i think they can because why would GW change their name from hellguns (sounds cool) to hot-shot lasguns (not so cool) if they were not supposed to be able to utilize that order. also according to lore; hot-shot lasguns are Sniper variant lasguns with greater stopping power and range.

The Angry Commissar wrote:i think they can because why would GW change their name from hellguns (sounds cool) to hot-shot lasguns (not so cool) if they were not supposed to be able to utilize that order. also according to lore; hot-shot lasguns are Sniper variant lasguns with greater stopping power and range.

There have been several threads about this. The RAW argument is that since it is not a "Lasgun" but a "Hotshot Lasgun", then it cannot receive the rule.
RAI arguers say that it is quite clearly intended (as you have), but the problem is that this is speculation as to the intention.

Would I give it to my opponent? Sure.
But that doesn't make it RAW.

Firstly i think It would be nice if they could use FRFSRF, hell i even think i makes sense for them to be able to.

But they are not specifically mentioned in the rule so do not get an extra shot.

It is also a poor argument that Hell guns = hot-shot lasguns. Hell guns (cool name or not) are AP 5 lasguns, Hot shot lasguns are AP3, range 18.

I wish.

But no, it's definitely a different weapon and doesn't seem fair to apply FRFSRF to a weapon that isn't specifically described in the rule.

Then again, if all Rams are Tank Shocks...

DoW

I agree with "The Angry Commisar" as the rule just says that lasguns, hotshot lasguns are just an adapted version of it (though it could be quite an unfair advantage to you unleaseing potentially 30 AP 3 shots on your foe.) it would be great for taking down carnifexes and hive tyrants though

Tri wrote:Firstly i think It would be nice if they could use FRFSRF, hell i even think i makes sense for them to be able to.

But they are not specifically mentioned in the rule so do not get an extra shot.

This is my opinion (in both ways) as well.

Tri wrote: Hot shot lasguns are AP3, range 18 and Assualt weapons

This is incorrect though. They are Rapid Fire not Assault (luckily(?) Storm Troopers have Hot Shot pistols as well (and CC weapons too even))

Jack

ah forgive me ... I keep forgetting they have a pistol. (always seems they've got an assault 1 weapon as he never seems to rapid fire me. Just fires the pistol and charges)

A hot-shot lasgun has a different name and rules profile than a lasgun.

Seems pretty simple and obvious that it wouldn't be affected by the order.

The more I think about it, the more I think this is a very similar situation to the "special CCW are still CCW" argument.

Lightning Claws/Powerfists/Thunder Hammers may have different rules than normal CCW, but many would argue that any effect that applies to 'CCW' in general would apply to them as well.

Do Hot-shot Lasguns fall under the main category of Lasguns, albeit with special stats? Or are they to be considered totally separate?

If the former is the case, then I think we would have to accept that FRFSRF applies, if not, then it doesn't.

DoW

DogOfWar wrote:The more I think about it, the more I think this is a very similar situation to the "special CCW are still CCW" argument.

Lightning Claws/Powerfists/Thunder Hammers may have different rules than normal CCW, but many would argue that any effect that applies to 'CCW' in general would apply to them as well.

Do Hot-shot Lasguns fall under the main category of Lasguns, albeit with special stats? Or are they to be considered totally separate?

If the former is the case, then I think we would have to accept that FRFSRF applies, if not, then it doesn't.

DoW

What effects apply to only CCW? I'm unable to think of a single rule that effects them directly. Would you be so kind as tell me which ones, where i can find them, and/or the thread this was in?

I think that DoW has it in terms of how to define if a hot shot lasgun qualifies, unfortunately it will be up to GW to rule on it, and I am sure that they will only do it in a FAQ and not errata it so even then it will only be a soft rule other than a hard rule. I am honestly not sure how to answer this as there are sub-categories of different things in the world, but trying to subject real world similarities hardly solidify an arguement within the WH40k universe.

No.

Not the same.

In a perfect world perhaps, but this is GWs kitty, NOT a perfect world.

Tri,

Apparently there is an Eldar (or Dark Eldar?) wargear called 'Razorsnares' that affects models wielding two CCW and negates the +1 bonus attack gained. Whether that means two normal CCW or if it would work against all variants of special/normal CCWs was in dispute.

This all stemmed from the stationary ramming question (found Here) which asked a similar question regarding whether anything that affected a Tank Shock would also affect a Ram by virtue of Ramming being a 'special kind' of Tank Shock.

Hope that helps!

DoW

oh god wych weapons ... should have guessed it would be a Dark Eldar rule.

Dam that is tricky there's 2 lines of thought I can see coming from this

Ether they can only use 1 CCW at a time of any sort.

or the rule doesn't work since it doesn't specify Normal or Special CCW's

Personally I'd go with only 1 CCW since they're both sub types of CCW but I can see how the rule lawyer could argue it the other way.

Yes, Lasgun is a Lasgun. The rule says it only affects Lasguns with no wording limiting the types of Lasgun. Plasma and other gun types don't recieve the rule because the were excluded specifically by the wording.

Well, I was going to say:
A hotshot lasgun is not a lasgun, it has a different name and it has different rules. Having the word "lasgun" in its name does not define it as a type of lasgun.

But, you've taunted me, DoW
So, HURP! DURP! HS lasguns are a special type of lasgun and therefore benefits from the rule, just like a platypus.

my point was that why would they bother to rename it (other than GW flippancy) if they wouldnt be able to use the order?

I'd allow it. It might even help to redeem the unit after GW's policy of 'overprice AP3'. Just too bad Vespid and 1k sons can't FRFSRF.

Except platypi always fire 3 times!

But to be fair this is a situation where the same logic comes up with a pretty unrealistic result. No matter how 'heroic' an officer might be, I seriously doubt he can increase the firing range of a weapon just by ordering THAT IT BE SO!

Game-wise, I really don't think it's a valid ruling but if I suppose it *could* be argued as such.

DoW


Automatically Appended Next Post:

The Angry Commissar wrote:my point was that why would they bother to rename it (other than GW flippancy) if they wouldnt be able to use the order?

Because Hellguns still exist until they change the DH and WH codices.

On a related note, I say you should be able to equip your guardsmen with Triplex pattern Lasguns so you can dial up or dial down the intensity depending on the firefight. If Dan Abnett's guardsmen can do it, so can mine!

DoW

They changed them to hot-shot lasguns so people wouldn't be confused and try to argue that their old inquisitorial storm trooper hellguns were AP 3. They definitely cannot be given the FRFSRF order. They are not "lasguns". If I had an ability that made "bolters" shoot more, my heavy bolters would not benefit.

That argument doesn't really hold water given the TH/SS situation.

Jack

<irrelevant aside>

DogOfWar wrote:Except platypi always fire 3 times!

As a member of the relevant country, and seeing as how important nomenclature is on YMDC, I feel that I should point out that platypi is not the correct pluralisation - the root language is greek, not latin. Platypuses or Platypodes please, or else you won't be able to be clear on the rules that affect them
</irrelevant aside>

Also no, if they had meant to allow all weapons that have 'lasgun' in the name to FRFSRF they would have said pretty much that.

Please note that this has already been discussed to death. Unless some new information has come up, why are we having this thread?

EDIT: Speller'ing

RAW reason: "hot-shot lasguns" are not "lasguns".
Fluff reason: storm troopers don't fire in ranks. They run around shooting and accomplishing their special objective.
Rules precedent reason: the weapons lysander re-rolls are all listed (heavy bolters, bolters, storm bolters, bolt pistols), not just stated as "bolters". Same for vulkan and flamers/heavy flamers, meltaguns/multimeltas. If FRFSRF was to work with hot-shot lasguns it would have listed hot-shot lasguns.

additional comparison.

Necron codex:

Gauss Weapons only have Gauss in their names rather than in their type.

unistoo wrote:<irrelevant aside>
As a member of the relevant country, and seeing as how important nomenclature is on YMDC, I feel that I should point out that platypi is not the correct pluralisation - the root language is greek, not latin. Platypuses or Platypodes please, or else you won't be able to be clear on the rules that affect them
</irrelevant aside>

Wait, you're Greek? You should definitely get your flag fixed then!

In all seriousness, I was attempting to use the colloquial (and much more amusing) plural for comedic effect. But you do bring up an interesting point.

From a more linguistic point of view, English is one of the most dynamic and dialectic languages in the world and as such generates countless 'acceptable' alternatives for many different words in use today. After all, I doubt anyone would agree that Australian English, British English and American English are exactly alike, yet all are classified as the English language. Platypi is one of those accepted variations of pluralisation (along with shined/shone, ironic/ironical, etc) that often differ from country to country (and sometimes province to province/state to state) so while it might not be as correct when looking at the root language, I think it's perfectly acceptable to use in everyday speech.

This being said, if we were in a particular discussion about the roots of the English language, well then you'd be absolutely right in correcting me.
------------------------------------
Back to FRFSRF.

While I agree with you, ph34r, I think it's an important point that hot-shot lasguns aren't actually different weapons in the fluff. They're just loaded with beefier power packs. Not sure if this makes a difference to anyone's viewpoint (it certainly doesn't do anything to change the RAW), but it's like a Bolter loaded with Hellfire Rounds rather than regular rounds. It is technically still a Bolter.

DoW

ph34r wrote:They changed them to hot-shot lasguns so people wouldn't be confused and try to argue that their old inquisitorial storm trooper hellguns were AP 3. They definitely cannot be given the FRFSRF order. They are not "lasguns". If I had an ability that made "bolters" shoot more, my heavy bolters would not benefit.

Umm a hot-shot lasgun is a lasgun. Unless you also think that an assault terminator is not a terminator.

(quick everyone from my last thread. Jump all over these guys)

Timmah wrote:

ph34r wrote:They changed them to hot-shot lasguns so people wouldn't be confused and try to argue that their old inquisitorial storm trooper hellguns were AP 3. They definitely cannot be given the FRFSRF order. They are not "lasguns". If I had an ability that made "bolters" shoot more, my heavy bolters would not benefit.

Umm a hot-shot lasgun is a lasgun. Unless you also think that an assault terminator is not a terminator.

(quick everyone from my last thread. Jump all over these guys)

No, a hot-shot lasgun is a hot-shot lasgun. If it is a lasgun, I demand it follows ALL the rules for a lasgun and not just the ones you find convenient.

The specific ranges listed in the order is what gets me. If they meant it to include the hot-shot lasgun, then I would think it would use more generalized terms for the distances, such as something like "3 shots up to half the weapons range, 2 shots for over half the weapons' range" or something equally vague. The way they specify "3 shots for up to 12" and 2 for up to 24"" suggests that they never intended hot-shot lasguns to be included in this order. Rules as Written, it says simply "Lasguns", so I will only be using "Lasguns" for FRFSRF, not "Hot-Shot Lasguns".

