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.

Actually we are argueing because the rule is fethed up.

There are rules indicates two same weapons dont double attacks. Perfect case is Boss Choppa from Orc Boss and the Plegue Monks.

But there are also rules indicates two weapons should double attacks. One example is the big guys in Skaven.
Lord Skreech Verminking, he has a Pleaguereaper that has 5 attacks at full health (he also get one Doom Glaive with 4 attacks)
Verminlord Corruptor, he has two Pleaguereapers in his armory. In the WS it writes he gain 10 attacks at full health with Pleaguereapers. (Notice this 's' at the end)
Exact the same weapon, one with 's' and one without. The WS of 'Pleaguereapers' is exactly doubled from 'Pleaguereaper'

Also if we look back into Dreadlord and the fking exile blade. If you have a shield you can get reroll all failed saves, but with two weapons you have same attack and only reroll '1's: Tell me the defference between 'all failed' and '1'?
I culculated the average of 12 attacks with Exile blade against 4+ armor target. The result is fair like 2,3xxxx (I have considered reroll of 1s)
One Empire General with great weapon has 2,2xxxx damage against same target.
Vampire lord with Possessed Sword has 2,4
Tomb King with Dynastic Sword has 2,4 with Shield
Dwarven Tharn with Rune Axe has 3,2xxxxxx

So Dreadlord is not dreadful at all.
If the attack number with two blades is just 6, the the Dreadlord with no protection will have average 1,1xxxx damage against 4+ enemy. I can say then he is somehow quite dreadful

Been saying that since page 1 Aeonotakist

Converting average damage to Rend-0 equivalent wounds, the Dreadlord with a chill blade does an average 2.33 saveable wounds. A single Exile Blade does 2.0 saveable wounds.

Give him a second Exile Blade with the reroll 1's ability and he does 2.33 saveable wounds.

Let him swing twice with the Exile Blade and he's doing 4.0 wounds.

Vetril wrote:
Been saying that since page 1 Aeonotakist

And many people have been telling you that you're wrong since page 1

Chosen have a Chaos Greataxe and no further weapon options. It's in the table under the table heading Melee Weapons.

Am I allowed to glue more arms on for more axes and if so should I just go for the axes?

pretzel wrote:
Chosen have a Chaos Greataxe and no further weapon options. It's in the table under the table heading Melee Weapons.

Am I allowed to glue more arms on for more axes and if so should I just go for the axes?

Does the Warscroll's description section tell you that you can? Warscroll key... "The description tells you what weapons the model can be armed with." Chosen Warscroll Description... "Chosen wield mighty double-handed Chaos Greataxes that can cleave a warrior in half with one blow."

Looks like the description does NOT tell you that some Chosen have extra arms glued on and wield more than one Chaos Greataxe.

If you have nothing useful to contribute, it would probably be best to keep your combative and sarcastic comments to yourself.

 mikhaila wrote:

Vetril wrote:
Been saying that since page 1 Aeonotakist

And many people have been telling you that you're wrong since page 1

Doesn't mean they are right, or they would have proven it.

Vetril wrote:

 mikhaila wrote:

Vetril wrote:
Been saying that since page 1 Aeonotakist

And many people have been telling you that you're wrong since page 1

Doesn't mean they are right, or they would have proven it.

We've established this isn't something that can be proven short of a comment from GW. Instead, there's an almost overwhelming avalanche of circumstantial evidence. In front of a jury of your peers, you are being found wrong over and over. This doesn't mean you're wrong. It just means you're very likely wrong. There is a right answer. We just won't be able to say who is right and who is wrong until the almighty GW speaks.

Ultimately, you don't need the agreement of strangers of the internet to have fun with your friends. I wouldn't expect to get your way at an average FLGS or organized play event, though.

You get to attack with each of your listed weapons in the chart once. Having a second hand weapon on a warrior doesnt add another listing on the chart.

Yesterday and the weeks before I was convinced that you don't get extra attacks from an extra weapon, just the ability. After reading the various army warscrolls though I'm not so sure.

Dragon Slayer get the option for a pair of Runic Axes, the weapon profile for Runic Axes and the ability Runic Axes.
Chaos Lord get the option for a pair Chaos Rune-axes, the weapon profile for Chaos Rune-axes and the ability Chaos Rune-axes.
Dragon Ogres get the option for a pair of Ancient Weapons, the weapon profile for Ancient Weapons and the ability Furious Attack.

Ogres get the option for an Ogre Club or Blade in each hand, the weapon profile for Ogre Club or Blade and the ability Ogre Clubs and Blades.
Mournfang Cavalry also get the option for an Ogre Club or Blade in each hand, but the weapon profile says Ogre Clubs and Blades and the ability Ogre Clubs and Blades.

