AOS multiple weapons & number of attacks

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.

**Vetril**

My programming brain tells me that when you use two boss choppas you get 8 attacks instead of the 6 you get when you use one.

There are rules, you daemon. I'm saying you double attacks because if you use two weapons with the same profile, you are effectively multiplying by 2.

COMBAT PHASE
[...]
Step 2: Each model in the unit attacks with all of the melee weapons it is armed with (see Attacking).

ATTACKING
[...]
The number of attacks a model can make is determined by the weapons that it is armed with.
[...]
melee weapons can be used in the combat phase. The number of attacks a model can make is equal to the Attacks
characteristic for the weapons it can use.

It can't be better worded than this. Do note:

1. it says "all the weapons".
2. it says "armed with", not "available" or "optional" or "weapons listed on the warscroll".
3. it says the number of attacks is equal to the A characteristic for "the weapons it can use", plural. What weapons can it use? "All of the melee weapons it is armed with".

Now tell me:
1. where it says that since you also get to reroll 1s, you can ignore these rules.
2. why with 1 sword and 1 spear you get more attacks, and with 2 chaos close combat weapons you don't.
3. why a dragon gets more attacks using maw and claws.

**timetowaste85**

It's no use arguing with him guys. Just tell him if he gets to double all attacks with two hand weapons, you get to do 72 attacks with high elf bolt throwers. Or watch, point and laugh as everyone refuses to play a game with him.

**AncientSkarbrand**

Haha. I'll definitely take the daemon tag as a compliment. For what it's worth, i understand your point of view. I'm definitely going to pass this question to the others in my group and play it both ways a bit to see which one feels right, because i believe it's unnecessarily vague. At the moment though i'm fairly convinced in my interpretation and will just agree to disagree for the time being.

You seem like an intelligent fellow and i have no reason to think either one of us is correct over the other that doesn't ultimately boil down to my personal interpretation of the rules, or the intent.

Maybe if they would have made the rules at least a 8 or 6 page pdf it could have saved everyone from alot of the rules confusions that have been prevalent since the AOS release.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Timetowaste85 - Vetril stands to gain nothing from this argument. He plays wood elves and has no characters who can wield duplicate weapons. He's actually a part of this conversation because he believes his opponents should get the benefit.

**timetowaste85**

What about war dancers? Those are wood elves and have multiple blades.

And I don't buy twisting a rule until you think it says what you want it to say to make a disadvantage for you is a likelihood. Most of us want to find loopholes to gain an advantage, a hidden rule, against our opponent. Forcing a crazy interpretation to screw yourself over? No way.

**Charistoph**

timetowaste85 wrote:
What about war dancers? Those are wood elves and have multiple blades.

Not the same thing. The Description for War Dancers states: "They fight with Weaving Blades.", not "They fight with two Weaving Blades." like the Dreadlord in question does.

Still, I do believe that the rule for Exile Blades tells us how the interaction with Two Exile Blades works as opposed to just assuming that the model gets to use twice the number of Attacks one of the weapon provides. After all, we are not given any specific direction to double the base Attacks for two, are we?

**Vetril**

timetowaste85 wrote:
What about war dancers? Those are wood elves and have multiple blades.

And I don't buy twisting a rule until you think it says what you want it to say to make a disadvantage for you is a likelihood. Most of us want to find loopholes to gain an advantage, a hidden rule, against our opponent. Forcing a crazy interpretation to screw yourself over? No way.

Wardancers have a single weapon called "Weaving Blades" and no option to acquire another one.

I don't play Warhammer or Age of Sigmar trying to find loopholes to game the system and crush my opponent.
That's bad sportsmanship and I expect TFG to do it.
Incidentally this is the reason why I refuse to play tournaments. The scene here is full of rule lawyers and downright cheaters.
Warhammer is a game first and foremost. You're supposed to have fun with it, not cringe at the thought of playing because your opponent is going to give you a headache debating rules.
That said.

Thanks Charistoph for the moral support. I do believe that the rules do tell us to attack with both exile blades, since they say that the model attacks with all the weapons it is armed with. Since each exile blade grants 6 attacks, the total is 12, or twice as many attacks you'd get from one blade.
All in all I think this is in line with the things other heroes can do - you get a killy dark elf hero that will fold quickly under any kind of shooting.
Chaos warriors with 2 weapons would get 4 attacks, which to me seems reasonable considering they are some of the best warriors in the setting; I've also noticed that they tend to reach melee range after taking heavy losses anyway; dual wielding would make it so that a full unit trashes most opposing melee units (as expected) and an almost depleted unit can still inflict losses. Imho it fits with the expectations.

