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.

Ive looked through threads here on dakka and it seems pretty even split on how many attacks zombies get in close combat. Some say base 1 attacks because it says (on page 61) that they are armed with "a single close combat weapon" and that the "pistols used for clubbing" is simply reference to the fact they cant shoot. The other side is that they are base 2 because they have the same wargear as a cultist, so they have a close combat wep + pistol. The wording is pretty ambiguous if you ask me and I can see it going either way (which is why other threads are so split). What does everyone else think now?

1 attack, 2 when charging.

The wording on page 61 is really clear.

They are armed with "a single close combat weapon"

That is it, just a single CCW nothing else.

If I had a knife in one hand, and a club in the other, how many melee weapons do I have?

Personally, I can swing both ways as this is an issue of bad writing. I don't dislike Phil Kelly, he is better then some of their writers, but I feel he fell for one of the biggest problems facing Game Workshop writers. While it is suitable for you to use flavorful and descriptive text in most English writings there are situations where you don't do that. Those situations are when you need to communicate an idea in a way that it can't be misunderstood, which requires the most simplest language. If you feel the need to add flavor text then it should be written along side the simple, rule based, language that states the very same thing.

It would of been far better for Kelly to have simply have stated: Plague zombies are cultists that have X, X, X, X, X and remove auto-pistols from their wargear.

He pretty much did. They are armed with ccws. That is all.

JinxDragon wrote:
If I had a knife in one hand, and a club in the other, how many melee weapons do I have?

If your rules said that you are armed with a Single CCW? Then 1, no matter how many actual weapons your model is holding you only have 1.

I could form an argument around the fact they are already armed with a single combat weapon as per their wargear, but I don't feel like playing the devil advocate tonight.

I still think it should of been better written, instead of using descriptive text they could of simply stated 'remove auto-pistol from the war-gear.' That doesn't change the fact I am quite willing to accept that you have two close combat weapons, but are restricted to using one for all rule purposes. I mean, it is a good argument based on the fact they have included this line of text in the first place. If we treat it as a rule in and of itself, then for all other rules related to combat weapons will need to focus on the word singular.

So chose which to do: stab them with your knife or hit them with your club.

They aren't armed with pistols. At all.
They are armed with a single CCW. No more. No less.

The fluff bit about clubbing is just that. Fluff. It only has a purpose if you're using a model that happens to have a gun. Gets around any WYSIWYG requirements.

 grendel083 wrote:
They aren't armed with pistols. At all.
They are armed with a single CCW. No more. No less.

The fluff bit about clubbing is just that. Fluff. It only has a purpose if you're using a model that happens to have a gun. Gets around any WYSIWYG requirements.

This.