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.

 n0t_u wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:

GodDamUser wrote:
He has to be trolling really

Hanlon's razor.

Not the 20k post I envisioned but meh.

I am not the one struggling over the meaning of "used together".

Got 7 pages here that are showing otherwise.

So for you there is no other way of using two things together except that they become combined into one thing?

col_impact wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Charistoph wrote:

While I haven't seen the datasheet of Guillaman in person, its pretty easy to tell if it is one Weapon or two. If it has a title and a profile, it is one Weapon.

This is an assumption on your part. Do you have a rule in the BRB stating this? Otherwise, your argument is a perfect example of a RAI argument, where you are basing your argument on what you assume the rules to say rather than what they actually say

Yes. Pg 40. Weapon Profiles "Every weapon has a profile"

If they were 2 separate weapons they would have 2 separate profiles. Since every weapon has a profile.

 Stephanius wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:

GodDamUser wrote:
He has to be trolling really

Hanlon's razor.

Not the 20k post I envisioned but meh.

I am not the one struggling over the meaning of "used together".

Indeed, your definition for "used together" is "used separately".
That is why I personally cannot follow your logic.

"Used together" can mean "used at the same time in combat".

You are confusing "used together" with "fused together as one"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lance845 wrote:

col_impact wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Charistoph wrote:

While I haven't seen the datasheet of Guillaman in person, its pretty easy to tell if it is one Weapon or two. If it has a title and a profile, it is one Weapon.

This is an assumption on your part. Do you have a rule in the BRB stating this? Otherwise, your argument is a perfect example of a RAI argument, where you are basing your argument on what you assume the rules to say rather than what they actually say

Yes. Pg 40. Weapon Profiles "Every weapon has a profile"

If they were 2 separate weapons they would have 2 separate profiles. Since every weapon has a profile.

Nope. The profiles don't have to be unique. Two weapons could have the same profile. In this case they have the same melee profile. Much like a lot of make-shift weapons all have the Close Combat Weapon profile.

col_impact wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:

GodDamUser wrote:
He has to be trolling really

Hanlon's razor.

Not the 20k post I envisioned but meh.

I am not the one struggling over the meaning of "used together".

Got 7 pages here that are showing otherwise.

So for you there is no other way of using two things together except that they become combined into one thing?

Well there is, there's this magical little thing called syntax. I may be ESL, but judging by these other responses I must be quite on point with my understanding.

2 weapons can have the same profile. But then you would have 2 profiles listed.

Does he have one profile listed as

____________________Range____ S___ AP____Type
Sword of the Emperor

and one

____________________Range____ S___ AP____Type
Hand of Dominion

Because if not, it's 1 weapon.

He would need 2 profiles to have 2 weapons.

 n0t_u wrote:


Well there is, there's this magical little thing called syntax. I may be ESL, but judging by these other responses I must be quite on point with my understanding.

ESL? Thought so.

"Using together" does not mean combining things into one thing.

col_impact wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:


Well there is, there's this magical little thing called syntax. I may be ESL, but judging by these other responses I must be quite on point with my understanding.

ESL? Thought so.

"Using together" does not mean combining things into one thing.

I'm aware. However I play card games where syntax is consistently very important to get right and in this case the combined profile means it's combined.

 Lance845 wrote:
2 weapons can have the same profile. But then you would have 2 profiles listed.

Does he have one profile listed as

____________________Range____ S___ AP____Type
Sword of the Emperor

and one

____________________Range____ S___ AP____Type
Hand of Dominion

Because if not, it's 1 weapon.

He would need 2 profiles to have 2 weapons.

The melee profile provided is nameless. It is provided for two weapons. One weapon is named Sword of the Emperor. The other weapon is named the Hand of Dominion.

We know for sure that the Hand of Dominion winds up with a melee profile attached to it.



This means we have two weapons and two profiles. The melee profile is the same for both weapons but the overall profiles are different since the Hand includes a ranged weapon profile.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 n0t_u wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:


Well there is, there's this magical little thing called syntax. I may be ESL, but judging by these other responses I must be quite on point with my understanding.

ESL? Thought so.

"Using together" does not mean combining things into one thing.