**Kriswall**

AncientSkarbrand wrote:
If someone could find a circumstance in which someone gets the option to wield duplicates of the same weapon, and it says nothing about giving them any bonus, we could put this to rest. However i dont think it exists because the intent is not to double your attacks. If the intent was to double the attacks, the orc warboss would say "he makes 8 attacks instead of 12" rather than "he makes 8 attacks instead of 6." this rule directly supports the interpretation that the intent is NOT to double attacks. Even disregarding all the other points that have been brought up, looking at this statement clearly shows intent. I dont know how this has been disregarded.

Furthermore why would he get more attacks, but have a clause that specifically denotes how many, and every other character with this option has NO such mention of extra attacks. Instead, in the same warscroll spot, it says they get to reroll 1's.

@Vetril - your programming brain doesnt have a problem with this? What does boolean logic say about this exact situation with the warboss vs. Other characters. Because any way i look at this it's undoubtedly clear the intent is not to double attacks.

Also there is no rule telling you to double them. Anywhere. It would have been very easy to do it in the main rules, or even on the warscrolls like the warboss. Instead that variable on the waracroll has been filled with rerolling ones for most characters that have the option to wield duplicate weapons.

Actually, I think the issue is that the rules as written DO support doubling the attacks. Combat Phase Sections - "Step 2: Each model in the unit attacks with all of the melee weapons it is armed with (see attacking)." Under the attacking sections we see that "The number of attacks a model can make is determined by the weapons that it is armed with" and "The number of attacks a model can make is equal to the Attacks characteristic for the weapons it can use".

Let's explore this idea using an Orc Warboss armed with a "pair of Boss Choppas". Per the first quote above, we know he can attack with all the melee weapons he's armed with. That means he can attack with both Boss Choppas. We know the number of attacks he can make is determined by adding up the Attacks characteristics for the weapons he can use. An individual Boss Choppa has an Attacks characteristic of 6. Since we have two Boss Choppas, we add 6 and 6 to get 12 total attacks. 6 Attacks come from Boss Choppa #1 and the other 6 come from Boss Choppa #2. But wait! The "Choppa Boss" special rule tells me that an Orc Warboss armed with a pair of Boss Choppas makes 8 attacks instead of 6. Ok. So, I need to change the Attacks characteristic of the Boss Choppa Melee Weapon from 6 to 8. Then I double it from 8 to 16 for two weapons.

This is the RaW.

RaI is likely that the Warboss simply gets 8 attacks. That's also HIWPI.

**timetowaste85**

And I'd argue that the RaW tell you straight up that an Orc Boss makes 8 attacks with 2 weapons instead of 6. It doesn't say "instead of 6 for each weapon". Most scrolls give you a re-roll for adding a second weapon. But this Boss gives you additional attacks. It doesn't say "for each weapon", it says "do 8 attacks instead of 6 if you have a second blade". Honestly, I'm at a loss at this point how people keep messing it up. If it said "each" on the boss scroll, I'd hang my head and admit defeat. But it doesn't. It says they can do more damage when they have two blades: make 8 attacks instead of 6. Not 8 attacks each instead of 6 each.

Kris, I know you said you'll play this way too, and I don't feel it's RaI, it's clearly RaW. You're playing the correct way. Just bring lots of high elf bolt throwers in case you play against TFGs and Power Gamers who insist on the doubled attacks.

And people need to stop saying "in 8th edition, this did this". For better or for worse, it doesn't matter what 8th did. This is a new game with new stats. We can't rely on what used to be. It makes me sad. I enjoyed 8th (except magic; I'd rather play 8th edition with 6th or 7th edition spells). But I can treat both games as separate with units having different abilities in each game.

**Snapshot**

I think there's an implied mechanic at play in AoS. Units gain access to rules through various means through the course of play. This Rule Set determines how the unit behaves. I am pretty sure the Rule Set is a SET - no duplcates allowed.

So, you can cast Mystic Shield on a unit 10 times, but it doesn't give +10 Sv). A model cab be armed with 1 or 2 Exile Blades, butit only adds to the Rule Set once; same with a few Pistols. Of course, if you have 2 Exile Blades, the unit gets Exile Blades added, and so on.

When you get to combat, you look for all the melee rules (profiles) in the Rule Set and apply them.

This concept seems to hold for all the debatable situations I've looked, and applying the principle looks like it works for all the other examples people have raised in this thread.

