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.

Well I have tried to logically lay out each rule and how it could apply. Yes the model was out before the 5th edition rulebook. However the marine 5th edition codex did come out after the 5th edition rulebook. Knowing full well the letter of the 5th edition rulebook, the codex clearly details the "matched pair." Unfortunately the official 40k 5th edition rulebook and marine codex FAQ does not address this issue. But Dakka's own "Independent National Tournament Warhammer 40,000 FAQ" (INAT FAQ) does. In it, it states the below,

PG. 84

SM.129A.01 – Q: Does Marneus Calgar get the +1A
bonus when fighting with his pair of powerfists (the
Gauntlets of Ultramar)?

A: Yes, he may choose to fight either with his Power sword
(in which case he does not get the +1A bonus) or with his
pair of Guantlets (in which case he does get the +1A bonus)
[clarification].

So i'd say that the argument has merit.

Pg 42 of the small (main) rulebook, under the 'Two Of The Same Special Weapon' states, 'These models gain one additional attack.'

nosferatu1001 wrote:DR - agreed. You ignore the rules i present, and present a flawed argument in response. Obviously i wont agree.

I am not ignoring the rules you present, I will address those specifically:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Read the lines for special weapons - you pick one to use in CC

So 2 CCW is not a subset of 3? When asked "did you roll a double" on 3 dice, your answer would be no? really?

Your evidence is as flawed as the last time you presented it. Nothing will make you change your mind on this, so whats the point in rehashing it?

I read the lines for the weapons, you pick one to use in CC when you are using two different special weapons as detailed in the 'two different special weapons' rules

The 'two different special weapons' state:

"When it is their turn to attack, these models must choose which weapon to use that turn, but they never get the bonus attack for using two weapons (Such is the penalty for wielding too many complex weapons)".

Please read that completely, It states you NEVER get the bonus attack for USING two [different special] weapons. (As outlined in the 'two different special weapons' rules).

Ergo, if you are using 'two different special weapons' you never get the bonus attack.

If you are using Two of the same special weapon you gain one bonus attack as outlined in the rules for 'Two of the same special weapon'

It comes down to what people believe *using* means. Most people think that means that a model can use two ccw in combat, some people think that models use any weapon that they are carrying.

A problem with the idea that carrying = using is that the rules specifically talk about using two different ccw; but doesnt talk at all about using three ccw. This means that the rules really dont address the situation, if one believes that the model has to use all of its weapons.

Now if the model can pick which two cc weapons to use, the rules do cover the problem fine.



Also, if one wants to consider the rule as meaning two weapons is a subset of three weapons.....doesnt this mean that the using term HAS to be applied as if it means the model has a choice to only use two weapons?




Sliggoth

You only ever use one weapon in CC, otherwise if you "used" two you could argue some really odd combinations