Also, it refers to the Hot-Shot Lasgun as both a "hot-shot lasgun" and a "Hellgun" in its description in the IG 'dex. I quote:

"The hot-shot lasgun uses a more powerful, external energy cell. This allows the HELLGUN to project a much more powerful, and penetrating, shot."

This also implies to me that it was not meant to be included in the order. It could go both ways though.

Would I call another player on it if they wanted to use this rule against me? I don't really know, I guess it would depend on how much of TFG he was being. I would probably allow it, as long as he allowed me the same.

I would love it if they could as an IG player. I never thought they could but the thing that pretty much did it for me was when I hears someone say that " a heavy bolter is not a bolter, therefore a hot-shot las gun is not a lasgun" Totally put it in perspective for me.

I would love it if they could as an IG player. I never thought they could but the thing that pretty much did it for me was when I hears someone say that " a heavy bolter is not a bolter, therefore a hot-shot las gun is not a lasgun" Totally put it in perspective for me.

I would love it if they could as an IG player. I never thought they could but the thing that pretty much did it for me was when I hears someone say that " a heavy bolter is not a bolter, therefore a hot-shot las gun is not a lasgun" Totally put it in perspective for me.

The Angry Commissar wrote:my point was that why would they bother to rename it (other than GW flippancy) if they wouldnt be able to use the order?

Because Hellguns still exist until they change the DH and WH codices.


DoW

Hotshot Lasgun is no more a Lasgun than a Stormbolter is a Bolter.

And the argument about the name change is a non-starter. Of course GW "changed" the name, it is a different gun!

No. I think it's silly.

The Angry Commissar wrote:fantastic point. i never even thought about that.

The funny thing is that they even use the word 'Hellgun' later in the same paragraph describing Hot-shot Lasguns. Oh GW...

DoW

Well even if it did mean something, we cannot guess their intention in the name change. It could be trying to make the WH ones stand out and avoid confusion or it could be GW's fickle nature. However the chances of it being a suggestion that they can use FRFSRF is rather small, especially when the words "or Hotshot lasgun" in the FRFSRF rules would have made it easier.

So since a hot-shot lasgun isn't a lasgun, does that mean my assault terminators are not terminators?

Totally separate issue, and totally pointless and non-contributory to this thread.

FoxPhoenix135 wrote:Totally separate issue, and totally pointless and non-contributory to this thread.

Quite the contrary. The question of "are models in Terminator armour, in fact Terminators" is a very similar issue and has been discussed at length.

The consensus being (as far as I could tell) that even if a rule only specifically mentions 'Terminators,' you can be safe to assume they mean it to apply to all models equipped with that particular wargear, despite the fact that the reference is clearly to a specific type of unit.

In this case, one could take 'lasguns' to be referring to all types of lasguns (all types of models in terminator armour) or it could be only referring to the particular weapon known uniquely as 'Lasgun' (only applies to 'Terminators', rather than all models with Terminator armour).

I hope that explains why Timmah is referencing this related issue. It would be difficult to argue that you can stand on one side of the fence for the Terminator debate, yet be on the other side for the FRFSRF debate. If you're using the same logic for both, it seems you would need to come to a consistent resolution.

DoW

Timmah wrote:So since a hot-shot lasgun isn't a lasgun, does that mean my assault terminators are not terminators?

Yes.

DogOfWar wrote:

FoxPhoenix135 wrote:Totally separate issue, and totally pointless and non-contributory to this thread.

Quite the contrary. The question of "are models in Terminator armour, in fact Terminators" is a very similar issue and has been discussed at length.

The consensus being (as far as I could tell) that even if a rule only specifically mentions 'Terminators,' you can be safe to assume they mean it to apply to all models equipped with that particular wargear, despite the fact that the reference is clearly to a specific type of unit.

In this case, one could take 'lasguns' to be referring to all types of lasguns (all types of models in terminator armour) or it could be only referring to the particular weapon known uniquely as 'Lasgun' (only applies to 'Terminators', rather than all models with Terminator armour).

I hope that explains why Timmah is referencing this related issue. It would be difficult to argue that you can stand on one side of the fence for the Terminator debate, yet be on the other side for the FRFSRF debate. If you're using the same logic for both, it seems you would need to come to a consistent resolution.

DoW

Terminators (unit) are not the same as Assault Terminators (unit) both consist of terminators (models); both have very different weapons layouts. I'm not going to take this further as this is a head ache.

DogOfWar wrote:

FoxPhoenix135 wrote:Totally separate issue, and totally pointless and non-contributory to this thread.

Quite the contrary. The question of "are models in Terminator armour, in fact Terminators" is a very similar issue and has been discussed at length.

The consensus being (as far as I could tell) that even if a rule only specifically mentions 'Terminators,' you can be safe to assume they mean it to apply to all models equipped with that particular wargear, despite the fact that the reference is clearly to a specific type of unit.

In this case, one could take 'lasguns' to be referring to all types of lasguns (all types of models in terminator armour) or it could be only referring to the particular weapon known uniquely as 'Lasgun' (only applies to 'Terminators', rather than all models with Terminator armour).

I hope that explains why Timmah is referencing this related issue. It would be difficult to argue that you can stand on one side of the fence for the Terminator debate, yet be on the other side for the FRFSRF debate. If you're using the same logic for both, it seems you would need to come to a consistent resolution.

DoW

Well let's think about this for a second. Terminators are UNITS, not wargear. Therefore, when a rule specifies "Terminators", it is specifying units that share a unique piece of wargear: the Terminator Armor. That is a separate issue. It is different to discuss what rules pertain to a unit rather than discussing rules pertaining to a piece of equipment.

A lasgun is a piece of equipment, not a unit. A particular piece of equipment in relation to this order (otherwise it would state "all weapons with lasgun in the title") Thus, the FRFSRF order was written to pertain to that piece of equipment. The word "lasgun" in the title of the hot shot is just semantics: if they had wanted to include the hot shot then they would have written the rules to include the differences in range between the two. RAW I think it pretty clearly pertains only to lasguns, not all forms of lasguns.

Long time, sinc 2nd ed, IG player. And not just no, but hell no. I can'tbelieve that many actually voted yes.
As to why they changed the name, maybe because inquisitorial Storm Troopers still have hellguns, just maybe?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Long time, sinc 2nd ed, IG player. And not just no, but hell no. I can'tbelieve that many actually voted yes.
As to why they changed the name, maybe because inquisitorial Storm Troopers still have hellguns, just maybe?

Tri wrote:

Terminators (unit) are not the same as Assault Terminators (unit) both consist of terminators (models); both have very different weapons layouts. I'm not going to take this further as this is a head ache.

This. Otherwise my assault termis could pack heavy flamers.

Tri wrote:I'm not going to take this further as this is a head ache.

I agree, it took 13 pages of yapping to get everyone on (mostly) the same page on the 'Terminator' issue so it's not worth it to repeat the process.

If anyone truly wants to have an actual discussion (rather than just comment on this 'rule in a vacuum' and not have it have any bearing on similar situations) please read that thread and then decide what you think about how intent can be interpreted differently based on wording.

Does something that makes a specific reference to terminators (and only 'terminators', neglecting to mentioning the wargear) apply to IC wearing terminator armour?
Does a rule that negates the attack bonus for "Close Combat Weapons" also negate the attack bonus for paired "Special Close Combat Weapons"?

If you answered yes to both of these questions (as most people apparently would) why should you reverse your logic for the Lasgun issue? ICs have different statlines to Terminators, Special Close Combat Weapons have different rules to Normal Close Combat Weapons. Why should a Hot-shot Lasgun not be beholden to a rule that covers its parent weapon type?

I understand why people *want* the rules to be a certain way (and indeed, that might be what GW intended) but there seems to be a large amount of arbitrary inconsistency. Why is that?

DoW


Automatically Appended Next Post:

don_mondo wrote:Long time, sinc 2nd ed, IG player. And not just no, but hell no. I can'tbelieve that many actually voted yes.
As to why they changed the name, maybe because inquisitorial Storm Troopers still have hellguns, just maybe?

I should start a new poll: "Do you actually read the other posts in a thread or do you just reply straight away to the OP and repeat things other people have said 3 times already?"

Honestly, I'm all for people saying "I agree with X!" or "I disagree with X!" but come on.

DoW

DogOfWar wrote:

I hope that explains why Timmah is referencing this related issue. It would be difficult to argue that you can stand on one side of the fence for the Terminator debate, yet be on the other side for the FRFSRF debate. If you're using the same logic for both, it seems you would need to come to a consistent resolution.

This. Basically.


(ofc this is the internet so having differing opinions is fine because you don't need to be logical. )

DogOfWar some of what you say i agree with but not all.

Does a rule that negates the attack bonus for "Close Combat Weapons" also negate the attack bonus for paired "Special Close Combat Weapons"?

The rule in question is Dark Eldar Wych weapons." No member of a unit fighting the wyches in close combat count as being equipped with an additional Close Combat weapon." As It is never mention if this means "Normal Close Combat Weapons" or "Special Close Combat weapon", most people assume it means All Close Combat weapon (Wrongly or Rightly so)

Also if we take a step back and try to use it we find that it doesn't work perfectly. Hot shot Lasguns can't shoot 24". If this was a sloppy written rule intended for them to be able to use it would read "If the unit did not move in its Movement phase they fire two shots with their lasgun at an enemy at maximum range, instead of just one".

It would also have a line at the end reading "(note this includes Hotshot Lasguns)". This because GW 99% of time will make sure it gives you permission to do something they want you to do,

Tri wrote:DogOfWar some of what you say i agree with but not all.

Does a rule that negates the attack bonus for "Close Combat Weapons" also negate the attack bonus for paired "Special Close Combat Weapons"?

The rule in question is Dark Eldar Wych weapons." No member of a unit fighting the wyches in close combat count as being equipped with an additional Close Combat weapon." As It is never mention if this means "Normal Close Combat Weapons" or "Special Close Combat weapon", most people assume it means All Close Combat weapon (Wrongly or Rightly so)

Also if we take a step back and try to use it we find that it doesn't work perfectly. Hot shot Lasguns can't shoot 24". If this was a sloppy written rule intended for them to be able to use it would read "If the unit did not move in its Movement phase they fire two shots with their lasgun at an enemy at maximum range, instead of just one".

It would also have a line at the end reading "(note this includes Hotshot Lasguns)". This because GW 99% of time will make sure it gives you permission to do something they want you to do,

I think you're right.