IWO, for the OP, 6 attacks and re-roll 1s to-hit.

**Vetril**

timetowaste85 wrote:
And people need to stop saying "in 8th edition, this did this". For better or for worse, it doesn't matter what 8th did. This is a new game with new stats. We can't rely on what used to be. It makes me sad. I enjoyed 8th (except magic; I'd rather play 8th edition with 6th or 7th edition spells). But I can treat both games as separate with units having different abilities in each game.

You're the only one who has been referencing 8th. I never have, and I've been saying that 2 or 3 times now. Frankly I'm tired of repeating myself. I invite you to read carefully what I write next time.

Snapshot wrote:
I think there's an implied mechanic at play in AoS. Units gain access to rules through various means through the course of play. This Rule Set determines how the unit behaves. I am pretty sure the Rule Set is a SET - no duplcates allowed.

So, you can cast Mystic Shield on a unit 10 times, but it doesn't give +10 Sv). A model cab be armed with 1 or 2 Exile Blades, butit only adds to the Rule Set once; same with a few Pistols. Of course, if you have 2 Exile Blades, the unit gets Exile Blades added, and so on.

When you get to combat, you look for all the melee rules (profiles) in the Rule Set and apply them.

This concept seems to hold for all the debatable situations I've looked, and applying the principle looks like it works for all the other examples people have raised in this thread.

IWO, for the OP, 6 attacks and re-roll 1s to-hit.

But why? That seems quite arbitrary to me. If you have two weapons, you are told by the rules to use both. This is a simple rule. Why introduce exceptions and implied rules? Leave balance out of the equation for a moment - we all know GW has always published unbalanced rules, and without points can you even say that something is truly unbalanced anyway?

About the Boss Choppas - I don't think you get 16 attacks. I think you get 8. Because the specific rule of the unit tells you you get 8 attacks for using 2 weapons; that imho overrides the general procedure.
On the contrary, the rules that allow the player to reroll 1s don't say anything about the numbers of attacks granted by the two weapons. This means that you stick to the default rules, right?
And in fact in the warscrolls breakdown, it says: "abilities are things that the model can do during a game that are not covered by the standard game rules". That means that unless it changes a standard rule, you default to that. For example, standard rules say that you can't run and charge; but if you have a rule that says you can, you ignore the standard rules.
If you follow the same reasoning it fits what we have.

**Charistoph**

Vetril wrote:
[
But why? That seems quite arbitrary to me. If you have two weapons, you are told by the rules to use both. This is a simple rule. Why introduce exceptions and implied rules? Leave balance out of the equation for a moment - we all know GW has always published unbalanced rules, and without points can you even say that something is truly unbalanced anyway?

Actually, it doesn't say you have two weapons, just two of the same weapon, and that weapon is only listed once, correct?

Two weapons would be like a Monster with claws listed as one weapon and a mouth as another. This is not the case with the Dreadlord, as it only lists the Exile Blade once.

About the Boss Choppas - I don't think you get 16 attacks. I think you get 8. Because the specific rule of the unit tells you you get 8 attacks for using 2 weapons; that imho overrides the general procedure.
On the contrary, the rules that allow the player to reroll 1s don't say anything about the numbers of attacks granted by the two weapons. This means that you stick to the default rules, right?
And in fact in the warscrolls breakdown, it says: "abilities are things that the model can do during a game that are not covered by the standard game rules". That means that unless it changes a standard rule, you default to that. For example, standard rules say that you can't run and charge; but if you have a rule that says you can, you ignore the standard rules.
If you follow the same reasoning it fits what we have.

And let us look at the Doombull, it says when armed with two weapons, you make 5 Attacks, not 4.

**PenPen**

for everyone who thinks singular or plural weapon(s) make a difference

read ogres singular club
read mournfang cav plural clubs
both dual weapon rule the same
but
mournfang can equip club & ironfist but have no club as weapon, so club & ironfist ogres have 0 attacks

btw the boss choppa
8 instead of 6 ... not 12, 6!

and yes raw, you get 12 attacks, but the bolt thrower gets 72 attacks raw
raw sucks!

**Charistoph**

PenPen wrote:

and yes raw, you get 12 attacks, but the bolt thrower gets 72 attacks raw
raw sucks!

Why RAW? It's actually only an interpretation and an assumption that if a model possesses two of a weapon, it can use the Weapon List twice. I don't remember that rule being listed anywhere. Do you?

