Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

It's worded slightly differently than the space marine one...Are you allowed to only have 1 per squadron because it says "a landspeeder may..." ?

yes you can have more than 1. There was another thread on this topic earlier.

Synnister wrote:yes you can have more than 1. There was another thread on this topic earlier.

You obviously read it wrong, because you can't.

Space Wolves are limited to one typhoon per Squadron.

Could you please link this thread so I can correct them?

To answer scuddman, you are correct. The different wording ("a" as opposed to "any") means that you can take, at most, one Typhoon in a Squadron of Land Speeders.

I'm going to disagree with Gwar on this because it depends entirely if you consider landspeeder to be a specific name.

All Fords are cars, but not all cars are Fords.

I also think that the biggest arguement for allowing more than 1 typhoon in a squadron is that everywhere in the codex where you can only to something once, it says "One blah blah may blah blah."

But I'm not going to argue about it again. Its completely a language comprehension issue and depends entirely on how the individual reads it.

If there is a question ask your tourny organizer or your friend (if in a friendly game) if they care one way or the other.

Jayden63 wrote:I'm going to disagree with Gwar on this because it depends entirely if you consider landspeeder to be a specific name.

It is. It has to be. If it wasn't, then what are the options referring to?

I also think that the biggest arguement for allowing more than 1 typhoon in a squadron is that everywhere in the codex where you can only to something once, it says "One blah blah may blah blah."

And the biggest argument against is that "a" item means one item. If I give you "a" banana, how many do you have? If I give "a" Dollar, how many Dollar do you have?

And the real kicker: The wording is different to the wording in both the SM and the BA codexes, which DO allow you to take multiple Typhoons. If SW could also take Multiple, why is the wording different?

Gotta agree with Gwar here. "A" is synonymous with "one" in this context.

Say you have three apples, and I say "you may eat an apple". How many apples may you eat?

A grocery store has two signs. The first says:

Bananas are 50 cents each.

The second sign says:

You may exchange a banana for an orange at no additional cost.


Are you seriously telling me the grocer will only let you exchange 1 banana for 1 orange regardless of how many bananas you originally bought?

A does not always equal 1 especially when dealing with named objects.

A landspeeder is just a landspeeder. It does not always mean 1 landspeeder.

Except that in all other cases, when multiples are allowed, it's explicitly stated?

Like Gwar! said, why bother with the distinction (in the same codex) if they mean the same thing?

Warhammer fruity-K bring it on!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
just dave would love this!

Jayden63 wrote:A grocery store has two signs. The first says:

Bananas are 50 cents each.

The second sign says:

You may exchange a banana for an orange at no additional cost.


Are you seriously telling me the grocer will only let you exchange 1 banana for 1 orange regardless of how many bananas you originally bought?

A does not always equal 1 especially when dealing with named objects.

A landspeeder is just a landspeeder. It does not always mean 1 landspeeder.

This is a false analogy and a nice example of misleading "argument", especially since the situations are not equal at all.

A correct analogy would be this:
"You may buy 3 Bananas at 50¢ each. You can exchange a Banana for an orange for 40¢ extra".

So, you take 3 bananas, then exchange a banana for an orange.

You then take 3 MORE bananas, and then exchange a banana for an orange.

You then take 3 MORE bananas and then exchange a banana for an orange.

In total, you have 6 bananas and 3 oranges, at which point your fruit basket is full and you cannot fit any more fruit.

The "unit" here is a Single Banana, for a cost of 50¢.
That unit has an option that says "You may exchange a Banana for an Orange at no Additional cost", which you do.

You now take a 2nd unit of Banana for 50₵, at which point you now have an option that says "You may exchange a Banana for an Orange at no Additional cost", which you do (again).

You now take a 3rd unit of Banana for 50₵, at which point you now have an option that says "You may exchange a Banana for an Orange at no Additional cost", which you do (again again).

You now can't take any more bananas, because your banana compartment in your basket is full.