PDA

View Full Version : Magic Blades



DeathlessDraich
30-04-2007, 10:16
More of an opinion check than an actual rules question:D

Pg 121 "Magic Weapons always ignore any rules that apply to an ordinary weapon of the same type unless otherwise specified"

Q1 Isn't a blade part of a weapon and not a weapon in itself? A Dictionary defines a 'blade' as "cutting edge of a knife etc".

Q2. A Great Weapon, Halberd, sword and knife have blades. Therefore a magical blade replaces the blade of the weapon that the character is equipped.
The rule above pertains to the magic weapon and not part of it. The words, "of the same type" are also important because blade is not listed as a weapon.
How can the rule above now be accurately applied to a weapon whose blade has been replaced with a magical blade?

I know most players will simply equate blade with sword but what happens if a newbie claims that his Great Weapon's blade has been replaced with a magical blade?

Thank you for all opinions.

Bloodknight
30-04-2007, 10:38
In which case would this apply?
I am not sure if I understand your question, but the fact that the Dwarfs have a rune which allows their GW to retain the GW rules if other runes are inscribed on it lets me think that every mundane weapon loses all rules unless otherwise noted. Also, is it not so that magic weapons can take all forms? For example, a sword of armour ignoring could also be a mace of armour ignoring?

Atrahasis
30-04-2007, 10:52
I too am at a loss as to your point, sine the rule you quote doesn't even use the word blade.

Avian
30-04-2007, 10:52
but what happens if a newbie claims that his Great Weapon's blade has been replaced with a magical blade?
About the same as would happen should he claim that the Warhammer gods had bumped the stats of all his models up to 10, I'd think. You can claim anything you like, but if it has no basis in the rules, then people tend to (at best) ignore it.

eldrak
30-04-2007, 10:55
No idea what you are getting at. Where are you getting blade from?

Yes Bloodknight, at least that was stated in the old editions.

T10
30-04-2007, 11:16
More of an opinion check than an actual rules question:D

(...)

Thank you for all opinions.

I've not noticed other terms than "weapons" as far as magical items are concerned. Where does this "blade" figure in to it? Have you, perhaps, misunderstood your question?

I must first find the source of your confusion before crushinating it with logickings!

-T10

Griefbringer
30-04-2007, 11:18
Q2. A Great Weapon, Halberd, sword and knife have blades. Therefore a magical blade replaces the blade of the weapon that the character is equipped.
The rule above pertains to the magic weapon and not part of it. The words, "of the same type" are also important because blade is not listed as a weapon.
How can the rule above now be accurately applied to a weapon whose blade has been replaced with a magical blade?


I think the issue is simple: magical weapons do not contain individual parts. Thus you cannot opt to only use part of the magical weapon. Similarly, there are no magical upgrade parts that can be screwed on to mundane weapons (like a spare blade to a hobby knife).

If a player claims that because his weapon is called "Blade of Awesome Killyness" instead of "Sword of Awesome Killyness" that it comes with just a blade without any handle attached, then I would freely allow him to model his model waving just the plain blade without any handle attached. Equally well, I would also allow the person to model that weapon as an axe, hammer, spear, giant carrot or a pink pom-pom - the names of the magic weapons are there for fluffiness.

[And for people wondering where DD got the original idea, see for example Skaven book: it has weapons like Fellblade, Weeping Balde and Desolate Blade.]

Vattendroppe
30-04-2007, 12:29
I, too, see no part in the quote, nor can I come to no rememberance, where the word "blade" is of use amongst the magic weapon rules.

Onisuzume
30-04-2007, 13:22
I can think up a few lizardmen magic weapons that have "blade" in the name.(4 to be precise, not counting common magic items)
Which I prefer a lot more than "sword" or "axe" or "hammer", since it allows a lot more freedom when representing said magic weapon. So I could model a skink to have 10 foot tall axe, without it getting a strength bonus for being a "great weapon".

Though in the BRB, there's no mention of a "magic blade" or something similiar. (unless you count the "biting blade")

Atrahasis
30-04-2007, 13:40
Names of magic items are completely irrelevant to their function. The Fellblade, for example, could be called "Carrot of Immolation" and it would still work in exactly the same way.

T10
30-04-2007, 13:59
Duh! The Flaming Carrot (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flaming_Carrot) is a character, not an item!

-T10

Masque
30-04-2007, 15:42
Names of magic items are completely irrelevant to their function. The Fellblade, for example, could be called "Carrot of Immolation" and it would still work in exactly the same way.

This isn't exactly true. The Lore of Light spell Pha's Illumination makes magic weapons 'count as mundane weapons of the same type', which I believe would cause a magic lance, for example, to count as a regular lance.

Vattendroppe
30-04-2007, 15:51
This isn't exactly true. The Lore of Light spell Pha's Illumination makes magic weapons 'count as mundane weapons of the same type', which I believe would cause a magic lance, for example, to count as a regular lance.

On the other hand I think that the rules always sais what type of weapon the magic weapon is other than if it's a HW (then it sais nothing). Isn't that so?

I just checked it up, and you're right, it doesn't say other than in the name.

Griefbringer
30-04-2007, 16:26
The Fellblade, for example, could be called "Carrot of Immolation" and it would still work in exactly the same way.