Personally, the range issue is really the only thing I have a hard time reconciling. I know the rules generally say exactly what you CAN do - hunting for easter eggs is somewhat poor sportsmanship imo - but in this situation I think it's really is just a poor choice of wording by GW. I believe they intended for it only to affect the standard Lasgun but it has enough ambiguity to leave the door open. Had they written the rule as you described it, or even said "may fire their standard Lasguns..." we wouldn't be having this discussion.

On a related note, the argument that says "Heavy Bolters are not Bolters, so Hot-shot Lasguns are not Lasguns" is somewhat misleading as I don't think it is a good comparison. I think saying "Hellfire Bolters are not Bolters, so Hot-shot Lasguns are not Lasguns" is more accurate. I don't think many people would argue that if a rule says you may fire your Bolters three times, you wouldn't be able to fire Hellfire rounds 3 times. (Not sure if there are specific rules against this particular example, but at least I hope I'm getting my point across)

Anyway, as people have already mentioned, I really don't think it would be terribly gamebreaking either way. Stormies are super overpriced and I doubt you'd get too much benefit from FRFSRF anyway. It seems like more of a tactic for a blob of 30 guardsmen than 10 guys, even if they are BS4.

DoW

Tri wrote:DogOfWar some of what you say i agree with but not all.

Does a rule that negates the attack bonus for "Close Combat Weapons" also negate the attack bonus for paired "Special Close Combat Weapons"?

The rule in question is Dark Eldar Wych weapons." No member of a unit fighting the wyches in close combat count as being equipped with an additional Close Combat weapon." As It is never mention if this means "Normal Close Combat Weapons" or "Special Close Combat weapon", most people assume it means All Close Combat weapon (Wrongly or Rightly so)

Also if we take a step back and try to use it we find that it doesn't work perfectly. Hot shot Lasguns can't shoot 24". If this was a sloppy written rule intended for them to be able to use it would read "If the unit did not move in its Movement phase they fire two shots with their lasgun at an enemy at maximum range, instead of just one".

It would also have a line at the end reading "(note this includes Hotshot Lasguns)". This because GW 99% of time will make sure it gives you permission to do something they want you to do,

Yeah, that bit about the Hot shots not shooting 24" basically just restates what I said in earlier posts about range.

I agree with X!

sorry DoW.

Also, with regards to the 'under 12 inches' and 'up to 24 inches' that's still valid. The rule isn't saying that you can shoot your hotshot lasgun further than you normally can. It's telling you how many shots you get. At 24" the hotshots clearly get no shots, because they have an 18" range. firing from 18 inches, however, is still 'up to 24 inches', so they would fire twice. I don't see the problem.

The rule doesn't seem to be worded to exclude hotshot lasguns at all.

Plus, RaI, it makes sense that even though stormtroopers are elite and have been trained to fight differently than guardsmen, they still can fall back on their tried-and-true guardsman roots to fire a load of shots when needed.

Orkestra wrote:I agree with X!

sorry DoW.

Also, with regards to the 'under 12 inches' and 'up to 24 inches' that's still valid. The rule isn't saying that you can shoot your hotshot lasgun further than you normally can. It's telling you how many shots you get. At 24" the hotshots clearly get no shots, because they have an 18" range. firing from 18 inches, however, is still 'up to 24 inches', so they would fire twice. I don't see the problem.

The rule doesn't seem to be worded to exclude hotshot lasguns at all.

Plus, RaI, it makes sense that even though stormtroopers are elite and have been trained to fight differently than guardsmen, they still can fall back on their tried-and-true guardsman roots to fire a load of shots when needed.

You must be one of those 'smart' Orks... those are both excellent points.

I especially didn't even think about what it would mean for normal Lasguns if it didn't say "up to 24 inches" in the description. You would only be able to fire twice at targets who were exactly 24 inches away. Not 23, not 22... and 25 is right out.

As for your little 'X' comment... let's just say I'll be keeping an eye on troublemakers like you, my lad!

DoW

darn it... just when I thought I had a convincing solution, you go and blow it out of the water Orkestra! Now I am back to straddling the fence. I guess a roll-off will be what I fall back on until GW says anything more concrete than us arguing about it.

No, it's not the same as hellfire rounds. Hellfire round bolters are not separate weapons. Hotshot lasguns are. The situation is most similar to heavy bolters and normal bolters.

As I've said before, if you want to use your hot-shot lasguns with rules for lasguns, I expect them to follow the rest of the rules for lasguns too.

Ok if you don't want to use Heavy Bolters you want to use special ammo in your example. I will compare Storm-Bolters and Bolters. Storm-Bolters have the same range, strength and AP. The only difference is its Assault 2.

However you cannot use sternguard special ammo in a Storm-Bolter because it is not a bolter. It is a type of bolter in the same way a hot shot lasgun is a type of lasgun.

Yep, that example works for me. I think we're done here, unless someone is suggesting that we allow stormbolters to shoot sternguard ammo.

Pika_power wrote:Yep, that example works for me. I think we're done here, unless someone is suggesting that we allow stormbolters to shoot sternguard ammo.

Why not?

If it's the same weapon (albeit double-barreled and conveniently mounted) why shouldn't you be able to load it with different ammunition? If a rule specifically says that you cannot, then I agree. Otherwise that's like saying you can't load buckshot in your double-barreled shotgun because it is not a shotgun.

And in regards to the Bolters loaded with Hellfire rounds. You have a completely different statline for that ammunition. It is the same as Hot-shot Lasguns having a different statline for their ammunition. GW could just as easily said that Hot-shot Lasguns are just Lasguns with Hot-shot packs loaded into them for a different AP value. In fact, that is essentially what they are.

I might be getting too far into the 'logic' of all this, but it seems very fishy.

DoW

Its clear that you can. In the order lasgun is not capitalized, if it was it would be speaking of a specific thing but sense it's not RAW you are able to use any type of "Lasgun" you want.
(Basic Grammer.)

Easter Egg: The Hot Shot Lasgun in its listing calls itself a hellgun XD

DogOfWar wrote:

Pika_power wrote:Yep, that example works for me. I think we're done here, unless someone is suggesting that we allow stormbolters to shoot sternguard ammo.

Why not?

If it's the same weapon (albeit double-barreled and conveniently mounted) why shouldn't you be able to load it with different ammunition? If a rule specifically says that you cannot, then I agree. Otherwise that's like saying you can't load buckshot in your double-barreled shotgun because it is not a shotgun.

And in regards to the Bolters loaded with Hellfire rounds. You have a completely different statline for that ammunition. It is the same as Hot-shot Lasguns having a different statline for their ammunition. GW could just as easily said that Hot-shot Lasguns are just Lasguns with Hot-shot packs loaded into them for a different AP value. In fact, that is essentially what they are.

I might be getting too far into the 'logic' of all this, but it seems very fishy.

DoW

You can't use special ammo as an example because it is always a Boltgun firing, the gun doesn't change its name. StormBolters cannot be equiped with special ammo because they are not Bolters.

I'd like to say something about the hellfire bolter/hot-shot lasgun issue.

The argumentation that hot-shot lasgungs are just juiced-up normal lasguns and therefore are similar to normal bolter loaded with hellfire rounds is totally and completely fluff-based.

On the bolter side, you have a weapon A (the bolter) and an upgrade 2 (hellfire rounds), making this an A-2 weapons.

On the lasgun side, you have a weapon X (lasgun) and a weapon X (hot-shot lasgun). There's no upgrade. They don't merge into a new, single weapon because they are already separate weapons. You don't buy "hot-shot upgrades" for your stormtroopers, like you buy hellfire round upgrades for marines, do you.


Therefore I find this way of argumentation quite flawed and am on the side of people that say that hot-shot lasguns can't work with the FRFSRF order.

- - -

And if you want some more fluff-based arguments : Hot-shot lasguns use bigger and meaner power packs than normal lasguns, but in novels (for example by Dan Abnett) it is stated that this high-power ammunition quickly causes tear and wear on the barrell. Also, if something electrical like a laser (lasgun) is fired, I guess condensators and stuff are working somewhere in the rifle. If you want higher energy output, the capacitators will have to recharge longer, which reduces the RoF of a hot-shot lasgun compared to a normal lasgun.
Therefore, hot-shot lasguns fire too slow to benefit from FRFSRF.

Additional note: This fluff statement is solely for the fluff part of the discussion and not for the RAW discussion that should be the primary concern.

No, because FRFSRF is an evil, evil rule that no-one should have!!!! I don't care how guard are normally, they DON'T NEED THIS!!!

It wrote:No, because FRFSRF is an evil, evil rule that no-one should have!!!! I don't care how guard are normally, they DON'T NEED THIS!!!

Thank you It you opinion is duly noted. How ever since they do have this we will continue to argue whether it works for hotshot lasguns or not.

Seems to me there isn't really enough information to completely sway me either way. There are good arguments to both sides and I think it just comes down to how you perceive the rules working on the whole. To me there seems to be three viewpoints:

1) You believe that the rules must expressly forbid you from doing something otherwise you are allowed - Yes FRFSRF works with HS Lasguns
2) You believe that the rules must expressly ALLOW you to do something (and you believe the rule in this case says you can) or you are not allowed - Yes FRFSRF works with HS Lasguns
3) You believe that the rules must expressly ALLOW you to do something (and you believe the rule in this case says you can't) or you are not allowed - No FRFSRF does not work with HS Lasguns

Personally I'm leaning towards group 2, but I'm more than happy to vote democratically. To expedite the process let's just allow one representative from each group to vote. Result = 2 Yes, 1 No.

Well who would've expected... that's splendid!

To the gaming table, my friends, I have orders to vox!

DoW

"4) You believe that the rules must expressly ALLOW you to do something (and you believe the rule in this case does not says you can) or you are not allowed - No FRFSRF does not work with HS Lasguns " (minor word change but that still changes the meaning)
has my vote but in a friendly game I'm normally happy to bend the rules.

I'm channelling the ghost of Gwar....

He says that unless the rules specifically say you can do something you can't do it.

Gwar! wrote: The rules don't say that I can't make a roll of 1+ and win the game. So on a 1+, I win the game

Not to, you know, change positions or anything.

Just ignore the storm troopers and go for phase out.

So, the rules for "Terminator armor" refer to "terminators"(as many times as they refer to models in terminator armor).

Do the rules for FRFSRF refer to Hellguns or Hot Shot Lasguns? (Specifically.)

If so, I totally see Timmah(and co.)'s point.

I need to just buy that codex.

Tri wrote:"4) You believe that the rules must expressly ALLOW you to do something (and you believe the rule in this case does not says you can) or you are not allowed - No FRFSRF does not work with HS Lasguns " (minor word change but that still changes the meaning)
has my vote but in a friendly game I'm normally happy to bend the rules.

Ah good correction, you're absolutely right.

gardeth wrote:Just ignore the storm troopers and go for phase out.

Nice.