I think all other models that get the option for a pair of hand weapons have the singular name for the weapon in the profile.
It's like they went s crazy, maybe typos, maybe not. If it is double same weapons, double attacks, Warriors of Chaos is looking good.
Bring on the FAQ ASAP please.
Not trying to be combative, the table for greataxe is headed melee weapons, for a model that can only get one melee weapon.

pretzel wrote:


Ogres get the option for an Ogre Club or Blade in each hand, the weapon profile for Ogre Club or Blade and the ability Ogre Clubs and Blades.
Mournfang Cavalry also get the option for an Ogre Club or Blade in each hand, but the weapon profile says Ogre Clubs and Blades and the ability Ogre Clubs and Blades.

only 1 little problem with the cavalry, they can have ironfists too
but there is no singular club or blade in profile
clubs and blades makes ironfist impossible

So I have read through this entire thread, as well as the thread discussing the same problem on warseer. I will submit my opinion on the subject because, well its the internet and my opinion means something! Right...?

But really, to me it boils down to this.... The camp that says double your attacks is relying on the wording of "how a model attacks" rule, the fact that GW forgot/does know how to use plurals (e.g. Foetid Blade(s)) and is ignore the circumstantial evidence that would paint a picture refuting that. That evidence would be the how similar rules look on units, like the warboss, and the fact that reading the ruling this way would make selecting your weapon option in every single case an exercise in stupidity. "Did you take the two weapons to double your attacks? No? You messed up badly".

The reason for that is because in just about every situation where a unit can take a pair weapon, if you not only get to double it's attack but also get the bonus ability, there is absolutely no reason to take another option. Whereas if you don't double the attacks and just take the ability, then you end up coming out with similarly balanced options that come down to preference.

Examples that I have seen in threads:

(1) Liberators - You can choose between 2 attacks and a re-roll 1s to save or get 4 attacks and reroll 1s to hit. This choice presented would be either having a unit that is slightly more durable or more than doubling the base damage output of that unit. And then, why would you ever take the 1 in 5 special weapon when you will statistically do more damage with the paired hammers/blades?
(2) Plague Monks - You can either have 2 foetid blades or 1 foetid blade and a staff. The choice would be between 4 attacks that hit/would on 4+ that reroll all misses. Or 2 attacks that hit/would on 4+ and 1 attack that hits/woulds on 4+/5+. That isn't even an actual option and you would never take the staff.

I for one am in support of the idea that there should be actual give and take in your weapon choices and not a clear-cut winner in 90% of the situations for every unit. Without point costs, the options should be relatively balanced and allow you to make choices that best support your army synergy or unit battlefield role.

tldr: Double attacks follows a very specific reading of a rule and GW's inability to proofread/use plurals consistently. It also ignores context provided by other units and makes the two weapon choice vastly stronger than any other choice. For that reason I believe the attacks should not double and you simply get the special rule associated with the weapon.

I'm still confused about what to do when the warscroll description gives permission to wield a duplicate weapon.

To make things easier to compare, here's the Rend-0 equivalent Wounds for various combinations (Rend-0 equivalent just scales up the Wounds for a weapon with Rend -1/-2 so you can compare it to a Rend 0 weapon - it's not 100% correct because there's no difference if the target has a Save of '-', but that's fairly rare).

Unit Weapon R A H W R D R0 Dmg Dreadlord Chillblade 1 3 3 3 -1 d3 3.11 Dreadlord Exile Blade 1 6 3 4 0 1 2.00 Single Exile Blade Dreadlord Exile Bladex2 6 3rr1 2.33 Paired EB, Only attack once, reroll 1s (Exile Blades ability) Dreadlord Exile Bladex2 12 3rr1 4.67 Paired EB, Attack with each EB, AND reroll 1s (Exile Blades ability) Skaven WL WF Blade 1 3 3 3 -2 d3 3.56 Skaven WL War Halberd 2 3 3 3 -1 1 1.56 Skaven WL Barbed Blade 1 5 3 4 0 1 1.67 Skaven WL Halberd+BB 3.23 Combined damage from multi-weapon attacks Skaven WL Barbed Bladex2 5 3rr1 1.94 Paired BB, Only attack once, but reroll 1s of Flurry of Rusted Steel Skaven WL Barbed Bladex2 10 3rr1 3.89 Paired BB, Attack with each BB, AND reroll 1s of Flurry of Rusted Steel

Regardless of the "camp" you're in, something seems screwy here.

