Friday Night Internet Fight, Round 15

Has there ever been a rules discussion on a forum that doesn't end in a dick-waving, name-calling fight between bullies? Well as far as my research indicates the answer is "no."
This week Kennedy was kind enough to send me a link to "Rune Priests and Foehammer Questions" at Librarium online. MylesTheTroll started this thread to sort out a few things about the way Space Wolf Rune Priests and Foehammers work, even though they were largely covered in the SW FAQ. Well that should make this an easy question to answer then, right. Ha, you wish- nothing on the Internet is ever that easy.

This is one of my favorite types of fight. Not that it's about a rules argument, but because everybody sucks. Yes, one person is definitely correct in his rules interpretation, but everybody involved is beyond socially awkward, lacking the skill necessary to carry on an intelligent dialogue. Instead they fall back on repetition and arguing. Fuck YEAH!

As always none of the names have been changed to protect the innocent, but their avatars have been for my amusement. I will snowmobile the conversation in red. Make sure to visit the poll at the top of the page when you're done reading. One last thing. Usually I try and avoid using quoted text. Instead I try and edit the quoted responses into a seamless conversation. I think this makes an easier read and cuts down the space needed. I didn't do that this week. Frankly it's a huge pain in the ass to edit the way I have done it in the past. So this is an experiment to see if anybody cares which way I edit these. Let me know what you think in this week's bonus poll. Let's dive in, shall we.....

MylesTheTroll- Can multiple Rune Priests use their runic weapons to stop the SAME psychic power if previous attempts fail in the same turn? ~see official FAQ. Game over...or is it? I was glancing over the SM codex and it states that Librarians aren't capable of doing this, and was wondering if people just play it the same way, or not since it isn't specifically indicated as such. ~except in the FAQ! Seriously does anybody put a modicum of effort into researching their issues before they post this shit?


Also, does Arjac's Foehammer give a model Initiative 1 when used as a ranged attack?

Draake- From the BRB, page 42:


"all models that suffer an unsaved wound from a thunder hammer....reducing their initiative value to 1"

It does not state how the wound must be caused by the thunder hammer for this to take effect, i.e. it does not say that the unsaved wound must be suffered in melee. ~what if you're watching the hammer closely while walking and fail to notice that you're about to run into a wall? Did the wall cause the wound? Was it the Hammer? Was it your absent mindedness? Is there a hammer? I would quite confidently say that yes, using Foehammer will apply the normal thunder hammer effects if it causes an unsaved wound.

As for your other question, sorry mate I'll leave that one to someone else! ~how about we leave it to the damn FAQ. Seriously people, there is a FAQ for this!

Archon Charybdis- Except Thunder Hammers don't have a shooting profile-- you're not using a thunder hammer to perform a shooting attack, you're using the Foehammer ranged weapon ~which does happen to have a shooting profile which bears no mention of behaving like a thunderhammer, which in fluff, just happens to also be a TH. Being as Thunder Hammer isn't a category of shooting weapon, and the Foehammer rules don't indicate it has any impact on your opponents initiative (or automatically shaking vehicles), there's no reason to assume the melee attributes apply to shooting. Do you assume an Infernus Pistol ignores armor in CC because it's AP1 in shooting? ~you know that has always bothered me about the pistol melee rules. they're kinda fucked

First entry in the SW FAQ, you roll once regardless of the number of Runic Weapons in range. ~yay for reading comprehension. thanks for clearing that one up

Draake- I read this, and it makes complete sense to me. ~I read your text that follows several times and it makes no sense to me. Are you agreeing or disagreeing or sort of agreeing? what exactly about Archon's argument are you finding fault with? help me understand what you're trying to say and I will translate for you. I would almost completely agree with you. It does have its own weapon profile, it is a shooting attack. But at the end of the day, you are being struck in the face with a thunder hammer. So I ask you, whats the difference?

MylesTheTroll- You're basically saying that the thunder hammer that is used as a ranged attack isn't the same thunder hammer used in an assault. ~not at all, he's saying there is a rules precedent for things behaving different ways in different phases/uses. do you think before you type?