DoW

DogOfWar wrote:Seems to me there isn't really enough information to completely sway me either way. There are good arguments to both sides and I think it just comes down to how you perceive the rules working on the whole. To me there seems to be three viewpoints:

1) You believe that the rules must expressly forbid you from doing something otherwise you are allowed - Yes FRFSRF works with HS Lasguns
2) You believe that the rules must expressly ALLOW you to do something (and you believe the rule in this case says you can) or you are not allowed - Yes FRFSRF works with HS Lasguns
3) You believe that the rules must expressly ALLOW you to do something (and you believe the rule in this case says you can't) or you are not allowed - No FRFSRF does not work with HS Lasguns

Personally I'm leaning towards group 2, but I'm more than happy to vote democratically. To expedite the process let's just allow one representative from each group to vote. Result = 2 Yes, 1 No.

Well who would've expected... that's splendid!

To the gaming table, my friends, I have orders to vox!

DoW

This question 1. is complete nonsense and should go in no-one's favour, because it doesn't follow the way that the rules are suppose to be followed. The rule set is permissive. A rule needs to allow you to do it. 1.'s way of interpretation also lets stormbolters fire hellfire ammo, which we know cannot happen.



Terminators are not the same as Assault Terminators. Chaos Space Marines were the only ones who could user Fabius Bile last codex, and Possessed Chaos Space Marines could not. (The only reason for argument in this codex is a table which brings confusion on the issue.)

Stormbolters cannot fire hellfire, even though they are essentially two bolters glued together, and logic dictates they should! Hotshot Lasguns cannot FRFSRF because they are Hotshot lasguns, not just lasguns.

Other codices have set a precedent. It's what's specifically allowed in the rules, not what makes sense in fluff. Otherwise I demand space marines to be higher-statted that Movie Marine list.

im completely out of depth lol. both sides do have good arguments. does any1 have any idea when GW will publish an errata or FAQ?

The Angry Commissar wrote:im completely out of depth lol. both sides do have good arguments. does any1 have any idea when GW will publish an errata or FAQ?

When they feel like it ... Christmas?

Tri wrote:

The Angry Commissar wrote:im completely out of depth lol. both sides do have good arguments. does any1 have any idea when GW will publish an errata or FAQ?

When they feel like it ... Christmas?

of 2012? lol

A "hotshot lasgun" is still a lasgun, IMO. "Hotshot" is a (silly) adjective.

A "puny" lasgun is a lasgun, as is a "ineffective" lasgun or a "laughable" lasgun.




A better question may be why do I wade into threads like this?


Where's that IG FAQ already...

Nyarlathotep: So you agreee that a heavy bolter and a stormbolter are both bolters?

A hotshot lasgun in the game is absolutely not the same as a lasgun. They are different weapons with different profiles. Those saying HSLGs are included are arguing for the creation of a lasgun category ala pistols. the problem is, nowhere in the rules is such a category created- the only reference to a "lasgun" is the singular weapon which does not state that it inlcudes the HSLG.

So they turn to grammar rules. The problem is that normal grammar sules do not necessarily apply to a specialized context, especially when using defined terms. Is this such a case? Hard to tell as GW doesn't give us much guidance.

Clouding the water with terminators doesn't really help as terminators as a unit and as a category (models wearing terminator armor) are both defined. Additionally, it is somewhat different from the description of models and weapons as the guardsmen are not described as "lasgunners" or similar due to equipment.

Strictly applying the words as written, though, the rule applies to lasguns (and only lasguns, not lascannons, laspistols, or any other las weaponry- remember that this is a ruleset where you can only do what the rules specifically allow). "hotshot lasguns" != "lasguns", so models equipped with them would not benefit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

jmurph wrote:Nyarlathotep: So you agreee that a heavy bolter and a stormbolter are both bolters? Please reference me the page with the stats for a "puny lasgun" in the rules. I see "lasgun" and "hotshot lasgun" are both in there.

A hotshot lasgun in the game is absolutely not the same as a lasgun. They are different weapons with different profiles. Those saying HSLGs are included are arguing for the creation of a lasgun category ala pistols. the problem is, nowhere in the rules is such a category created- the only reference to a "lasgun" is the singular weapon which does not state that it inlcudes the HSLG.

So they turn to grammar rules. The problem is that normal grammar sules do not necessarily apply to a specialized context, especially when using defined terms. Is this such a case? Hard to tell as GW doesn't give us much guidance.

Clouding the water with terminators doesn't really help as terminators as a unit and as a category (models wearing terminator armor) are both defined. Additionally, it is somewhat different from the description of models and weapons as the guardsmen are not described as "lasgunners" or similar due to equipment.

Strictly applying the words as written, though, the rule applies to lasguns (and only lasguns, not lascannons, laspistols, or any other las weaponry- remember that this is a ruleset where you can only do what the rules specifically allow). "hotshot lasguns" != "lasguns", so models equipped with them would not benefit.

The storm bolter to bolter comparision is a fallacious argument due to one being rapid fire and the other being assault 2.

The Hot shot has a slightly reduced range but is still a rapid fire lasgun.

The entire argument comes down to whether you can add descriptive words to equipment without changing it.

If you accept that you can, then hotshot lasgun = lasgun
Assault terminator = terminator
Heavy bolter = bolter (of sorts)

If you don't accept this than hotshot lasgun =! lasgun
Assault terminator =! terminator
Heavy bolter =! bolter (of sorts)

Either way, I would say you need to stay consistant.

Timmah wrote:The entire argument comes down to whether you can add descriptive words to equipment without changing it.

If you accept that you can, then hotshot lasgun = lasgun
Assault terminator = terminator
Heavy bolter = bolter (of sorts)

If you don't accept this than hotshot lasgun =! lasgun
Assault terminator =! terminator
Heavy bolter =! bolter (of sorts)

Either way, I would say you need to stay consistant.

*sigh*

I suppose this means that assault terminators can sweeping advance by RAW?

@Focusedfire: There is a change in the profile. It doesn't matter whether it's by the range of one inch, or by ten strength points, 40 inches and the ap of it. The argument is that weapons with descriptive words do not use the rules of the original weapon when convenient.

Pika_power wrote:

Timmah wrote:The entire argument comes down to whether you can add descriptive words to equipment without changing it.

If you accept that you can, then hotshot lasgun = lasgun
Assault terminator = terminator
Heavy bolter = bolter (of sorts)

If you don't accept this than hotshot lasgun =! lasgun
Assault terminator =! terminator
Heavy bolter =! bolter (of sorts)

Either way, I would say you need to stay consistant.

*sigh*

I suppose this means that assault terminators can sweeping advance by RAW?

@Focusedfire: There is a change in the profile. It doesn't matter whether it's by the range of one inch, or by ten strength points, 40 inches and the ap of it. The argument is that weapons with descriptive words do not use the rules of the original weapon when convenient.

No both because both units (Terminators and Assualt Terminators) are both made up of Terminator models who wear terminator armour

Tri wrote:
No both because both units (Terminators and Assualt Terminators) are both made up of Terminator models who wear terminator armour

Exactly. The terminator example is obfuscation. "Terminators" are a defined term both as a unit and category. However, it only refers to one piece of equipment that is present on all types. Ignoring the completely different AP and range value, I guess you could say hotshots and lasguns are the same- all that matters is that they are both rapid fire weapons with lasgun in the name

jmurph wrote:

Tri wrote:
No both because both units (Terminators and Assualt Terminators) are both made up of Terminator models who wear terminator armour

Exactly. The terminator example is obfuscation. "Terminators" are a defined term both as a unit and category. However, it only refers to one piece of equipment that is present on all types. Ignoring the completely different AP and range value, I guess you could say hotshots and lasguns are the same- all that matters is that they are both rapid fire weapons with lasgun in the name

You could but the flaw lies in the simple fact that both units do not get lasguns. If they got lasguns and a rule ie Hotshot where their lasguns counted as AP3 but lost a bit of range maybe. Now I'm sure people are going to say things like why would GW do this or what ever. Simple fact Thousand sons get bolters that fire at AP3 its still a bolter. Where as Storm troopers do not get Lasguns.

Pika_power wrote:

@Focusedfire: There is a change in the profile. It doesn't matter whether it's by the range of one inch, or by ten strength points, 40 inches and the ap of it. The argument is that weapons with descriptive words do not use the rules of the original weapon when convenient.

You may be right except GW does exactly that whenever it "is" convienent. Usually for the SMs. This era of BT stormshields not being the same as Ultramarine storm shields is a very recent occurance and I don't think it will last. Terminator armor will probably go back to being generic as the various codices are released and customers complain that things with the same names and different values are too confusing. Blessed ammunition rules suddenly come to mind for some reason. I may need to check.

The point I'm getting at is That the FRFSRF rule applies to rapid fire Lasguns and the Hotshot is a Rapid fire Lasgun. Arguments can be made both ways and the same is true for some of the supporting evidence such as officers available to give orders and whether Storms are allowed to recieve orders.

The Storms "are" allowed to recieve orders if within range of an officer but get "no" officer of their own to issue such orders when they are in forward positions which is where they are supposed to be.
Because of this I look at this as intentional design to balance(You want to use the rule then you have to put a command squad in Jepoardy) but just as many arguments can be made that the design is to dicourage such attempts.

If GW ever gets around to doing an Errata don't be surprised that GW goes against whichever is the prevailing line of thought on the subject.

Now my personal opinion on the rule is that it isn't game breaking and I play Tau. My army would be hurt more by this than the SM players I hear so vehemently saying no to whether the rule applies. Also I can't see the Storms being priced the way they are unless the rule applied. I don't think their pricing is as horrendous as a ;ot would say but without the rule I'd say they are overpriced by a point or two. Just my opinion.

Pika_power wrote:

@Focusedfire: There is a change in the profile. It doesn't matter whether it's by the range of one inch, or by ten strength points, 40 inches and the ap of it. The argument is that weapons with descriptive words do not use the rules of the original weapon when convenient.

Counter Example:
Necrons: Gauss weapons:
note: gauss weapons do not have Gauss in their type but only in their name despite the change in profile.

Are there any non-gauss necron weapons? AFAIK, there are none, so I could argue that it is applied to all Necron weaponry.

Also, I don't have a Necron codex, so I would appreciate the paragraph.

Also, unless it specifically refers to a specific gauss weapon, it doesn't count. This one is saying Lasguns get it, and you are arguing hot-shot Lasguns should too. All Gauss names are different apart from the Gauss cannon/heavy Gauss cannon.

Also, the Necron dex is from third edition, much like the Dark Eldar dex. Anyone could easily drive a destruction-derby truck through one of those codices, saying they don't follow current profile formats, etc. If you have to resort to using them as a counter argument when pitched against the much more recent Space Marines codex, I'd say your example is inferior.

