Abaddon & his Daemon Weapon - Warhammer 40K Fantasy
 

Welcome to Librarium Online!

Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!

Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!


Register Now!

User Tag List

Closed Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 26
  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputation
    31 (x1)

    Abaddon & his Daemon Weapon

    There are some rather unclear rules on this Character, I was unable to find any threads dedicated to him. Any links would be appreciatted.

    1. In the previous Rules Appendix, it was noted that Abaddon had mastered his Daemon Weapon and therefore was immune to its affects. Under it's rules under Abaddon, he says he gains +D6 attacks with it, would he still be immune to the Weapon affects in the updated Codex?

    2. According to the rules of the Daemon Weapons, any Lord that possesses a Daemon wpn gains an additional ability based on the Mark of the Lord. Abaddon has the unique Mark of ALL the Powers of Chaos. Does this mean that his attacks are granted ALL the additional abilities of every Mark? (So IE; he has another shooter weapon, gains 2D6 attacks, wounds on 4+ no matter what and can instant kill everything he wounds)

    Personally I'm a little torn on this. The last time I fielded him we decided to go with #2, where he has all the powers but is succeptible to the Daemons Attacks. Suffice it to say, he annihilated 3 Squads and didn't suffer any wounds.

    *Given his rediculously high pt cost, I wouldn't actually say both rulings are out of the question, rules wise he isn't "that cool" for so many points.
    *Given the spirit of the character; why would Daemons choose to do anything against the one they choose to destroy humanity?
    *Given the spirit of the wording, I would say he only gets D6 attacks because his special rules would take precedence first (ignoring the Mark of Khorne), but still gain the powers of the other icons (the sword did used to kill people outright).

    I'd like to hear some thoughts on this. If all of the above would apply, it's true he would be an absolute monster, but isn't that kind of the point with him? So let's talk!


  2. Remove Advertisements
    Librarium-Online.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    Member skullhammer75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    96
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    0 (x0)

    Abbadaon is an HQ not a lord all the rules for his sword are in his entry ie d6 attacks strenght 8 etc, so the deamon weapon entrys dont come into it at all.

  4. #3
    Age
    Age is offline
    Senior Member Age's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Canterbury, England
    Age
    30
    Posts
    479
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    25 (x1)

    I think you just have to accept him 'as is'.

    After all, his Daemon weapon isn't one specific to a god like the others, it's a named weapon (I'm not even going to try and spell it) and unique. Therefore, accordingly it has it's own rules separate to all the others. I don't think abbadon really needs anything else to make him an uber killing machine. other than perhaps wheels or something that will make him move just a little faster.
    If I've replied, i've probably used Italics...

    www.goodbyeboltgun.blogspot.com - Some of my stuff.

  5. #4
    resident iconoclast Left of West's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    791
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    159 (x3)

    You pretty much went exactly the wrong way on your choice. Abbadon has a funny unique mark--he does not have any of the actual marks.

    He does not get any of the special abilities that other Daemon Weapons get, only the core rules for Daemon Weapons apply.

    Similarly, all of the core rules for Daemon Weapons apply. So, he gets an extra D6 attacks, and he takes an unsavable wound and may not attack at all if he rolls a one for his extra attacks.


    So: He is not immune to the downside of the weapon, and he does not get any of the mark-specific abilities (or the ability for not having a mark, for that matter.)

    In effect, he simply has a single, two handed weapon which increases his strength to 8, allows him to re-roll failed rolls to wound and ignore armour saves, gives him an extra d6 attacks, and wounds him and stops all of his attacks if he rolls a one for this.

    It's actually pretty straightforward.
    Once again, the conservative, sandwich-heavy portfolio pays off for the hungry investor!

  6. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputation
    31 (x1)

    Quote Originally Posted by Left of West View Post
    You pretty much went exactly the wrong way on your choice. Abbadon has a funny unique mark--he does not have any of the actual marks.
    Except he gains the abilities of all 4 Marks included in his profile. Odd wording isn't it? He doesn't have "any", but he gets them "all". Consider the terminolgoy used in the codex "each of the chaos powers", etc.
    Quote Originally Posted by Left of West View Post
    He does not get any of the special abilities that other Daemon Weapons get, only the core rules for Daemon Weapons apply.

