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.

"Some models are Equipped with two single-handed weapons they can use in close combat, with the rules below."

I can point out that yes, they have to Have the weapons in question to unlock the special rules for Use. And pointing out that they cannot use 2 different Special CCWs together doesn't help your position; that is what I already said.

Highlighting buzzwords only works when said buzzwords are used in support of your position, as opposed to countermanding it.

Also highlighting that you need to have a model with 2 weapons really doesn't support your position either; it just shows that you were skimming for your buzzword to fight without paying attention to what said word is talking about.

Now back to calgar and this exact situation: you have admitted and quoted that making a choice between using 2 different special weapons means you cannot gain the 2ccw bonus attack. When calgar is fighting with his GoU, he has chosen to do so under the 2 different specials rule correct? And how are you attempting to gain a bonus attack from the Gauntlets? via using 2 of the same CCW; but you had to get to that rule through the rule specifically forbidding any 2CCW bonus.

Kel, for a model to use those combinations they must be using the weapon. Everything in this section is about using (/wielding), if you are not using it does not matter.

So if Malgar is using two power fists then he is using a matched pair of special weapons and get +1 attacks. If Malgar is using a Power fist and sword then and only then must he choose which special weapon he is using and will not get a bonus attack.

As for the highlighting that was to show that there is no must. Only thing that matters is you can use 2 weapons and if you do use them what effect you will have.

Kommissar Kel wrote:Now back to calgar and this exact situation: you have admitted and quoted that making a choice between using 2 different special weapons means you cannot gain the 2ccw bonus attack. When calgar is fighting with his GoU, he has chosen to do so under the 2 different specials rule correct? And how are you attempting to gain a bonus attack from the Gauntlets? via using 2 of the same CCW; but you had to get to that rule through the rule specifically forbidding any 2CCW bonus.

No that is not correct. He has not chosen to do so under the 2 different specials rule, since he is not using two different special weapons, he is using two of the same special weapon.

The making a choice between using 2 different special weapons sections refers to models fighting with two different special weapons.

If he is not using/fighting with his power weapon and power fist, you do not use those rules at all. You should net even look at them, since you are using two weapons that do not fit into this category.

you use the ruleset that matches what you are using.

So if he is using two power fists you use the rules for two of the same special weapon and he gains an additional attack.

If you are using his power weapon and power fist you use the rules for two different special weapons, and does not gain the additional attack, and must chose between which, of the two weapons he is wielding, that he will use the bonuses and penalties for.

you don't get to that rule through the other rule. You get to that rule because you only look at the rules for what you are fighting with, a Power weapon in his pocket does not affect anything, since you only use the rules for two different special weapons, if you are actually Fighting with two different special weapons, and not simply equipped with two different special weapons.

Fighting with = using = wielding.

I posted this, oh a year ago or so, but here it is again.

The definition of wield itself does not actually help anyone in this, without ignoring a fair bit.

That actually helps a lot.

wielding is holding and using something, not just merely being equipped with.

if you are not wielding something, you do not use its rules.

kirsanth wrote:I posted this, oh a year ago or so, but here it is again.

The definition of wield itself does not actually help anyone in this, without ignoring a fair bit.

Less of an issue if you look at an English dictionary definition (not an American one) Where its normally using a weapon.

Tri wrote:Less of an issue if you look at an English dictionary definition (not an American one) Where its normally using a weapon.

You mean like the Oxford English Dictionary link I just posted?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DeathReaper wrote:That actually helps a lot.

If you say so.

I play it as you state, but I do not think there is actually text backing it.
Of course, I do not think there is text for the situation at all, but we have to play it somehow.

kirsanth wrote:

Tri wrote:Less of an issue if you look at an English dictionary definition (not an American one) Where its normally using a weapon.

You mean like the Oxford English Dictionary link I just posted?

wield(wield)

Entry from US dictionary
...

... As i said it is normally used in this context as using a weapon in UK English dictionary ...

...still same link - "?region=us" does work ...

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/wield

Tri wrote:...still same link - "?region=us" does work ...

Hmm..they changed the site and messed with my bookmark!
Even so, OED lists that definition identically in both World and US english.

Thanks for the heads up, I changed my bookmark.