8th Ed. Piranha Blade?

[Lizards o Lustria]

Is it worth taking the Piranha Blade for say an Oldblood? It is pretty pricey at 50 pts and doesnt seem to be the best magic weapon around.
Armour Piercing: a Sword of Might can do the same thing AND make it easier to wound, and that only costs 20 points.
Multiple Wounds: Maybe in bigger games if you are planning on going character hunting, but an Oldblood with 5 attacks and predatory fighter might not need it anyway. Plus, if you roll a one or two you could get screwed over relying on the multiwounds.

So im thinking: is it really worth it for 50 points?

 

[Ondjage]

D3 wounds is not a common thing for heroes, combine the piranha blade with a potion of strength and the old blood can mess up any monster or character.

 

[GhostWarrior]

I personally really enjoy the Piranha Blade on my Oldblood, in the context of my list.

I don't take a Slann, and I have two Lvl 1 Beasts Shamans (though I'm considering making them Lvl 2's instead of taking a Blastiladon). The Oldblood has:

Piranha Blade, Charmed Shield, Talisman of Preservation, Cold One.

I find him a flexible and efficient killer, whose value goes up with a casting of even one Wildform. He tends to be in a unit of Saurus Warriors with Spears, or CO Cav, so the whole unit benefits from the spell. He does sometimes roll 1's in key challenges, but he also will roll 2 x 5-6's and kill whatever it is he's facing. Without the AP ability, I would agree that the blade is overcosted. With AP, its just good enough in my book. Again, my list is combat-focused, and he exists in combination with 2 GW Cowboys. He's in my list starting at 2k.

In an army where there's not even a chance of boosting his strength, I'd say his value would be lessened.

 

[Lizardmatt]

While it depends on the opponent, a old blood with Piranha Blade is on par with a Red Fury + ASF + Ogre Blade Vampire Lord when going up against multi-wound models.
Yes, that vamp is great against everything, but that vamp also has 120 points of gear and blood lines, compared to the 50 point sword.

In short, I'd say the blade is worth 50 points.

 

[Pofadder]

I love the piranha blade...As I normally have str 7 attacks in the way of GW scar-vets I think it fills a good niche. Characters, MI and MC should fear this guy if they have any sense

Being base str 5 without augments or potions etc will be enough most of the time. AP is the cherry on the cake. Along with potential PF procs means this could turn into quite a couple of wounds in a combat against multi-wounds models.

Ogres beware!

 

[RasputinII]

As the weapon says the weirder has multiple wounds (D3) if combined with the steg helm he could be very effective against daemons and ogres and trolls. Especially if he was in a unit with the flaming banner for flaming D3 wound AP impact hits.

 

[Putzfrau]

As the weapon says the weirder has multiple wounds (D3) if combined with the steg helm he could be very effective against daemons and ogres and trolls. Especially if he was in a unit with the flaming banner for flaming D3 wound AP impact hits.

Debatable.

 

[tektekboom]

As the weapon says the weirder has multiple wounds (D3) if combined with the steg helm he could be very effective against daemons and ogres and trolls. Especially if he was in a unit with the flaming banner for flaming D3 wound AP impact hits.

Debatable.

I want to start out by saying that what I am about to say is not meant to be in any way an insult towards you. For something that is debatable, I see little to no debate as to why this would not be valid. The wording seems to imply that any attacks inflicted by the wielder has MW. Other items and abilities are rather specific in their wording ("Sharpened Horns" affects only impact hits, "Executioner's Axe" grants MW caused by wounds using the axe only, while other items in the BRB are specific to the weapons attacks, or affecting the models profile). Putting poor rules writing to the side, we can see that where things would make contradictory rules within this rulebook, they are controlled, (this can be seen within the disciplines section of the rulebook. Considering the fact that there is only one piece of magic armor within this rulebook and 2 magical weapons, we are left with a whopping 2 combinations if selecting wargear purely from the armybook. Where the sword of realities is specific to attacks made using the sword, we can see no gray areas here, though the Piranha blade grants the wielder MW and armor piercing (period) There is no mention of attacks made with the weapon, or anything else.

Now for the counterpoint, the BRB states that attacks made with Armor Piercing/Multiple Wounds, gain the special rule. Nowhere does it say that a model with this special rule confers it onto his close combat attacks. In fact, the faq goes so far as to state the special attack stomp/thunderstomp can never benefit from the Multiple Wounds rules.

The rebuttal to the counterpoint, many units in the game have the multiple wounds or the armor piercing rule in their profile, the army books does not go on to specify whether this rule goes on to apply to the close combat attacks (most notably the Carnosaur), though all tournament players, and all examples (that haven't been contradicted) of the Carnosaur on this site show his close combat attacks using the multiple wounds special rule, we can safely assume that if a model has MW on it's profile it will apply to his/her/it's close combat attacks. As for stomp, the brb faq is specific to stating that stomp benefits from no special rules, Impact Hits are still considered close combat attacks and have yet to be stated otherwise. In fact there are examples of units that combine impact hits, and multiple wounds with other special rules (most notably for us Lizardmen players we see this with the stegadon).

