I had a question about Execution Shot. Do you get a free maneuver to switch weapons between the shot and the Melee Strike? Otherwise, you'd have to be dual wielding a pistol and single-handed weapon (which is fine) or strike with your handgun. The second option seems a little odd for a finishing move, to shoot someone point blank with a rifle and then to club them with the rifle.

Does anyone know if there is an official ruling on this or if anyone has house-ruled it?

Thanks!

As I see it most witch hunters fight with a sword in the right hand and a pistol in the left hand. Using the sword as the primary weapon (a generalization, but still). Here's a picture: mythicmktg.fileburst.com/war/us/home/images/armiesofWAR/empire/WitchHunter/witchhunter-concept-01.jpg

There are several options for the player with execution shot in my opinion, which are all valid choises:

1. Have the sword and pistol equiped allready as above.
2. Suffer a fatuigue prior to the execution shot action to draw the sword.
3. Hit the enemy with the pistol/handgun (using it as an improvised weapon).
4. Hit the enemy with a fist or kick them (making unarmed damage).

Also, remember that the handgun is a 2 handed rifle, but you could stick a bayonet onto it and use that with your melee strike. The witch hunter in picture above even has a small bayonet on his pistol (which might give them the stats of a knife in melee combat).

So, as I see it, you get no free manouvers but you have several different ways of doing it and all of them are "right/ok".

As k7e9 said. You do not get a free maneuver. It is pretty much intended to be used when dual-wielding a pistol+melee weapon. However, by suffering fatigue to gain additional maneuvers (or deciding not to reload the blackpowder weapon) a player could technically attempt to use a rifle.

The card says the melee strike is immediately following the shot. So I assume that means you can't use a maneuver to switch weapons or anything? If you use a rifle instead of sword and pistol, you have to hit with the rifle or bayonet, right?

ChristSaves said:

That is correct, when cards say immediately I've allways assumed that there is no time for manouvers or any other stuff in between the two actions. So yes, if you use a rifle you have to hit them with it or an attached bayonet, or you could just kick them.

Another possibility is if you have a mutation for an extra arm/tentacle, then you could have both a rifle and a sword equiped at the same time.

This dual wielding, pistol and sword Witchunters are creation of Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning.

Of course, there were such Witch Hunters before, but many other were different.

Sadly, Witch Hunters for players are designed in such a way, sword and pistol, which can be seen in abilities stictly for them.

Avdima said:

I know little of Warhammer lore, never read a novel. But, I had always assumed that the sword&pistol Witch Hutner of Warhammer Online had its roots in earlier lore. I vaguely recall a cover of a novel featuring a Witch Hunter with sword&pistol that predated WO. Perhaps my memory is faulty?

EDIT:

Warhammer Online launched in 2009. Links below have the covers of Werner's Witch Hunter (2004) and Witch Finder (2005). These covers could be new artwork, I have no idea if they are the original. But, the 2004 novel depicts a Witch Hunter with a pistol in one hand, a torch in the other, a sword on his back. The pistol has a bayonet like the Warhammer Online pic above. The 2005 novel has the Witch Hunter with the iconic sword&pistol.

Perhaps these covers came out on re-releases after the release of Warhammer Online in 2009, but I couldn't find anything earlier. Every search came up with the same covers.

Witch Hunter
Witch Finder

So it looks like WO based its sword&pistol Witch Hunter on earlier lore. The nature of WO made the version they chose (sword&pistol) to stick in the minds of new fans. Of course I wouldn't force any RPG Witch Hunter to have to carry such weapons and would use the many melee options listed above - Pistol&Punch, Rifle&Buttstroke, etc.

Sturn, you are right. I didn't said there was no such Witch Hunters before, but that every Witch Hunter npc I remember being portrayed in second edition of rpg and in Witche's Song adventure for third edition, shows them in different light.

Maybe I missed the point in my post.

The sword and pistol Witch Hunters seem to be more canon, they are portrayed this way on most of the images, which is not true to many descriptions presented in other resources, like adventures.

I don't have the card on me, but I have a player who used to use it all the time, so a few points might be a bit off.

First I would tell you to check the card. In its requirement does it state a melee weapon and pistol equipped? If I remember correctly it doesn't. So yes, he could go from the rifle to the sword, spending a maneuver to change weapons.

You were wondering if they can't do it if they don't have a free maneuver? Curiously you then state you wouldn't let them spend a fatigue to switch weapons by using a maneuver? Yet if it was free you would let them do it? I don't mean to sound like a nagging girlfriend, but that just doesn't make sense. lol! kidding, of course.

Warhammer combats don't represent a single round or limited time frame, like in standard games. It represents a long sequence of events. By the spirit of the rules using a maneuver is not a problem to switch weapons even if it says immediately. That is still pretty much immediately. Immediately also helps distinguishes a time frame. It allows a character to perform an additional attack. That is a serious variation from the norm of all the other cards. So it needed specific language to communicate this atttack happens now, not next turn, or next scene, but right now. The maneuver doesn't interrupt it.

I also don't see what the big deal is about a card with a recharge 3 allowing you to shoot a rifle then make a basic attack with a sword at the cost of a purple die. Heck, Double Strike does basically the same thing, with less recharge and without having to make a second to hit roll. I just don't see it as "game breaking" when compared to the rest of the mechanics.

I also don't see why you would want to limit your player in this way. I remember ruling once or twice, that the character could spend a maneuver to move and attack a different opponent with execution shot when either they rolled really well (lots of boons) or when it added dramatic emphasis to a scene.

This isn't dnd 4e. Roleplay isn't miniature war gaming. No one wins or loses. Most of the cards really aren't that balanced anyway (Dramatic Flourish anyone? Sword and Board?). They are just ways for players to express how they view their character behaving, how they play out and act. If your player wants to go from a rifle to a sword swing, there is no harm in that at all. As a matter of a fact, that's a pretty cool idea that no one in my group has ever thought of. I like it!

Just have fun, tell a great story and use the system to guide you to tell great stories with your fellow players. Sorry, my little rant will go leave now.

Happy gaming,

Commoner