**Melevolence**

timetowaste85 wrote:
And I'd argue that the RaW tell you straight up that an Orc Boss makes 8 attacks with 2 weapons instead of 6. It doesn't say "instead of 6 for each weapon". Most scrolls give you a re-roll for adding a second weapon. But this Boss gives you additional attacks. It doesn't say "for each weapon", it says "do 8 attacks instead of 6 if you have a second blade". Honestly, I'm at a loss at this point how people keep messing it up. If it said "each" on the boss scroll, I'd hang my head and admit defeat. But it doesn't. It says they can do more damage when they have two blades: make 8 attacks instead of 6. Not 8 attacks each instead of 6 each.

Kris, I know you said you'll play this way too, and I don't feel it's RaI, it's clearly RaW. You're playing the correct way. Just bring lots of high elf bolt throwers in case you play against TFGs and Power Gamers who insist on the doubled attacks.

And people need to stop saying "in 8th edition, this did this". For better or for worse, it doesn't matter what 8th did. This is a new game with new stats. We can't rely on what used to be. It makes me sad. I enjoyed 8th (except magic; I'd rather play 8th edition with 6th or 7th edition spells). But I can treat both games as separate with units having different abilities in each game.

Agreed. There is no place for the argument of 'you gain double attacks' in any way shape or form. Each warscroll tells you clearly in black and white exactly what happens when you dual wield. I can't fathom how this is so damn difficult to understand. If anyone ever tries to argue in my area they gain double attacks, you bet your butt they won't have any games with me. It isn't even a debate. The rules are clear as day.

**munnster**

I would say that you don't get to double the attacks I would say that you just get the special rule applying for carrying two weapons which is usually in their warscroll. I think the rules as written could be interpreted as you doubling the amount of attacks but I think that would just be to much.

**Charistoph**

Melevolence wrote:
Agreed. There is no place for the argument of 'you gain double attacks' in any way shape or form. Each warscroll tells you clearly in black and white exactly what happens when you dual wield. I can't fathom how this is so damn difficult to understand. If anyone ever tries to argue in my area they gain double attacks, you bet your butt they won't have any games with me. It isn't even a debate. The rules are clear as day.

Oddly enough, double the Attacks is actually inaccurate for what is being presented.

It is being argued that the Weapon is present twice, so therefore can be used twice. THIS is what provides the "double the Attacks" concept.

Sadly, there is absolutely nothing that says we do this when a Weapon is possessed twice, but only listed only once, but there is nothing to say one cannot, either.

So, in the end, it depends on how limited you see the game.

**Vetril**

Why should they have listed it twice? What would have been the benefit of having two lines in the weapons table that are identical?
I think you are arguing semantics when you say that you don't have two weapons, but two of the same weapon. Either way you must attack with both.

So again why can you do it with two different weapons but you can't if you have two of the same? Find me a rule that says you don't attack with all your weapons if you have two of the same kind.

By the way, stop trying to coerce me into changing my mind through saying "well then I'll play bolt throwers with 72 shots or I'll not play with you if you go this way with dual wielding". Reality check, those are not arguments nor proof of anything. And I don't give a gak because I am never going to play with you anyway. Stick to discussing the rules and to presenting evidence that supports your position.

**Melevolence**

Charistoph wrote:
Melevolence wrote:
Agreed. There is no place for the argument of 'you gain double attacks' in any way shape or form. Each warscroll tells you clearly in black and white exactly what happens when you dual wield. I can't fathom how this is so damn difficult to understand. If anyone ever tries to argue in my area they gain double attacks, you bet your butt they won't have any games with me. It isn't even a debate. The rules are clear as day.

Oddly enough, double the Attacks is actually inaccurate for what is being presented.

It is being argued that the Weapon is present twice, so therefore can be used twice. THIS is what provides the "double the Attacks" concept.

Sadly, there is absolutely nothing that says we do this when a Weapon is possessed twice, but only listed only once, but there is nothing to say one cannot, either.

So, in the end, it depends on how limited you see the game.

Nothing says I can't declare myself the winner of the game before we start. Doesn't mean it makes it a legal way to win the game.

The game doesn't say I can't burn your models. Doesn't mean I'm allowed to do so.

The whole 'it doesn't say I can't ' argument is not a valid argument. It has no basis. It isn't even rules as written. Nothing in the rules at all says anything remotely close to what people are trying to insinuate. All I've heard in defense of gaining the extra attacks is 'It doesn't say I cant' and 'But I have two weapons...I get to use them both', which also has no rules to back up that claim either. The rules tells you the benefits of having multiple weapons. But you only get the attacks of the weapon profile, regardless of how many you wield. (Unless your dual wield rules state otherwise) This isn't rocket science and comes down to if you want to be THAT guy for even trying to lawyer it in the first place.