I'm aware. However I play card games where syntax is consistently very important to get right and in this case the combined profile means it's combined.

Here, semantics is important and not reading into the words on the page. Where does it say "combined"?

col_impact wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
2 weapons can have the same profile. But then you would have 2 profiles listed.

Does he have one profile listed as

____________________Range____ S___ AP____Type
Sword of the Emperor

and one

____________________Range____ S___ AP____Type
Hand of Dominion

Because if not, it's 1 weapon.

He would need 2 profiles to have 2 weapons.

The melee profile provided is nameless. It is provided for two weapons. One weapon is named Sword of the Emperor. The other weapon is named the Hand of Dominion.

That's not how this works as per pg40 and pg49 stating two single handed weapons are required. As they're used together with one profile they may as well be two handed.

Using together is not a rule. Profiles are rules. Without a profile there is no permission to use anything as a weapon at all.

Does the sword and hand have 2 separate profiles?

Is there any rule that says either of them have have a CCW profile? I haven't seen anyone quote that.

The burden of proof is on you to provide the separate profiles. We have direct quotes where there is a single profile which grants rules for RG to make melee attacks with a weapon. We have no second profile that allows him a bonus attack.

You do not have a second profile. You are attempting to assume you have a second profile, but you do not. You have one that has been explicitly stated work for RG in melee.

 Lance845 wrote:
Using together is not a rule. Profiles are rules. Without a profile there is no permission to use anything as a weapon at all.

Does the sword and hand have 2 separate profiles?

Is there any rule that says either of them have have a CCW profile? I haven't seen anyone quote that.

The burden of proof is on you to provide the separate profiles. We have direct quotes where there is a single profile which grants rules for RG to make melee attacks with a weapon. We have no second profile that allows him a bonus attack.

You do not have a second profile. You are attempting to assume you have a second profile, but you do not. You have one that has been explicitly stated work for RG in melee.

I have two weapons. Nothing says I have one weapon.

Per the rules every weapon has a profile.

I have no other choice but to apply the melee weapon profile to each weapon individually. They wind up with the same melee profile but no rule has a problem with that.

The Hand of Dominion is a melee weapon so it has its own melee profile.



In order for that to have happened, the single melee profile listed must have been applied to both the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion.

col_impact wrote:

 Stephanius wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:

GodDamUser wrote:
He has to be trolling really

Hanlon's razor.

Not the 20k post I envisioned but meh.

I am not the one struggling over the meaning of "used together".

Indeed, your definition for "used together" is "used separately".
That is why I personally cannot follow your logic.

"Used together" can mean "used at the same time in combat".

You are confusing "used together" with "fused together as one"

...

What would "used at the same time in combat" mean rulewise? What are we instructed to do differently than normal procedure, i.e. pick one melee weapon?

col_impact wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Using together is not a rule. Profiles are rules. Without a profile there is no permission to use anything as a weapon at all.

Does the sword and hand have 2 separate profiles?

Is there any rule that says either of them have have a CCW profile? I haven't seen anyone quote that.

The burden of proof is on you to provide the separate profiles. We have direct quotes where there is a single profile which grants rules for RG to make melee attacks with a weapon. We have no second profile that allows him a bonus attack.

You do not have a second profile. You are attempting to assume you have a second profile, but you do not. You have one that has been explicitly stated work for RG in melee.

The Hand of Dominion is a melee weapon so it has its own melee profile.

Spoiler:

The Hand of Dominion can also be used as a ranged weapon, using the profile below. It may be used as both a melee weapon and a ranged weapon in the same turn.

In order for that to have happened, the single melee profile listed must have been applied to both the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion.

As before this is just a permissive to allow you to shoot and still be able to fight in melee as because both are used as one under one profile if you were unable to use the fist half to complete it Bobby G would be unable to attack. The discussion here is not if the fist is a melee weapon; it is are they separate weapons when Bobby G is in melee so as to produce a bonus attack.

 n0t_u wrote:
I'll try to simplify it as you seem to be getting caught up on that line there.

Say I have blue paint (the sword) and yellow paint (the fist), and together it says they're green. Now green is the only thing I have to use so the two are combined into the one paint. You keep trying to make the point that yellow is its own paint and I'm saying that doesn't matter because we're looking at green paint not blue and yellow paint side by side.

