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.

Was looking at roughriders and had a question. They have 1 attack each and are armed with both a hunting lance and chainsword. The chainsword has the ability "Each time the bearer fights, it can make one additional attack with this weapon". So, if I charge and use my 1 attack as a hunting lance, can I still take the bonus chainsword attack?

I can see this being ruled both ways. It is unclear if the "additional attack" is in addition to other attacks or just chainsword attacks.

I'd say you can make the bonus attack if you use the Hunting Lance. It fulfils the requirements of the Chainsword. If the rule said "Each time the bearer fights with this weapon, it can make one additional attack" that would be different but there's nothing stopping you making all your attacks with something else then an additional with the Chainsword.

As far as I see it, the bearer need to be in a fight, at that point he gets an additional attack made with a chainsword (or equivalent weapon, there are others like that). So all you have to do in order to gain that bonus attack is to have the item equipped. so you can charge with the lance and get a bonus attack from the sword (not the lance).
As for gaining two bonus attacks for equipping items like, I'm waiting on the rulebook to see if there is more clarifaction on that matter.

There aren't any general 2 CCW bonus attacks, Roknar.

I didn't say anything of the sort? Chainswords give the bearer an additional attack with that weapon when they fight. So do lightning claws when you have two and I'm sure there are others and they probably follow the same wording. The wording on the bearer needing to be in a fight to gain the additional attack reads to me that you don't actually need to attack with chainswords/ lightning claws/etc to gain the extra attack. The only restriction is that the extra attack has to be made with the relevant weapon, not with a weapon of your choice.

The bonus attack has to be with the chainsword, as it specifies with this weapon.

If you are making the bonus attack with a different weapon it is not this weapon(the chainsword).

In other words a hunting Lance is not a chainsword.

Just like a Nov with Choppa and powerklaw doesn't gain a bonus power klaw attack, it gets a bonus attack with the Choppa. Because in plain English it says with this weapon in the Choppa rules.

Yes, but that doesn't mean you need to actually attack with it in order to gain the extra attack. It only means that the extra attack has to be made with the weapon that has that special rule.
The model can make X attacks with whatever weapon they have, then if they have a chainsword, they may make an additional attack with the chainsword, or choppa or whatever "each time the bearer fights". The bearer is still fighting when using a different weapon so that's enough to trigger the bonus attack from the chainsword.

 Roknar wrote:
Yes, but that doesn't mean you need to actually attack with it in order to gain the extra attack. It only means that the extra attack has to be made with the weapon that has that special rule.
The model can make X attacks with whatever weapon they have, then if they have a chainsword, they may make an additional attack with the chainsword, or choppa or whatever "each time the bearer fights". The bearer is still fighting when using a different weapon so that's enough to trigger the bonus attack from the chainsword.

Much like the Tyranid Tail Weapons as a case of reference.

 Roknar wrote:
I didn't say anything of the sort? Chainswords give the bearer an additional attack with that weapon when they fight. So do lightning claws when you have two and I'm sure there are others and they probably follow the same wording. The wording on the bearer needing to be in a fight to gain the additional attack reads to me that you don't actually need to attack with chainswords/ lightning claws/etc to gain the extra attack. The only restriction is that the extra attack has to be made with the relevant weapon, not with a weapon of your choice.

Sorry, misread what you were saying. You were wondering if having making attacks with 2 different chainswords would give you two bonus attacks? I'm not 100% sure either, but I'd say not.

 Roknar wrote:
Yes, but that doesn't mean you need to actually attack with it in order to gain the extra attack. It only means that the extra attack has to be made with the weapon that has that special rule.
The model can make X attacks with whatever weapon they have, then if they have a chainsword, they may make an additional attack with the chainsword, or choppa or whatever "each time the bearer fights". The bearer is still fighting when using a different weapon so that's enough to trigger the bonus attack from the chainsword.

Yep, that's what I am saying.

I misunderstood and thought someone had chainsword and hunting Lance and wanted to use the bonus chainsword attack for attacking with the hunting Lance.

