Extra Arm Mutation and Shield

Hey,

This is for those who use the 5+ Armour Save for shields in close combat. Would you allow a 5+ AS for shields when a warrior has the Extra Arm mutation and is wielding a double-handed weapon? The wording that I have seen with this rule mention that the warrior gets a 5+ AS in close combat when used with a single-handed weapon because they are able to weave a stronger defense. I don't like the idea of a 5+ AS with a shield and a double-handed weapon but I'll put it out to you for comment since it is a point of contention between me and one of my Beastmen Raiders players.

Also, if you penalise the off-hand attack when attacking with two weapons then would you penalise the attack from the Extra Arm mutation if the mutant was wielding 3 weapons? We are playing that the on-hand attack has no penalties but that the off-hand attack is at -1 WS and +1 to enemy parry. Would you apply this off-hand penalty to the Extra Arm mutation also?

Thanks,

Ben

Good question. I believe the idea of the "single hand weapon" probably came from people trying to cheat the system and have a two-armed model carrying two shields. "With light armor, he's got a 2+ save!" This "shield bearer", although unable to attack, would prove an annoying figure if used regularly. (Although, I still need to make that Dwarf "Shield Maiden" hired sword... note to self.)

All I know is, if you're playing with the "off hand = -1 to hit", that should apply to all arms that aren't dealing the initial attack. If you have, for example, an A2 model with a club, an axe, and a dagger, you have to pick each round which weapon gets the base 2 attacks, and which weapons are the "support" weapons that turn.

Also, if wielding two shields and a weapon, the second shield only grants a normal +1 (this almost came up with Tail Fighting.)

I think only your group can answer the first question. If you're using the 5+ save because your group adopted the 7th edition WHFB "Hand Weapon and Shield" Rule, than I would say that "no", he's not elgible for the 5+ save when using a Double-handed weapon and a shield (however, he would get the 5+ save if he switched to 2 "hand weapons" and a shield). If your group simply decided that shields will provide a 5+ save across the board to make them more attractive (which I understand many groups have done), then I would say "yes", he would get the 5+ save with a Double-hander. The answer depends on why you adopted the house rule in the first place.

As to the second scenario (wielding multiple weapons penalty), I'm a "yes" across the board. The Extra Arm should also suffer from the penalties.

@StoneTroll... You are right about the 5+ AS. We introduced that house rule to make Shields and Armour more attractive not to align with 7th edition WHFB. Therefore it probably is best to allow the 5+ Armour Save with the Extra Arm mutation and a Double-Handed weapon. I'm just frustrated because it is a beastmen warband with "Bloated Foulness" mutation (refer to the Corrupted Characters article or to the Marauders of Chaos warband) meaning that they have high Toughness and high Armour Save and high Strength (thanks to Double-Handed weapon). Ouch!

I also agree with both of you that the Extra Arm should suffer from the off-hand attack penalty.

Thanks!

I wouldn't allow the bonus save. The weapon is still a double handed weapon even if it is being used in one hand. The name of the item doesn't change.

Trying to swing a 2-hander is going to get challenging with a shield restricting your movements, even if it's held in a third arm, therefore I'd allow the usual shield save but not the 5+.

We play that having a Shield and a one handed Weapon gives you the 5+, so if you had 2 shields then you would get 2 6+ saves netting a 5+.

So if you had 3 arms, the first shield and hand weapon combo would give you 5+, then the second shield would not have a hand weapon to be paired with so you would only get a 6+ save from it, netting a 4+ save.

If you had 4 arms with 2 shields and 2 hand weapons then you would get 2 5+ saves netting a 3+ save.

Quote :

Two-handed: A model armed with a double-handed weapon
may not use a shield, buckler or additional weapon in close
combat. If the model is equipped with a shield he will still get
a +1 bonus to his armour save against shooting.

so taken literally, a model may not carry a shield in combination wih a two-handed weapon even if it had 10 arms. Applying common sense though suggests that he may not carry a shield as there is no arm left to hold the shield if you only have two arms. If you have three or more arms you probably could.

But balance-wise I would not allow it. DHW and shield seems to be wrong. Either you hit hard with low defense or hit less hard with a better defense. Combining both seems to me like cheating the system.

to the mutation-arm and -1 to hit penalty: the penalty should apply. Even if he is using "only" 2 weapons (one in the main hand and one in the mutated arm). Actually I don't see a reason why there should be no penalty.

Especially if wielding 3 weapons. This should rather give -2 penalty than none

For my Southlands setting I am going to have any model using a shield or Buckler in close combat gains a +1 to their armor save. Assuming that works out via playtesting the rule will be that it doesn't matter how many shields or what else you are using you only get the additional bonus once. But in the Southlands Heavy armor is going to be rare and cumbersome in the swampy jungles and the hot Tusker Plains.

The rule for the +1 to armor when combined with a 1 handed weapon was to represent parrying in WFB. Mordheim already has parrying rules. I just like the idea that a shield should be a powerful viable option. Ok that's a lie. I just really like the way models look with a shield...

to the two-or-more-shields-topic: wasn't there a (faq/errata-) rule that stated that a model cannot wear more than one shield?

In my circle we use the bonus +1 to AS for shields rule as well and we allow it for a 3-armed mutant armed with a shield and any two-handed weapon be it a spear or halberd or DHW and they do not seem to be any harder to take down than any other human with a weapon and shield. Granted, they are a bit more threatening, but they are still just as easy to take down as any other human.

We play that both on hand *and* off-hand have the -1 to hit, but under your circumstances we would apply it to the third arm weapon attack also.

I would not allow it. Its silly to use a two-hand weapon and a shield at the same time, three arms or not. Not to mention that the rules suggest that its impossible.

They do, but the very name of the special rule that forbids it (Two Handed) suggests that the *reason* for the restriction is the limited number of hands most models have.

In my circle the most important thing is to have fun and, in general, we find that having models armed the same leads to less fun. Multi-armed mutants restricted to one-handed weapons only is less fun than mutants that can be armed with whatever they can legally carry.

Granted, the fun from that freedom has to be balanced against the reduction in fun possible from an over-powered miniature, but we have found that in practice it is not overpowered at all.

Thanks for your continued feedback and discussion. It is interesting to get both points of view. I believe that for now we will be allowing this to occur but we will also monitor it to see how it goes. Thanks