This discussion, again, is NOT are they individual weapons it is ARE they individual at the time of combat so as to generate a bonus attack. Now to go back to my analogy the rules say you mix the two together to make green; I'm asking you to prove your point by saying where it says they aren't mixed. Then you respond with "but yellow is a paint" instead of how they aren't mixed and you've continued to do so for the last 6 pages or so with others.

 Stephanius wrote:


What would "used at the same time in combat" mean rulewise? What are we instructed to do differently than normal procedure, i.e. pick one melee weapon?

It would mean that you are dual-wielding, ie eligible for +1A.

col_impact wrote:

 Stephanius wrote:


What would "used at the same time in combat" mean rulewise? What are we instructed to do differently than normal procedure, i.e. pick one melee weapon?

It would mean that you are dual-wielding, ie eligible for +1A.

pg40 "every Weapon has a profile"
pg49 "models with two single handed weapons get +1 attack"
Where is the second unshared profile?

 n0t_u wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Using together is not a rule. Profiles are rules. Without a profile there is no permission to use anything as a weapon at all.

Does the sword and hand have 2 separate profiles?

Is there any rule that says either of them have have a CCW profile? I haven't seen anyone quote that.

The burden of proof is on you to provide the separate profiles. We have direct quotes where there is a single profile which grants rules for RG to make melee attacks with a weapon. We have no second profile that allows him a bonus attack.

You do not have a second profile. You are attempting to assume you have a second profile, but you do not. You have one that has been explicitly stated work for RG in melee.

The Hand of Dominion is a melee weapon so it has its own melee profile.

Spoiler:

The Hand of Dominion can also be used as a ranged weapon, using the profile below. It may be used as both a melee weapon and a ranged weapon in the same turn.

In order for that to have happened, the single melee profile listed must have been applied to both the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion.

As before this is just a permissive to allow you to shoot and still be able to fight in melee as because both are used as one under one profile if you were unable to use the fist half to complete it Bobby G would be unable to attack. The discussion here is not if the fist is a melee weapon; it is are they separate weapons when Bobby G is in melee so as to produce a bonus attack.

 n0t_u wrote:
I'll try to simplify it as you seem to be getting caught up on that line there.

Say I have blue paint (the sword) and yellow paint (the fist), and together it says they're green. Now green is the only thing I have to use so the two are combined into the one paint. You keep trying to make the point that yellow is its own paint and I'm saying that doesn't matter because we're looking at green paint not blue and yellow paint side by side.

This discussion, again, is NOT are they individual weapons it is ARE they individual at the time of combat so as to generate a bonus attack. Now to go back to my analogy the rules say you mix the two together to make green; I'm asking you to prove your point by saying where it says they aren't mixed. Then you respond with "but yellow is a paint" instead of how they aren't mixed and you've continued to do so for the last 6 pages or so with others.

If the Hand of Dominion is a melee weapon then the Emperor's Sword is also a melee weapon.

We know from the rule that Robute has two weapons.

The rule that grants an additional attack only cares that Robute has two melee weapons.

Which he does.

He has an Emperor's Sword and a Hand of Dominion. They are both melee weapons and he has two weapons.

col_impact wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Using together is not a rule. Profiles are rules. Without a profile there is no permission to use anything as a weapon at all.

Does the sword and hand have 2 separate profiles?

Is there any rule that says either of them have have a CCW profile? I haven't seen anyone quote that.

The burden of proof is on you to provide the separate profiles. We have direct quotes where there is a single profile which grants rules for RG to make melee attacks with a weapon. We have no second profile that allows him a bonus attack.

You do not have a second profile. You are attempting to assume you have a second profile, but you do not. You have one that has been explicitly stated work for RG in melee.

The Hand of Dominion is a melee weapon so it has its own melee profile.

Spoiler:

The Hand of Dominion can also be used as a ranged weapon, using the profile below. It may be used as both a melee weapon and a ranged weapon in the same turn.

In order for that to have happened, the single melee profile listed must have been applied to both the Emperor's Sword and the Hand of Dominion.

