Boneswords/Lashwhip and boneswords question

[torrisbullba]

I was looking at the faq for tyranids when this question popped into my head. It says, if a model has at least one pair of boneswords, it makes one extra attack. This is regardless of whether it has two pairs or one pair. But, in my thinking, having two lashwhip and boneswords would give you a pair of boneswords. I think this wouldn’t be RAI, but the weapon is called boneswords, and the text says “a model armed with a pair of boneswords...”. This leads me to believe just having two boneswords (regardless of whether they are from the boneswords weapon or lash whip and bonesword) would give you the extra attack, and the ability to fight after you die. Please let me know if I’m overlooking anything. And I’m not sure if this would be worth the points, but just an interesting thought I felt should be shared/discussed

[hivefleetkerrigan]

I don't think that works. There is an equipment called boneswords and there is a separate piece of equipment called lashwhip and bonesword. Having two lashwhip and bonesword does not give you the bonesword equipment.

If you want both fight and die and an extra attack just take one bonesword equipment and one lashwhip and bonesword equipment. Remember each warrior can take two sets of equipment.

[infornography]

Yeah, funny way of reading it, but ultimately pointless because you can just do as Kerrigan recommends. I'd give you a 50/50 chance the TO would agree with your interpretation. It would be lower but there is no reason you couldn't just take boneswords instead for one pair of arms.

[rpricew]

It's in the FAQ... you can make 1 additional attack with 1 pair. So no double dipping.

[infornography]

Feb 24, 2021 21:16:45 GMT rpricew said:

It's in the FAQ... you can make 1 additional attack with 1 pair. So no double dipping.

You misread the post.

They are not wanting to doubledip on the extra attack, they are trying to get an extra attack by having two LW+BS on the idea that the two boneswords together from the LW+BS count as a pair of boneswords and grant an extra attack.

[torrisbullba]

I agree with you all. This concept is pretty much pointless. The only ways I’ve thought it might even remotely come up is either randomizing your weapons (for a campaign or something I guess??) or for flavor purposes. Other than this possibility, the only real reason to take two of any of the close combat weapons on the warriors is the scything talons for the extra attack (unless I’m missing something of course). But thought this might be a way to add a little more flavor to my army

[infornography]

Feb 25, 2021 14:25:10 GMT torrisbullba said:

I agree with you all. This concept is pretty much pointless. The only ways I’ve thought it might even remotely come up is either randomizing your weapons (for a campaign or something I guess??) or for flavor purposes. Other than this possibility, the only real reason to take two of any of the close combat weapons on the warriors is the scything talons for the extra attack (unless I’m missing something of course). But thought this might be a way to add a little more flavor to my army

Well, getting the extra attack AND getting to swing after death is pretty cool with 2xBS and BS+LW, but in general, not worth giving up on some decent shooting.

So there are two builds worth considering with double melee instead of melee and shooting, but I think in both cases you are losing more than you gain by not having the shooting option.

[No One]

Well, double scy tal is also over 30% cheaper than the actually good gun .

[afewveiws]

Fair point but why bring a useless model?

[No One]

Because it's (generally) our most durable ob sec, and objectives are important.

[afewveiws]

Why not just bring rippers or tgants? Those are cheaper. Plus the lictor... how many border line useless units could we possibly need?

[No One]

By a whole 1 pt per unit in the case of terms, and for that extra point you trade 1 wound for T4 4+: rippers are cheaper for the same wound count, but warriors will still often be more durable. Lictor's not troops, and is likely only more survivable if you can sit in terrain on the objective (and also only against shooting). Whether you need more units that'll basically only contribute by sitting on objectives, well that'll depend on list, and the other options have other advantages i.e. body count/DS.

[garg]

Melee only Warriors are good for their points for holding objectives. Shooty warriors need a prime to be effective then you may as well go with some cannons splashed in and you're not like 50% more never mind the prime. Lashwhip bonesword warriors are good at screening because you cannot consolidate through them without double fight.