 

[hardyworld]

I believe the reason people say it is debatable is due to the answer given here:

Q: Does a weapon that gives a bonus to a characteristic only give that bonus when being used to attack a model?(p4)
A: Most weapons, including magic weapons, state when the bonus is given. For example, a model with the Fencer’s Blades will always have Weapon Skill 10 whilst a model with a great weapon will only have +2 Strength when striking an enemy in close combat. When a weapon does not say when the characteristic bonus applies, then it only applies when striking, or being struck, in close combat.

The implication being that special rules given by magic weapons are applied the same way as characteristic bonuses given by magic weapons. The rules aren't clear on this (and the wording in the weapon's description muddies the waters even further), which is why it's best to discuss it with your opponent before starting the game. I always err to the side that doesn't benefit myself in such situations, but if you and your opponent agree otherwise, I wouldn't say you are deviating from the given rules either.

 

[tektekboom]

To emphasize my point, Impact hits are still considered to be within the close combat phase.

 

[Putzfrau]

To emphasize my point, Impact hits are still considered to be within the close combat phase.

"When striking or struck"

You don't strike with impact hits. If they wanted to include impact hits they would merely say "attacks made in close combat" instead of using "strike" to, imo, signify the striking motion attacking with a weapon entails.

 

[hardyworld]

Agreed. Striking does not include impact hits. Typically impact hits do not include weapon bonuses (such as a strength bonus) unless otherwise specified. Since it's not specifically called out in this instance, it's hard (not impossible) to justify using existing rules and wording.

 

[tektekboom]

Agreed. Striking does not include impact hits. Typically impact hits do not include weapon bonuses (such as a strength bonus) unless otherwise specified. Since it's not specifically called out in this instance, it's hard (not impossible) to justify using existing rules and wording.

After reviewing my previous comment, I must apologize if my "tone" came off in any way as demeaning or malicious. As you both have emphasized "striking or struck", as impact hits automatically hit and are considered the close combat phase. Though if you would like to argue the difference between being "automatically hit" and "automatically struck", I would be more than willing to comply.

I must mention that in the spirit of the game which is meant to be "friendly", I will agree that a quick mention to an opponent before the game begins is more than agreeable.

 

[Putzfrau]

Agreed. Striking does not include impact hits. Typically impact hits do not include weapon bonuses (such as a strength bonus) unless otherwise specified. Since it's not specifically called out in this instance, it's hard (not impossible) to justify using existing rules and wording.

After reviewing my previous comment, I must apologize if my "tone" came off in any way as demeaning or malicious. As you both have emphasized "striking or struck", as impact hits automatically hit and are considered the close combat phase. Though if you would like to argue the difference between being "automatically hit" and "automatically struck", I would be more than willing to comply.

I must mention that in the spirit of the game which is meant to be "friendly", I will agree that a quick mention to an opponent before the game begins is more than agreeable.

strike

verb
1.
hit forcibly and deliberately with one's hand or a weapon or other implement.

Impact hits are not a strike. They are not struck in the matter that a close combat attack is struck with the weapon in question.

The idea behind the FAQ was to allocate the Special rule associated with a given weapon to the attacks made with that weapon.

Trying to attribute these rules to impact hits would be stretching it, and I think its in poor taste to play this way without at least breezing over it with your opponent first.

I think the FAQ is fairly clear with its intent, even if the "striking/struck" vocabulary isn't 100% clear. If you feel like impact hits should be included, IMO, you would need a pretty convincing argument as to why the choice was made to specify "striking/struck" instead of merely saying "ALL attacks made in close combat".

 

[hardyworld]

I didn't think your tone was malicious at all, tektekboom. Forum posts are not a clear medium to discuss rules and you have to clearly explain your understanding in the process, its just part of it.

Another helpful FAQ item:

Q: Do special rules that can inflict hits in close combat, such as Stomp and Breath Weapons, count as close combat attacks? (p42)
A: No they count as an unusual attack and will be distributed as a shooting attack.

So while occurring in the close combat phase, impact hits are not even a close combat attack, let alone 'strike'. Aside: Personally, I do not care for the terminology used here, but do agree with the effects of the ruling; as they are logical and consistent.

The implication from the BRB rules is that weapons are not actively used in impact hits (or other unusual attacks). Stretching the application of the earlier-quoted FAQ, as already discussed, further extends that implication to include characteristic bonuses and special rules applied by weapons. The whole 'count as an unusual attack' goes hand-in-hand with this since you normally attempt to strike a specific model in close combat (usually with a weapon), contrarily impact hits (and stomps, etc.) are applied in a different manner than striking a model (they are automatic hits applied to a unit in base-to-base contact). Hopefully what I am saying makes sense and, more importantly, is consistent with the rules.

 

[Ecomp]

Technically you could also argue that a skink chief with a blow pipe could use the multiple wounds X3 and armour piercing through the blowpipe, as in the rulebook, it states that ALL attacks made by a model with the rule get the bonus.

But of course, that would be ridiculous.

 

[forlustria]

Or a slann with piranha blade. Deadly spells lol

 

[Screamer]

Or a slann with piranha blade. Deadly spells lol

Haven't you heard of Thor, the weapon-flinging toad?

"I don't cast fireballs, I throw piranha blades!"

 

[Sleboda]

If someone wanted to model their Slann with a Piranha gun ala Despicable Me, I'd give it to 'em.

 

[tektekboom]

If someone wanted to model their Slann with a Piranha gun ala Despicable Me, I'd give it to 'em.

I wouldn't... unless said slann was also wearing an Orange jumpsuit and had a Mushroom styled haircut