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.

Hi all,

The Horus Heresy Age of Darkness rulebook states that every model has a basic close combat weapon, and this is repeated in the Astartes books. A pistol states that it can be used in combat.Therefore a normal legion tactical marine has 2 attacks in combat (3 on the charge), correct? 1 for the basic close combat weapon, +1 for an additional close combat weapon provided by the pistol.

I just want to confirm this is correct, unless I am missing something.

Having the Pistol overrides getting the CCW so no they don't get the extra attack.

 Gert wrote:
Having the Pistol overrides getting the CCW so no they don't get the extra attack.

Thanks - is this due to the box on page 176? I thought the wording was kind of confusing with the "A pistol can be used as a close combat weapon." But then it seems to say that a Pistol has "Melee". I suppose then the key sentence is the final one, ie, after checking if a model has the Melee keyword (which a Pistol would grant), if it does not have one, then it gets a basic close combat weapon profile?

I just want to make sure I'm doing this correctly as it's been a while since I played 3-7th edition and I am carefully reading everything to make sure I don't screw up some fundamental rule.

Didn't get the exact page but the idea behind the free CCW is that a model gets it *if* it doesn't have any other option.

its why the chainsword is so expensive it gives the +1 attack to regular tactical troops.

This is an issue that has been in the game forever. It really is just there so that a theoretical model without any listed melee weapons at least has something, otherwise it couldn't attack in melee at all. or something... But its very easy to misread it and think that this would make any model with a listed melee weapon technically have 2.

It's really a relic that isn't technically necessary anymore, if it ever was.

sidewinderscott wrote:
its why the chainsword is so expensive it gives the +1 attack to regular tactical troops.

TBF, a 15 pts legio tac with baseline additional attack and the attributes of chainswords is indeed actually a pretty nice mainline infantry unit.

Is it worth it? probably not for those legions that don't have a melee boost available, there's better alternatives like the cheap bayonett or chainbayonett for them, but for legions that want to go to melee it is an ok option for certain.

I was pretty miffed when I saw they'd jacked the price of chainswords to 5 pts at it bumps the price of my tac squads up by 100 pts. They were bloomin' 2 pts in 1.0. But I figure they had to put them up because of the bayonets/chain bayonets.

Still it's less of an issue for me then I first thought. What with 1st Legion losing Mastery of the Blade there's little point of having them on every tactical, especially with despoilers being a viable choice.