Lacross wrote:Counter Example:
Necrons: Gauss weapons:
note: gauss weapons do not have Gauss in their type but only in their name despite the change in profile.

Doesn't the Necron 'dex specifically say that the rules apply to 'all weapons with Gauss in their name' or something IIRC?

If my memory serves me well, the staff of light isn't a gauss weapon

Pika_power wrote:
Stormbolters cannot fire hellfire, even though they are essentially two bolters glued together, and logic dictates they should! Hotshot Lasguns cannot FRFSRF because they are Hotshot lasguns, not just lasguns.

Other codices have set a precedent. It's what's specifically allowed in the rules, not what makes sense in fluff. Otherwise I demand space marines to be higher-statted that Movie Marine list.

QFT

If hot shot lasguns can use FRFSRF then I'm going to have lots of fun using psy-bolts on land raider crusaders' hurricane bolters.

Either way, it's still an older codex, with many flaws when compared to the current rules, especially with their special rules. I consider using Necron special rules in a rules argument to prove any RAW point for a more recent codex is a null point, because of how much in need of an update the Necron codex is. I place it on the same level as the DE codex and the WH/DH codices. All of them are in need of an update before they can be used without a dash of RAI. The most recent precedent has been in the SM codex, with Stormbolters not being able to fire hellfire rounds. And don't give me anything about it being assault 2 rather than rapid fire, it's a separate weapon just as the Hotshot-lasgun is, despite any logical reasoning.

Pika_power wrote:Either way, it's still an older codex, with many flaws when compared to the current rules, especially with their special rules. I consider using Necron special rules in a rules argument to prove any RAW point for a more recent codex is a null point, because of how much in need of an update the Necron codex is. I place it on the same level as the DE codex and the WH/DH codices. All of them are in need of an update before they can be used without a dash of RAI. The most recent precedent has been in the SM codex, with Stormbolters not being able to fire hellfire rounds. And don't give me anything about it being assault 2 rather than rapid fire, it's a separate weapon just as the Hotshot-lasgun is, despite any logical reasoning.

adding to the above ....
bolter and storm bolter are both the same range, Strength and AP.Lasguns and hot shot lasguns are both the same Strength and Firing type.
Lasguns and hotshots are less alike then stormbolters and bolters, The bolters share 3 characteristics where as the lasguns only share 2.

The number of characteristics shared is irrelevant.
If a single char is changed AND it has a different name.....how can it not be a different weapon....

So do the "Lasguns" have a nice little section, like Terminator armor, that uses both names interchangeably?

I mean as opposed to a whole different set of rules, like Storm Bolters, Heavy Bolters, and Bolters?

That is what I go by, generally speaking.

I am slow picking up that codex, so I cannot just go read.

Geez, we're still arguing about this?

Maybe people are a little too concerned with the precedent, rather than the instance, of the rule.

In this INSTANCE, I don't think it was RAI to have the hot-shots use this order. It could possibly unbalance the game. Can you imagine a deepstriking unit, with an AP3 weapon, firing 30 times into the rear of a formation? Granted, its at str 3, but that could still wreck some SM's day. Of course... its not like GW has NEVER put out a broken unit before...

FoxPhoenix135 wrote:Geez, we're still arguing about this?

Maybe people are a little too concerned with the precedent, rather than the instance, of the rule.

In this INSTANCE, I don't think it was RAI to have the hot-shots use this order. It could possibly unbalance the game. Can you imagine a deepstriking unit, with an AP3 weapon, firing 30 times into the rear of a formation? Granted, its at str 3, but that could still wreck some SM's day. Of course... its not like GW has NEVER put out a broken unit before...

Whether its game breaking or not is not the question. For a long time chaos players had the option of a psychic power where you couldn't shoot or assault there Daemon prince.

What is the question is whether Hotshot lasguns are included in the rules. Precedent is the best way forward out of the stalemate. Since StormBolters do not equal a type of bolter (as far as the special ammo is bothered) nether should hotshot lasguns be effected by a rule for lasguns.

What exactly are the rules for FRFSRF and Hotshot-lasguns?

I've honestly got no clue what I'm fighting for. I'm arguing that Lasguns=//=Hotshot-lasguns.

Lacross wrote:additional comparison.

Necron codex:

Gauss Weapons only have Gauss in their names rather than in their type.

addition: the Gauss Weapons rule does not state that weapons with Gauss in their name are Gauss Weapons

Pika_power wrote:What exactly are the rules for FRFSRF and Hotshot-lasguns?

I've honestly got no clue what I'm fighting for. I'm arguing that Lasguns=//=Hotshot-lasguns.

without going mad and quoting word for word. Its an order, if passed the unit gets to fire its "lasguns" with an extra shot (+ wording about range because of rapid fire)

I see. Hotshot lasguns differ by AP and have shorter range?

there is no way i can see anyone claim hs lasguns would qualify .... look under the section weapons at the rear of the codex.

Lasgun and hotshot lasgun have seperate entries, therefore are different weapons, you cant just use the parts of the rules that are convininent for you, the fact they have seperate weapon lines is all you need to know that a hotshot lasgun in fact is NOT a lasgun, it is a hotshot lasgun.

just to add a little spice to this conversation.....

The Witchhunters codex defines stormbolters, bolters, Combi-bolter, and bolt pistol as being "Bolt weapons" for the use of Psycannon Bolts.

Any "Bolt Weapon" carried by the model with Psycannon bolts gets to use the special ammo. Does that qualify Bolt weapons as being a group..........wouldnt that make Las-guns a group, just like Necron "gauss weapons"

If a Combi-bolter counts as bolter then why isnt a HS lasgun a lasgun?

By the RAW logic I see here I can assume that I cannot use Commander Pask's Tank Ace ability no matter what tank I put him on as his ability only applies to the "Leman Russ" that he is in.......not a Leman Russ Battle Tank, nor a Leman Russ Punisher, or a Leman Russ Demolisher.....I would have to put him in a "Leman Russ" to use his ability......

Because they used a DIFFERENT TERM for the group - "bolt-weapons" to describe the class of weapons that fire rocket propelled mass reactive shells.

"lasgun" is the actual name of one of the entries, so cannot be the name of the group in this case.

Is "lasgun" the exact same as "hs lasgun"? No, then they are nto the same weapon.

DJ Illuminati wrote:just to add a little spice to this conversation.....

The Witchhunters codex defines stormbolters, bolters, Combi-bolter, and bolt pistol as being "Bolt weapons" for the use of Psycannon Bolts.

Any "Bolt Weapon" carried by the model with Psycannon bolts gets to use the special ammo. Does that qualify Bolt weapons as being a group..........wouldnt that make Las-guns a group, just like Necron "gauss weapons"

If a Combi-bolter counts as bolter then why isnt a HS lasgun a lasgun

Easy if they they tell you what can use it any of those bolter weapons, FRFSRF doesn't. Also should be noted that in the same codex there are 2 different versions of Psycannon bolts the infantry armoury ( which has stormbolters, bolters, Combi-bolter, and bolt pistol) and the vehicle armoury (which has storm bolters and heavy bolters).

Tri wrote:

DJ Illuminati wrote:just to add a little spice to this conversation.....

The Witchhunters codex defines stormbolters, bolters, Combi-bolter, and bolt pistol as being "Bolt weapons" for the use of Psycannon Bolts.

Any "Bolt Weapon" carried by the model with Psycannon bolts gets to use the special ammo. Does that qualify Bolt weapons as being a group..........wouldnt that make Las-guns a group, just like Necron "gauss weapons"

If a Combi-bolter counts as bolter then why isnt a HS lasgun a lasgun

Easy if they they tell you what can use it any of those bolter weapons, FRFSRF doesn't. Also should be noted that in the same codex there are 2 different versions of Psycannon bolts the infantry armoury ( which has stormbolters, bolters, Combi-bolter, and bolt pistol) and the vehicle armoury (which has storm bolters and heavy bolters).

I am quite sure the distinction was made because you cant put a bolt pistol on a tank, and if they haddnt of specified then people would claim it only affected the frist group listed and shouldnt work on Heavy bolters because they were not specificaly mentioned by name with little signs and a flag to announce the differance.

A combi-bolter shoots a different projectile than a Bolter.....even if it is only once, yet they are still "bolters"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DJ Illuminati wrote:just to add a little spice to this conversation.....

The Witchhunters codex defines stormbolters, bolters, Combi-bolter, and bolt pistol as being "Bolt weapons" for the use of Psycannon Bolts.

Any "Bolt Weapon" carried by the model with Psycannon bolts gets to use the special ammo. Does that qualify Bolt weapons as being a group..........wouldnt that make Las-guns a group, just like Necron "gauss weapons"

If a Combi-bolter counts as bolter then why isnt a HS lasgun a lasgun?

Automatically Appended Next Post:
By the RAW logic I see here I can assume that I cannot use Commander Pask's Tank Ace ability no matter what tank I put him on as his ability only applies to the "Leman Russ" that he is in.......not a Leman Russ Battle Tank, nor a Leman Russ Punisher, or a Leman Russ Demolisher.....I would have to put him in a "Leman Russ" to use his ability......

No you can't put bolt pistols on a tank but ask your self what is a hurrican bolter? Thats right it 3 TL-Bolters ... that can't take the ammo because it says so.

Tri wrote:No you can't put bolt pistols on a tank but ask your self what is a hurrican bolter? Thats right it 3 TL-Bolters ... that can't take the ammo because it says so.

Fair enough, we shall see what the next FAQ says then......

DJ Illuminati wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
By the RAW logic I see here I can assume that I cannot use Commander Pask's Tank Ace ability no matter what tank I put him on as his ability only applies to the "Leman Russ" that he is in.......not a Leman Russ Battle Tank, nor a Leman Russ Punisher, or a Leman Russ Demolisher.....I would have to put him in a "Leman Russ" to use his ability......

Yes that rule is badly worded. In order to make it work we must assume that they mean all types of Leman Russ.

Tri wrote:

DJ Illuminati wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
By the RAW logic I see here I can assume that I cannot use Commander Pask's Tank Ace ability no matter what tank I put him on as his ability only applies to the "Leman Russ" that he is in.......not a Leman Russ Battle Tank, nor a Leman Russ Punisher, or a Leman Russ Demolisher.....I would have to put him in a "Leman Russ" to use his ability......

Yes that rule is badly worded. In order to make it work we must assume that they mean all types of Leman Russ.

by the same logic, can we assume that FRFSRF is a badly worded rule and to make it work we must assume it means all types of Lasguns.........

Each Leman Russ has seperate names and stats, its not hard to notice that each Leman Russ got its own entry in the Profile page in the back, as well as seperate entries describing each tank.

