That's still a moot point because you can't use the elven blade as a 2handed weapon if you take a bow, so you might as well not even take the elven blade if you want a bow.

_________________
"Leave Sauron to me."
If you're in the Raleigh, NC area, let me know.

the new Kingdom of Men book has Wargear for Clansman of Lamedon only as "armor and two-handed sword"

_________________
warmancer

please clarify and reference this for me
where does it say that you cannot take weapon x if you also want to take a bow
Core rules:
1. Wargear section, p42.

thus a warrior with a bow and a sword can shoot the bow in the shooting phase and defend himself with the sword when charged in the Fight phase.

2. Wargear section, p44.

rules for two-handed weapon precludes use of two handed weapons and carry pikes, spears, shields, bows, but an elven blade is not a two-handed weapon. It has its own section in the wargear section separate from and following the two-handed weapon rules. it is a hand weapon that can also be a two-handed weapon.
so you cannot carry a shield and use the elven blade two handed.
you also cannot carry a spear and use the elven blade two handed.
but you carry a bow with with an elven blade.
yes yes yes true true true
but as it doesn't specify, can a model with elven blade and use it two handed and use a crossbow? what about an elf bow? rules as written inclusive and exclusive?
bows means just regular bows? regular bows and elf bows but not crossbows? regular bows, elf bows and crossbows?
so you interpret the rules as written to mean what exactly?

i don't play elves but the rules for their wargear are also sketchy
some models can carry a shield and an elven blade and an elf bow how might this work? as he cannot discard the shield (AFAIK there is no rules to permit discarding a wargear) and cannot use his elf blade two-handed, nor with the rules as written permit him to use an elf bow with the elven blade two handed, he in essence just have a hand weapon instead of an elven blade.
typical GW vagueness

but for khand heroes can take an elven blade and a bow. a warrior has a two handed weapon and may exchange it for a bow. the option to take both a two-handed axe and bow is not available. Thus in a fight, an elven blade is no better than a two-handed axe. both allows two handed use. both allows one handed use?



appeal to authority or name dropping doesn't strengthen an argument
nor does it impress me
but logic and rules references does
the rules i play by are the rules i listed and referenced in the printed rule books as well as the printed FAQ
rather than "Adam Troke"

_________________
warmancer

Firstly, Adam Troke is part of GW's Games Development team and is therefore not wrong. And you are illogical.



It says two-handed weapon, not weapon. Learn to read properly.



No, an elven blade can be used as a hand weappon or a two handed weapon whereas the two-handed weapons themselves can only be used as a two-handed weapon but all models (unless explicitly stated in their entry) also have a hand weapon. We assume the model puts his two-handed weapon in its sheath whilst taking the hand weapon out of its sheath and vice versa.

The only reason I am even bothering to answer you Mr Troll is because I do not want some poor sod to read you comments and think you are right and then become dissapointed when he plays a game against Uruk-hai Beserkers for example.

_________________
"I am the Flying Spagetti Monster. Thou shall have no other monsters before me"
-FSM.

On page 44 Elven blades, it says that you can use the blade two - handed when bow armed.



Good argument, one problem, you are not playing by the rules or FAQ according to everybody else, including the rules writer. Signing out of this thread now, pointless in carrying on.

Right, that's why we're having this argument. The new Clansman profile is different. The old profile specifically states that the model has a 2H weapon and is otherwise unarmed. It does not have this statement in the profile of, say, the Berzerker, because the Berzerker also has a hand weapon. GW is using "unarmed" as a technical term, not a simple adjective.

Now there is some question as to whether the FAQ will be updated to clarify the hand weapon rule, but as it currently stands, unless that technical term "unarmed" is stated in the profile, the model has a hand weapon, no matter what other equipment it may have.



Not even when the name is the guy who wrote the rules and FAQ?



Really? Then why are you ignoring the Gondor in Flames Clansman profile we keep pointing you to? If you don't have access to it, then you have to admit you don't have all the information.

In that case, ignore (which you all have already done) my posts about the bows and the Blades. Sorry, I don't have my rulebook with me and I couldn't check it, I thought that the bow restriction was the same as the shield and spear.

_________________
"Leave Sauron to me."
If you're in the Raleigh, NC area, let me know.

but a strict reading means only bows, not elf bows or cross bows
and since pikes, axes, and swords are not spear, you can carry these and use elven blade two handed


this is true
that i am a minority voice (sole voice?) on this
but this doesn't mean i am wrong.
an appeal to popularity or majority doesn't win an argument either

_________________
warmancer

@whafrog

i take the new supplement to replace and trumps that of the previous
whether it be stats, rules, or points cost
don't you?
thus what Gondor in Flame has for Clansman of Lamedon has been superseded by Kingdom of Men


Re: Adam Troke
not all of us knows the guy, plays with the guy, or drinks with the guy
the vast majority of us play by the rules as printed
likely there are rules he wanted to include that wasn't, and rules he opposed that were included when Cavatore and Ward finalized the rules. same with Alessio Cavatore and Matt Ward as with Adam Troke. Nothing against any of them.
thus in discussion about the rules, i prefer to use what is published rather than what is said.



