Librarium Online Forums banner

Additional hand weapon + frenzy not stacking under 8th edition?!

8K views 11 replies 7 participants last post by  Chatawax 
#1 ·
Hi,

I have a question about the way special rules stack under 8th edition. Specifically, if a model has two copies of the same special rule, do they stack or not?

For example, 'frenzy' and 'extra hand weapon' both grant the 'extra attack' rule. But does that result in +1 attack (the special rule only counts once), or +2 attacks (the rule is cumulative with itself)?

All I can see in the rules is the statement that multiple special rules are cumulative unless stated otherwise... but I read that as meaning that different special rules stack, not copies of the same rule.

So, can anyone explain this to me? Thanks!
Just a small question, I read this on another board, and people started to argue that frenzy and Extra hand weapon do only add up to +1 attacks in total... That would mean that additional hand weapon warriors with the mark of khorn is essentialy crap, you might as well take shields, or halberds.

This would also affect witch elves, they would loose 1 attack in total.

On the other hand, if the "special rules" stack, wouldn't it mean that banner of rage, and mark of khorne also stacks, for a total of +2 attacks ? since they both grant the "extra attack" special rule, together with an extra hand weapon this would give a warrior a whopping +3 attacks...

I just hope it will work as in 7th edition.

So what do you all make of this? And are there anyone who have read the new rules covering this ?
 
#2 · (Edited)
citated from the rulebook, pg 66: "Unless otherwise noted, the efects of multiple special rules are cumulative." Question is, what does it mean multiple. For me it means that effects just stack, no matter what is the source. Extra attacks doesnt have any sentence about not stacking up the attacks, so no, you can stack AHW and Fr IMHO so Chaos Warriors f.e. with 2 weapons and Khorne mark have each 4 attacks, but only one from support line ofc.


EDIT: to Frenzy, its odd that rules doesnt say nothing about stacking of frenzy, rulewise it seems that 2 attacks from double frenzy is possible, but its unlogical for me. Hope for FAQ on this.
 
#3 ·
Aye I ranted about this a few weeks ago. As Metaxa pointed out there's a wee little note on P66 (not actually seen it myself but it has been confirmed by a Black shirt.....funnily enough the same one who told me they didn't) that says they do stack.

So relax. Your Khorne warriors are still hurty.
 
#5 ·
But double frenzy... that would be one pretty angry dude to get +2A from two sources of frenzy. I'd say it's logically impossible, even though there might be a loophole in the rules. The 8th edition rulebook is leaning strongly toward RAI instead of RAW, so if it feels wrong, it probably is.
 
#9 ·
The 8th edition rulebook is leaning strongly toward RAI instead of RAW, so if it feels wrong, it probably is.
?????
When I read the book, I got a very strong feeling that they were trying to write the most clear, concise, and loophole-free rulebook than any they've ever made! They spent half a page telling me that Level3 is better than Level 1, and why. They also do a very good job at being very clear. There are mistakes sure, but they have already told us to expect an errata and faq that might do a very good job at cancelling questions like this.

In short (although the question is already answered) I am 100% certain that Frenzy and 2xHW will stack for a total of +2 attacks. Now, I'm quite curious if Frenzy will stack. If it does, that means that the next WoC book will probably see one of two things:
1. Frenzy banner is gone or made very expensive, since we can double it with Khorne.
2. Khorne grants MR or Hatred in place of Frenzy. This is probably the more likely of the two, and could possibly be altered in the errata rather than a new book.
 
#8 ·
Haha!
It would be so crazy it's actually funny.
Who cares for Warriors with 5A at S4? Imagine Warriors with halberds striking 3 times each at S5?

Or Marauders of Khorne... 10 wide... with great weapons... 5 deep.
 
#10 ·
What I meant was that they back up the written rules with sections of text describing the intention of the rule. So if the rule itself is unclear, then the intention of the rule isn't.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top