Librarium Online Forums banner
1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I currently have the 4th and 5th ed codices, since my army only consists of the old battleforce box
3 warriors, 8 gaunts ,8 termas, 1 carnifex and it will be a long time before i get new nids (im working on 3 armies) ive gone very bio-morph heavy to raise my points high enough to play regular games, my current genestealer setup is

Scything talons
toxin sacs
extended carapace

with this i have 3A @ S5 with rending and a 4+ Armour save.

In the new dex ive chosen to keep the toxin sacs and scything talons if i understand correctly i should now have
2A @ S4, rerolls to hit on 1s, and wounding on 4+ and rending
Or do i have to roll seperatley as the rending claws and scything talons are seperate

As i understand it in the 4th ed codex these upgrades were stackable, but im not sure that they are anymore.

Is this right, and if its wrong could someone please clarify this for me.

against power weapons (eg MC, Power fists etc) can i have an invulnerable save or not?
(I live in germany and have AoBR, so my rulebook is in german, in understand most of it, its just not 100% lol)

acording to the new dex, i no longer have a viable HQ as i have only 3 warriors.

Thanks in advance :)
 

·
No Life King
Joined
·
2,819 Posts
With the nex codex, it is harder to toughen up your units with biomorphs. Since this is the case loading up on morphs isn't really the best idea, as you can't make them harder to kill as they become more potent themselves.

The rending claws, scything talons, and toxin sacs will all be rolled into your attacks and do not have to be separated.

at your current point I think another battleforce would be a fine call, bulk up on more gribblies and some warriors. That would put you up to 24 gaunts/hormies, 16 stealers, and 6 warriors with your carnifex, this should be good for about 1k I'd think. Kit a warrior up as an alpha and you would be good to go.

What points are you trying to run with those models?
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
815 Posts
Hello,

The weapon arms is currently being debated in the unoffical faq thread. Check it out there. There are cases for and against. Personally I'm for them stacking.

You can almost always take Invunerable saves unless something specifically prevents it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 · (Edited)
1500k but getting new models is not so simple, i have SM, orks and the nids now so its fun.....lol, from the list i wrote today i have 760, not including the rippers (which would also be morphed), i think another box would be great.

Ok so i think ill leave the stealer as they are, as im all for stacking them, it makes more sense to keep it that way and hey, we pay the points to be able to do that., thanks for the help so far


After reading it again, it makes more sense now. Since rending weapons auto wound on a 6 @ AP2 and poisoned weapons Auto wound on 4+(Or are rerolled depending on tougness) than against MEQs the would get armour saves as normal exept fo those that wounded on 6.

I now dont understand what all the debating is about, it seems clear now
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
815 Posts
the debate is "read as intended" vs. "read as written" with regards to the main rulebook. In escense the book says something to the extent that a model can only use a single CC weapon. So regardless of the nids having 4 arms and coming default with multiple weapons, the main rulebook can be seen as overriding what the nids have been able to do for years now. It's a fun debate but most people I play with have no problem with nids using all their arms.

And go buy a trygon! That's a 200+ point model that rocks across the board. Most bang for you buck you can get if you're trying to load up on points.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
I also think the weapons should stack, but RAW I've even discussed it locally with my group, and they agree RAW they don't. Of course, they also agree RAW the Doom's special ability affects units in transports. However, we've chose to go RAI, that is weapons stack and transports are sanctuary. Which is fun, because I'm going to play the DoM but I'm not going to stack weapons.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
219 Posts
close combat attacks made by models with rending claws gain rnding as detailed in wh40 rulebook

It does not say you use them but it gains rending they do stack. also models can get hit by MOS in transports
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
close combat attacks made by models with rending claws gain rnding as detailed in wh40 rulebook

It does not say you use them but it gains rending they do stack. also models can get hit by MOS in transports
By that logic, all witchblades, PWs and Rending Weapons are stackable.

I want them to stack as much as you do, but I really don't see it working that way.
 

·
Bugs'r us!
Joined
·
1,242 Posts
I think I'll keep it simeple and stack them as they always have, when I face an opponent different than my usual I check what he says.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
exactly what im gonna do, they stacked before, why wouldnt they now. If the dont stack anymore ill consider passing up my tyranids to a hard core player and continue with my DA and Ork armies, it does seem a little childish to give them up over something so small but i dont have the patience for rules altercations like this.

So now i understand it, because i have two special CCWs I have to choose which im using at the time, or do i change all the arms on my genestealers to either scything talons or rending claws just to avoid confusion.........with WYSIWYG
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
815 Posts
Close combat attacks made by models with rending claws gain the rending ability as detailed in the warhammer 40,000 rulebook. It doesn't say "weapon" it specifically says "rending ability". It does not say attacks made by rending claws are rending. The model gains the rending ability.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
815 Posts
exactly what im gonna do, they stacked before, why wouldnt they now. If the dont stack anymore ill consider passing up my tyranids to a hard core player and continue with my DA and Ork armies, it does seem a little childish to give them up over something so small but i dont have the patience for rules altercations like this.

