Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So in both crusader and command squads, they start with a bolter and can swap it for a pistol and CCW. If they then take a melta or flamer, do they still have their pistol and ccw? The wording says they may be "armed with" the special weapon. It doesn't say anything about swapping the previous weapons for it.

It sounds like you keep both Pistol and CCW - if nothing requires you to swap or lose weapons

Correct. Crusader squads do not require you to swap anything, you just get a special weapon, so you can have a BP+CCW+Special.

This is being discussed on another forum here: http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.php?showtopic=180190

The main counter argument that is being made is that, when you take a powerfist it says you get a fist + bolt pistol which would be redundant if you kept the previous wargear. Does that change anything?

Isn't wording for the special CCW weapons is different to the ranged specials?

Its the same wording. "One Initiate may me armed with the following weapons: Power weapon and bolt pistol, power fist and bolt pistol, blah blah melta"

Ah, well in that case the RaW is clear, they have 2 Bolt Pistols, a CCW and a Power Fist, or a Bolter, Bolt Pistol and Power Fist.

Could it be possibly that armed is being used in the exclusive sense? Thats the only way i'm seeing for them to NOT get everything. Is armed being used to mean "only armed"? I don't see any indicators that it is.

What do you think the RAI for this would be?

with wolves getting a bolter, pistol and CCW, and keeping the pistol/ccw if they get a melta or whatever.. I could hardly justify telling a BT player that they couldnt just add it since it does not say they have to exchange or replace

NaZ wrote:with wolves getting a bolter, pistol and CCW, and keeping the pistol/ccw if they get a melta or whatever.. I could hardly justify telling a BT player that they couldnt just add it since it does not say they have to exchange or replace

Thats a nice sentiment and i agree, but we must remember that the BT codex is an old one. Back then it was standard to exchange stuff.

In the older days, I think the accepted thing was to replace old weapons with the new ones.

Unfortunately I don't have my 3rd ed rulebook with me, but I'm fairly sure it dictated that "equipped with" would replace the default equipment.

Nowdays, 5th edition doesn't mention anything of the like since the new codices are organised very differently and are more explicit when replacing things with others. Also, if you argue that "equipped with" means "replace other weapons with the following" it can cause problems because many units have options to be "equipped with" grenades.

I personally play that equipped with simply means an additional weapon is gained. But I have known people to argue till blue in the face that it should be played the older way, so be aware of the fact that some people might be very insistant that you can't have a meltagun, bolt pistol, and close combat weapon.

Well, turns out we're all wrong.

Black Templars Codex page 30: "Any model who takes an upgrade weapon loses the weapon he was originally armed with unless otherwise stated."

I got my 3rd edition rulebook out just out of curiosity to check if I was right.

on page 167 it states: "Important: Note that if you take a weapon option or upgrade, then the model's 'standard' weapons are lost.... The only exception to this are grenade upgrades, which allow the model to keep its original weapons as well as taking the upgrade."

So this is why many of the older codices simply use the term "upgrade to have" or something similar, because the rulebook dictated a functionality for that phrase (admittedly it was hidden down the back with the army lists), however that phrase is since gone. In the case of Black Templars, as Drudge has shown, they have the same rule within the codex, so it continues to apply, however other armies such as Dark Eldar do not have such a rule printed in the codex, and it still causes some confusion there.