Here's an Eldar example. ~oh this should be relevant A Singing Spear is S9 vs vehicles whether fired or used in close combat. The Eldar codex says that it follows the rules for witchbaldes which is in the BRB. So, it is following the rules of a close combat weapon EVEN as a ranged weapon. Why wouldn't the Foehammer do the same? I mean, it's not like it is a farfetched idea.

You're analogy ~he's an analogy? is beyond redundant. ~wow you are beyond a dick head. last time I ever try and help you you fucking piece of shit. wait, what? Why? It's the actual SHOTS FIRED from said pistol that are AP1, not the pistol itself. ~but CC is supposed to represent a combination of shooting the pistol and wielding it as a weapon by itself. Wouldn't a melta pistol to more damage the closer you are, like in CC? Just like a conversion beamer would do less damage the closer you are if it was used in CC...yeah I know you can't use it that way, but whatever Whereas the Foehammer is both the thunder hammer being shot with and used in assault. ~but you just proved yourself wrong retard. if a pistol has a different profile in CC and shooting, but is still the same weapon at all times then a foehammer can have a differnt profile in CC and shooting. learn to apply basic deductive reasoning

Also worth noting, the Spear always wounds on a 2+ which is stated in the COMBAT WEAPON profile in the BRB. All things I've mentioned are not in the shooting profile of the weapon. The fluff says that it is treated as a witchblade which you have to look up in the BRB since it is not in the codex itself. ~that's not fluff that's a rule you asshat! so let's recap- bad grammar, check. poor use of logic, check. failure to recognize and apply analogies, check. total dickwad, check.

ze_poodle- .That is what he's saying, and he's right. This has come up before. Here's how it breaks down:

Originally Posted by MylesTheTroll



You're basically saying that the thunder hammer that is used as a ranged attack isn't the same thunder hammer used in an assault

Arjac is armed with a thunder hammer, which is a melee weapon with special effects in melee (the Initiative reduction, increased vehicle damage and increased strength.) But it gives him a ranged attack as well, which is him throwing the hammer. This is the exact wording of that rule:
That's retarded ~oops, there it is you've just officially escalated this confrontation. battle stations everybody, no-one is going to pistol whip a dude in close combat. ~which is precisely why there has never been a pistol made with a weighted but or some kind of CC weapon attached to it, ever They're going to shoot him; pistols are a close-range weapon. Archon was saying that a model equipped with an inferno pistol doesn't ignore armour in close combat because the inferno pistol only has a ranged attack profile, even though fluff-wise he's shooting people with it at point-blank range. It's a perfectly good metaphor. I'll elaborate.

Originally Posted by Space Wolves Codex


The Foehammer is a thunder hammer that can be used as a ranged weapon with the following profile:

It then goes on to show the profile of the ranged attack, which is 6'', S10 AP1 Assault 1 and so on. I bolded that line because it's the important part: the Foehammer is not a thunder hammer that can be used outside of an assault. It is a thunder hammer with a second ranged attack that has a different profile. When you're using its ranged attack, you use the ranged weapon profile, exactly as if Arjac was armed with a ranged weapon with that profile. When you're in melee, you use Arjac's profile, i.e. his Strength, WS and Attacks. ~well there it is folks, the obviously correct answer- case closed. haha yeah right, why would these fucks listen to logic...

The simple fact is that the ranged weapon profile doesn't have the thunder hammer effect in it. It emulates a thunder hammer as accurately as possible, as the profile has a Strength double Arjac's base strength, and it has an AP1 to mimic the power weapon affect, but it does not have a stun effect in the profile. There are no ranged weapons that do that. ~well now you're trying to speak for the game designers. best to stop this line of thought before you end up looking like an idiot or calling someone retarded

The best way to think of it is as if Arjac was firing a S10 AP1 Assault 1 gun. That's all it is: the Foehammer has an alternate ranged attack fired exactly as if Arjac had a gun with that profile, and that profile doesn't have the thunder hammer stun. Nor does it automatically shake vehicles, I should mention. ~wow, can you find a way to say the same thing a few more times in a slightly different way. beating me to death with the same argument 15 times in one post will surely help drive your point home.