So now i understand it, because i have two special CCWs I have to choose which im using at the time, or do i change all the arms on my genestealers to either scything talons or rending claws just to avoid confusion.........with WYSIWYG
Nah, all of this debate really stems from people trying to micro-manage each word of each sentence and cross reference with everything else possible. 99% of the people you play would not try to argue that you can't use rending claws and scything talons together. And always keep in mind that codex rules override the main rulebook when there is a grey area.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
I think I'll keep it simeple and stack them as they always have, when I face an opponent different than my usual I check what he says.
This is the best idea IMHO. In fact, you can give it an evil twist. If they let you stack weapons, using the RAI interpretation, you'll be merciful and have Doom of Malan'Tai not affect units inside transports. If they get all RAW on you, well, let the dogs out. I'm sure they'll learn to like RAI.
 

·
Bugs'r us!
Joined
·
1,242 Posts
Haha, and then comes the FAQ that says eat it to my opponent:p

Or for us for that matter:p
 

·
Tyranid Warrior Fanatic
Joined
·
2,668 Posts
Close combat attacks made by models with rending claws gain the rending ability as detailed in the warhammer 40,000 rulebook. It doesn't say "weapon" it specifically says "rending ability". It does not say attacks made by rending claws are rending. The model gains the rending ability.
Rending claws are a special CCW so you only get the ability when you use them. As Lemt says, according to you power weapons, witch blades, and rending claws are stackable, but in practice they aren't.

Nah, all of this debate really stems from people trying to micro-manage each word of each sentence and cross reference with everything else possible. 99% of the people you play would not try to argue that you can't use rending claws and scything talons together. And always keep in mind that codex rules override the main rulebook when there is a grey area.
Its not micro-managing each sentence. Its rather simple:
- Nid special close combat weapons are special close combat weapons (as they aren't normal close combat weapons and they are listed as close combat weapons in the book).
- The BRB says you can only use one special close combat weapon per turn.
- The tyranid codex says anything about this, so it does nothing to override this rule.
- Therefore you can only use one tyranid CCW per turn.

While it does look like RC intended stacking, there is nothing in the rules that allows this. Neither I nor anyone else can stop you from playing how you want, but it would be fair to mention that fact that stacking seems to be the RAI even if its not the RAW.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
815 Posts
Again, we're going to have to agree to disagree. I read the exact wording of the weapon to counter the "weapon" word.

Actually if you read the nid codex there's a section titled "Tyranid close combat weapons" on page 33. It states that tyranids do not wield close combat weapons as such, but rather slash at their opponents with their own teeth, claws and talons. Goes on to say that nids never receive a bonus for multi CC weapons as those attacks are built into the profile. IE: nid CC weapons are not normal CC weapons.
 

·
Tyranid Warrior Fanatic
Joined
·
2,668 Posts
Again, we're going to have to agree to disagree. I read the exact wording of the weapon to counter the "weapon" word.

Actually if you read the nid codex there's a section titled "Tyranid close combat weapons" on page 33. It states that tyranids do not wield close combat weapons as such, but rather slash at their opponents with their own teeth, claws and talons. Goes on to say that nids never receive a bonus for multi CC weapons as those attacks are built into the profile. IE: nid CC weapons are not normal CC weapons.
So we agree to disagree. What I get from that sentence is that it says nids use weapons in an unconventional way compared to other races, something that would have no effect on them rules-wise on its own. Either way, Occam's razor. You have to go searching and use dodgy logic to use that sentence to justify nids weapons stacking. Meanwhile, you just look at the books and think and it becomes apparent that they don't. Which is simpler-> the solution where you rely on dodgy logic that doesn't really stand up that well or the argument that relies on the rulebook and assuming that tyranid close combat weapons are close combat weapons like they say they are? I would say option 2 makes more sense.

Either way, you still can't prove that they aren't normal CCWs. If you look at the rules page for them it just says "Close Combat Weapons", not "Tyranid Close Combat Weapons". Not only that, but it also doesn't say that the rules for special close combat weapons don't apply to them so there is no basis in saying that those rules don't apply. Plus, it also says that teeth and claws are normal close combat weapons so we've proved that we can have normal tyranid close combat weapons so there is no reason that we can't have special tyranid close combat weapons even if you do argue that tyranid close combat weapons are a category of their own.
 

·
Member
Joined
·
663 Posts
Even if the rules don't stack then you can use Rending claws and Scything talons. This is how. With two Special Weapons you must chose which to use. Choose the Scything Talons. You reroll 1s to hit and if you get a 6 to wound then it goes through armor. RAW clearly states that it is models that have the claws have rending, not models that use them. P 83 Tyranid Rule Book.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top