PDA

View Full Version : Torment Blade



Kalandros
27-05-2011, 17:42
Keeper of Secrets

Weapons & Armour:
Claws (Hand Weapon).

Torment Blade

Hand Weapon.


Does this count as Two Hand Weapons to grant the Extra Attack rule or does it not count as Two Hand Weapons?

theunwantedbeing
27-05-2011, 17:55
The keeper of secrets is a monster.
The rule for extra hand weapon is for infantry models, not monsters.

Kalandros
27-05-2011, 18:00
The keeper of secrets is a monster.
The rule for extra hand weapon is for infantry models, not monsters.

Edit: Found it, had only seen page 91's "Models on foot only" which made no reference to troop type, but page 89 does say "infantry model".

Still, page 91 doesn't list any exception to troop type.

Anyway, so at least Heralds of Slaanesh would get the Extra Attack, right?

theunwantedbeing
27-05-2011, 18:17
Yeah the heralds definitely get the extra attack.

The thing about the KoS being a monster so not getting to benefit from having an extra attack seems to just be a blip.

Given that Tomb King collossuses (bone giants) can be given an extra hand weapon which, according to the rules, they cannot benefit from.
So, it's a really aweful argument against letting the KoS get that extra attack (even though since 7th ed he shouldn't be getting it).

EDMM
27-05-2011, 18:21
So Ogres, Dragon Ogres, Shaggoths, Necrolith Colossi/etc. get no benefit from their additional hand weapons/Ironfists?

Kalandros
27-05-2011, 18:50
Given that Tomb King collossuses (bone giants) can be given an extra hand weapon which, according to the rules, they cannot benefit from.
So, it's a really aweful argument against letting the KoS get that extra attack (even though since 7th ed he shouldn't be getting it).

Indeed, so I will play it as it should: +1A.

AMWOOD co
28-05-2011, 01:31
The proper counter arguement is that the reference on p89 is an example while p91 is definative.

p89 is giving examples of special weapons that come in pairs as compared to a model having a spear and a hand weapon.

Dragoon999
28-05-2011, 01:47
Edit: Found it, had only seen page 91's "Models on foot only" which made no reference to troop type, but page 89 does say "infantry model".

Still, page 91 doesn't list any exception to troop type.

Anyway, so at least Heralds of Slaanesh would get the Extra Attack, right?


Yeah the heralds definitely get the extra attack.

The thing about the KoS being a monster so not getting to benefit from having an extra attack seems to just be a blip.

Given that Tomb King collossuses (bone giants) can be given an extra hand weapon which, according to the rules, they cannot benefit from.
So, it's a really aweful argument against letting the KoS get that extra attack (even though since 7th ed he shouldn't be getting it).


Indeed, so I will play it as it should: +1A.

I am looking at the two/additional hand weapon rule, it says models on foot only. Is there somewhere written in 8th that contradicts the fact that anything on foot are ok to benefit from this rule?

I am aware of the (example) under special weapons which shows how a halberd and hand weapon cannot be combined by an infantry model. However the rule itself is quite clear on what can and cannot benefit from the rule.

Lord Inquisitor
28-05-2011, 04:28
I will add my usual disclaimer, this is one of the most obvious RAI vs RAW examples that has never been addressed. There's just no way a 5-point gift was meant to provide an extra attack for a beast like the keeper. The gift is already a bargain for what it does. You could chalk it up as another hideously undercosted item in the daemon book except that many armed monstrosity, also for Slaanesh daemons, is costed at 50 points for +2 attacks. There's just no way it was intended to be an additional hand weapon (or, like every magic item that is a paired weapon, it would actually say so).

It's an Easter egg. I'm sure there are those that will say it's totally intended, why else would it be called a hand weapon or they had loads of time to errata it, etc., but it remains patently obviously not designed that way or it would be costed more in line with Many Armed or would be more explicit.

Now, this doesn't change RAW, nor will I say I've never used this to gain an extra attack on my Keeper, but it should be noted.

Kalandros
28-05-2011, 05:37
Just like many things weren't quite intended with the changes to 8th edition and they didn't errata everything~

I just wish GW would get a clue and just redo everything faster. Its really pathetic for a system to not have a complete rules update when a new edition comes out.

theunwantedbeing
28-05-2011, 09:05
I just wish GW would get a clue and just redo everything faster. Its really pathetic for a system to not have a complete rules update when a new edition comes out.

