Company Master wargear idea

[Cactus]

"a company master may take items from..." note it doesn't say replace. Ergo RAW this is legal loadout.

 

I may have missed something when I hurriedly checked my codex over breakfast, but don't those equipment lists then tell us to exchange an existing weapon?

[Major_Gilbear]

"a company master may take items from..." note it doesn't say replace. Ergo RAW this is legal loadout.

Actually it does if you followe the instructions - Catus is quite correct!

So, in the army list unit description you start with

"A company master may take items from..."

Then you go the the list in question, and at the top of the relevant list it says

"A model may replace a weapon with..." or similar.

Therefore, if you follow the instructions as directed, you cannot have two melee weapons and a two-handed ranged weapon.

Clearly, this is a rare moment of "Rules well written; working exactly as intended" from GW!

[FerociousBeast]

Yes, company masters can only ever have 2 weapons.

 

As an aside, however, it makes no sense from a competitive, list-building perspective to put two power fists on a model in 6E. If you want two power fist attacks the cheapest way to do it is by giving the model a power fist and LC, since the LC is only 15 points and the PF is 25. Plus you get additional CC options. Ditto for thunder hammer.

 

I'd also argue that it makes little sense anymore to do 2xLCs, since for only 10 points more you get the possibility for S8/AP2 hits on vehicles or when opponent's Initiative is higher.

 

All of this is from a list building perspective. Thematically, modeling-ly, and fluff-bunny-ly (like I am), I much, much prefer the 5E specialist weapon rule.

[Polythemus]

Right you are. I stand corrected. It is a bit silly not to be able to take an extra ranged weapon. That means this char is only 190 so still pretty nasty, w/o the lions roar.

[Phoebus]

It's probably neither here nor there in the sense that the Codex has been out for a while and thus I'm complaining about old news... but I'm still annoyed by arbitrary edition-based changes like "your Character now can only have two weapons." Were Space Marine Captains and Dark Angels Company Masters really so imbalanced when they possessed both assault and ranged combat capability (e.g., lightning claws and some sort of gun)? If you don't mind the point cost and are willing to go through the trouble of converting a Company Master so that he's sporting a pair of lightning claws, a plasma pistol, and a storm bolter (the specific example cited in the last edition's FAQ and Errata), then what's the big deal?

[Interrogator Stobz]

True, GeeDub has a really bent way of balancing things out... let the horse flogging commence ;)

[ValourousHeart]

I guess it shows my age. But when I started playing models could only have 2 weapons, even if they had more than two arms.

 

GW moved away from that and new players came in where you had punisher models with every weapon for every situation.

 

And now we are back to a limited number of weapons. I like it and I think it makes the models look better not having the model standing on a base of a hundred guns.

 

"Yes I have every weapon in the arsenal, and I brought them all. Now just as soon as I can find the right one I'm going to shoot you with it. Damn where did I put that. Hold on, wait..."

 

The only issue is this:

 

1. Some units get bolter, pistol & chainsword

2. Other units get bolter & pistol or chainsword

3. And yet other units get bolter or pistol or chainsword

 

I get the limiting, and I agree with it. What I don't get is that they are all marines, soo why isn't it standardized?