So going by the consensus here that one doesn't need to wield the weapon to get the bonus, and with the way the Warp Talon claws are worded (differently from the regular lightning claw wording) , a basic Warp Talon would get 3 attacks base. One for the 1 A, one for the first lightning claw equipped and one for the second one equipped. The champ would get 4 attacks. So a squad of five would have 16 str 4, -2 ap, rerolling wounds attacks. That's pretty good

I'd say not, if they wanted to have the Warp Talons get two bonus attacks they'd just have given them 2A, and not done it through a strange quirk in the text on their lightning claws.

I agree, but it has the same language, so RAW, it would be the same. Or they would have just used the same text on their lightning claws as everywhere else. This is not "what they wanted" RAI, but a RAW thread.

That's the part I'm not sure enough about to answer one way or another. Historically that's the kind of thing GW goes out of their way for in order to prevent. But I don't really see anything that say you can't gain the benefit twice. They aren't even special rules in that sense. You simply have two individual weapons that grant an additional attack by following their rules text.
This is also a problem of bespoke rules. Is the lightning claw text a typo in the warp talons, are they really meant to gain the benefit twice (unlike a normal pair of lightning claws, in which case, why call them lightning clawsto begin with?) or is there something in the rules that prevents this kind of stacking. Could be profile < armoury for example. I've only seen the the leaked core rules that had liek a handful of pages so far.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Until we're certain, I'm going to treat them as a single bonus attack. It feels wrong to gain two attacks in this manner.

If you get a pair of Chainsaws (Captains can do this) I don't see anything wrong with them getting a bonus attack with each of them.

They have 4 attacks base and go up to 6 that way. They could instead use the "classic" stock loadout of Boltpistol and Chainsword, that would trade in the disputed 2nd bonus attack for an equal Boltpistol shot (S4 AP0 D1).

Both are 0 points, the Chainswords attack can be used in both sides' turns while the Pistol can be used at range, too, but only on my turn.

That seems reasonable to me. I don't have the stats for the Talons, but are there alternate options, and how would they stack against the two bonus attacks?

Most weapons (ranged or melee) have a "with this weapon" caveat. Many of those are "when making attacks with this weapon" or specific rolls to hit or to wound "with this weapon". Chainswords and the like(identical wording) are "each time the bearer fights"; so the trigger is that the bearer is fighting(part of a close combat), the effect is a bonus attack with the weapon.

This mitigates some chicanery: a sigle chainsword as a melee weapon(as in no others) and 2A profile means 3 attacks with the chainsword. 2 chainswords(no others) and 2A. Means 4 attacks withthe chainswords. A Chainsword and a power fist with 2A means 2 Attacks with whichever weapon ans an attack with the chainsword.

It seems really simple as a bearer-triggered ability that has a singular effect.

I am really not even sure why there is a debate on this. It is not like we have brand new players discussing the edition that is not out yet. We have had the bearer vs use distinction off and on for a few editiins now, the most recent ruling has been bearer wording means use is not needed, and this is written really clearly.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
I am really not even sure why there is a debate on this. It is not like we have brand new players discussing the edition that is not out yet. We have had the bearer vs use distinction off and on for a few editiins now, the most recent ruling has been bearer wording means use is not needed, and this is written really clearly.

Maybe it's because we have an entirely new ruleset. Rulings for 7th aren't applicable at all. Don't fall into the "well we always did it this way" trap, that way you'll probably end up with the wrong interpretation in quite a few situations. Go with what the rules say. And just because YOU are a veteran player doesn't mean everyone else is. People WILL start looking into 40k, they will have questions that have come up in the past - and greeting them with a "dude, we discussed this 3 years ago how can you be so dense to not know this?" is really not something we should do.

Yes, new players will come in within the next few months to years; having this cleared up(and with the lack of any current ruling that bearer of weapon abilities require use of that weapon, which is exactly as the new rules are; falling back to a default "must use the weapon" attitude is exactly what you are chastising me for).

