warpspiders the new uber unit?

[aenar]

Are the warpspiders the new unit of choice for eldar armys. 10 warp spiders with an exarch with power blades and dual web spinner and an autarch with banshee mask fusion gun and power axe are a jump infantry unit with 22 S6 and 1 S8 shot per shooting phase prety usefull in itself. Prior to charge the same 22S6 and 1S8 shots and then 5S3 power weapon attacks that ingnore armour saves from the exarch and the autarch has 5S4 AP2 power weapon attacks at I10. As the rule book specifically states in the last paragraph on page 7 that where a conflict arises between codex and rule book the codex rule takes prescedence, therefore an individual with a banshee mask strikes at I10 irrespective of the weapon they are using. The entry for an autarch states power weapon it does not state what type of power weapon, therefore it is whatever power waepon he is modeled with and the warp spiders power blades specifically state that they ignore armour saves. Any comments welcome are the spiders our new default unit of choice?

[Djones9916]

No.

I still think their effective, but their lack of AP means that they aren't auto infantry killers, just like always. They can be alright against vehichles, but your gonna be hoping for glances more often then not. Their low inherint strength means they won't be all that effective in close combat either. The exarch is going to get 3-4 attacks in CC, but against MEQ's needing to wound on 5's is still pretty limiting.

In my eye, Warp Spiders are a precision unit, not a take on all comers unit. You have to maneuver them carefully to exploit their best targets of oppurtunity. Get into the rear of vehicles as best you can, which shouldn't be to horribly difficult, and hope your dice roll decently. Use their assualt jump ability to get away from danger. In a nut shell, use them as you always used them before. The dynamics of the game hasn't changed enough to make a specialist unit like Warp Spiders a Jack of All Trades unit.

[Marnepup]

I don't have the book in front of me, but there's language in the power weapons section of the BGB that overrides "codex>BGB," saying something like "specifically on the topic of power weapons, old codexes are going to be way out of line with these rules. Replace whatever is in the codex with these rules, and then add back in any wierd special rules that may exist.". Denying armor saves (as opposed to having a specific AP value) is NOT a wierd special rule, therefore you don't get AP2 power swords. I'm not sure about the banshee mask cheese, but that's probably cheating, too.

[Djones9916]

Wrong Marnepup. Warp Spider Power Blades are not Power Swords. The codex entry specifically reads as such. "Power Blades are twin power weapons fitted to the forearms, enabling the wearer to use both hands freely. Powerblades confer +1 attack and ignore armor saves."

Lets take a look at the Howling Banshee executioner in comparison.

"The executioner is a powered glaive capable of slicing an opponent in half with a single blow. It is a two-handed power weapon that adds +2 S."

What is the differance between these two power weapons? One states that it is a power weapon, while another states that it is a power weapon that ignores armor saves. The Spider power blades are a power weapon with special rules, and the 40K rulebook states that power weapons with special rules such as ignores armor, does exactly that. Just like Tyranid Bone Swords, or closer to home the Banshee Mirror Swords. Now, for purposes of AP value when damaging vehicles it will be AP3, not conferring a damage bonus, but the special rule of ignores armor still holds. Even saves of 1+ would be useless against them.

[Marnepup]

Wrong, Jones. The BGB says:

Many models have unusual power weapons that have one or more unique rules. If a power weapon has its own unique rules, treat it as an AP3 melee weapon with the additional rules and characteristics presented in its entry.

At the time that "ignores armor saves" was written in the entry, that was a universal rule of power weapons, not a "one or more unique rules" sort of rule. The universal rule that power weapons ignore armor saves is very clearly replaced by the application of the AP system to melee weapons.

What you're saying about applying the "unique special rules" bit to ignoring armor saves would be reasonable if the entry about ignoring armor saves were in a codex released after the 6th edition BGB, but in the context of having been written when ALL power weapons ignored armor saves, it fails to meet the test of being a unique rule. It's merely a redundant restatement of the then-existing general rule, it's in no way a unique rule.