**Snapshot**

Well in an obtuse way, the rules do say how things operate.

Almost the first para says"

"All models are described by warscrolls,
which provide all of the rules for using
them in the game."

If I'm armed with a weapon, I examine the table to find out what rule I'm allowed to use. If I have an Exile Blade, I can use that rule (profile). If I have 2, I can use the Exile Blade rule, and also the Exile Blades ability. When my model attacks, he uses the rules he has available to him. The concept of having the same rule twice, or "a few times" in the case of a model carrying "a few Pistols" isn't part of the the system.

So the wargear tells you what rules your model can use. If you have more than 1 copy of a wargear item, unless there is a rule that matches that situation, you don't get to duplicate rules.

**JamesY**

Agree with snapshot. The rules say that the model attacks with the options on the warscroll, exile blade is listed once, so it can be used once. The benefit of having two us the re-roll. If having two was intended to give more actual attacks, 'exile blades' would be on the warscroll with a different profile.

**RoperPG**

I'm still not absolutely 100% convinced the rules are as clear as they could be, or if it's another instance of ex-WFB thinking filling expectations.
However, for me it came down to the rules for liberators (which I think is going to be the model for new units, going forward)

Got a shield? Reroll 1's on your saves.
Swap shield for another weapon, reroll 1's to hit instead.
Nice, simple choice where the 'best' option is a matter of intended battlefield role and using them properly.
The greatblades/hammers are indeed objectively better - which is why you are limited on the number you can take.

If twin weapons gave you double attacks, they would be an absolute no-brainer in nearly all cases because there isn't a drawback - more attacks that are more likely to hit is always the better option.

**Charistoph**

Melevolence wrote:
Charistoph wrote:
Melevolence wrote:
Agreed. There is no place for the argument of 'you gain double attacks' in any way shape or form. Each warscroll tells you clearly in black and white exactly what happens when you dual wield. I can't fathom how this is so damn difficult to understand. If anyone ever tries to argue in my area they gain double attacks, you bet your butt they won't have any games with me. It isn't even a debate. The rules are clear as day.

Oddly enough, double the Attacks is actually inaccurate for what is being presented.

It is being argued that the Weapon is present twice, so therefore can be used twice. THIS is what provides the "double the Attacks" concept.

Sadly, there is absolutely nothing that says we do this when a Weapon is possessed twice, but only listed only once, but there is nothing to say one cannot, either.

So, in the end, it depends on how limited you see the game.

Nothing says I can't declare myself the winner of the game before we start. Doesn't mean it makes it a legal way to win the game.

The game doesn't say I can't burn your models. Doesn't mean I'm allowed to do so.

The whole 'it doesn't say I can't ' argument is not a valid argument. It has no basis. It isn't even rules as written. Nothing in the rules at all says anything remotely close to what people are trying to insinuate. All I've heard in defense of gaining the extra attacks is 'It doesn't say I cant' and 'But I have two weapons...I get to use them both', which also has no rules to back up that claim either. The rules tells you the benefits of having multiple weapons. But you only get the attacks of the weapon profile, regardless of how many you wield. (Unless your dual wield rules state otherwise) This isn't rocket science and comes down to if you want to be THAT guy for even trying to lawyer it in the first place.

That is a longer version of what I was saying, really.

There are just some people who do not see a lack of permission as a denial of permission. This can cause problems as has been said.

Vetril wrote:Why should they have listed it twice? What would have been the benefit of having two lines in the weapons table that are identical?
I think you are arguing semantics when you say that you don't have two weapons, but two of the same weapon. Either way you must attack with both.

Well, every rule discussion is about semantics and grammer when you boil it down.

But as for why it should be listed twice, Snapshot detailed well enough:

Snapshot wrote:Well in an obtuse way, the rules do say how things operate.

Almost the first para says"

"All models are described by warscrolls,
which provide all of the rules for using
them in the game."

If I'm armed with a weapon, I examine the table to find out what rule I'm allowed to use. If I have an Exile Blade, I can use that rule (profile). If I have 2, I can use the Exile Blade rule, and also the Exile Blades ability. When my model attacks, he uses the rules he has available to him. The concept of having the same rule twice, or "a few times" in the case of a model carrying "a few Pistols" isn't part of the the system.