I understand the counter to my statement will be that they are all under the listing of Leman Russ Squadren, but both Lasguns are listed under the Wargear listings...is it realy any differant.

DJ Illuminati wrote:

Tri wrote:

DJ Illuminati wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
By the RAW logic I see here I can assume that I cannot use Commander Pask's Tank Ace ability no matter what tank I put him on as his ability only applies to the "Leman Russ" that he is in.......not a Leman Russ Battle Tank, nor a Leman Russ Punisher, or a Leman Russ Demolisher.....I would have to put him in a "Leman Russ" to use his ability......

Yes that rule is badly worded. In order to make it work we must assume that they mean all types of Leman Russ.

by the same logic, can we assume that FRFSRF is a badly worded rule and to make it work we must assume it means all types of Lasguns.........

Each Leman Russ has seperate names and stats, its not hard to notice that each Leman Russ got its own entry in the Profile page in the back, as well as seperate entries describing each tank.

I understand the counter to my statement will be that they are all under the listing of Leman Russ Squadren, but both Lasguns are listed under the Wargear listings...is it realy any differant.

Can not make the same jump as there is no such thing as a Leman Russ. There is however a Lasgun. Its one thing to go ... yep they must mean one of these types of Leman russ as there is no "Leman Russ" to use it on ... and quite another to go ... hay if i ignore hot-shot then its the same weapon and i can use the order on it.

===edit===

In fact I'd go as far as say if FRFSRF was meant to work with them then they would have got lasguns and a rule called hotshots.

Hot-Shots
Due to the demands faced by storm troopers they have modified their Lasguns to fire a much deadlier beam. All Storm Trooper's Lasguns count as being AP. However these modifications have also reduced the maximum range to 18"

"Can make the same jump as there is no such thing as a Leman Russ. There is however a Lasgun. Its one thing to go ... yep they must mean one of these types of Leman russ as there is no "Leman Russ" to use it on ... and quite another to go ... hay if i ignore hot-shot then its the same weapon and i can use the order on it."

How can someone assume on one rule and hold such blind faith to the wording of another....... So ignoring the lack of any name after "Leman Russ" is not the same as ignoring the HS from a HS lasgun? I still agree with another person on here that pointed out the fact that they went through the effort of renaming the gun an HS "LASGUN"....... I dont see why they would make such a move if it wasn't intentional. Some would say it is so that Inquisatorial Stormtroopers dont get the AP3.....but doesnt the Codex trump all else..... even if the IG got a AP3 Hellgun the GKs wouldn't because they are locked down with their codex wargear

Why is it hard to say " yep, they mean any type of lasgun, and it looks like they renamed a gun to fit that slot"?

If someone is going to play RAW then, IMHO, go full out, dont pick and choose what leaps of logic are permissable and which are bogus just because the book didnt spend the extra 3 pages it needed to quantify every possible view point of a rule.

Hellguns renamed to Hotshot Lasguns lets think about that for a second.
Hellguns are
Range 24" Str3 AP5 Rapid fire
Hotshot Lasguns are
Range 18" str3 AP3 Rapid fire

It looks more like GW has made a new gun and given it a new name. And include some fluff for long term games so we know what happened to the Hellgun, Which is the name use in all the fluff for storm troopers guns.

Tri wrote:Hellguns renamed to Hotshot Lasguns lets think about that for a second.
Hellguns are
Range 24" Str3 AP5 Rapid fire
Hotshot Lasguns are
Range 18" str3 AP3 Rapid fire

It looks more like GW has made a new gun and given it a new name. And include some fluff for long term games so we know what happened to the Hellgun, Which is the name use in all the fluff for storm troopers guns.

I dont see how fluff applies to a RAW point of view.......

Hotshot lasguns are Hell guns (according to fluff)

Hell guns are modified Lasguns (according to fluff)

ergo Hotshot lasguns are Lasguns.....(according to fluff)

Lets assume the SM have a rule just like FRFSRF...... would it be that all Boltguns get an extra shot.......what would you call a group/class of guns that all shoot lasers....."Lasguns" seems like a good name for that group of weapons, not just a singular weapon, much like how saying M16s refer to both the M16A1 and the M16A2

DJ Illuminati wrote:

Tri wrote:Hellguns renamed to Hotshot Lasguns lets think about that for a second.
Hellguns are
Range 24" Str3 AP5 Rapid fire
Hotshot Lasguns are
Range 18" str3 AP3 Rapid fire

It looks more like GW has made a new gun and given it a new name. And include some fluff for long term games so we know what happened to the Hellgun, Which is the name use in all the fluff for storm troopers guns.

I dont see how fluff applies to a RAW point of view.......

Hotshot lasguns are Hell guns (according to fluff)

Hell guns are modified Lasguns (according to fluff)

ergo Hotshot lasguns are Lasguns.....(according to fluff)

Lets assume the SM have a rule just like FRFSRF...... would it be that all Boltguns get an extra shot.......what would you call a group/class of guns that all shoot lasers....."Lasguns" seems like a good name for that group of weapons, not just a singular weapon, much like how saying M16s refer to both the M16A1 and the M16A2

and i went through that line of reasoning on page 2 with the others

Tri wrote:Ok if you don't want to use Heavy Bolters you want to use special ammo in your example. I will compare Storm-Bolters and Bolters. Storm-Bolters have the same range, strength and AP. The only difference is its Assault 2.

However you cannot use sternguard special ammo in a Storm-Bolter because it is not a bolter. It is a type of bolter in the same way a hot shot lasgun is a type of lasgun.

As far i'm concerned HotShot Lasguns are a completely new gun

Any "Bolt Weapon" carried by the model with Psycannon bolts gets to use the special ammo. Does that qualify Bolt weapons as being a group..........wouldnt that make Las-guns a group, just like Necron "gauss weapons"

If a Combi-bolter counts as bolter then why isnt a HS lasgun a lasgun?


Lasgun isnt a category of weapon, it refers to a 24" s3 ap- rapid fire gun. If FRFSRF said LasWEAPON, then yes you could use it.

But a hotshot lasgun is NOT a lasgun. You CANNOT ignore the fact they have seperate entries, that alone makes them different guns.

I guess we are at a stalemate until someone else can present something new to the conversation.........certainly gave me much to think about,......


Automatically Appended Next Post:

kill dem stunties wrote:Any "Bolt Weapon" carried by the model with Psycannon bolts gets to use the special ammo. Does that qualify Bolt weapons as being a group..........wouldnt that make Las-guns a group, just like Necron "gauss weapons"

If a Combi-bolter counts as bolter then why isnt a HS lasgun a lasgun?


Lasgun isnt a category of weapon, it refers to a 24" s3 ap- rapid fire gun. If FRFSRF said LasWEAPON, then yes you could use it.

But a hotshot lasgun is NOT a lasgun. You CANNOT ignore the fact they have seperate entries, that alone makes them different guns.

No because a Las-cannon would classify as a LasWeapon, and I am sure they didnt want that.....

the "seperate entries" train of thought was already shown to be flawed as Combi-bolters have seperate entries and yet are bolters, as well as every style of Leman Russ having a seperate entry, and yet all of them being classified as a Leman Russ

There is NOTHING to think about.

lasgun is NOT a category of weapons, it is one type of weapon.

The rule says lasguns.

Since lasguns ONLY refers to the aforementioned gun, i.e 24" s3 ap- rapidfire, it doesnt work for the entirely different gun, hotshot lasgun. Period.

Combie weapons are all boltguns with a single shot weapon built on. The weapon actually says that "bolter" can fire every turn.

kill dem stunties wrote:There is NOTHING to think about.

lasgun is NOT a category of weapons, it is one type of weapon.

The rule says lasguns.

Since lasguns ONLY refers to the aforementioned gun, i.e 24" s3 ap- rapidfire, it doesnt work for the entirely different gun, hotshot lasgun. Period.

That is a horrible simple minded approach to the matter.......it is no wonder that debates end with no resolution on these matters...... the point to these conversations is to present every possible angle and viewpoint to a problem and see what makes the most sense.

I am willing to at least consider both sides and be open to the chance that I might be wrong...........But if you are just going to blindly latch onto the version of the rules that does you the most good and instantly discount any opinion that might be different, then please just go play your game and let us do our thing without people shouting their opinions without contributing to the topic at hand.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tri wrote:Combie weapons are all boltguns with a single shot weapon built on. The weapon actually says that "bolter" can fire every turn.

and maby Hot Shot Lasguns are lasguns that are 18" with AP3........

still has seperate entries and stats from the weapons they are being compared to.......but you do have a point there.

I will send this out to GW and see what the reply says.......

DJ Illuminati wrote:

kill dem stunties wrote:There is NOTHING to think about.

lasgun is NOT a category of weapons, it is one type of weapon.

The rule says lasguns.

Since lasguns ONLY refers to the aforementioned gun, i.e 24" s3 ap- rapidfire, it doesnt work for the entirely different gun, hotshot lasgun. Period.

That is a horrible simple minded approach to the matter.......it is no wonder that debates end with no resolution on these matters...... the point to these conversations is to present every possible angle and viewpoint to a problem and see what makes the most sense.

I am willing to at least consider both sides and be open to the chance that I might be wrong...........But if you are just going to blindly latch onto the version of the rules that does you the most good and instantly discount any opinion that might be different, then please just go play your game and let us do our thing without people shouting their opinions without contributing to the topic at hand.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tri wrote:Combie weapons are all boltguns with a single shot weapon built on. The weapon actually says that "bolter" can fire every turn.

and maby Hot Shot Lasguns are lasguns that are 18" with AP3........

still has seperate entries and stats from the weapons they are being compared to.......but you do have a point there.

I will send this out to GW and see what the reply says.......

Good luck getting a reply

DJ Illuminati wrote:
That is a horrible simple minded approach to the matter.......it is no wonder that debates end with no resolution on these matters...... the point to these conversations is to present every possible angle and viewpoint to a problem and see what makes the most sense.

And he has thought about them, and is presenting the one that makes the most sense to him, as you are doing for yours. This entire forum is an adversarial system, not an inquisitorial one. If you want to change that, I don't recommend starting in a thread already in full swing. Perhaps try discussing the notion elsewhere.

DJ Illuminati wrote:I am willing to at least consider both sides and be open to the chance that I might be wrong...........But if you are just going to blindly latch onto the version of the rules that does you the most good and instantly discount any opinion that might be different, then please just go play your game and let us do our thing without people shouting their opinions without contributing to the topic at hand.

Adversarial system. This is how all the rules work, with some people jumping in and picking the side they believe is correct. I bet that over half of the people saying yes to the FRFSRF rule are guard players. We argue our point, you argue yours. If you bring up enough points that we are unable to address, you win. If we do, we win. If neither of us does, it's a stalemate and it's diced for every time it pops up until a FAQ or new codex comes out. It's the way this forum works.