    Similarly, all of the core rules for Daemon Weapons apply. So, he gets an extra D6 attacks, and he takes an unsavable wound and may not attack at all if he rolls a one for his extra attacks.
    You're contradicting yourself. If ALL core rules apply, then he gains powers based on the Mark he possesses (which says in his profile "Combines all of the Gifts". If you are making him suffer from the drawbacks, why not provide him the benefits as well? The Core rules obviously don't apply because he's listed as having two weapons that work in conjuction, not a single two-handed power weapon.
    Quote Originally Posted by Left of West View Post
    It's actually pretty straightforward.
    Obviously not, 4 players interpreted it slightly differently (but usually in favor of him getting more power). Also why I'm making the thread.

    In reference to the other two posts, the "play as is" would indicate he is immune to his Daemon Weapon.

  7. #6
    Undersecretary of Decay Radioactivejack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Iowa, USA
    Age
    36
    Posts
    184
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    21 (x1)

    I was under the impression that is was very simple. He has a deamon weapon. +d6 attacks, doubles his strength, wounds him on a 1. That's it. He has a mark that gives him the benefits of each mark, but that does not mean he actually has each mark. Since he dosen't actually have any marks, his deamon weapon just just like an unmarked one, except that instead of +1 str, he gets double. All the power of a fist, without that bothersome init of 1. There ya go.
    Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. - Douglas Adams

  8. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputation
    31 (x1)

    Quote Originally Posted by Radioactivejack View Post
    I was under the impression that is was very simple. He has a deamon weapon. +d6 attacks, doubles his strength, wounds him on a 1. That's it. He has a mark that gives him the benefits of each mark, but that does not mean he actually has each mark. Since he dosen't actually have any marks, his deamon weapon just just like an unmarked one, except that instead of +1 str, he gets double. All the power of a fist, without that bothersome init of 1. There ya go.
    Here's another way to look at it using Typhus as the example. Typhus is listed as having "The ManReaper", which is treating like a normal deamon weapon + force weapon. He is also listed as having the Mark of Nurgle. This means that Typhus gains +D6 attacks, and wounds everything on a 4+ at least regardless of toughness (according to the Daemon wpn rules with Lords having Mark of Nurgle). He also suffers the drawback as treated like a normal Daemon wpn.

    I'm not neccessarily going to push and argue my way into having every single daemon ability for Abaddon. But what I am saying, is that if you are going under the rules listed under Daemon Weapons and Abaddon, it needs to be "Either/Or". You can't pick and choose in essence.

    It says in his profile he gains +D6 attacks, nothing about it being treated as a normal Daemon Weapon, so according to the spirit of taking Abaddon "as is", why would he suffer from the Daemon Weapon when it doesn't specifically state usinig the standard rules? If you treat it has a normal Daemon weapon, he should be provided all the powers of each weapon and suffer the consequences.

    I'm good either way, but I'm not good with him suffering from the normal rules, when the normal rules don't apply. That's the dilema we are facing (at least those in my playing circle).

  9. #8
    Now with STFU flames! Caluin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Age
    36
    Posts
    5,917
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    708 (x8)

    I'm going to go with Skullhammer's take on the situation. The Daemon Weapon rules found on page 93 apply to Chaos Lords. Like the Plaguebringer... "Lords with the Mark of Nurgle."

    Abaddon and Typhus are not Lords. They are HQs, with Lord like stat lines, but are not Chaos Lords. Therefore, the special abilities of the Marks normally granted to Marked Chaos Lords do not apply to them.

    Edit -
    Though, note that the basic abilities list don't require a Lord - they apply to all Daemon Weapons, including Typhus and Abaddon.


  10. #9
    resident iconoclast Left of West's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    791
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    159 (x3)

    Quote Originally Posted by Revelations View Post
    Except he gains the abilities of all 4 Marks included in his profile. Odd wording isn't it? He doesn't have "any", but he gets them "all". Consider the terminolgoy used in the codex "each of the chaos powers", etc.
    Getting some statline benifits which are the same as those given by the marks is not the same thing as having the marks. He does not have a Mark of Nurgle. He does not have a Mark of Khorne. He has neither a Mark of Tzeentch nor a Mark of Slaanesh.

