The One Ring
http://ww.one-ring.co.uk/

Two-handed Weapons and Special Strikes
http://ww.one-ring.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=32487		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Wan Shi Tong [ Thu Sep 29, 2016 3:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Two-handed Weapons and Special Strikes
I was wondering if someone might be able to clear up a bit of confusion I am having with two-handed weapons. What I would like to know is if two-handed weapons can used to make special strikes (feinting, bashing, piercing ect.) without being used as two-handed weapons. I would say no and have been playing it that way but I am not sure if my logic is sound.

Two-handed weapons can only be used two-handed unless they are elven blades right? So if a model is not fighting two-handed they are assumed to be using some secondary weapon instead which could make special strikes for whatever it is modeled as being (a dagger, axe, ect.) or nothing special if they don't have anything modeled, like the clansmen. So axmen of Lossarnoch could not piercing strike without also fighting two-handed. That is the correct interpretation right?
Author:  Commissariat [ Thu Sep 29, 2016 3:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Two-handed Weapons and Special Strikes
I would assume that your interpretation is correct. In order to special strike you must be equipped with the correct weapon to do so. If you want to piercing strike but you are equipped with a two-handed axe and a dagger, you must resort to the axe which is two-handed.

Khazad Guard can Piercing Strike without going two-handed because they have a handaxe on their belt.

Uruk-hai berserkers cannot special strike if they do not two-hand because unless they use their two-handed weapon they only have the vague term "equipped with a hand weapon" to go off of. You could model a dagger or something on their.... loin cloth, to get the special strike.

I may not be speaking from rules as written, but I am speaking from logic. It is not like we can say "my berserker is only holding his sword, which is classified as a two-handed weapon, with one hand and kinda tries to use it" in order to feint. Elven blades being the classification that can do this since they are classified as both.

As for Axes of Lossanarch.... I'd be on the fence. They kinda have short halberds, which brings easterling pikes into the picture. I think the Lossanarchs are "using the stabby bit" and can't, but easterling pikes..... hmmm. They are not "axes" but they are like an axe and have a pick on it too, which is another weapon that piercing strikes...
Author:  Dikey [ Thu Sep 29, 2016 4:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Two-handed Weapons and Special Strikes
I play as commissariat do. If a model has only a two handed weapon visible, it has to use it as such to call a special strike, unless the rules say that he has other weapons (like gimli, whom is said to have several axes)
As for the lossarnachs, we allow them to call piercing strike if the weapon is used as 2hw. Otherwise, is a spear, and spears are not able to make special strikes.
Author:  jdizzy001 [ Thu Sep 29, 2016 5:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Two-handed Weapons and Special Strikes
The rules do state that models have additional weapons. The most current rules in the Hobbit indicate that all models are armed with a generic handweapon.
Author:  Dikey [ Fri Sep 30, 2016 7:00 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Two-handed Weapons and Special Strikes
jdizzy001 wrote:
The rules do state that models have additional weapons. The most current rules in the Hobbit indicate that all models are armed with a generic handweapon.


Yes, but that just means they could fight normally. If is only a generic handweapon, they should not be able to call special strikes, expecially if they are that kind of unit that has access to different handweapons.
Author:  largonien [ Fri Sep 30, 2016 7:38 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Two-handed Weapons and Special Strikes
I would play that way too :
If you want to special strike with a 2HW, you have to use it as a 2HW, unless you clearly know what 1HW the model is equipped with, and then special strike with that 1HW.
Author:  jdizzy001 [ Fri Sep 30, 2016 11:12 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Two-handed Weapons and Special Strikes
Dikey wrote:
jdizzy001 wrote:
The rules do state that models have additional weapons. The most current rules in the Hobbit indicate that all models are armed with a generic handweapon.


Yes, but that just means they could fight normally. If is only a generic handweapon, they should not be able to call special strikes, expecially if they are that kind of unit that has access to different handweapons.

Can you please cite a rule in the book to support this claim?
Author:  Dikey [ Fri Sep 30, 2016 11:29 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Two-handed Weapons and Special Strikes
jdizzy001 wrote:
Dikey wrote:
jdizzy001 wrote:
The rules do state that models have additional weapons. The most current rules in the Hobbit indicate that all models are armed with a generic handweapon.


Yes, but that just means they could fight normally. If is only a generic handweapon, they should not be able to call special strikes, expecially if they are that kind of unit that has access to different handweapons.

Can you please cite a rule in the book to support this claim?


Rules says it's a generic hand weapon. It could be a sword, a pick, a hammer. But if is not shown and identified, I don't think it could be used as anything more than a weapon for a simple dice roll. Otherwise it could be abused and became what is best for the moment. This is just how we play when a model has not a visible hand weapon.
Author:  Wan Shi Tong [ Fri Sep 30, 2016 2:26 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Two-handed Weapons and Special Strikes
It seems I had it right after all then. Thanks for putting my mind at ease gentlemen.
Author:  Commissariat [ Fri Sep 30, 2016 3:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Two-handed Weapons and Special Strikes
As a reference point, observe GBHL Podcast on Youtube. Jamie specifically modeled hand-axes on his Druadan Warriors to get the option to piercing strike. During their SBG World Cup, they specifically chose to ignore the axes and receive no option of special striking as it was "true to the original model" to do so.

Sometimes they default to "he probably just has a dagger tucked away" but from what I can tell, this was only in more casual situations. Of course Uruk-hai berserkers never got this treatment, because... where would they keep it? I suspect they always said dagger because it was the least controversial of the various items that could be hidden on a person's body.
Author:  SouthernDunedain [ Wed Oct 05, 2016 4:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Two-handed Weapons and Special Strikes
No weapon shown = no weapon strikes. Simples.

(also don't take the GBHL as gospel, they are known to get things wrong from time to time ;) )
Author:  jdizzy001 [ Wed Oct 05, 2016 5:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Two-handed Weapons and Special Strikes
Pg 67 under special strikes confirms SD's statement.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/