Tyrant is going to throw his great weapon and simply treat it as a thrown weapon." After all, it doesn't say he can't.

Magical hand weapons cannot use the parry combination with shields.

1) There are *no* rules on pg 56 that *specifically* state that some weapons cannot be used [or must be used] when mounted or on foot.
e.g. Pistols, Flails' etc rules - do not state they must be used excusively on foot or that they cannot be used when mounted.

Using this 'absence of a stated rule' argument here renders these weapon rules unplayable.


2) The [mistaken] notion that lances are allowed only on mounted models comes from this:

"Spears (Mounted only) ".

If the words in brackets are to be construed as a restriction to Mounted models only, then using the same reasoning for Pistols

"Pistols (Hand to Hand)"

- Only Hand to Hand models may use Pistols - an absurdity!
or does that mean only models holding hands?!!:p

Using the HE army book:
It is clearly legal to equip a Prince or Noble with a lance *without* mounting him. - this leads to another controversial idea which I won't mention.

A lance on an unmounted model simply does nothing.



how do you equip a magic weapon?

Hello and welcome. Don't know which post you were referring to but it made me laugh.


So does this mean all runic dwarf weapons benefit from the parry rule?

I'm pretty sure that it says that your weapon counts as a magic hand weapon with whatever runes you put on it (with the exception of the Kragg the Grimm one) I don't have my army book with me at the moment but I believe that's what it says.

Yes, the Runic rules do state runic weapons are the same as magic weapons.


[nquist0r;2723973']So do you get the +1 parry bonus with a magic hand weapon and shield?

No, the rules forbid this regardless of the mundane equivalent of the magic weapon. - pg 121

The only way the HW and shield bonus will be granted is *after* the magic weapon's conversion to a HW via Law of Gold etc.

Atrahasis
30-07-2008, 10:06
No, the rules forbid this regardless of the mundane equivalent of the magic weapon. - pg 121

The only way the HW and shield bonus will be granted is *after* the magic weapon's conversion to a HW via Law of Gold etc.

If you have a magic hand weapon, then you'll get the bonus. There are very few magic hand weapons but the new Dark Elf book means there are more than there used to be.

Gazak Blacktoof
30-07-2008, 10:25
2) The [mistaken] notion that lances are allowed only on mounted models comes from this:

"Spears (Mounted only) ".

If the words in brackets are to be construed as a restriction to Mounted models only, then using the same reasoning for Pistols

"Pistols (Hand to Hand)"

- Only Hand to Hand models may use Pistols - an absurdity!
or does that mean only models holding hands?!!:p


I think you mean, "LANCES (MOUNTED ONLY)".



Anyway, my gaming group and I believe it is you that is mistaken.

Clearly the pistol rules under the heading "PISTOL (HAND-TO-HAND)" are when it is used in hand to hand combat, it has separate rules for ranged combat.

If you read the rules in a sensible manner and treat the parenthesis as indicating situations under which those weapon rules are applied you'll find the rules make sense and you don't have to resort to using smilies in an attempt to denigrate the opposing view.

EDIT: I agree with Atrahasis' post above.

DeathlessDraich
30-07-2008, 10:53
Yes, that is the only plausible and broadly accepted interpretation although IIRC an army specific FAQ also supported it?
Using phrases like HW, GW and even lance, in magic weapons' rules, is a poor shortcut however as it is incompatible with pg 121.
Such magic weapons should instead clearly state:
allows HW and shield bonus, +2S or +2S when mounted and charging.

But I'm sure I've mentioned this in a previous thread!:p

Atrahasis
30-07-2008, 11:24
Using phrases like HW, GW and even lance, in magic weapons' rules, is a poor shortcut however as it is incompatible with pg 121.No, it isn't, as p121 says that some weapons specify otherwise. Saying "Hand Weapon" in the description of the item is specifying otherwise.

Gazak Blacktoof
30-07-2008, 12:40
Again I agree with Atrahasis.

Its also important (as you already pointed out DD) in that certain effects reduce a weapon to being a mundane version. A weapon that doesn't state is a great weapon, hand weapon, lance, etc doesn't have a type when it becomes mundane so the character wil sensibly revert to using their in-built hand weapon (choppa if they're an orc, etc) which provides some bonus whilst a weapon of no type gives no bonuses.

DeathlessDraich
30-07-2008, 18:15
No, it isn't, as p121 says that some weapons specify otherwise. Saying "Hand Weapon" in the description of the item is specifying otherwise.

Well, we're going over the same issue, yet again.