As before this is just a permissive to allow you to shoot and still be able to fight in melee as because both are used as one under one profile if you were unable to use the fist half to complete it Bobby G would be unable to attack. The discussion here is not if the fist is a melee weapon; it is are they separate weapons when Bobby G is in melee so as to produce a bonus attack.

 n0t_u wrote:
I'll try to simplify it as you seem to be getting caught up on that line there.

Say I have blue paint (the sword) and yellow paint (the fist), and together it says they're green. Now green is the only thing I have to use so the two are combined into the one paint. You keep trying to make the point that yellow is its own paint and I'm saying that doesn't matter because we're looking at green paint not blue and yellow paint side by side.

This discussion, again, is NOT are they individual weapons it is ARE they individual at the time of combat so as to generate a bonus attack. Now to go back to my analogy the rules say you mix the two together to make green; I'm asking you to prove your point by saying where it says they aren't mixed. Then you respond with "but yellow is a paint" instead of how they aren't mixed and you've continued to do so for the last 6 pages or so with others.

If the Hand of Dominion is a melee weapon then the Emperor's Sword is also a melee weapon.

We know from the rule that Robute has two weapons.

The rule that grants an additional attack only cares that Robute has two melee weapons.

Which he does.

He has an Emperor's Sword and a Hand of Dominion. They are both melee weapons and he has two weapons.

He has one profile, you just keep making the assumption they both get it while is states that they have it together. Your argument is based on an assumption masqueraded as a fact.

 n0t_u wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 Stephanius wrote:


What would "used at the same time in combat" mean rulewise? What are we instructed to do differently than normal procedure, i.e. pick one melee weapon?

It would mean that you are dual-wielding, ie eligible for +1A.

pg40 "every Weapon has a profile"
pg49 "models with two single handed weapons get +1 attack"
Where is the second unshared profile?

The profile is not shared. The Hand of Dominion is individually a melee weapon. It can only be itself a melee weapon by not sharing a combined profile. Therefore there is no combined profile and the Emperor's Sword also has its own individual melee weapon profile.

The +1A rule is satisfied and the +1A is granted.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 n0t_u wrote:


He has one profile, you just keep making the assumption they both get it while is states that they have it together. Your argument is based on an assumption masqueraded as a fact.

He has two weapons, correct?

Every weapon has a profile, correct?

So the one profile provided is applied to each weapon. We know this is for certain the case because the Hand of Dominion winds up with a melee profile.


In other words, you don't have permission to fuse the two weapons into a single weapon.

col_impact wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:

col_impact wrote:

 Stephanius wrote:


What would "used at the same time in combat" mean rulewise? What are we instructed to do differently than normal procedure, i.e. pick one melee weapon?

It would mean that you are dual-wielding, ie eligible for +1A.

pg40 "every Weapon has a profile"
pg49 "models with two single handed weapons get +1 attack"
Where is the second unshared profile?

The profile is not shared. The Hand of Dominion is individually a melee weapon. It can only be itself a melee weapon by not sharing a combined profile. Therefore there is no combined profile and the Emperor's Sword also has its own individual melee weapon profile.

The +1A rule is satisfied and the +1A is granted.

Again, purely an assumption perhaps an annoying assumption to try to squeeze more power out of Bobby G.
"These weapons are used together, using the profile below"
They don't have the profile individually they only have it while together. Syntax is important, semantics whilst ignoring syntax is merely wishlisting at best.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

col_impact wrote:
In other words, you don't have permission to fuse the two weapons into a single weapon.

And thanks for finally proving my point.

You do not have permission to use them separately, they must be used together thus are counted as one weapon and not two for the purposes of combat.

 n0t_u wrote:


Again, purely an assumption perhaps an annoying assumption to try to squeeze more power out of Bobby G.
"These weapons are used together, using the profile below"
They don't have the profile individually they only have it while together. Syntax is important, semantics whilst ignoring syntax is merely wishlisting at best.

You don't have permission to fuse the two weapons into a single weapon.

So the two weapons are going to wind up each with their own profile even if only one profile is provided.

There is nothing preventing them from individually referring to the same melee profile.

We know for sure that the two weapons wind up with their own individual melee profile because the rules tell us precisely that in the case of the Hand of Dominion.

col_impact wrote:
You don't have permission to fuse the two weapons into a single weapon.

