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.

I thought they did?

Uhh Ohh....

Grey Templar wrote:Yes they do.

So it'd be them, and some characters that'd benefit from that proposed rule.

sebster wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:Yes they do.

So it'd be them, and some characters that'd benefit from that proposed rule.

Sounds good to me lol

Riddick40k wrote:Sounds good to me lol

Well I guess you're as objective and fair a judge of this as can be so I'll start writing up the petition to GW... :looks at Riddick40k's signature: Wait a minute...

sebster wrote:

Riddick40k wrote:Sounds good to me lol

Well I guess you're as objective and fair a judge of this as can be so I'll start writing up the petition to GW... :looks at Riddick40k's signature: Wait a minute...

I have to admit that was pretty good

But in all seriousness you are right in the fact that this rule really only benefits warriors but i'm pretty sure there are other army books that have WS5 or more infantry that can use this rule, Corsairs come to mind very quickly and i think some Beastmen units too. But you have to think, MoK Warriors would be less killy if you took away the +1 attack they gain from 2 weapons. Sure they still have 3 attacks alltogether but only at S4. Thats still a better deal for the opponent over MoC warriors with halbreds and shields or great weapons.

Duke_Corwin wrote:Again, this might make sense for a hero or lord who has special training (could be an optional ability for certain armies) but probably not for a rank and file soldier.

Like Hellebron, the Dark Elf Hag Queen. She has two magic weapons, the Deathsword and Parrying Blade. The Deathsword makes her strength 10 and the Parrying Blade reduces the opponents attacks by 1. She still gets the bonus attack from two hand weapons too (as long as she isn't riding her Manticore).

So there's at least one character who does have this kind of bonus from two hand weapons, though it's a bonus from one of her weapons as opposed to a special rule on the character herself.

Sorry if this came up before, but 7th ed ogres actually had this. Ironfists were both, you chose at the beginning of each combat phase how they were used.

Again, sorry if that already came up.

Also, the idea is nice, on a duellist type character, but not the common folk.

If you want 2 1 Hand Weapons on a model... That means you will need to buy extras from GW... For the low low price of $40 they will sell you 16 more Swords on a sprue! =]

this would set horrible precedent =]


But your right that would be a cool option perhaps for DE and HE since they are all OLD enough to maybe have mastered 2 single weapons... Rats and Humans etc dont have the life span to be ninjas with 2 single hand weapons en masse.

Duke_Corwin wrote:Because soldiers are usually not master fencers. Using 2 hand weapons as a fencing art (with parries) is a rare form that is beyond the skill of basic soldiers.

Hence why there's a magic item that gives WS10 as a result.

HawaiiMatt wrote:

If orcs had the option for halberd, you'd see a lot less extra hand weapons.

-Matt

if orcs had 2 handed weapons, you would see a lot less extra hand weapons and no halberds