@Draugluin
it is all good.
the rules are not clear in places.

_________________
warmancer

Yeah, I'm with the rest...you are trolling while sitting on your own self made pedestal.

You are quoting the new sourcebooks and the FAQ that has been updated this month and found on the GW site. What you are not quoting or READING is the The Lord of the Rings Strategy Battle Game rule book. The blue hardback with the One Ring on its cover. With all three sources of information on this game/hobby you will find your answer. Again, not to your liking or logical way of thinking, but it is there.

Again you want it black and white, but as you have already stated the "vagueness of GW" is what we have to go by. And it really comes down to compiling information from all available sources to answer questions. A Wargear section shows only that which makes the model unique.

In your logic a Dwarven Warrior as shown in the new sourcebooks The Free People shows no weapons, only dwarven heavy armour...is unarmed. There is no reference to any weapons in the Wargear, BUT it also does not reference the warrior as being unarmed. So the only available weapons that the Dwarven Warrior can obtain is from its available equipment at a price: a bow, and a 2hd axe. Of course in your logic a player could outfit a Dwarven Warrior with a shield to go with his only available wargear: dwarven armour, but then they would have to clip off all the dwarven models shown with a hand axe and swap a empty hand....to your way of logic.

The Kazad Guard (Dwarves) are listed as only carrying a 2hd axe, but on the GW site they are listed as having Dwaven heavy armour, axe, 2hd axe. So as you can see GW has not done a great job of clarifying certain rules in a SINGLE source...they are scattered about their various sources, but they are there.

Again, you want it in black and white and in such a manner that there is no room for free thought. You would have every profile showing under Wargear exactly what they come with. Then a section stating what exactly they can buy to use/wear/take. While directing below that another section stating exactly what a model cannot take/use/wear. It becomes cumbersome.

As for discarding weapons and picking up weapons...again it has been covered in the ORB and will be pointless to go over it with you.

You ache to be told you are right. You state you want reference, it has been given. You state you want logic, it has been used...just not to your liking. You can make house rules to play your way, just be sure to let the other player know you are using your own made-up rules.

As for the WoTR terrain reference, thats the way my group of friends have always played. Even prior to it being FAQ'd, and I only joined this site a while back and had no idea that it was a contested ruling.

enjoy..your..game.

_________________
Free speech carries with it some freedom to listen. -B.M.

Again, reference the very first page of the new supplements, called sourcebooks, and you will have your answer as to why I keep referring back to the ORB. You stated that "this is true
that i am a minority voice (sole voice?) on this
but this doesn't mean i am wrong.
an appeal to popularity or majority doesn't win an argument either"

in this argument, you are wrong.

Until GW puts out a concise book on rules, we have to go through all the sources made available to us. Which supports that all models have hand weapons. Again, till GW comes out and says in black and white that model "X" ONLY has "x,y, and z", we go by what was covered in the ORB... All models means...All.

_________________
Free speech carries with it some freedom to listen. -B.M.

I disagree scarpeIron and I am a rules basher.

1)
Cirdan and Galadriel state they are unarmed.
Elf warrior does not state as such.
Why waste ink if it was assumed they were unarmed?

2)
Theoden comes with armour but NO HAND WEAPON!!! He has no option for any hand weapons (car shield), is he therefore unarmed??

That's irrelevant. The Gondor in Flame profile was the example to prove our interpretation of the rule. That it's now different doesn't invalidate our interpretation.

Ah well, I'm done. Sorry Meatboy's thread got hijacked...Khand seems more competitive now than they used to be, but probably still best bundled with Easterlings.

[quote="fracas]
@Draugluin
it is all good.
the rules are not clear in places.[/quote]
No, it's not that they aren't clear (because this is rather clear when you read the FAQ), it's that I forgot them and couldn't check to see for myself. Just accept that you're wrong and get over it.

_________________
"Leave Sauron to me."
If you're in the Raleigh, NC area, let me know.

Did no one notice that? or are we just going to pretend he didnt say it?

Jobu from another gaming site wrote in response to fracas posting on that site about "hand weapons." Its good to get a 2nd opinion, even if they repeat what has already been stated. Who knows, Jobu may have gotten through to him...or at least answer the reason the Khand Chieftain was given the special ability with their 2hd axe.

From Jobu and another gaming site::
"It clearly states that "all models carry a sword, axe, club or similar weapon in one hand" on page 42.