You're analogy is beyond redundant. Why? It's the actual SHOTS FIRED from said pistol that are AP1, not the pistol itself. Whereas the Foehammer is both the thunder hammer being shot with and used in assault.

Let's assume we've got a BA special character with a unique inferno pistol, and the inferno pistol says that it can be used as a S8 melee weapon that ignores armour saves in close combat, which mimics the pistol's ranged profile. This is an exact reversal of Arjac, who has a melee weapon with a ranged profile; here we have a guy with a ranged weapon that has a melee "profile." I say "profile" in quotes because melee weapons actually use a character's profile, but I'll call it that for the sake of coherency. ~please can you explain the same thing one more time in a slightly different way. I don't understand what you're trying to say yet. I'm beginning to think that you like hearing yourself talk

let me do you a favor, I will strike out anything that follows that consists of you being redundant
Now, because his weapon's melee profile says so, he would ignore armour saves and get higher strength, but he wouldn't get bonus dice attacking a vehicle in melee, because despite the fact that the inferno pistol can be used as a melee weapon with a melee profile, that melee profile doesn't have the Melta special rule and doesn't get extra dice for AP. The Melta rule is only in the pistol's ranged profile and only applies when it's used as a ranged weapon. When it is used in melee, even though it has special melee effects, it is using a different profile. A ranged weapon cannot use its ranged profile in melee: Arjac's melee weapon cannot use its melee profile at range.


This is actually really simple, but it can get a little confusing. Like I said, the best way to think of it (and the way the Codex actually describes it) is as if Arjac had a second ranged weapon with the profile listed. The profile has most of the same effect as a thunder hammer, but it has those effects for different reasons, namely ones associated with ranged weapons - it's not taking Arjac's strength and doubling it, it just has S10. It's not ignoring armour saves like a power weapon, it's just AP1. It does not have a way of mimicking the stun and it doesn't have that effect. ~You're welcome folks

If you want a fluff explanation, we can say that because he's throwing the hammer there's less of a oomph behind it as it loses power in flight. ~well thanks for making up some fluff for us. that'll help close this argument down

Originally Posted by Draake


But at the end of the day, you are being struck in the face with a thunder hammer. So I ask you, whats the difference

In this case, the rules. ~wow, concise and bitter. now you're getting it. I can't reconcile my thoughts and feelings about the wall of text you just posted with this nice quick quip.

MylesTheTroll- Way to totally glance over my post and intentionally ignore the VERY similar predicament of the Singing Spear. ~fuck your singing spear. nobody cares. deliberately ignoring something with different rules that is therefore irrelevant shouldn't really be a problem


I'm just not convinced. The reasonings that you state aren't enough. ~if I give you $5 will that be enough. Will you stop being a moron and admit you're wrong? Going by that Eldar example which is pretty much ripped from the BRB, and hardly from the codex itself is too similar to the thunder hammer situation where the rules for both and its special properties are grounded in the BRB combat weapon section, and not their codexes. ~codices is the plural or codex duder

ze_poodle- The Eldar codex doesn't actually say that a singing spear follows the rules for a witchblade. It says that it is "similar to a witchblade" and that "like witchblades, singing spears wound on a 2+." At no point does it say "A singing spear is a witchblade. ~again you're right and on target. quit while you're ahead See the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook for rules for witchblades." Arjac's entry does say explicitly that the Foehammer is a thunder hammer, albeit one with a secondary ranged profile.


The reason this is important is because a witchblade, as a close combat item, only has an effect in close combat (like a thunder hammer) so if the singing spear was a witchblade, it wouldn't have S9 at range. So instead, the singing spear is a different item that says that they have a Strength of 9 when rolling to damage vehicles, with no mention of whether this applies when used in close combat or as a ranged weapon.