They're drip feeding us stuff on purpose, so they have things to call an update over the coming months/years. Look at the last Errata as an example, anyone who had a giant got the thump with club attack clarified slightly and that was the entire errata for several armies.

As for it being pathetic....the pathetic bit is that the torment blade was called a hand weapon in the first place, simply because aside from the staff of change, nothing else in the daemon list of items bothered having any mundane properties. Clearly more than one person wrote the rules for that and there was zero communication between the two(or more) people that were involved in that. It's not just the 7th ed Daemon book that is limited to that problem either.....

Morkash
28-05-2011, 09:31
Wait, my Shaggoth does not get an additional attack with his 2 handweapons? I do not have my BRB here, but I honestly did not thought about this before!

Kalandros
28-05-2011, 15:32
Wait, my Shaggoth does not get an additional attack with his 2 handweapons? I do not have my BRB here, but I honestly did not thought about this before!

Like we've been saying, you do. Because they did intend monsters to get it.
The reference to Infantry on page 89 isn't the entire rule - page 91 clearly says Models on Foot. A shaggoth, kipper and bone giant are models on foot - they get +1A when using 2 Hand Weapons.

BEEGfrog
29-05-2011, 04:31
Isn't the torment blade covered by the rule that a magic weapon and a hand weapon do not combine to give an extra attack? (unless specifically granted in the magic weapon's text)

Kalandros
29-05-2011, 04:32
Isn't the torment blade covered by the rule that a magic weapon and a hand weapon do not combine to give an extra attack? (unless specifically granted in the magic weapon's text)

Daemonic Gifts are not magic items.
Torment Blade is a Hand Weapon, with special rules, but not a Magic Weapon like other Magic Items. Its written quite clearly "Hand Weapon. And special rules hereafter."

BEEGfrog
29-05-2011, 05:18
Good old GW and their unintended consequences.

However, doesn't the additional attack rule require an "additional hand weapon" or brace of pistols? With torment blade and a hand weapon you have two hand weapons but not an "additional hand weapon" special weapon.

As the torment blade is a "special" weapon (pg89) you have to use it instead of your normal hand weapon, also since neither the torment blade nor the normal hand weapon is an "additional hand weapon", neither give the extra attack rule; you just have normal hand weapon as a backup (despite there being no method to destroy the torment blade as it is not a magic item!).

Kalandros
29-05-2011, 12:37
Two/Additional Hand Weapons is what the rule says.

Torment Blade is a "Special" Hand Weapon - it follows the rules for Hand Weapons (because it says so in its rules "Hand Weapon." - the same way a magic lance says "Lance." and has other abilities.)

Appreciate the effort at debunking this but so far its still +1A for Heralds and Kippers.

Atrahasis
29-05-2011, 13:46
normal hand weapon is an "additional hand weapon", .
There is no such thing as an "additional hand weapon". "Additional" in this context is an adjective and not part of a compound noun, ie it is used to describe a hand weapon in addition to the hand weapon[s] already owned, and not to describe a special entity which is inherently "additional".

Which of the hand weapons is additional is entirely down to the order the model picks them up; the rules don't require "an additional hand weapon" to gain +1 attack, only that a model has more than one hand weapon and fights with one in each hand (ie the off-hand is not occupied with a shield or other hand-occupying equipment).

(It should be pointed out that the above is copy-pasted from an e-mail I sent to the Direwolf mailing list in 2006, and it is still true today).

Lord Inquisitor
29-05-2011, 15:24
Daemonic Gifts are not magic items.
Torment Blade is a Hand Weapon, with special rules, but not a Magic Weapon like other Magic Items. Its written quite clearly "Hand Weapon. And special rules hereafter."

Actually what the two/additional hand weapons rule says is "an additional hand weapon cannot be used... by a models that has a magical close combat weapon".

I don't think this closes the loophole, but the torment blade is arguably a magical close combat weapon, it is a magical weapon that has a magical effect and inflicts magical damage.

The special close combat weapon thing is interesting. I would have said that a hand weapon with additional special rules is not the same thing as a hand weapon. For example, I've been playing that Ogres with their ogre clubs (hand weapons + special rule) is a special weapon that they can select and use in preference to their ironfists. This is indirectly supported by the FAQ that conforms that bulls with ironfists get to keep their clubs (why rule this way if they could never use them?).

But I would agree, even if a torment blade is a special hand weapon, it is still a hand weapon. Otherwise beastmasters couldn't get an extra attack for their scourges.

Dark Reaper
29-05-2011, 17:01
However, the scourges have been errataed to simply give +1 attack, so it is all very confusing.