The terminology here is what is important more than anything. The khand captain can carry a bow because his two handed weapon is classified as an elven blade.
Only those models that have a weapon classified as an elven blade can also be armed with a bow. Otherwise the rule book says that the model can not carry any other wargear,i.e. no shield, no bow, no spear, no crossbow etc. The khand captain would also not be able to ride a horse if his weapon was not classified as an elven blade since a regular two handed weapon can not be used while mounted.

All models are allowed to carry more than one weapon, and all models carry a hand weapon, unless specified. Does it make the elven blade rule seem strange?
In certain situations yes, as you pointed out.
In some cases having a weapon classified as an elven blade(and not a regular THW) means they CAN use it as a two handed weapon while mounted
( i.e. i am going to use both hands ) and can carry other wargear, like a bow. So, it is rule gerrymandering which allows certain options to become available for those models that fluff says should carry a two handed weapon. And allows elves to carry a two handed weapons while mounted, which could be devastating since I had never thought of that before. "

The above quote is in its entirety. At this point I have to add that a friend of mine has converted a few 1st Alliance Elves to actually be Elven Blade Cav., and they are devastating. Kinda odd that was never a well known benefit for having Elven Blades. Anywho, its time to get back to some painting. Night.

_________________
Free speech carries with it some freedom to listen. -B.M.

You are not only misunderstanding the rules, you are also misunderstanding the meaning of an appeal to authority logical fallacy. This type of fallacy means trying to argue your point by saying that someone famous, highly respected, etc. person agrees with you. However, this person is not an expert in the area and isn't really in any way related. An appeal to authority logical fallacy in this situation would be saying that the Pope agrees with me, therefore I must be correct. However, the Pope does not actually have a better understanding of the situation than I do (and most likely, his understanding of this situation is much smaller in this situation) and so the argument is a fallacy.

However, Adam Troke is not the Pope. Adam Troke is part of Games Workshop's development team. This is the HIGHEST authority on this matter. They created the rules, and they know exactly how the rules were meant to be played. Thus, if Adam Troke says that you are wrong, you ARE WRONG, unless he is contradicted by someone with even higher authority on the rules (which in this case would be Matt Ward or Alessio Cavatore) and since he has not been contradicted, and has instead been supported by the FAQ, the rules, and logic, it doesn't seem like you have much of a case.

You are welcome to create your own rules where Khandish warriors are not allowed to wield hand weapons. If you can find people who will play with you using these rules, great, go for it, nobody is stopping you. All we are asking is that you stop trying to claim that your own rules are the OFFICIAL rules, when they are clearly contradicted by everything. What you are doing is arguing with people about whether the sword Sting glowed blue or yellow, and even after everyone points at a passage in the books where it clearly states that it glowed blue, and even after everyone calls JRR Tolkien back from the dead to tell you that the sword indeed glowed blue and not yellow, you still believe that the sword glowed yellow. It doesn't matter what ANYONE says, YOU will be right about Lord of the Rings, because you CLEARLY know more about Lord of the Rings than the author JRR Tolkien. (just so you know, that was a metaphor, don't take it literally.)

I also made a post yesterday which I have not seen you comment upon yet. Though others have said the same things, I tried to summarize everything neatly in one post, and I would like you to refute all the points in that post to prove that you are wrong. I can see that you are most likely trolling, and trying to make people [word deleted] off. Though it is possible that you might have succeeded slightly in other people's cases, I actually very much enjoy debating, and I especially enjoy pwning n00bs, assholes, and trolls like you. I can't remember how long ago it was, but there was a guy on The Last Alliance forums named coolestguy, who was going around being a complete arrogant dick. I proceeded to post in every thread that he had posted in and pwned him in every single one of those threads in a different way depending on what the topic was. I have not seen him on The Last Alliance since.

Thanks!

Maermaethor.

_________________
(insert awesome signature here)

Can I add, the Shadow in the East sourcebook has the Khandish Horseman wargear as

"A Khandish Horseman carries a bow and wears armour"

Please answer this question Fracas. If Khandish Warriors/Horsemen don't have hand weapons then why do 3 of the 5 mounted Khandish Miniatures wield an axe in one hand? They are hand weapons! There is no other explanation. This supports the rule that every model (unless specifically stated as being unarmed), has a handweapon.

Some fantastic points being made above, please read these posts carefully

_________________
The Southern Fiefdoms: http://www.one-ring.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=21928

Actually, you can get charged in the Fight Phase via Heroic Fights.

_________________
"Leave Sauron to me."
If you're in the Raleigh, NC area, let me know.

fracas [ˈfrækɑː]
n
a noisy quarrel; brawl

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/fracas

-- I guess we shoulda known...