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.

His fist and sword are two close combat weapons using the same profile but neither are specialist unwieldy. So on the charge would he have 8 attacks and 7 in on going combats?

The rules for the Hand of Dominion and the Sword of the emperor state rather explicitly they use the same profile TOGETHER. No bonus attacks.

Actually, I'm not sure about that. He does have two weapons, but their rules are listed together rather than separate. By the way it's written, it could very well be two weapons with functionally identical profiles, meaning that you do have two weapons and therefore +1 attacks.

Until determined though, I'll just play with no bonus attacks because there's just one weapon profile, not two (even if it is shared).

From directly above the profile for the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion:

These weapons are used together, using the profile below.

There is no close combat profile for the individual weapons, just a profile for using them together

 Ghaz wrote:
From directly above the profile for the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion:

These weapons are used together, using the profile below.

There is no close combat profile for the individual weapons, just a profile for using them together

Even still, that's using two weapons together, which is using two weapons. It's just not clear whether that's intended to give +1A or not.

Does he have two weapons with two profiles, each with the Melee type?

OR...

Does he have two modeled weapons with one combined profile?

I think it's pretty clear that, from a rules perspective, he's not equipped with two weapons with the Melee type.

 Kriswall wrote:
Does he have two weapons with two profiles, each with the Melee type?

OR...

Does he have two modeled weapons with one combined profile?

I think it's pretty clear that, from a rules perspective, he's not equipped with two weapons with the Melee type.

Good call there Kriswall. Just one profile, with the Melee type. So, even together, they count as a single weapon. No bonus attacks!

If he has 2 weapons with a single profile and that gets him an extra attack then the lashwhip + bonesword counts as 2 weapons for all tyranids and they can use their other arms to bring a gun.

I.E. there is already a precedent for this. A single profile is a single weapon. It doesn't matter how many arms it takes or different weapons are in different hands.

It's the same as twin linked guns being mounted on both shoulders of a tau suit. It's not 2 guns even though it's modeled as 2 guns. It's 1 gun because it's a single profile.

 Kriswall wrote:
Does he have two weapons with two profiles, each with the Melee type?

OR...

Does he have two modeled weapons with one combined profile?

I think it's pretty clear that, from a rules perspective, he's not equipped with two weapons with the Melee type.

Actually I think you're wrong on the second part with RAW.
It states on his data slate " These weapons are used together using the same profile below" first thing listed under the type is "Melee".

Furthermore it also states under the hand of dominion "The hand of dominion can also be used as a ranged weapon, using the profile below. It may be used as both a melee and ranged weapon in the same turn.

What is the Melee profile for the separate weapons? We only have a Melee profile for when they're used together.

You can't separate them is how I have read it. I think the RAI is for him to basically have 3 attacks with each but you get the bonus of having the individual bonuses on all the attacks.

Shouldn't it be D6 bonus attacks, since he's a primarch with blond hair and all?
(/sarcasm)

Each part of the rules is clear:
- there are no two entries on the equipment list
- the sword and hand share one melee profile
- the weapons are explicitly used TOGETHER with this profile
- the sentence about "also melee" is there so people don't claim you cannot hit people if you shot them

That means that as far as rules go, there is only one weapon, which can also shoot and is explictly free to hit people after being used as a shooting weapon.

There is no bonus attack.

If you feel the model is too weak for the points, go and compare him to a 350pt daemon prince or the almost 700 points Magnus.

 Stephanius wrote:



If you feel the model is too weak for the points, go and compare him to a 350pt daemon prince or the almost 700 points Magnus.

Out of topic discussion, do you mean compare him to a 350pts Tzeentch Daemon Prince with wings and often have a 2++ rerollable and have 3 chances to roll on StrD power or Tzeentch Treason, and in a Inferno Tetra? Yes, then the 350pts loyalist Primarch is Much Much weaker than it. 650pts Magnus? I agree that he costs too much, but he can fly and garantees can keep StrD as well as controlling opponent's strongest shooty units to shoot themselves, while Guilliman can do nothing but watch helplessly.