It's essentially a different item, with a different but similar effect. ~so Foehammer and Singing Spear aren't the same thing. Does Myles know this. let's call a meeting on it right away stop the presses The singing spear's version applies the S9 at range and in melee, whereas the witchblade only applies in close combat because it's a close combat weapon like a thunder hammer and has no ranged application. Is this clear?

You also seem to be getting a little loud about this, ~are you guys voice chatting or something? or can you hear Myles pounding his keyboard from across the country? besides NOBODY CAN TYPE AS LOUD AS I CAN!!!!!!! so I'd advise you to back up a little before a mod finds this thread heretical and declares Exterminatus.

All I can really do is point to Archon's inferno pistol example above. ~oh thanks for sharing, AGAIN The line of reasoning you're using is tempting, but it's illogical. ~cue Spock Close combat weapons don't apply an effect at range. It's as absurd as stating that a model with a bolter can ignore a guardsman's 5+ armour save in close combat.


My last point is this: if you insist on mixing Arjac's ranged and melee capabilities, then I request that you stick to your guns and make him fire at Initiative 1, exactly as if he was firing with the thunder hammer. ~why not, that would totally matter...

MylesTheTroll- Loud...? Because I firmly state that YOU are not showing enough evidence? ~how many different ways does he have to show his wealth of evidence to make you understand Take your own advice, and back up out of this thread. Your assistance is not needed here. ~plus you're not listening any way. Did you really even want a debate about your rules questions or did you just set out to fight people? Are you really just Dethtron's pseudonym? Let the mods decide when someone is being "loud." You're not a mod. ~I'm king of the mods


You are saying that the singing spear is able to do it what it does because it is stated to be SIMILAR to a witch blade with the difference being that it can be thrown. Whereas the Foehammer is stated to be the SAME ~it isn't stated as a rule you halfwit piece of crap. just shut the fuck up and crawl back under your bridge weapon as a thunder hammer that can even be thrown, but somehow because of that it doesn't get all the bonuses when thrown. What's that phrase you used earlier? "That's retarded." Weird, huh? ~no you're retarded

Draake- It is the energy surrounding the thunder hammer that is released when it strikes an opponent which stuns them.


When Arjac strikes, its S10. The thrown version is also S10. The force of the blow is the same.

All this aside, I think the weapon profile provided takes precedence. Yes, the weapon profile they give you for the ranged attack does not specifically state that you gain the bonus from the thunder hammer. ~ok thanks. that poodle guy only said that like 50 times, so why not state it again. that line of thinking seems to be changing lots of opinions.

But again, you're still being struck by a thunder hammer ~you've been THUNDERSTRUCK, the only difference here is the delivery method. I'm not very inclined by any evidence given so far to completely agree with either point of view, though I am leaning more towards the "its still a thunder hammer" view. ~please contradict yourself one more time. or just sit on that fence forever. better yet, stop posting if you have nothing to contribute

Originally Posted by Archon Charybdis



Do you assume an Infernus Pistol ignores armor in CC because it's AP1 in shooting?

Pistols have their own rules in the BRB, page 29. Foehammer is a unique case. ~that also has its own rules. that basically happen to work in the reverse of pistols That is why this thread exists. ~no it exists so that myles can fight people

MylesTheTroll- The FAQ has corrected the rune priest situation stating:


Page 36, Runic Weapon, replace the fourth
sentence with:
Furthermore, whenever an enemy model
succeeds on a Psychic test within 24" of one or
more models with a Runic Weapon, roll a dice –
[…]. ~no shit, didn't we lay that to rest days ago?

ze_poodle- This is exactly the behaviour I'm talking about. I can't have a discussion with a person if the other person is treating it like a fistfight. ~can we instead treat it like a row?

But again, you're still being struck by a thunder hammer, the only difference here is the delivery method. I'm not very inclined by any evidence given so far to completely agree with either point of view, though I am leaning more towards the "its still a thunder hammer" view

You have no rule supporting this. In fact, you have a whole game system that explicitly separates ranged and melee weapon profiles and effects saying that you can't do this.