DJ Illuminati wrote:and maby Hot Shot Lasguns are lasguns that are 18" with AP3........

And maybe Storm Bolters are Bolters that are assault 2.

Yes, they are. The thing is, they are now Hot Shot Lasguns as opposed to ordinary, run of the mill lasguns, meaning they do not get the rules for lasguns.

DJ Illuminati wrote:still has seperate entries and stats from the weapons they are being compared to.......but you do have a point there.

DJ Illuminati wrote:I will send this out to GW and see what the reply says.......

As with the Leman Russ argument, as well as the gauss, I have an answer. If a rule cannot be interpreted to target a specific weapon, any weapon with the terminology it refers to in its name gets it. This satisfies all rules to date. Leman Russ? Check. Hot Shot Lasguns? Check. Gauss Weapons? Check. Storm Bolters? Check.

And the DH codex decides to settle it by using purely internal rules, specifying what gets it, so it's irrelevant to our argument.

Pika_power wrote:
Adversarial system. This is how all the rules work, with some people jumping in and picking the side they believe is correct. I bet that over half of the people saying yes to the FRFSRF rule are guard players. We argue our point, you argue yours. If you bring up enough points that we are unable to address, you win. If we do, we win. If neither of us does, it's a stalemate and it's diced for every time it pops up until a FAQ or new codex comes out. It's the way this forum works.


As with the Leman Russ argument, as well as the gauss, I have an answer. If a rule cannot be interpreted to target a specific weapon, any weapon with the terminology it refers to in its name gets it. This satisfies all rules to date. Leman Russ? Check. Hot Shot Lasguns? Check. Gauss Weapons? Check. Storm Bolters? Check.

If it is a purely adversarial system, then let us all respond with a single blunt yes or no to the question and to hell with being open to understanding the other persons perspective. Shall I limit my thinking to simply assuming you are compleatly wrong if you dont agree with my first knee-jerk response to a rule, and nothing short of a new codex will change my mind. If that is the case then why bother to have a forum to discuss the issue at all. Lets just all wait for the next codex to come out as no matter what stance you or I take we are both wrong in each others eyes.

Adversarial systems are one of the fastest ways to turn a simple debate into a flame war.

I would like to see every possible aspect of the rule pondered and reviewed to the point that we have left no stone unturned........
Do I believe that GW changed the name for a reason.....Yes
Do I think the HS Lasgun is the same as a Lasgun...... no
Do I think it is possible that GW ment to have the term "lasgun" refer to multiple forms of guns (ie Bolt weapons).......yes
Do I think that RAW has gotten so ridiculous to the point that I could make the "Leman Russ" argument at a Tounament and expect to see my view upheld......yes

Where I get hung up on this rule is if Lasgun is a single weapon, or ment to be a group of simular weapons......much like a Leman Russ is a general term for all variations of the same tank. Many of the reasons that I have seen from bothsides of the debate refferance a common link between rules such as Stat profiles on the back page, or over analytical definitions of wording.

Yet many Codexs have rules that show that RAI may hold more credability than a poorly written rule that left a slight loophole.

Why would the call it a HS lasgun when Hellgun would be sufficient, or even to avoid confusion they could have called them Laser rifles, or Purgatus Carbines, or Blast Rifles, or some other name that has no relation to anything else in the codex. The fact that the name changed in the first place is what hold the most weight for me in my position.

as you can see an adversarial system is not effecient when the reasons for viewpoints are more complicated than a simple "No they cant" or "yes they can"
Maby through my long rant I may have shown someone a reason to believe what I see, or even to help others to explain to me better what it is that I am missing and why I am wrong.

I am just a simple RAI guy with RAW tendencies..........I am not saying you are wrong, just asking you to explain better why you are right........

Lol this is ridiculous.

Lasgun is an actual gun in the game. There is no RAW reason to believe any rule that applies to Lasguns should be extended to anything else without a specific clause stating such.

Edit: Similarily, rules that apply to only either Assault Cannons, Autocannons or Lascannons - despite all 3 having the word cannon in the name, cannot be extended to the others.

Dracos wrote:Lol this is ridiculous.

Lasgun is an actual gun in the game. There is no RAW reason to believe any rule that applies to Lasguns should be extended to anything else without a specific clause stating such.

Edit: Similarily, rules that apply to only either Assault Cannons, Autocannons or Lascannons - despite all 3 having the word cannon in the name, cannot be extended to the others.

I think were some of the confusion comes from is simple...... does a Twinlinked Assault Cannon count as an Assault Cannon??

It also has a different name and a different way of shooting....and thus is why so many of us are unsure as to how much a "Name" counts when figuring out what it is........can you see the logic jump that we see? An Assault Bike is a bike. An HK missile is a Missile, a Leman Russ Tank is a Tank.......could a Hotshot Lasgun be a lasgun by grouping???

Dracos wrote:Lol this is ridiculous.

Lasgun is an actual gun in the game. There is no RAW reason to believe any rule that applies to Lasguns should be extended to anything else without a specific clause stating such.

Edit: Similarily, rules that apply to only either Assault Cannons, Autocannons or Lascannons - despite all 3 having the word cannon in the name, cannot be extended to the others.

if you want to use that as an example then cite a rule that involves "cannons"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lacross wrote:
Counter Example:
Necrons: Gauss weapons:
note: gauss weapons do not have Gauss in their type but only in their name despite the change in profile.

there is precedent in GW not being through in their rules clarity.

Addition: The Gauss Weapons Rules do not specify that Weapons with Gauss in their name have Gauss Properties


Automatically Appended Next Post:
conclusion: I support this Argument

There is no "Lasgun-grouping".

In the cases where we need a grouping, we are given one.

In the case of Psybolts we are given a grouping, that aplies to that particular situation.
In the case of Gauss we are given a grouping that applies in that particular situation.

We are not given a grouping in the situation concerning the FRFSRF.

It is important to note that the groupings given only applies to the situation they are specified to apply to. Those grouping have zero relevance outside of the specific sets of circumstances described.

one way to look at it would be that in the SM codex Lysander's Bolter Drill states each type of bolter weapon that it affects. in the sternguard listing special ammunition also specifically states that you can use it in a combi weapon, so i would think that it would need to be expicitly stated to work with each weapon.

That is a horrible simple minded approach to the matter.......it is no wonder that debates end with no resolution on these matters...... the point to these conversations is to present every possible angle and viewpoint to a problem and see what makes the most sense.

^^ That is ridiculous.

The point ive been making is the only logical RAW approach.

There is no category of weapons named "lasguns" including anything with lasgun in the name.

There is a weapon entry in the back of your codex under "Lasgun"

The plural of "Lasgun" is "Lasguns"

A "Lasgun" is 24" s3 ap- rapid fire

A "Hotshot Lasgun" is 18" s3 ap3 rapid fire.

They are obviously Two entirely seperate weapons, FRFSRF would have to specifically say "hotshot" lasguns.

This is a game of ISIC and not IDSIC.

wait, if you're excluding Hotshot Lasguns just because they are "hotshot"(and have different statlines)

then can you also exclude Assault Terminators from any rules references to Terminators just because they have "Assault"?

Lacross wrote:wait, if you're excluding Hotshot Lasguns just because they are "hotshot"(and have different statlines)

then can you also exclude Assault Terminators from any rules references to Terminators just because they have "Assault"?

kirsanth wrote:So, the rules for "Terminator armor" refer to "terminators"(as many times as they refer to models in terminator armor).

Do the rules for FRFSRF refer to Hellguns or Hot Shot Lasguns? (Specifically.)

Terminators and assault terminator units are both made up of terminator models (see the stat line)

Lasgun and hotshot lasguns are two different guns because they don't share the same name. For the rule to work it would have to include hotshot lasguns.

Tri wrote:Terminators and assault terminator units are both made up of terminator models (see the stat line)

ah, but the names are different. One has Assault in front of it.
and yet the rules for terminators include assault terminators AND any other terminator armor wearer (ex: Chaplain) with different stat-lines.

Tri wrote:Lasgun and hotshot lasguns are two different guns because they don't share the same name. For the rule to work it would have to include hotshot lasguns.

the name argument thus does not work

huh, so the summary is that the rule is actually referencing a specific item/weapon rather than a item/weapon type?

and yet the rule doesn't seem to state it.

so this all appears to be assumptions made by both sides.

The writer for thinking that the readers would know.

and the readers for interpreting the writer's intent.

NO.

Sniper-las are called long-las. jeez.

They should benefit, because Storm Troopers are overpriced as hell with them.

Tacobake wrote:NO.

Sniper-las are called long-las. jeez.

huh? what?
Clarify?

DJ Illuminati wrote:
If it is a purely adversarial system, then let us all respond with a single blunt yes or no to the question and to hell with being open to understanding the other persons perspective. Shall I limit my thinking to simply assuming you are compleatly wrong if you dont agree with my first knee-jerk response to a rule, and nothing short of a new codex will change my mind. If that is the case then why bother to have a forum to discuss the issue at all. Lets just all wait for the next codex to come out as no matter what stance you or I take we are both wrong in each others eyes.

Wrong. We must consolidate our arguments and counter the other person's proof. Usually this gets done by page three, and it continues for another ten pages with each side restating their points, getting further and further away from the main point.

I have considered your views, I just consider mine to be the true ones. You consider mine to be wrong. It's how the argument works. We are trying to make our opinions understood to the opponent, and get them to agree with us.

DJ Illuminati wrote:
Adversarial systems are one of the fastest ways to turn a simple debate into a flame war.

Correct. However you aren't going to change it in this thread. May I recommend trying to change it slightly higher up? Even if this thread plays out with the flame defused, others will erupt. Take this issue to the top. But I'm getting off the topic.

DJ Illuminati wrote:
I would like to see every possible aspect of the rule pondered and reviewed to the point that we have left no stone unturned........

You present your ideas, I present mine. You shoot mine down, I shoot yours down. Assuming we have competent debaters on both sides, we should reach this conclusion.

DJ Illuminati wrote:
Do I believe that GW changed the name for a reason.....Yes

Well we're getting into RAI here, but even so, I think it could have been to avoid confusion in the WH/DH codices. Or they simply liked the name. Either way, there are conclusions other than that they wanted to clarify for FRFSRF. And let's face it: Surely they'd do something a tad less subtle if they wanted us to know that HSLG could be used for FRFSRF?

DJ Illuminati wrote:
Do I think the HS Lasgun is the same as a Lasgun...... no

Agreed here.

DJ Illuminati wrote:
Do I think it is possible that GW ment to have the term "lasgun" refer to multiple forms of guns (ie Bolt weapons).......yes

Ah, but here is your mistake. The bolt weapons you use as your primary example have been ruled in the opposite direction. Despite Storm Bolters and Bolters both being Bolters, one cannot fire special ammo. I agree with your point here. They meant for "Lasgun" to refer to multiple weapons, in the same way "Bolter" does: Without effects carrying over.