Your statement that it's AP3 for the purpose of not gaining a bonus on the pen damage chart fails the common sense test. Stating that it's AP3 doesn't deny it the bonus, failing to state that it's either AP2 or AP1 denies the bonus. There is NO reason for it to be simultaneously AP3 and armor-ignoring. Furthermore, it doesn't say "treat it as an AP3 melee weapon for the purpose of not gaining a bonus on the vehicle damage table," it says "treat it as an AP3 melee weapon," period. Only special rules that don't violate or modify the AP3 bit carry over.

Wanting it to be simultaneously AP3 and armor-ignoring (really, you just want to override AP3 with armor-ignoring!) is like wanting an ork truk to be open-topped for the purpose of assaulting out of it from any point along the hull instead of from an access point while simultaneously not being open-topped for the purpose of the vehicle damage table (under 5th edition rules, the analogy doesn't work in 6th, of course!). You can't have it both ways, and the rules explicitly say it's AP3.

[Marnepup]

As the rule book specifically states in the last paragraph on page 7 that where a conflict arises between codex and rule book the codex rule takes prescedence, therefore an individual with a banshee mask strikes at I10 irrespective of the weapon they are using.

Definitely cheating. C: E doesn't say that the wearer of a banshee mask strikes at I10, it says he has I10 in the first round of combat. I don't care what initiative you have, if your weapon has the "unwieldy" USR, you strike at I1.

Now quit mining the books for cheater exploits and go win some games the honorable way.

[Lost Nemesis]

Just playing devil's advocate, but wouldn't this...

Many models have unusual power weapons that have one or more unique rules. If a power weapon has its own unique rules, treat it as an AP3 melee weapon with the additional rules and characteristics presented in its entry.

... mean that power blades are considered an AP3 melee weapon that ignores armour saves? Seeing as that is an additional rule as written in the codex, and the BGB explicitly states to include the additional rules and characteristics presented. "Ignoring armour saves" is every bit of an additional rule and characteristic as "confer +1 attack" is.

I'm with Djones on that one; seems quite clear to me, and until it is FAQ'd otherwise, it holds up to a rules analysis.

[Marnepup]

"An AP3 power weapon that ignores armor saves" would be redundant, since AP3 means "ignores armor saves of 3 and worse."

In that sense, I could argue that it doesn't specify which armor saves are ignored, and it very clearly doesn't state "ignores all armor saves." An AP3 weapon does ignore armor saves, just not ALL armor saves. So it could be that "ignores armor saves" was a restatement of the BRB rule in the old edition...and still is, only now it's a restatement of "ignores armor saves...of 3+ and worse." That would clearly be exactly as ridiculous as arguing that it's simultaneously AP3 and also AP-all.

But the reality is that "ignores armor saves" isn't a unique rule. At the time that it was written, it was simply a restatement of the general rule that applied to ALL power weapons. Unless it is FAQed that the wording "ignores armor saves" (which was clearly redundant at the time that it was written) overrides, then the AP3 stated in the same rule that allows the unique special rules applies. You can't split the sentence in half and say "the rulebook says I get the +1A" but ignore the part of the same sentence that limits the AP of the powerblades to 3.

If you want to be a cheesy RAW rules lawyer, then "AP3," meaning "ignores armor saves of 3 or worse" is fully consistent with "ignores armor saves" and you don't get to cut TDA because the word "all" is missing. Or, we can agree that a restatement of the general (no longer in effect) rule that ALL power weapons, not just powerblades, cut armor was never an "additional rule" in the first place, just excess words. Personally, the second option seems less distasteful, but if you want to go into the ruleslawyering gutter, I'll hold my nose and join you.

/edit/
Let me be clear that I would like them to be AP2, and would be happy if GW errataed them that way.

[Gedderz]

To be honest I think your clenching at straws with the "Ignores all armour saves". I don't think that at any point has ignores armour saves been miss understood.

For example the Necron warscythe says ""Armour saves are not permitted against...." there is nothing there that anyone has thought the word all is required.

Also Ignore armour saves is a unique rule as it is not one of the universal rules in the BRB.

However I wouldn't be surprised if it was FAQ'd to AP3 and the ignore armour saves was dropped.

[Faek]

I dont get your whole discussion about Powerblades. I didn't even bring them today.

Anyway my squad of 5 Warp Spiders (+Exarch) deepstriked behind a Leman Russ today and killed it. Well worth their points. They then ran for an object forcing about 4 units to turn around and shoot them instead of other stuff. Performed really well.