Harlequin Solitaire and a Harlequin's Kiss

As I think we all know that Games Workshop is extremely careful with how they phrase every single sentance in their books to make sure there can be no doubt on how they should be interpreted, we can probably all agree that the actual rule regarding the issue should be ignored in favour of said peticular proof-reading.

Sigmaril wrote:

As I think we all know that Games Workshop is extremely careful with how they phrase every single sentance in their books to make sure there can be no doubt on how they should be interpreted.......

I hope this is sarcasm

Evil Space Elves wrote:

Sigmaril wrote:

As I think we all know that Games Workshop is extremely careful with how they phrase every single sentance in their books to make sure there can be no doubt on how they should be interpreted.......

I hope this is sarcasm

It is indeed :-) But it's premise is also the base of this entire subject.
Why would we place so much faith in GW using a slightly different word in a rules description, knowing fully that consistency isn't their strong side, when there is a perfectly good rule on page 41 saying this is not the way to do it.

Just a quick note - the SW dread shield does not specify it's 3++is only in combat - infact every time I have faced it I worked it exactly like a storm shield save for the fact it only covers the front armour.

I assume you read it as the shield effect being part of the weapon profile and as such, only usable in combat and while using the shield to attack?

It doesn't say close combat per se, but it does say against "strikes", and there is already established precedence based on the difference between the rules for "Precision Shots" and "Precision Strikes". Besides, what would be the point in even providing it with a weapon profile, when it always comes with the great axe, if not to benefit from the 3++?

To grant it protection against weapon destroyed in my mind.

Sigmaril wrote:

Besides, what would be the point in even providing it with a weapon profile, when it always comes with the great axe, if not to benefit from the 3++?

Because it grants it an extra attack for two close combat weapons if I recall correctly.

Sigmaril wrote:

Evil Space Elves wrote:

Sigmaril wrote:

As I think we all know that Games Workshop is extremely careful with how they phrase every single sentance in their books to make sure there can be no doubt on how they should be interpreted.......

I hope this is sarcasm

It is indeed :-) But it's premise is also the base of this entire subject.
Why would we place so much faith in GW using a slightly different word in a rules description, knowing fully that consistency isn't their strong side, when there is a perfectly good rule on page 41 saying this is not the way to do it.

Because if we ignore the phrasing of rules the game quickly degenerates into Calvinball. Next time I play against wave serpents I could just be like, "the range is obviously supposed to be 6" inches, they just wrote it wrong."

The perfectly good rule on page 41 is overridden by the advanced rule in the codex.

Sorry to reply to this older message.  I caught up on some harlequin reading this weekend and noticed the various threads about this subject.  I'm not sure if this will advance anything, but here's $.02 more:

Trystis wrote:

The perfectly good rule on page 41 is overridden by the advanced rule in the codex.

The sentence in question:

"If a model has more than one Melee weapon, he must choose which one to attack with when he comes to strike blows - he cannot mix and match the abilities of several different Melee Weapons."

I'm not sure this needs to be overridden.  I'd concede the rule calls for selection of a single weapon.  But "he cannot mix and match the abilities of several different Melee Weapons" certainly does not mean "choose one weapon and ignore all special rules on weapons not selected".  

This sentence means you cannot pick and choose rules from your weapons, you must choose a weapon.  Period.  Special rules on your gear may or may not apply based on that choice.  Nowhere does it say they cease to exist for that phase or cannot be applied.  They sort themselves out based on their wording.

For example, a Solitaire makes a late game Blitz and successfully charges an Ob Sec Land Raider camping the game-winning objective.  Clearly he's going to chose to attack with his Caress because his Kiss cannot harm the Land Raider.  But he won't get 12 Caress of Death attacks on the Land Raider.  He gets 11.  Because the Kiss of Death Special Rule says one of the model's attacks "will be" a Kiss of Death attack if the model is equipped with a Harlequin's Kiss.

He cannot "mix and match" the Caress of Death and Kiss of Death Special Rules as he pleases.  He chooses a weapon and Special Rules apply based on that choice.