Back to the topic, I would agree that Guilliman only have one weapon, because I think there is no where we can find "these are two separate weapons" So he is boned with 6A base, 7A on the charge. That might not be the intension of GW, but due to their lazy rule writting, they make Guilliman even weaker compare to Eldar WK and Flying Daemon Princes, at least before they FAQ it.

 Lance845 wrote:
If he has 2 weapons with a single profile and that gets him an extra attack then the lashwhip + bonesword counts as 2 weapons for all tyranids and they can use their other arms to bring a gun.

I.E. there is already a precedent for this. A single profile is a single weapon. It doesn't matter how many arms it takes or different weapons are in different hands.

Actually lash whip and Bone Sword do have separate profiles.. In both Codex Tyranids and Codex Genestealer Cult

Yeah, a 350 point Daemon Prince is so much better than Bobby G!*

*With support, costing god knows how many points, and is not the most reliable.

To resolve this issue in terms of RAW we need to stick precisely to what the rules tell us and not add any of our own rationale to the process.

The rule for granting an additional attack only cares about whether there is 2 or more weapons with the melee type. The rule does not care if the weapons are 'used together'.



The rules don't care if the melee weapons in question 'share a profile'. Only that there is a plural number of them ("two or more").


Robute definitely has "weapons" plural that have the melee type which can be seen on the profile used for the weapons.

Therefore Robute has two CCW.

Therefore Roboute gets +1A.

Am I missing something, where multiple weapons available to Guilliman have the melee type?

because absent that, there's no basis to presume that multiple weapon (as presented on the model) give multiple attacks (as noted by the basic rules for multiple melee weapons).

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
Am I missing something, where multiple weapons available to Guilliman have the melee type?

because absent that, there's no basis to presume that multiple weapon (as presented on the model) give multiple attacks (as noted by the basic rules for multiple melee weapons).

The Emperor’s Sword and the Hand of Dominion each have the melee type

col_impact wrote:

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
Am I missing something, where multiple weapons available to Guilliman have the melee type?

because absent that, there's no basis to presume that multiple weapon (as presented on the model) give multiple attacks (as noted by the basic rules for multiple melee weapons).

The Emperor’s Sword and the Hand of Dominion each have the melee type

As I read it, the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion SHARE the melee type, they don't "each have the melee type".

Were it the latter, they'd grant an extra attack. Were it the former, they'd only grant an extra attack if another weapon (with a profile granting the melee type) were present.

 Unusual Suspect wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
Am I missing something, where multiple weapons available to Guilliman have the melee type?

because absent that, there's no basis to presume that multiple weapon (as presented on the model) give multiple attacks (as noted by the basic rules for multiple melee weapons).

The Emperor’s Sword and the Hand of Dominion each have the melee type

As I read it, the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion SHARE the melee type, they don't "each have the melee type".

Were it the latter, they'd grant an extra attack. Were it the former, they'd only grant an extra attack if another weapon (with a profile granting the melee type) were present.

How many weapons does Robute have?



Since the rule uses the plural, I can come to no other conclusion than 2.

Is the Emperor's Sword a melee weapon? yes

Is the Hand of Dominion a melee weapon? yes and also a shooting weapon




This rule does not care if the melee weapons have unique profiles. The rule only cares that there are two weapons with the melee type. This is unequivocal in the case of Robute.


Consider these two statements:

"These weapons are used together, using the profile below. [profile has melee type]"

"These weapons are used together as a single weapon using the profile below. [profile has melee type]"

These are different statements with different rule consequences. The former leads to 2 CCW. The latter leads to 1 CCW.

I would think "use THE profile below" as a reference to a singular weapon would be sufficient.

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
I would think "use THE profile below" as a reference to a singular weapon would be sufficient.

You are reading into the statement and making an assumption about what a profile is or what the rules writer means by "used together". In other words, you are forming a Rules As Intended argument.

Robute's Army List Entry is missing the "as a single weapon" that would make your argument a RAW one. This is important to understand.

col_impact wrote:

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
I would think "use THE profile below" as a reference to a singular weapon would be sufficient.

You are reading into the statement and making an assumption about what a profile is or what the rules write means by "used together". In other words, you are forming a Rules As Intended argument.