And lots of people would try to claim that it is a flaming attack, since it has the word "immolation" in the name. :evilgrin:

Atrahasis
30-04-2007, 16:40
This isn't exactly true. The Lore of Light spell Pha's Illumination makes magic weapons 'count as mundane weapons of the same type', which I believe would cause a magic lance, for example, to count as a regular lance.

Only if the magic lance said it was a lance in its description (and I believe they all do).

Vattendroppe
30-04-2007, 16:46
Only if the magic lance said it was a lance in its description (and I believe they all do).

I checked that up with the bret armybook and it sais nowhere in any of the lances (or, what i presume is lances due to the word lance being present in their name). Though it sais in all that they gives a 2+ strength on the charge if mounted.

lparigi34
30-04-2007, 17:36
Do they change rule designers frequently? It seems to be the usual case of a succesful corporation that keeps rotating staff frequently and you have to deal with people that is always learning everything again. Apologies for the rant!

It is that I just checked the Brets book and there it is, in the attempt to make things clearer, specifying again the mundane rule for the weapon instead of just saying it is a mundane wepon of the type + a magic bonus (it is my oppinion that this is the attempt), giving room to the confusion of what mundane rules apply to such weapon if they lose the magic status to somethign like Pha's Illumination.

They already should already have had developed guidelines as for how to write rules for magic items, but no. maybe something like:

"Carrots of Inmolation" ................. 30 Pts
(Heroes Only)
Roten carrots tied together, breathing poisonous gases that imbues the mind of those who breath it. No important character would dare to carry such a lesser abomination. [Fluff part]
Not Mundane. [Mundane Part, confers all the normal attributes of the mundane weapon in case the magic status is lost, if it is no weapon at all it should say "Not Mundane", or if it becomes a simple hand weapon it should say "Hand Waepon"].
S2, any wounded unit/character does not suffer the wound but instead suffers from stupidity for the rest of the battle. If the character/unit are already Stupid for any reason, including previously Carrot effects, then it will suffer a wound with no possible salvation (not even Ward Saves), and still remain Stupid. [Magic Part, section that applies while the waepon is magical, it overrides the the mundane characteristics of the weapon unless the opposite is specified. Additonal explanation for effects or interaction with other items or effects may be given here.

ashc
30-04-2007, 18:37
Trouble is, some items are declared as what their mundane weapon type is or whether it is meant to be treated as such, and others don't.

Case in point: Wood Elf book, The Dawnspear clearly states in its rules 'counts as a spear' suggesting it gains all benefits/drawbacks of spears. In addition i would imagine if you 'turned off' the dawnspear it should count as a mundane spear.

Unfortunately next case in point directly underneath Dawnspear: Spear of Twilight merely confers Killing Blow upon the wielder; it has no spear benefits and if it was turned off does that make it a hand weapon? if it makes it a hand weapon does it mean you can claim the hand weapon and shield bonus to your save with it?

gets a big :confused: from me, namely because of the whole inconsistency of the system.

Ash

MorkaisChosen
30-04-2007, 18:47
If it doesn't get spear effects, it becomes a hand weapon and you can block with it.

ashc
30-04-2007, 19:32
Yes but my main bone of contention is not with that ruling; thats fine as long as GW make a point of actually stating *what* each weapon when in a 'mundane' form is - which they obviously have not done for many items in the game and particularly those such as bretonnian lances.

Ash

lparigi34
30-04-2007, 20:06
... inconsistency of the system.



Right to the eye!

MorkaisChosen
30-04-2007, 20:53
Yes but my main bone of contention is not with that ruling; thats fine as long as GW make a point of actually stating *what* each weapon when in a 'mundane' form is - which they obviously have not done for many items in the game and particularly those such as bretonnian lances.

Ash

I think the most obvious thing to do with this is just to use common sense. If it says it's a lance and it has the lance rules, it's a lance. If it doesn't say it's a lance or it doesn't have the lance rules, it isn't.

ashc
30-04-2007, 21:34
Believe me, I always apply common sense to situations like this; the problem arises when you play the complete idiot who does not.

Ash

enyoss
01-05-2007, 12:37
Regarding the Spear of Twilight, in my group we play that it does count as a spear, for consistency with the other items in the section.

For example, the Bow of Loren does not state 'counts as a longbow' in it's rules, but instead starts with 'This longbow... ', in exactly the same way as the Spear of Twlight ('This spear...'). As no-one (to my knowledge) has ever queried whether the Bow of Loren is a longbow, it seemed reasonable to us that a similar appraoch suits the spear.

Cheers,

enyoss

Sasha
01-05-2007, 14:47
Bow of Longbow does not state 'counts as a longbow' in it's rules, but instead starts with 'This longbow... ',

surely anything called the bow of longbow must be a bow :D

and yeah, i agree, anything that starts 'this "weapon type"' must count as that "weapon type".

enyoss
01-05-2007, 16:35
surely anything called the bow of longbow must be a bow :D


*groan* Nothing like an idiotic typo to drain credibility from a statement :o. Not sure how that one slipped past quality control.

Duly corrected :).

Cheers,

enyoss