If you believe that you attack with BOTH paired weapons (ie, x2) the Skaven Warlord BBx2 wounds of 3.89 is in the same ballpark as the WarpForged Blade and Halberd+BB (Halberd has 2" range, so the discrepancy is reasonable). But, the Dreadlord is ludicrously OP with 4.67 for EBx2 versus 3.11 and 2.0 for the Chillblade and EBx1 respectively.

If you think that double attacks is not the way, then the Dreadlord looks about right with even(-ish) damage across the different loadouts. But the Skaven Warlord is ridiculously UNDER-powered with BBx2. Even with the rerolls of 1s to-hit, this loadout only does 1.94 wounds compared to 3.56 and 3.23 for the others.

I've got no idea anymore....

EDIT: I should clarify that the idea of Rend-0 Equivalent rules is not precise, because the value of Rend changes depending on the targets Save. For example, a Rend -1 Wound means 1/6 extra Save fails for targets with a Save, but makes absolutely no difference to a Target with Save '-'. Similarly, a -2 Rend allows an extra 2/6 Wounds to damage the target for targets with Saves <= 5, but only 1/6 extra for targets with Save 6. So Rend is a really nice mechanic, but it's game effect is variable based on the target. For my purposes, I assume the Rend delivers its full value - situationally, the actually damage that gets through is less than stated for lightly/no armoured targets. I just find it easier than talking about X Rend -1 Wounds and trying to do some mental calculations to see if that is more and less than Y Rend 0 wounds.

EDIT2: Fixed error in chart. Chillblade has 3+ Wound, not 4+ as I had in the original

What are the stats for WF blade attacking unarmoured? As you scale up wounds for rend-2. Would be interesting to see, as perhaps one is better at unarmoured targets?

That's really interesting, Snapshot. If you assume the dual barbed blades are meant to attack once for each blade (for ten total attacks), the dual blades perform ~40% better at mashing enemies with no save and the warpforged blade performs ~40% better at mashing enemies with a 3+ save. It seems like that particular model is balanced around attacking twice with the barbed blades.

So either this is an error and they should have added a "dual barbed blades" profile with 10 attacks, or there's some kind of axiom here that models that can wield different weapons in each hand should be able to attack with the same profile twice if they dual wield it.

ETA: kyrellification, Warpforged Blade deals 2.67 wounds against models with no save.

Yeah the WF blade seems a clear no brainer for damage output. Perhaps the buff for two was meant to be different but it went FUBAR. Maybe re-roll all misses or extra attacks like one of the Orc ones?

Who knows

kyrellification wrote:
What are the stats for WF blade attacking unarmoured? As you scale up wounds for rend-2. Would be interesting to see, as perhaps one is better at unarmoured targets?

Warpforged Blade does 2.67 vs models with no Save (ie, the Rend -2 is worth nothing to combat power). I have really only looked through a subset of the warscrolls, but I get the impression Save '-' is somewhat rare.

Oops, didn't realise question already answered...

Aeonotakist also made a good point. Lord Verminking from Skaven uses a Doom Glaive and a Plaguereaper. Lord Verminking gets 5, 5, 4, 4, 3 attacks with it (depending on how many wounds it has taken). The Verminlord Corruptor wields two Plaguereapers and gets 10, 9, 8, 7, 6 attacks with the them (depending on how many wounds it has taken). So the Verminking gets half the attacks with one Plaguereaper (rounding up) that the Corrupter gets with wielding two. Not only that but the Corrupter gets to reroll all failed hit rolls. To me this pretty much sums up how they meant the other units to be.

That's one of those situations where the rule (table) is making it explicit that the pair gives 2x attacks. I agree that it lends weight to the 2x attack for paired weapons though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In my ludicrously complicated in-house points system, I re-evaluated Liberators and they went from +1pt for Paired Warblades/hammers to +7pt. The base cost for a Libby in my system is 23pts. No surprise really, since "1-attack plus paired bonus" is substantially inferior to "2-attacks plus paired bonus". It happens that this is also the upgrade cost for Grandblade/hammers.

Gryph wrote:
Aeonotakist also made a good point. Lord Verminking from Skaven uses a Doom Glaive and a Plaguereaper. Lord Verminking gets 5, 5, 4, 4, 3 attacks with it (depending on how many wounds it has taken). The Verminlord Corruptor wields two Plaguereapers and gets 10, 9, 8, 7, 6 attacks with the them (depending on how many wounds it has taken). So the Verminking gets half the attacks with one Plaguereaper (rounding up) that the Corrupter gets with wielding two. Not only that but the Corrupter gets to reroll all failed hit rolls. To me this pretty much sums up how they meant the other units to be.