    He doesn't have any of these marks. There is no reason, whatsoever, to think that he would get special rules on his daemon-weapon which correspond to him having any of these marks--since, in fact, he doesn't have any of them.

    The fact that he gets 'bonus' stats as if he did have them is pretty much entirely irrelavent. He doesn't have them--end of story.

    You're contradicting yourself. If ALL core rules apply, then he gains powers based on the Mark he possesses (which says in his profile "Combines all of the Gifts". If you are making him suffer from the drawbacks, why not provide him the benefits as well? The Core rules obviously don't apply because he's listed as having two weapons that work in conjuction, not a single two-handed power weapon.
    I certainly am not contradicting myself. His daemon weapon follows all the normal rules for Daemon Weapons. It gets some additional benifits (namely: it doubles his strength and allows him to re-roll failed rolls to wound) but it still follow all the rules for Daemon Weapons.

    He does have a Mark (so he isn't a Lord without a Mark) but he doesn't have any of the four marks which have special abilities listed for them.

    Also, I am allowing him one benifit which comes only from the 'core' Daemon Weapon rules: I'm pretty sure Drach'nyen ignores armour saves as a Power Weapon, and I'll bet that Abbadon's own rules-text doesn't say anything about that at all .

    Obviously not, 4 players interpreted it slightly differently (but usually in favor of him getting more power). Also why I'm making the thread.
    Look, the fact that multiple people have gotten it wrong in different ways doesn't really give your position any extra weight. The answer to this question, as I said, is clear cut.



    To address a couple other points:

    First, I'm on the fence about the Lord thing. On the one hand, the text in parentheses next to the name of each weapon does seem to indicate that only Lords get those specific weapons. On the other hand, the 'core' rules for Daemon Weapons state that they get abilities based on the mark of the bearer. They don't say that the Bearer has to be a Lord.

    I'm not sure that, "He's not a lord, therefore he doesn't get any of the special abilities," constitutes a convincing argument.

    As I said, though, I'm a little on the fence. It doesn't matter for Abbadon, but it does seem a little harsh for Typhus. Of course, the Nurgle Daemon Weapon doesn't work,, since the rules specifically forbid you from using Poisoned Weapon attacks and Power Weapon attacks at the same time--you have to pick whether you wanted to wound on 4+ or ignore armour saves, and you can't do both. I'm planning to ignore this oversight in game, but it depresses me a little bit that it's there.

    Second, Drach'nyen (not sure on the spelling) is a Daemon Weapon. What that means is that it follows the rules for Daemon Weapons. That's what being a Daemon Weapon is--following the rules for Daemon Weapons.

    Abbadon's Daemon Weapon is still a Daemon Weapon. The rules don't have to specify that it follows all the normal Daemon Weapon rules--they accomplish that simply by stating that it is a Daemon Weapon.

    There is no good reason to think that he will not suffer the normal penalty for rolling a 1 on his roll for extra attacks.

    In conclusion, you are not allowed to pick and choose which rules to apply to him. His sword follows all the normal rules for Daemon Weapons along with the ones that are specific to him. Unfortunately for him, he fails to meet any of the conditions which would give him extra special abilities (such as having a Mark of Nurgle, Tzeentch, Slaanesh, or Khorne). Fortunately for him, his Daemon Weapon is exceptionally powerful anyway.

    edit:
    Also, for the record, Radioactivejack and Caluin have both said, effectively, exactly what I said. No one has agreed with you at all.
    Last edited by Left of West; January 4th, 2008 at 21:54.
    Once again, the conservative, sandwich-heavy portfolio pays off for the hungry investor!

  11. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputation
    31 (x1)

    Quote Originally Posted by Left of West View Post
    Getting some statline benifits which are the same as those given by the marks is not the same thing as having the marks. He does not have a Mark of Nurgle. He does not have a Mark of Khorne. He has neither a Mark of Tzeentch nor a Mark of Slaanesh.

    He doesn't have any of these marks. There is no reason, whatsoever, to think that he would get special rules on his daemon-weapon which correspond to him having any of these marks--since, in fact, he doesn't have any of them.