Robute's Army List Entry is missing the "as a single weapon" that would make your argument a RAW one. This is important to understand.

Odd, because the rules for the weapon profile are to be taken as "together" and the the weapons taken apart have no rules associated with them.

For the RAW to be otherwise, the rules would have to grant the weapons rules independent of the rules they are granted "together" no?

 Unusual Suspect wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
I would think "use THE profile below" as a reference to a singular weapon would be sufficient.

You are reading into the statement and making an assumption about what a profile is or what the rules write means by "used together". In other words, you are forming a Rules As Intended argument.

Robute's Army List Entry is missing the "as a single weapon" that would make your argument a RAW one. This is important to understand.

Odd, because the rules for the weapon profile are to be taken as "together" and the the weapons taken apart have no rules associated with them.

For the RAW to be otherwise, the rules would have to grant the weapons rules independent of the rules they are granted "together" no?

Again, you are reading into what it means if two melee weapons have the same profile.

1) Robute has two weapons.

2) Every weapon has a profile so each of those weapons references the same profile.

3) That profile has the Melee type so each of those weapons is a melee weapon.

4) They are used together.

Are they used together as a single weapon? You cannot answer that question as yes without reading into information provided.

If you answer yes that is a fine RAI argument but it is definitely not a RAW argument.

The RAW argument leads unequivocally to +1A. It is unequivocal because no where in the Army List Entry are we told to consider Robute's melee weapons as a single weapon.

col_impact wrote:

 Unusual Suspect wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
I would think "use THE profile below" as a reference to a singular weapon would be sufficient.

You are reading into the statement and making an assumption about what a profile is or what the rules write means by "used together". In other words, you are forming a Rules As Intended argument.

Robute's Army List Entry is missing the "as a single weapon" that would make your argument a RAW one. This is important to understand.

Odd, because the rules for the weapon profile are to be taken as "together" and the the weapons taken apart have no rules associated with them.

For the RAW to be otherwise, the rules would have to grant the weapons rules independent of the rules they are granted "together" no?

Again, you are reading into what it means if two melee weapons have the same profile.

1) Robute has two weapons.

2) Every weapon has a profile so each of those weapons references the same profile.

3) That profile has the Melee type so each of those weapons is a melee weapon.

4) They are used together.

Are they used together as a single weapon? You cannot answer that question as yes without reading into information provided.

If you answer yes that is a fine RAI argument but it is definitely not a RAW argument.

See, you're going to have to prove number 2 before its taken for granted.

Without being taken TOGETHER, does any of the potential melee weapons have a weapon profile detailing their melee nature? If taken together, does that allow the those weapons to be taken individually in a way that would grant extra attacks?

 Unusual Suspect wrote:


See, you're going to have to prove number 2 before its taken for granted.

From the BRB . . .

 Unusual Suspect wrote:


Without being taken TOGETHER, does any of the potential melee weapons have a weapon profile detailing their melee nature? If taken together, does that allow the those weapons to be taken individually in a way that would grant extra attacks?

The rule that grants the +1A only cares that there are two or more weapons. It does not care whether they are "used together" or not. Only that there are indeed two or more weapons.

"Used together" would have to mean "used together as a single weapon" for your argument to work. Do you have rules to back this?

That's your problem. You don't have rules to back the claim that "used together" means "used together as a single weapon". This is what relegates your argument to a RAI one.

I am not saying your argument is right or wrong. I am only saying that your argument is not RAW.

The RAW argument is +1A.

col_impact wrote:

 Unusual Suspect wrote:


See, you're going to have to prove number 2 before its taken for granted.

From the BRB . . .

Spoiler:

WEAPON PROFILES
Every weapon has a profile.

 Unusual Suspect wrote:


Without being taken TOGETHER, does any of the potential melee weapons have a weapon profile detailing their melee nature? If taken together, does that allow the those weapons to be taken individually in a way that would grant extra attacks?

The rule that grants the +1A only cares that there are two or more weapons. It does not care whether they are "used together" or not. Only that there are indeed two or more weapons.

"Used together" would have to mean "used together as a single weapon" for your argument to work. Do you have rules to back this?