I believe that is a result of them attempting the balance the two different units (that come from the same kit and the only real difference is weapon loadouts) with each other in terms of useful and damage output. I do not believe this instance speaks to how they instead the weapons to work. It is also worth noting that this is one of the few times that in the model description it says it is armed with a pair of them and then makes those plural in the weapon listing table. The case for doubling the attacks would actually have been a lot stronger if this listing only had 5 attacks because then it would have been vastly under performing compared to the same model with a different loadout. If that was the case, it would have been a stronger point to say they intended you to double it for each weapon.

Snapshot wrote:

kyrellification wrote:
What are the stats for WF blade attacking unarmoured? As you scale up wounds for rend-2. Would be interesting to see, as perhaps one is better at unarmoured targets?

Warpforged Blade does 2.67 vs models with no Save (ie, the Rend -2 is worth nothing to combat power). I have really only looked through a subset of the warscrolls, but I get the impression Save '-' is somewhat rare.

Oops, didn't realise question already answered...

Yes but there are a lot of "immune to rend" models (all the ethereal for example)

It is still better to take WF blades though.

Killermonkey wrote:

Gryph wrote:
Aeonotakist also made a good point. Lord Verminking from Skaven uses a Doom Glaive and a Plaguereaper. Lord Verminking gets 5, 5, 4, 4, 3 attacks with it (depending on how many wounds it has taken). The Verminlord Corruptor wields two Plaguereapers and gets 10, 9, 8, 7, 6 attacks with the them (depending on how many wounds it has taken). So the Verminking gets half the attacks with one Plaguereaper (rounding up) that the Corrupter gets with wielding two. Not only that but the Corrupter gets to reroll all failed hit rolls. To me this pretty much sums up how they meant the other units to be.

I believe that is a result of them attempting the balance the two different units (that come from the same kit and the only real difference is weapon loadouts) with each other in terms of useful and damage output. I do not believe this instance speaks to how they instead the weapons to work. It is also worth noting that this is one of the few times that in the model description it says it is armed with a pair of them and then makes those plural in the weapon listing table. The case for doubling the attacks would actually have been a lot stronger if this listing only had 5 attacks because then it would have been vastly under performing compared to the same model with a different loadout. If that was the case, it would have been a stronger point to say they intended you to double it for each weapon.

If it only had 5 attacks in the weapon profile then it would be a stronger case for NOT doubling attacks as then it would show a prime example that when you get paired weapons you only get the bonus, not the extra attacks. But they went out of their way to quite obviously give it 2x attacks PLUS still give it the paired bonus of reroll all attacks.

As far as the warscroll making the weapon description plural, that is because the Plaguereapers can't be equipped with anything else such as a shield, or war halberd, or anything else. So there is no need to make it singular.

Finally, looking at Snapshot's damage chart, a Skaven Warlord with dual Barbed Blades (if it only gets the reroll 1s and not the added attacks) does under perform compared to the Barbed Blade and War Halberd. But when you look at doubling the attacks for having two and having re-roll 1s it comes on par with Barbed Blade and War Halberd. So saying they only doubled the Verminlord Corrupters attacks to make it on par with the Verminking's attacks but not doing the same for other models does not fit.

@Snapshot, also your calculation for the Dreadlord's Chillblade is incorrect. The W is 3+ not 4+. So it should be something closer to 2.66666... I know, not a big change.

Gryph wrote:

Killermonkey wrote:

Gryph wrote:
Aeonotakist also made a good point. Lord Verminking from Skaven uses a Doom Glaive and a Plaguereaper. Lord Verminking gets 5, 5, 4, 4, 3 attacks with it (depending on how many wounds it has taken). The Verminlord Corruptor wields two Plaguereapers and gets 10, 9, 8, 7, 6 attacks with the them (depending on how many wounds it has taken). So the Verminking gets half the attacks with one Plaguereaper (rounding up) that the Corrupter gets with wielding two. Not only that but the Corrupter gets to reroll all failed hit rolls. To me this pretty much sums up how they meant the other units to be.

I believe that is a result of them attempting the balance the two different units (that come from the same kit and the only real difference is weapon loadouts) with each other in terms of useful and damage output. I do not believe this instance speaks to how they instead the weapons to work. It is also worth noting that this is one of the few times that in the model description it says it is armed with a pair of them and then makes those plural in the weapon listing table. The case for doubling the attacks would actually have been a lot stronger if this listing only had 5 attacks because then it would have been vastly under performing compared to the same model with a different loadout. If that was the case, it would have been a stronger point to say they intended you to double it for each weapon.

If it only had 5 attacks in the weapon profile then it would be a stronger case for NOT doubling attacks as then it would show a prime example that when you get paired weapons you only get the bonus, not the extra attacks. But they went out of their way to quite obviously give it 2x attacks PLUS still give it the paired bonus of reroll all attacks.

As far as the warscroll making the weapon description plural, that is because the Plaguereapers can't be equipped with anything else such as a shield, or war halberd, or anything else. So there is no need to make it singular.

Finally, looking at Snapshot's damage chart, a Skaven Warlord with dual Barbed Blades (if it only gets the reroll 1s and not the added attacks) does under perform compared to the Barbed Blade and War Halberd. But when you look at doubling the attacks for having two and having re-roll 1s it comes on par with Barbed Blade and War Halberd. So saying they only doubled the Verminlord Corrupters attacks to make it on par with the Verminking's attacks but not doing the same for other models does not fit.

@Snapshot, also your calculation for the Dreadlord's Chillblade is incorrect. The W is 3+ not 4+. So it should be something closer to 2.66666... I know, not a big change.

Oops quite right, 2.67 Rend-1 Wounds. 3.11 Rend-0 wounds for anyone finds that comparison helpful. Will fix chart.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Can honestly say I won't play a game with someone trying for doubled attacks AND reroll bonuses. The scroll dictates what one weapon does, and lays out what adding a duplicate does. There is no RAW vs RAI here. There IS however RAIP*

*rules as interpreted poorly.

I agree. How many pages has this thread gone to on a point that is clearly spelled out on a Chaos Warrior scroll?

Relapse wrote:

I agree. How many pages has this thread gone to on a point that is clearly spelled out on a Chaos Warrior scroll?

Indeed, or the scroll for the Doombull
"Slaughter Storm: An extra weapon allows a Doombull to brutally hack through even more foes. A Doombull equipped with a pair of Doombull Axes makes 5 attacks instead of 4."

Well, when you get a poster who thinks it's better to block people who disagree with him and carry on with his near Mandle-Logic, the amount of fallacies will continue for a while, and occasionally other posters will fall under the sway of "I can get more attacks this way". We've even had someone contact GW and get an answer (yes, I realize that's not even usually "official", but this is a new game); and the answer was they don't stack. If a representative of the company says it's so...we should accept it as so.

I don't know how much clearer that Chaos Warrior scroll could be on the topic.

Relapse wrote:
I don't know how much clearer that Chaos Warrior scroll could be on the topic.

Oh, I know. But some people wouldn't admit there was a grizzly bear right in front of them, even if it swiped off their nose.

 timetowaste85 wrote:

Relapse wrote:
I don't know how much clearer that Chaos Warrior scroll could be on the topic.

Oh, I know. But some people wouldn't admit there was a grizzly bear right in front of them, even if it swiped off their nose.

The issue is that the rules are poorly written.

There are obvious rules benefits for taking two weapons. It seems obvious that GW intends us to get the same number of attacks as for one instance of a weapon and then add some special rules for the second instance.

BUT...

What they ACTUALLY wrote says that we base the number of attacks on the weapons we can attack with and that we can attack with every weapon we're equipped with. If I'm equipped with two hammers, per the core rules, I can attack with each hammer. there is NO rule telling me that I make a single set of attacks with both at the same time. If a hammer gets 3 attacks, I should get 3 for the first and 3 for the second. If I don't get 3 for the second, I've not attacked with it. I didn't make to hit, to wound, etc. rolls, so it can't have been an attack. That's how attacks are explained in the core rules. So, I know I can attack with it, but you're telling me I can't.

This is the issue. I'm 99.99% certain GW doesn't actually want us to attack with both weapons. I'm 99.99% certain they want us to only attack with one and gain a benefit from having a second equipped. BUT... this is not what they wrote. This needs an FAQ to clarify. The rules are poorly written.

This thread really needs a lock. This has boiled down to a yes/no argument.

For any new readers...

1. The intention seems to be that you get to make one set of attacks despite have two of the same weapons and that instead of a second set of attacks, you gain some other rules benefit as listed in your abilities.
2. Expect to see it played as above in every organized play event you go to.
3. Some people are ignoring tons and tons of circumstantial evidence and sticking with a very rigid interpretation of the rules to grant double attacks when two weapons are equipped.
4. The rules are written so vaguely that it's impossible to conclusively prove the people from point 3 wrong without an Errata or FAQ from GW.

I don't see this progressing any farther.

I get the feeling GW suffers from a translation issue. I remember reading a post about how the German rules were much clearer. A lot of lines in the rules would not get past an English technical writer. They are blatantly ambiguous. Wish they would figure that out. Does anyone know if the master draft of their rules are in English or another language?