So the two weapons are going to wind up each with their own profile even if only one profile is provided.

You do not have permission to use them individually, you're assuming you can. You can't, it's pretty clear.

 n0t_u wrote:


You do not have permission to use them separately, they must be used together thus are counted as one weapon and not two for the purposes of combat.

You don't have any rules that say they are counted as one weapon.

"Used together" simply means they will be used at the same time in combat, ie dual-wielding.

col_impact wrote:
We know for sure that the two weapons wind up with their own individual melee profile because the rules tell us precisely that in the case of the Hand of Dominion.

No they let the shooting half of his melee weapon able to do both so as not to lock him out of combat on turns he has shot. Again assumption.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

col_impact wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:


You do not have permission to use them separately, they must be used together thus are counted as one weapon and not two for the purposes of combat.

You don't have any rules that say they are counted as one weapon.

"Used together" simply means they will be used at the same time in combat, ie dual-wielding.

Used together would mean that if it didn't add "using the following profile below"
They count as one melee weapon for combat purposes, stop presenting assumptions as facts.

 n0t_u wrote:

col_impact wrote:
You don't have permission to fuse the two weapons into a single weapon.

So the two weapons are going to wind up each with their own profile even if only one profile is provided.

You do not have permission to use them individually, you're assuming you can. You can't, it's pretty clear.

The rules consider them weapons and do not tell us to count them as a single weapon.

"Used together" simply means they are dual-wielded, which means I attack with them at the same time as two melee weapons

col_impact wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:

col_impact wrote:
You don't have permission to fuse the two weapons into a single weapon.

So the two weapons are going to wind up each with their own profile even if only one profile is provided.

You do not have permission to use them individually, you're assuming you can. You can't, it's pretty clear.

The rules consider them weapons and do not tell us to count them as a single weapon.

"Used together" simply means they are dual-wielded, which means I attack with them at the same time as two melee weapons

If rules considered them separate weapons it would not say "used together, using the profile below" and give them just one profile. Please stop with the assumptions.

 n0t_u wrote:

col_impact wrote:
We know for sure that the two weapons wind up with their own individual melee profile because the rules tell us precisely that in the case of the Hand of Dominion.

No they let the shooting half of his melee weapon able to do both so as not to lock him out of combat on turns he has shot. Again assumption.

The rule proves that the melee profile is applied to the Hand of Dominion and not to some combined "Emperor's Sword and Hand of Dominion" single weapon.

Your entire argument is disproven by this quote.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 n0t_u wrote:
[
They count as one melee weapon for combat purposes, stop presenting assumptions as facts.

You are projecting onto me.


No where does it day that the weapons count as a single weapon. You are making that up.

col_impact wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:

col_impact wrote:
We know for sure that the two weapons wind up with their own individual melee profile because the rules tell us precisely that in the case of the Hand of Dominion.

No they let the shooting half of his melee weapon able to do both so as not to lock him out of combat on turns he has shot. Again assumption.

The rule proves that the melee profile is applied to the Hand of Dominion and not to some combined "Emperor's Sword and Hand of Dominion" single weapon.

Your entire argument is disproven by this quote.

Spoiler:

The Hand of Dominion can also be used as a ranged weapon, using the profile below. It may be used as both a melee weapon and a ranged weapon in the same turn.

For the 4th time it is unphased by that quote.

 n0t_u wrote:
I'll try to simplify it as you seem to be getting caught up on that line there.

Say I have blue paint (the sword) and yellow paint (the fist), and together it says they're green. Now green is the only thing I have to use so the two are combined into the one paint. You keep trying to make the point that yellow is its own paint and I'm saying that doesn't matter because we're looking at green paint not blue and yellow paint side by side.

This discussion, again, is NOT are they individual weapons it is ARE they individual at the time of combat so as to generate a bonus attack. Now to go back to my analogy the rules say you mix the two together to make green; I'm asking you to prove your point by saying where it says they aren't mixed. Then you respond with "but yellow is a paint" instead of how they aren't mixed and you've continued to do so for the last 6 pages or so with others.

