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.

Ok, not sure if this has been done to death. I used the search function first, and couldn't find an answer that wasn't dealing with something else or just convoluted.

SM Captain:
Equipment: ...Bolt Pistol, Chainsword... (C:SM, Pg. 164)
"-May take items from the Melee Weapons....Lists." (C:SM, Pg. 164)

Space Marine Wargear List, Melee Weapons
"A model can replace his bolt pistol and/or melee weapon with one of the following: - Lightning Claw" (C:SM, Pg. 159)

So, my question:
Can a SM captain replace his bolt pistol and chainsword for two lightning claws?

I am confused as I can read it two ways:

One: He may replace his Bolt Pistol with one of the following AND he may replace his chainsword with one of the following, thus enabling you to replace each one with one lightning claw, thus allowing two lightning claws....

-or-

Two: He may replace his Bolt Pistol and/or chainsword with ONE of the following, thus saying that he cannot have more than one of the following weapons.

Honestly, I lean more towards #2, but I have that really cool LE Sicarius model with the Twin Lightning Claws, and I want him to be my captain. For friendly games, I don't think many people will cry 'foul' over two lighning claws, although that would be quite the AP3 Blender (twin linked w/ shred), but for official reasons I want to make sure I'm covered.

Discuss.

Assuming it says BP and/or CS - then yes, he can swap both for LCs.

Yes he can take 2 lc. Because it says bolt pistol/ or cc weapon. Its just like how a ba assault sgt can take 2 hand flamers.

No need for a poll - he can replace one item for a LC, then exchange another item for a second LC. He's allowed to replace both by that sentence. The and/or gives you that option, and it would say only "or" if it was one item only.

Though I can see the confusion - GW could certainly express that in a clearer manner. It's just that it would take more text to do it, saying you may swap BP for one and chainsword for another.

Ok, thanks everyone!

I'm not sure why, but I just couldn't wrap my head around that one. The weirdest things seem to stump me.

godswildcard wrote:
The weirdest things seem to stump me.

Hey, GW writing can stump everyone. I know a teacher in English and I myself managed 297 out of 299 in English for the student exam from the Gymnasium (same age range as American High School but a lot more mandatory courses), resulting in a Laudatur score. We still can't make it all work like later GW FAQs say it's supposed to work.

This is one I have brought up before, one of those good examples of bad wording you find throughout the rule books. The intent is very clear, duel wielding lightning claws has been done for so very long at all sorts of official events, but by the English language you would come to the complete opposite conclusion. The sentence does technically read one of two ways: "A model can replace his bolt pistol and melee weapon with one of the following" or "A model can replace his bolt pistol or melee weapon with one of the following." Thanks to this very poor wording one could very easily claim a 2-lightning claw Sargent is not possible though it makes the whole situation ridiculous and raises a more pressing question.

When you have the choice of swapping one or two weapons for one, whom in their right mind will replace two weapons for one?

If I was to vote I would have to say No for Rules as Written reasons but Yes for Rules as Intended reasons. The and/or would have no reason to exist if it wasn't making it possible to take two weapons at the same time, as it would take less ink and make the rule far more clear to simply state "or." I am a little thankful for this fact actually as the poor writing found in some rules, and how often Game Workshop releases books, means sites like this will continue to exist for years to come. I might blame the editors a lot, they deserve it, but at least it is keeping us all entertained here.

twin linking with shred???? Are these new rules for twin lightning claws???

Good catch there Hobbs, wonder how we all missed that error in his post.

To my knowledge lightning claws have not changed, that would take quite a lot of FAQ'ing as even chaos marines have them in their arsenal so at least six codex's would have to be re-written or updated. As far as I know they are still bound by the melee weapon rules, and per those rules only a single melee weapon can only used at a time. As specialist weapons, the real and only benefit of taking a second claw is nothing more then allowing the two-melee weapon rule to take effect, when it would otherwise be denied.

JinxDragon wrote:
Good catch there Hobbs, wonder how we all missed that error in his post.

To my knowledge lightning claws have not changed, that would take quite a lot of FAQ'ing as even chaos marines have them in their arsenal so at least six codex's would have to be re-written or updated. As far as I know they are still bound by the melee weapon rules, and per those rules only a single melee weapon can only used at a time. As specialist weapons, the real and only benefit of taking a second claw is nothing more then allowing the two-melee weapon rule to take effect, when it would otherwise be denied.

Yep, you're right. I'm not a competitive player, so at times I'm a bit lax on the rules as a whole. Back in the day, the benefit of taking two lightning claws was that they were twin-linked. That has changed apparently (I looked it up, no question about it).

But twin-linked with shred.... A man can dream!

godswildcard wrote:

JinxDragon wrote:
Good catch there Hobbs, wonder how we all missed that error in his post.

To my knowledge lightning claws have not changed, that would take quite a lot of FAQ'ing as even chaos marines have them in their arsenal so at least six codex's would have to be re-written or updated. As far as I know they are still bound by the melee weapon rules, and per those rules only a single melee weapon can only used at a time. As specialist weapons, the real and only benefit of taking a second claw is nothing more then allowing the two-melee weapon rule to take effect, when it would otherwise be denied.

Yep, you're right. I'm not a competitive player, so at times I'm a bit lax on the rules as a whole. Back in the day, the benefit of taking two lightning claws was that they were twin-linked. That has changed apparently (I looked it up, no question about it).

But twin-linked with shred.... A man can dream!

No melee weapons have ever been 'twin-linked'.

Dra'al Nacht wrote:

godswildcard wrote:

JinxDragon wrote:
Good catch there Hobbs, wonder how we all missed that error in his post.

To my knowledge lightning claws have not changed, that would take quite a lot of FAQ'ing as even chaos marines have them in their arsenal so at least six codex's would have to be re-written or updated. As far as I know they are still bound by the melee weapon rules, and per those rules only a single melee weapon can only used at a time. As specialist weapons, the real and only benefit of taking a second claw is nothing more then allowing the two-melee weapon rule to take effect, when it would otherwise be denied.

Yep, you're right. I'm not a competitive player, so at times I'm a bit lax on the rules as a whole. Back in the day, the benefit of taking two lightning claws was that they were twin-linked. That has changed apparently (I looked it up, no question about it).

But twin-linked with shred.... A man can dream!

No melee weapons have ever been 'twin-linked'.

Well CLEARLY I meant the turn they charged with an attached chaplain! GOL! Don't know how you missed that!

I swear guys, I've never used these things (lightning claws). I've never cheated anyone with my Terri-bad memory and clearly cheating orientd subconscious!

Lol 2 lightning claws just means +1 attack.

From a min max standard, you are better off taking a plasma (or grav pistol) and lightning claw. Yes, you lose 1 melee attack, but you can a str7 shooting attack that you can make prior to the charge, ensuring you get at least one good "attack" in case you fail the charge, it can hurt vehicles, MC etc, high str is better for wounding.

My old BA chaplain used to pick off vehicles from the rear all the time.