    The fact that he gets 'bonus' stats as if he did have them is pretty much entirely irrelavent. He doesn't have them--end of story.
    Here's the lone of thinking I was using to explain this. And which may come up again with the new Daemon codex. You used to require icons of specific types to summon demons, his mark applied to all deamons. It would make sense that his mark would continue to operate like any lords mark, when the rules call for it. There aren't any now, so I can certainly see your point, but its note worthy for future reference.
    Quote Originally Posted by Left of West View Post
    I certainly am not contradicting myself. His daemon weapon follows all the normal rules for Daemon Weapons. It gets some additional benifits (namely: it doubles his strength and allows him to re-roll failed rolls to wound) but it still follow all the rules for Daemon Weapons.

    He does have a Mark (so he isn't a Lord without a Mark) but he doesn't have any of the four marks which have special abilities listed for them.
    No it doesn't, that's the problem. IF it did, it would state that it did. But it clearly states what it's powers are. Underneath it says he gains +D6 attacks, why would you sub in the Daemon +D6 attack rule for this? Just so he has a chance to suffer the attack on a 1? The only rule it doesn't change is the ignore armor saves, that's it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Left of West View Post
    Look, the fact that multiple people have gotten it wrong in different ways doesn't really give your position any extra weight. The answer to this question, as I said, is clear cut.
    The fact your claiming they're wrong, doesn't make them wrong. Were arguing opinions at this point, plain and simple. If it were clear cut, just like Typhus, it would say "Treat this as a normal Daemon weapon".
    Quote Originally Posted by Left of West View Post
    First, I'm on the fence about the Lord thing. On the one hand, the text in parentheses next to the name of each weapon does seem to indicate that only Lords get those specific weapons. On the other hand, the 'core' rules for Daemon Weapons state that they get abilities based on the mark of the bearer. They don't say that the Bearer has to be a Lord.

    I'm not sure that, "He's not a lord, therefore he doesn't get any of the special abilities," constitutes a convincing argument.

    As I said, though, I'm a little on the fence. It doesn't matter for Abbadon, but it does seem a little harsh for Typhus. Of course, the Nurgle Daemon Weapon doesn't work anyway, since the rules specifically forbid you from using Poisoned Weapon attacks and Power Weapon attacks at the same time anyway--you have to pick whether you wanted to wound on 4+ or ignore armour saves, and you can't do both. I'm planning to ignore this oversight in game, but it depresses me a little bit that it's there.
    Could you point me to the rule? I'm hazy on that one being brought up. It wouldn't make sense to offer either that or power weapons to Lords, unless you Nurgle Mark monstrous creatures I suppose, but 4+ wouldn't have more barring anyway.
    Quote Originally Posted by Left of West View Post
    Second, Drach'nyen (not sure on the spelling) is a Daemon Weapon. What that means is that it follows the rules for Daemon Weapons. That's what being a Daemon Weapon is--following the rules for Daemon Weapons.

    Abbadon's Daemon Weapon is still a Daemon Weapon. The rules don't have to specify that it follows all the normal Daemon Weapon rules--they accomplish that simply by stating that it is a Daemon Weapon.

    There is no good reason to think that he will not suffer the normal penalty for rolling a 1 on his roll for extra attacks.

    In conclusion, you are not allowed to pick and choose which rules to apply to him. His sword follows all the normal rules for Daemon Weapons along with the ones that are specific to him. Unfortunately for him, he fails to meet any of the conditions which would give him extra special abilities (such as having a Mark of Nurgle, Tzeentch, Slaanesh, or Khorne). Fortunately for him, his Daemon Weapon is exceptionally powerful anyway.
    Yes, he has a rules contradicting the Daemon Weapon rules. If his rules state he gains +D6 Attacks with no mention of taking a wound on a roll of 1, that rule SHOULD superceed a general rule stating he gains +D6 attacks but suffers a wound on a roll of 1. I believe the only reason they listed it as a Daemon Weapon was for fluff and to ignore armor saves.

    Quote Originally Posted by Left of West View Post
    edit:
    Also, for the record, Radioactivejack and Caluin have both said, effectively, exactly what I said. No one has agreed with you at all.
    For the record, 2 other people have disagreed with him suffering the daemon attack. And as I have stated, that's what I'm arguing, all or nothing.
    Last edited by Revelations; January 4th, 2008 at 21:57.

Closed Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts