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.

I know the 8th FAQ explictly said it was +2, and I've always taken it as rote that that still applied on 9th.

However, the other day my mate it was only +1, because the rules say you can never benefit from the same buff twice.
I argued +1 attack isn't a buff applied to the unit, it's an ability coming from the weapon, so the rule on buff stacking doesn't apply.
Is there any explicit ruling that would confirm or deny +2?
The recent addition covering "if you have two weapons, get +1 attack" certainly seems like the exception proving the rule that it should be +2.

Stacking buffs works unless there's a specific rule to the contrary. Ask them to show you such a rule here.

Anyway, there is no general rule preventing stacking + to attacks though, so it does generally stack. Though bare in mind that different weapons might word themselves in such a way that prevents it: see Tyranid scything talons which give +1 attack if the barer has more than one pair, not 1 per weapon.

Why would there even be an option to take a second chainsword if it didn't do anything? Anyway, it is specifically aura abilities that don't stack (plus there are restrictions on certain specific characteristics like hit modifiers).

 Bilge Rat wrote:
Why would there even be an option to take a second chainsword if it didn't do anything? Anyway, it is specifically aura abilities that don't stack (plus there are restrictions on certain specific characteristics like hit modifiers).

Well, to be fair looking Tyranids again: Trygons have 3 pairs of scything talons. The 3rd pair literally does nothing for any rules purpose.

 kirotheavenger wrote:

I know the 8th FAQ explictly said it was +2, and I've always taken it as rote that that still applied on 9th.

However, the other day my mate it was only +1, because the rules say you can never benefit from the same buff twice.
I argued +1 attack isn't a buff applied to the unit, it's an ability coming from the weapon, so the rule on buff stacking doesn't apply.
Is there any explicit ruling that would confirm or deny +2?
The recent addition covering "if you have two weapons, get +1 attack" certainly seems like the exception proving the rule that it should be +2.

Except the rules don't say that. He's misquoting this rule:

Aura Abilities
Some abilities affect models or units in a given range – these are aura abilities. A model with an aura ability is always within range of its effect. The effects of multiple, identically named aura abilities are not cumulative (i.e. if a unit is within range of two models with the same aura ability, that aura ability only applies to the unit once).

There is no such rule regarding Weapon Abilities or Abilities that are not Aura's that I can recall.

Your friend is inventing rules. Onus is on him to show you this rule preventing extra attacks. As it doesn’t exist he can’t.

It works, but it's stupid and frankly shouldn't. It never happens in fluff and doubling (or even tripling) the units attacks for free is just dumb. It really should be +1 attack only if you have a pistol or different melee weapon.

 Bilge Rat wrote:
Why would there even be an option to take a second chainsword if it didn't do anything?

Why you can take a pistol and a rifle when you can't ever fire both? Or two power fists, which does nothing (outside of Gravis dude with special provision for it)? Why you can upgrade BS of units that have no ranged weapons? Same deal, the fact you can pick niche, negative value combo doesn't mean there is some sort of upside to it, often it's just bad writing or relic of old rules that don't work anymore.

(EDIT: Changed response)

So the closest equivalent in the rules is in the FAQ:

ADDITIONAL ATTACKS FOR A PAIR OF WEAPONS
If a model is equipped with two weapons that have an ability that
reads ‘Each time the bearer fights, if it is equipped with 2 [name
of weapon], it makes 1 additional attack with this weapon.’ (e.g.
Orks killsaws, Grey Knights nemesis falchions, Drukhari macro-
scalpels, etc.), that model only makes 1 additional attack, not 1 for
each specified weapon it is equipped with.

It doesn't explicitly cover things like chainswords, as those don't have the requirement that it's two of the same weapon, so technically it does work. But I wouldn't be surprised if this was clarified in a future revision.

 Irbis wrote:
Why you can take a pistol and a rifle when you can't ever fire both?

There are times when you can fire a Pistol but no other weapons.

Aelyn wrote:
(EDIT: Changed response)

So the closest equivalent in the rules is in the FAQ:

ADDITIONAL ATTACKS FOR A PAIR OF WEAPONS
If a model is equipped with two weapons that have an ability that
reads ‘Each time the bearer fights, if it is equipped with 2 [name
of weapon], it makes 1 additional attack with this weapon.’ (e.g.
Orks killsaws, Grey Knights nemesis falchions, Drukhari macro-
scalpels, etc.), that model only makes 1 additional attack, not 1 for
each specified weapon it is equipped with.

It doesn't explicitly cover things like chainswords, as those don't have the requirement that it's two of the same weapon, so technically it does work. But I wouldn't be surprised if this was clarified in a future revision.

Completely different case. That FAQ was an answer to weapons that taken singularly didn't give +1A but taken in a pair they gave +2A RAW, instead of the intended +1A.

Single chainsword gives +1A instead. If it's possible to take a 2nd chainsword then that's another +1A. Just like lightning claws.

Yes, taking two chainswords to get +2 attacks for 0 points is stupid. However, it does include the opportunity cost of the Pistol you didn't take to get the second chainsword.