The rules' statement is

"magic weapons always ignore rules that apply to an ordinary weapon of the same type unless otherwise specified in the description of the weapon"


This phrase:
"always ignore rules that apply to an ordinary weapon of the same type" is quite obvious to me.

E.g. mundane weapon, say Great Weapon - has a rule of "+2S" - this is ignored if a magic weapon "type" is also a GWeapon.

I fail to see a different interpretation.


Next phrase:
"unless otherwise specified in the description of the weapon [magic]"



Again this clearly means that the magic weapon will adopt the mundane [equivalent] weapon's *rules/abilities* *only* if the *magic weapons' rules specifically say so*.

This is done in the HE book but unfortunately not in some of the others

e.g. [I]"Star Lance - The weapon follows the rules for lances".

Very clearly worded from a good rules' writer cognizant with the BRB rules. The Star Lance *will* have +2S when charging and mounted.

Same thing in Ogre kingdoms
- Siege Breaker, Tenderiser - " follows the rules for GWeapons"

Bothe of these magic weapons therefore clearly have +2S, striking last etc.

However there are other magic weapons which do *not* phrase their rules accurately. They simply state - Hand weapon, Spear etc.

e.g. The notorious Sword of Quest - "may be used as either HW or GW",
Pikstikka -"Spear" etc etc

In this case, it would be only fair to "assume" that a designation of merely HW, Spear or GW really means "they follow all the rules for HW, Spear or GW".

The opposing assumption would be grossly unfair.


Atrahasis - The last time we discussed this, I believe you adopted this interpretation as well?

Gazak Blacktoof
30-07-2008, 21:24
In this case, it would be only fair to "assume" that a designation of merely HW, Spear or GW really means "they follow all the rules for HW, Spear or GW".


You could have just said "I agree".

DeathlessDraich
31-07-2008, 09:07
No, I don't agree that a magic hand weapon and a mundane shield *definitely* benefits from HW and shield.

The FAQ specifically states it does not.

However, as I have mentioned above it depends on the specific rules of the magic weapon and *assumptions* have to be made so that there is consistency when the [poorly worded] rules of *some* magic weapons are considered. - refer to my last post.

Atrahasis
31-07-2008, 09:36
No, I don't agree that a magic hand weapon and a mundane shield *definitely* benefits from HW and shield.

A magic weapon that is a hand weapon will benefit from the bonus.


The FAQ specifically states it does not.The FAQ does not deal with magical hand weapons, only with magical weapons that have "lost the normal rules for hand weapons", which by definition are not magical hand weapons.

DeathlessDraich
31-07-2008, 09:49
Misquote.
The FAQ uses the phrase magic weapons i.e. *all MW* and *not* specific magic weapons and certainly not as you have written "magic weapons that have lost the normal rules for hand weapons".

But the above is still *not* the crux of my view:

which is mainly

in the latter half of my previous post which you have omitted.

Da GoBBo
31-07-2008, 11:16
No, I don't agree that a magic hand weapon and a mundane shield *definitely* benefits from HW and shield.

Yes you do agree on that by definition of the phrase. The definition "magic handweapon" is just a shortcut for saying "this is a magic weapon that also follows all the rules for handweapons because the rules for this magic item says it counts as handweapon" and thus, like you allready pointed out yourself, a weapon like this combined with a shield gives you the HW-shield bonus. If this is not what you mean to say when using the term magic handweapon, don't use it.


In this case, it would be only fair to "assume" that a designation of merely HW, Spear or GW really means "they follow all the rules for HW, Spear or GW".

Indeed, another shortcut.


Using the HE army book:
It is clearly legal to equip a Prince or Noble with a lance *without* mounting him. - this leads to another controversial idea which I won't mention.

A lance on an unmounted model simply does nothing.

How did you jump to a conclusion like this? Even HE follow the rules in BRB, which state lances are mounted only items. There's a lot of ways this can be written. GW chose the shortest (as with the rules above) but the meaning should be clear for everyone even though it gives room for ruleslawyering. GW leaves this space cause the book is thick enough as it is.
I don't see how a character on foot can be equiped with a lance, I don't see how a character on foot can use one if he happened to have on anyway. Like you said: A lance on an unmounted model simply does nothing. Just like a bow does nothing in CC. Therefore, even while a character on foot has a magic lance, he is not obliged to use it, beacuse he can't.

Gazak Blacktoof
31-07-2008, 13:24
in the latter half of my previous post which you have omitted.

That would be the part where you appeared to be agreeing, but actually weren't?

Going back to the OP's question (below) would your answer be "yes" or "no"?


[nquist0r;2723973']So do you get the +1 parry bonus with a magic hand weapon and shield?