That's your problem. You don't have rules to back the claim that "used together" means "used together as a single weapon". This is what relegates your argument to a RAI one.

I am not saying your argument is right or wrong. I am only saying that your argument is not RAW.

The RAW argument is +1A.

The RAW argument requires that a model have "two or more melee weapons."

If a weapon is only treated as a melee weapon when considered together with another, it isn't RAW treated as a melee weapon individually barring some other rule designating it as such.

The rules allowing a weapon to grant +1 A requires it to be a melee weapon: What grants the Melee quality individually, such that each weapon is a Melee weapon sufficient to qualify under the RAW, when it is only the two weapons taken TOGETHER that grants it the Melee weapon quality?

col_impact wrote:

 Unusual Suspect wrote:


See, you're going to have to prove number 2 before its taken for granted.

From the BRB . . .

Spoiler:

WEAPON PROFILES
Every weapon has a profile.

 Unusual Suspect wrote:


Without being taken TOGETHER, does any of the potential melee weapons have a weapon profile detailing their melee nature? If taken together, does that allow the those weapons to be taken individually in a way that would grant extra attacks?

The rule that grants the +1A only cares that there are two or more weapons. It does not care whether they are "used together" or not. Only that there are indeed two or more weapons.

"Used together" would have to mean "used together as a single weapon" for your argument to work. Do you have rules to back this?

That's your problem. You don't have rules to back the claim that "used together" means "used together as a single weapon". This is what relegates your argument to a RAI one.

I am not saying your argument is right or wrong. I am only saying that your argument is not RAW.

The RAW argument is +1A.

While i agree with you that not having 2x weapons profiles don't means he's not wielding 2x weapons i would like to point that there is some Eldar and Dark Eldar weapons that just show a single profile but grants the extra attack.

But those weapons clearly indicated in their rules entrances they count as a set of 2 weapons and provide an extra attack or just have an special rule that does it ( Demi Klaives, Shardnet & impaler, Chainsabres, Mirrorsowords and Powerblades as example)

So i think RAW RG don't get the extra attack.

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
What grants the Melee quality individually, such that each weapon is a Melee weapon sufficient to qualify under the RAW, when it is only the two weapons taken TOGETHER that grants it the Melee weapon quality?

Nothing says taking the two weapons together grants the Melee weapon type. You are reading into the rules.

The Army List Entry says:

1) Robute has 2 weapons.

2) Those weapons are used together.

3) Here is a profile to use for them . . . Range (-) S (10) AP (1) Type (Melee, Armourbane, Concussion, Soul Blaze, Touch of the Emperor, Whirling Flame)

We know from the BRB that

4) every weapon has a profile.

Therefore, the profile for the Emperor's Sword (which is one of the weapons) is . . .



and the Hand of Dominion (which is the other weapon) is . . .








Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lord Perversor wrote:
While i agree with you that not having 2x weapons profiles don't means he's not wielding 2x weapons i would like to point that there is some Eldar and Dark Eldar weapons that just show a single profile but grants the extra attack.

But those weapons clearly indicated in their rules entrances they count as a set of 2 weapons and provide an extra attack or just have an special rule that does it ( Demi Klaives, Shardnet & impaler, Chainsabres, Mirrorsowords and Powerblades as example)

So i think RAW RG don't get the extra attack.

It doen't matter what Eldar and Dark Eldar do.

We go off of the rules provided.

RAW he has two weapons and those weapons each reference a profile with the Melee type.

Therefore, RAW, +1 A.

GodDamUser wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
If he has 2 weapons with a single profile and that gets him an extra attack then the lashwhip + bonesword counts as 2 weapons for all tyranids and they can use their other arms to bring a gun.

I.E. there is already a precedent for this. A single profile is a single weapon. It doesn't matter how many arms it takes or different weapons are in different hands.

Actually lash whip and Bone Sword do have separate profiles.. In both Codex Tyranids and Codex Genestealer Cult

There are Lashwhips (used by venomthropes and toxicrenes) Bone Swords (used by many things) and Lashwhip & Bonesword which is used by Hive Tyrants and Warriors and is a single weapon with a single profile.