Pistols have their own rules in the BRB, page 29. Foehammer is a unique case. That is why this thread exists.

How is that relevant? The metaphor is meant to explain why shooting and assault weapons don't have effects in their respective phases. The inferno pistol gives you an extra attack in close combat, but that attack doesn't ignore armour or strike at S8.

Saying that the Foehammer is unique is overlooking the actual wording of the Foehammer rule, which is "can be used as a ranged weapon with the following profile." If thunder hammer effects could apply to ranged attacks, there would be no need for the profile. ~careful you're about to start repeating yourself again

MylesTheTroll-

Originally Posted by ze_poodle




My last point is this: if you insist on mixing Arjac's ranged and melee capabilities, then I request that you stick to your guns and make him fire at Initiative 1, exactly as if he was firing with the thunder hammer.

Why certainly! If only INITIATIVE was included in profiles outside of unit profiles.~haha at least somebody else caught that Where as we know that unit profiles also contain special rules that can either apply to shooting and/or close combat. Don't let the door hit you on the way out. ~meanwhile Myles is still trying to figure out how a door works

Originally Posted by ze_poodle


If thunder hammer effects could apply to ranged attacks, there would be no need for the profile..

How else are we supposed to know the weapon's range and type...? ~or ALL of the rules that it follows as explicitly stated in said profile

Just go...your "points" are getting worse and worse. ~they're not getting worse, they have just repeated over and over. you, however, seem to be getting exponentially dumber

ze_poodle- This is what I mean. I'm not accusing you of anything. I haven't told you to stuff off. I'm just trying to explain how you're wrong in a clear and direct manner, and I'd rather do it without arguments. ~don't back down. you started the argument part of things. FINISH HIM


I'm not a mod, although I was one very briefly about four years ago. But I do know how mods behave and how they react. ~When a mod is added to calcium over a ferrous plate, acting as a catalyst, the mod explodes leaving behind a salt precipitate and evolving methane gas.

You are saying that the singing spear is able to do it what it does because it is stated to be SIMILAR to a witch blade with the difference being that it can be thrown. Whereas the Foehammer is stated to be the SAME weapon as a thunder hammer that can even be thrown, but somehow because of that it doesn't get all the bonuses when thrown. What's that phrase you used earlier? "That's retarded." Weird, huh?

No. The singing spear is not a witchblade; it's a different weapon with similar rules. If it was a witchblade, it wouldn't work, since the witchblade's effects only apply in close combat. The Foehammer is a thunder hammer. Its thunder hammer effects only apply in close combat, which is where the thunder hammer is listed - under Close Combat Weapons, in the Assault section of the rulebook. ~come on show us your argument again, just one more hit. I need a taste, daddy

Why certainly! If only INITIATIVE was included in profiles outside of unit profiles. Where as we know that unit profiles also contain special rules that can either apply to shooting and/or close combat. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

I apologise for calling your earlier statement retarded. It wasn't a comment aimed at your intelligence; it was intended to convey the magnitude by which you'd misunderstood Archon's metaphor. Perfectly intelligent people sometimes say stupid things, usually by mistake. ~don't back down. escalate things. spit venom on him. make death threats. tell him how you will use your former mod powers for evil. let your hatred flow through me. just don't apologize for telling it like it is.

You can find an older thread where we went over this with some other people before. We arrived at the conclusion I'm trying to convey to you now. If you do a brief search, ~pfffft, Myles research. you're only deluding yourself. you can probably find that thread. ~I think we should have errata for the last sentence. replace the word "you" with the following: "most sentient beings" and add this after the word "thread": "but MylesTheTroll, who through his display of lack of cognitive reasoning has proven unable to research, will not even be able to find his own asshole But if you keep brawling, a mod is going to shut this one down.

Draake-

Originally Posted by ze_poodle


If thunder hammer effects could apply to ranged attacks, there would be no need for the profile.