So the wargear tells you what rules your model can use. If you have more than 1 copy of a wargear item, unless there is a rule that matches that situation, you don't get to duplicate rules.

**Vetril**

That is true if you choose to disregard the fact that the model has indeed two weapons in his hands.
Right now the discussion has devolved into a yes no repetition, so I don't think continuing it is going to be productive, especially if people keep misrepresenting my position: I never said you can because the rules don't say that you can't; I said that you can (actually that you must) because the rules say you attack with all weapons. It tells you to.

**timetowaste85**

After speaking with two stores full of people, I still haven't found anyone who agrees with Vetril. Good luck finding games.

Everyone so far has agreed that having a pair of duplicate weapons gives you be number of attacks shown, as well as the bonus ability for carrying a pair. Not the number shown, then doubled, then add the bonus. The bonus listed is your ONLY bonus for duel wielding the same weapon. Everyone. I'm not sure why you can't accept that you're wrong, but when 99% of a group tells you you're wrong (yes, I realize 2 people on here have agreed with you), there's a really good chance that you may be incorrect.

Like I said; if GW comes out and states you get BOTH the doubled attacks AND the bonus ability, I'll eat a slice of humble pie. But I'm not counting on it.

**Charistoph**

Vetril wrote:
That is true if you choose to disregard the fact that the model has indeed two weapons in his hands.
Right now the discussion has devolved into a yes no repetition, so I don't think continuing it is going to be productive, especially if people keep misrepresenting my position: I never said you can because the rules don't say that you can't; I said that you can (actually you must) because the rules say you attack with all weapons. It tells you to.

Actually, that is incorrect on the last part.

Yes, he has two weapons in his hands. That is not really in question. The problem is that they are the same weapon, and it is only listed once as an available weapon in the weapon list.

What is in question is what is allowing you to pick the same weapon twice when you make Attacks, and THAT is not a written rule nor are you told that you cannot. So, you are taking it from the basic position that "It says to use all my weapons, and it doesn't say not use the Weapon Profile Twice, so I'm going to use it Twice, since I have it Twice."

It may not be what you are intending, or even think you are saying, but that is how it is coming across.

**Vetril**

Charistoph, if you have two oranges for lunch, do you eat two or one?

The weapon is listed once because duplicating a line makes no sense! Would you write down the exact same thing twice?

timetowaste, you surely are wasting my times with your snide remarks. Congrats on being the first user ever who made it to my ignored list.

**Snapshot**

I had another careful read of "Attacking" and it says:

"The number of attacks a model can make is equal to the attacks characteristic for the weapons it can use."

When you wield 1 or 2 Exile Blades, you can use Exile Blade, so you look up the # of attacks.

When you wield 1, 2, or a few Pistols, you can use Pistol, so you look up the # of attacks.

Etc, etc.

The rule doesn't say your # of attacks is determined by how many of the weapon you have, but simply whether you can use it.

**RoperPG**

Snapshot wrote:
I had another careful read of "Attacking" and it says:

"The number of attacks a model can make is equal to the attacks characteristic for the weapons it can use."

When you wield 1 or 2 Exile Blades, you can use Exile Blade, so you look up the # of attacks.

When you wield 1, 2, or a few Pistols, you can use Pistol, so you look up the # of attacks.

Etc, etc.

The rule doesn't say your # of attacks is determined by how many of the weapon you have, but simply whether you can use it.

That's the semantic moneyshot, but unfortunately doesn't cover the response "but it says weaponS, and I have two if them!"
I'm still going with the fact that if you get double attacks there is absolutely no contest in what you pick as your option, which doesn't "feel" right.

**Snapshot**

First I'm not sure a moneyshot is good or bad in this context!

Second, if my parsing of the rule is wrong, how do we play an attack from a unit that has "a few Pistols"? The only thing that makes sense is to look at the weapons the model has, disregarding the number of weapons, and match them to the profiles.

As we all know, when a model has duplicate weapons, there is an additional ability that is enabled.

And you're right, it's the vibe!

**Vetril**

Snapshot wrote:
First I'm not sure a moneyshot is good or bad in this context!

Second, if my parsing of the rule is wrong, how do we play an attack from a unit that has "a few Pistols"? The only thing that makes sense is to look at the weapons the model has, disregarding the number of weapons, and match them to the profiles.

As we all know, when a model has duplicate weapons, there is an additional ability that is enabled.

And you're right, it's the vibe!

That might be a problem with the unit that has "a few pistols", and not a problem with the rules per se. Meaning, they should have defined how many pistols that unit has.