Stop presenting assumptions as fact, your argument has had nothing to stand on for a good 2-4 pages now. The discussion is do they count as two weapons for the purpose of melee; they do not.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

col_impact wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:
[
They count as one melee weapon for combat purposes, stop presenting assumptions as facts.

You are projecting onto me.


No where does it day that the weapons count as a single weapon. You are making that up.

"used together, using the profile below"
Added with page 40's "all weapons have a profile" quickly disproves that, no need to strawman.

 n0t_u wrote:


If rules considered them separate weapons it would not say "used together, using the profile below" and give them just one profile. Please stop with the assumptions.

The rules refer to them in the plural separably as "these weapons".

"Used together" means simply that they are used at the same time in combat.

This quote proves that the Hand of Dominion is individually a melee weapon.



If the Hand of Dominion were a component of some combined weapon, the Hand of Dominion would not be itself a melee weapon.

You argument is thoroughly disproved with the rules.

col_impact wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:


If rules considered them separate weapons it would not say "used together, using the profile below" and give them just one profile. Please stop with the assumptions.

The rules refer to them in the plural separably as "these weapons".

"Used together" means simply that they are used at the same time in combat.

This quote proves that the Hand of Dominion is individually a melee weapon.

Spoiler:

The Hand of Dominion can also be used as a ranged weapon, using the profile below. It may be used as both a melee weapon and a ranged weapon in the same turn.

If the Hand of Dominion were a component of some combined weapon, the Hand of Dominion would not be itself a melee weapon.

You argument is thoroughly disproved with the rules.

Not in the slightest, why would they only have the one profile to be used when they are used together? The real issue here is you cannot accept being incorrect. There's nothing wrong with it and in fact it helps us learn and grow as people.

col_impact wrote:

Ceann wrote:
No, they share Close Combat Weapon in their WARGEAR that GIVES THEM the profile. There is no wargear list shown for him to come to the conclusion he has a basic "CCW" profile.

You don't get profiles from nothing. Wargear gives you a profile.

There is no wargear called "The Hand of Dominion" we know that the profile is explicitly calling out something called that name but we don't see a profile for it.

For Robute we aren't dealing with Wargear. We are dealing with Relics. Pay attention.

You need to pay attention.

In fact, let's give that old chestnut a once over, shall we?

You seem to be stating here that because the Sword and Hand are Relics that the examples being given of similar weapon sets that a Two-As-One (Lashwhip and Bonesword etc) don't count. Because 'Relics are special.' Because they're exceptions, right?

I mean, surely if there were relics that were a paired set of weapons or so on then they would indicate whether or not that was the case, right? And if only it were recent.

Wait.

Traitor Legions - Night Lords - The Claws of the Night Terror

The description specifically mentions that it is a pair of melee weapons and that each one uses the profile given.

And if you want examples of relics that have BOTH a ranged and a melee function?

The Pandemic Staff - which funnily enough gives profiles for both.

Now impact, going by RAW...

The Sword and Hand have a combined profile. One assumes this covers both. There is nothing stating they count as a pair of melee weapons or that they grant +1 attack (as per the Claws of the Night Terror). If anything it's very similar to a Tyranid armed with a Lash Whip and Bonesword - this has its own, combined wargear entry. It does not grant a bonus attack. And though they have individual profiles the fact this exists as a combined profile suggests it behaves differently.

Furthermore, the argument that 'the Hand can be used in melee' falls down pretty flat when you see that the Hand has no melee profile. There is also a precedence for weapons being either used at range or in melee but not both. Ork Burnas 101. But, here's the thing. The Burna has a melee profile too.

So if we really want to follow your asinine logic, looking at everything presented, all that has come before it and how it behaves then this leads us to one of two conclusions.

EITHER - The Hand and Sword have a combined profile (ala Lash Whip and Bonesword) which does not grant an extra attack or indeed count as a pair of melee weapons (it doesn't follow precedent with other examples given - no mention of counting as a pair).

OR - Bobby G can use his Hand's pew pew in combat. Still no bonus attack as it still isn't a pistol.

I mean, let's be real here. Everything can use every weapon in melee. They just count as being armed with a solitary close combat weapon if they do so (unless armed otherwise for assault). Otherwise the assault phase would be real interesting for Fire Warriors and Termagants.