I fail to see the logic in this statement. If there was no profile, then I can say the attack has unlimited range and hits at strength 20! ~you fail to see it because Myles' reading comprehension skills seem to be rubbing off on you. there is a weapon profile here, so you can't make up shit about it. that's the fucking point.

ze_poodle- No. Following your logic, you would use the thunder hammer's rules.


You will notice that the thunder hammer rules in BRB are insufficient to determine the range of a ranged attack derived from thunder hammers. This is because the thunder hammer's rules are not intended to affect shooting attacks, and in fact do not affect shooting attacks. It leads to all sorts of silly stuff, like Arjac shooting at Initiative 1. This is why GW provided us with a ranged attack profile instead. ~one more time, I think I almost understand it now

Draake- I don't think myself, or anyone else, would care if you shot at initiative 1.... its irrelevant. ~I would like to take this time to announce my campaign to begin teaching proper use of apostrophes to infants in the womb which is to be called "Dick Move's Grammar Up in Your Vagina: A Primer"... and yes I know that babies aren't carried in the vagina, but Uterus doesn't have the same ring and "uh oh that baby is all up in your fallopian tube" just seems wrong even to me


Come to think of it, I don't know why myself, or anyone else in this thread is still arguing with you. You clearly will not accept any other point of view, ~I am rubber you are glue, etc and constantly try to impose your own interpretations of the rules upon others, ~which may have something to do with Myles asking for a rules interpretation when this issue clearly a trifle ambiguous. ~if by ambiguous you mean clear as day

Myles, your first question has been answered. On the Foehammer, I would ask your opponent if they mind you running the rules the way you are interpreting them currently, but again, its up to you mate.

Good luck bringing the wrath of the Imperium down upon your fellow gamers (In good spirit)!

ze_poodle- Try this: if the Foehammer's melee qualities pass on to its ranged attacks, then do its ranged qualities pass on to its melee attacks? Its ranged profile is AP1. This gives its ranged attack +1 to the result on the damage chart when damaging a vehicle. If Arjac damages a walker in close combat, does he get to add +1 to the damage result because of the AP1 in his ranged weapon profile? ~hell yes something new. and now that I've read it, my mind has collapsed. it's kind of like a hands drawing hands argument now


You have to fill these holes if you want your argument to be credible. You can't just say "no."

Hawkuli- Alright, I will play along. I apologise if I am coming across harsh, ~well you're no fun as I assure you that this is not my intention at all, but this ruling in the FAQ does not give an answer. All it says is that if it succeeds within 24" of one or more. In no way at all does it say that each Rune Priest can test for the same Psychic Power that was passed through the use of a Psychic Test. ~this has been laid to rest so many times now that it's not even funny I still stand by my assumption, and I think that we all need to just take a deep breath, and welcome all input that has been posted here. If someone posts something that you think is coming across as threatening, then point it out to them, but point it out to them in a civil tone. ~wrong you should immediately get in their face We are all friends here, and let's not be rash.


Directed towards the Foehammer, regardless of the fact if close combat weapons do not confer their properties to range (prove this please?), the wording in the rulebook about Thunder Hammers still does not say anything about wounds in close combat OR range ~but a thunderhammer isn't a ranged weapon!! for fook's sake how many times does this need to be stated? It only says unsaved wounds. Therefore, this is a rather vague, yet broad term that defines all varieties of wounds. So, this would lead me to believe that a model that survives the ranged attack from the Foehammer will strike at Intiative 1 in the ensuing assault phase.

However, I really do not see this happening with standard infantry, as it will probably cause Instant Death if it is effective. Hitting on 2+, wounding on 2+, ignoring all armor... AND an assault weapon. ~yes a S10 weapon will inflict instant death on most things, so this is a bit of a moot argument as it only applies to creatures with T6 or better or eternal warrior. now what this being an assault weapon has to do with anything I will never know....

Good Hunting. ~lame. get a better catch phrase