Entirely new ruleset does not state a weapon must be used for it's abilities to apply. Most of the actual weapon abilities state this(in effect) via "Attacks with this weapon". The only thing I can think of off hand is Plasma weapons where the supercharge states "a/any to hit rolls of 1... bearer is slain after all of this weapon's shots have been resolved" It is listed under the ability of the Supercharge profile, but any weapon is going to be making to hit rolls in either shooting or melee, so the effect from that trigger will slay the bearer as soon as it resolves the shooting attacks of either profile have been resolved.

SO... Yay we have already found GWs really poor wording that has unintended effects no matter how we look at it.

Personally I see the Chainsword/Choppa/etc wording to mean exactly what it says: If the bearer is fighting(with any weapon) it makes a single extra attack with any of the weapons it has with the ability(A DW Veteran Armed with a chainsword and power fist gets 3 attacks: 2 with P-Fist and 1 with chainsword; if he had 2 chainswords he'd get 4 atacks, 2 base and 2 bonus for having 2 chainswords). So in the OP's case the rough rider charging attacks with the lance and the bonus attacks with the chainsword.

 Roknar wrote:
So do lightning claws when you have two and I'm sure there are others and they probably follow the same wording.

And then we have cases like warp talons that have lightning claw that says "each time bearer fights it can make 1 additional attack with this weapon". Since he's armed with 2 he gets two extra attack. Then when we have terminator it has lightning claw that states "when armed with 2 lightning claws gets extra attack with them".

So we have TWO entries with word "lightning claw" as name with different rules and somehow warp talons getting more attacks than terminators when armed with 2 lightning claws...

Bespoken rules!

edit: Oh it was already noted later.

I suspect the warp talons will get nerfed in a FAQ in short order, but for now, it's pretty clear the rules grant +1 A per warp claw. Enjoy!

Chainsword weapon profile specifically states that the extra attack is with the chainsword. So in the original question, the roughrider gets one attack with the lance and one bonus attack with the chainsword

 Trickstick wrote:
Was looking at roughriders and had a question. They have 1 attack each and are armed with both a hunting lance and chainsword. The chainsword has the ability "Each time the bearer fights, it can make one additional attack with this weapon". So, if I charge and use my 1 attack as a hunting lance, can I still take the bonus chainsword attack?

I can see this being ruled both ways. It is unclear if the "additional attack" is in addition to other attacks or just chainsword attacks.

No. When you attack with the lance you use the profile for the lance, which means no bonus attacks. If you attack with the Chainsword you get 1 additional attack. Having it equipped is not enough, you need to actually nominate to use it to get the benefits.

Now if your model has 2 A in its profile you can split your attacks between dice. Meaning you can nominate 1 attack to be the Lance and the other to be the Chainsword. In this case you would roll 1 dice for the Lance and 2 for the Chainsword because of the Chainsword's ability.

BomBomHotdog wrote:

 Trickstick wrote:
Was looking at roughriders and had a question. They have 1 attack each and are armed with both a hunting lance and chainsword. The chainsword has the ability "Each time the bearer fights, it can make one additional attack with this weapon". So, if I charge and use my 1 attack as a hunting lance, can I still take the bonus chainsword attack?

I can see this being ruled both ways. It is unclear if the "additional attack" is in addition to other attacks or just chainsword attacks.

No. When you attack with the lance you use the profile for the lance, which means no bonus attacks. If you attack with the Chainsword you get 1 additional attack. Having it equipped is not enough, you need to actually nominate to use it to get the benefits.

Now if your model has 2 A in its profile you can split your attacks between dice. Meaning you can nominate 1 attack to be the Lance and the other to be the Chainsword. In this case you would roll 1 dice for the Lance and 2 for the Chainsword because of the Chainsword's ability.

Umm no. Chainsword just says "when this bearer fights". Nothing said about using the weapon.

Are you fighting when you use the lance? Yes. Ergo you satisfy the condition. If it was supposed to be used only when using it they would have likely written it "when this weapon is used" or something.

If it's supposed to be like what you say MASSIVE fail in writing by GW writers.