DJ Illuminati wrote:
Do I think that RAW has gotten so ridiculous to the point that I could make the "Leman Russ" argument at a Tounament and expect to see my view upheld......yes

Well to be fair, that's mostly in a rules forum where people love to argue about pointless things that will never come up. We had a person argue for twelve pages about sweeping advance Terminator Librarians. Was he justified? Sure. Would he try to play it in a game? I doubt it very much. Despite how it looks, this forum still possesses common sense when in a tabletop environment. (At least, I really hope that guy wasn't planning on arguing it in a game...)

DJ Illuminati wrote:
Where I get hung up on this rule is if Lasgun is a single weapon, or ment to be a group of simular weapons......much like a Leman Russ is a general term for all variations of the same tank. Many of the reasons that I have seen from bothsides of the debate refferance a common link between rules such as Stat profiles on the back page, or over analytical definitions of wording.

That's where the main point of contention lies. We don't know whether HSLG counts as a LG for FRFSRF. If we examine it in a vacuum, I'd agree to sit back and wait for an F.A.Q. But we did that with the Space Marine codex with Storm Bolters. We know the precedent. We can use the methods used there and apply them to this identical situation.

DJ Illuminati wrote:
Yet many Codexs have rules that show that RAI may hold more credability than a poorly written rule that left a slight loophole.

Unfortunately if we open up the RAI floodgates, we will be swept away and drown. RAI is all very well if it's bleedin' obvious (sweeping advance Librarians in Termie armour), but in cases where people genuinely get confused and decent RAI can be made for both sides, we have to go to RAW.

DJ Illuminati wrote:
Why would the call it a HS lasgun when Hellgun would be sufficient, or even to avoid confusion they could have called them Laser rifles, or Purgatus Carbines, or Blast Rifles, or some other name that has no relation to anything else in the codex. The fact that the name changed in the first place is what hold the most weight for me in my position.

It's GW. They change designs and names all the time. We don't have to assume it means something. Also, surely they would make it clearer? I've already covered alternatives for why they might do this in another paragraph.

DJ Illuminati wrote:
as you can see an adversarial system is not effecient when the reasons for viewpoints are more complicated than a simple "No they cant" or "yes they can"
Maby through my long rant I may have shown someone a reason to believe what I see, or even to help others to explain to me better what it is that I am missing and why I am wrong.

By adversarial, I don't mean sides which dissolve into yelling at each other. I mean opposite sides which calmly present arguments to each other and counter them. (A bit of an idealistic dream, I know.) I strive to open your eyes to my way of thinking, as you do to mine.

DJ Illuminati wrote:
I am just a simple RAI guy with RAW tendencies..........I am not saying you are wrong, just asking you to explain better why you are right........

Same here. But I feel that in this case, RAI and RAW rule against FRFSRF for HSLG, while you don't. So we must fight.

Lacross wrote:

Tri wrote:Terminators and assault terminator units are both made up of terminator models (see the stat line)

ah, but the names are different. One has Assault in front of it.
and yet the rules for terminators include assault terminators AND any other terminator armor wearer (ex: Chaplain) with different stat-lines.

Tri wrote:Lasgun and hotshot lasguns are two different guns because they don't share the same name. For the rule to work it would have to include hotshot lasguns.

the name argument thus does not work

huh, so the summary is that the rule is actually referencing a specific item/weapon rather than a item/weapon type?

and yet the rule doesn't seem to state it.

so this all appears to be assumptions made by both sides.

The writer for thinking that the readers would know.

and the readers for interpreting the writer's intent.

You Have Failed. StatLine reads ...

TERMINATOR SQUAD
Terminator Sergeant WS4 BS4 S4 T4 W1 I4 A2 Ld9 Sv2+
Terminator ---------- WS4 BS4 S4 T4 W1 I4 A2 Ld9 Sv2+

TERMINATOR ASSAULT SQUAD
Terminator Sergeant WS4 BS4 S4 T4 W1 I4 A2 Ld9 Sv2+
Terminator ---------- WS4 BS4 S4 T4 W1 I4 A2 Ld9 Sv2+

Both units are made up of Terminators (models) have terminator armour but have different Weapons layouts in the different Terminator units.

Ah, thanks. Now I understand. Even though the squads have different names, they're the same models in them.

The difference comes in the squad, and what weapons they may take due to the squad. But the actual marines in both squads are exactly the same, right down to the last letter in the last name.

Thanks Tri, that clears that misconception up. Now we're on the home straight.

Tri wrote:

You Have Failed. StatLine reads ...

TERMINATOR SQUAD
Terminator Sergeant WS4 BS4 S4 T4 W1 I4 A2 Ld9 Sv2+
Terminator ---------- WS4 BS4 S4 T4 W1 I4 A2 Ld9 Sv2+

TERMINATOR ASSAULT SQUAD
Terminator Sergeant WS4 BS4 S4 T4 W1 I4 A2 Ld9 Sv2+
Terminator ---------- WS4 BS4 S4 T4 W1 I4 A2 Ld9 Sv2+

Both units are made up of Terminators (models) have terminator armour but have different Weapons layouts in the different Terminator units.

well,since the wargear for both of them also reads that they have terminator armor the names and statlines are then irrelevant when considering the rules for terminator armor.

now, comparing to FRFSRF, the internal interchanging of the terms between uses of the word terminators and models in terminator armor(as clarified in a previous thread) would support the argument that "hotshot" LG are also LGs.

(and since we're nitpicking exact rules wordings)
in addition the Lumbering Behemoth Rule(pg.48 IG) also contains similar wording in comparison to FRFSRF. In which the rule applies to some Generic Name(Leman Russ) but you are then presented with a multitude of differently named vehicles with different statlines yet also sharing the same name.

Pika_power wrote:
Same here. But I feel that in this case, RAI and RAW rule against FRFSRF for HSLG, while you don't. So we must fight.

It is too bad we must......it seems like we would get along quite well....lol.

Lacross wrote:now, comparing to FRFSRF, the internal interchanging of the terms between uses of the word terminators and models in terminator armor(as clarified in a previous thread) would support the argument that "hotshot" LG are also LGs.

Except, as I have requoted myself saying, the actual "Terminator armor" rules refer to the wearer as "terminators" (as often as they are refered to as "models in terminator armor").

Do the "Lasgun" rules refer to or apply to "Hotshot Lasguns"? Or perhaps the "Hotshot Lasgun" rules refer to or apply to "Lasguns"?

As I read it, they do not.

I am really not understanding the comparison.

the example is reversed in the case of Terminators

how it applies is the usage of naming conventions to apply Terminator Qualities to a unit and thus the unit includes Terminator in its name.

FRFSRF refrences lasguns.

Hot-Shot Lasguns have Lasgun in its name.

regular lasguns also do not state FRFSRF rules although most people would understand that FRFSRF applies.

Compare Lumbering Behemoth as affecting all Leman Russes that are named Leman Russ *(some name)

FRFSRF thus affects Hot-Shot LG given that no equipment has lasgun as a type.

But the rules for "Terminator armor" itself use "models in terminator armor" and "terminators" synonymously.

Do the rules for either gun explain that they are in fact the other gun, or that the names can be used interchangably?

That is what I missed.

both assault and regular terminators wear terminator armor, and thus follow all rules for terminators.

Special CCWs are still CCWs by the rules, and thus follow the basic rules for CCWs (mainly gaining +1 attack in pairs).

Hot Shot Lasguns, aside from the name, share no characteristics with lasguns. They aren't part of a common group. Absent a CCW style stating that Hotshots follow all the rules for basic lasguns, or some shared base like terminators, those comparisons simply aren't accurate.

Rather, hotshot lasguns are more like storm bolters: in the fluff they are related, but the rules never conflate the two.

The Angry Commissar wrote:i think they can because why would GW change their name from hellguns (sounds cool) to hot-shot lasguns (not so cool) if they were not supposed to be able to utilize that order. also according to lore; hot-shot lasguns are Sniper variant lasguns with greater stopping power and range.

Lacross wrote:

Tacobake wrote:NO.

Sniper-las are called long-las. jeez.

huh? what?
Clarify?

hot-shot Lasguns have nothing in common with Lasguns and Storm Troopers have nothing in common with Infantry Platoons. hot-shot lasguns are not Sniper variants, Sniper variants are called "long-las" because they are still not ballistic, they are comparable to Tau Pulse Rifles if anything.

Also, from now on, whatever it is I just agree with Polonius unless he is complementing my lousy painting.

Terminators from a Terminator squad and Terminators from a Terminator assault are identical, right down to the names. So when one is talked about being affected, both are.

To put it in the context of Orks, it's the same as if there were a rule in the Ork codex saying Ork Nobs get +5 strength on the turn of a waargh. The Nobs in a nob mob and the nobs in the Boyz mob would both get it. Contrast how the Meganobs wouldn't get it, because they are different. You are arguing that the Terminator situation is the Meganob one, when really it is the normal nob one.

Ok this is getting ridiculous. I think everything that actually added anything useful to this conversation was already said long ago. Y'all just beating a dead horse now.

FoxPhoenix135 wrote:Ok this is getting ridiculous. I think everything that actually added anything useful to this conversation was already said long ago. Y'all just beating a dead horse now.

Well some people breath life into the idea again and we must make sure its firmly beaten out.

FoxPhoenix135 wrote:Ok this is getting ridiculous. I think everything that actually added anything useful to this conversation was already said long ago. Y'all just beating a dead horse now.

Hey, you're ahead of schedule. We've got the lock-summoners written in for page seven onwards. For the next two pages, we're sticking to company policy of throwing the same ideas back and forth until something interesting happens.

Either way, we haven't reached a proper conclusion yet, and the other side hasn't yet responded to the terminator issue that we shut-down.

Oh ok... didn't know that everything is going according to plan! I'll check back when this post gets a few more pages

Well as to the RAI arguement, the Author of the codex was asked about FRFSRF and HSL.
He said "no they don't"

So RAW says no, and RAI says no.
I'd say that people shouldn't hold their breath on a FAQ granting it.

Can you confirm this? Is it written somewhere or did you just recall it on a whim?

RaW: No
RaI: No

"A heavy bolter is not a bolter, therefore a hot-shot las gun is not a lasgun" is pretty much the end of that :3


Automatically Appended Next Post:

FoxPhoenix135 wrote:Can you confirm this? Is it written somewhere or did you just recall it on a whim?

Does it honestly matter? RaW says no, so it is no. If we played RaI (aka Fluff) My Space Marine should be able to kill 9001 Guardsmen and my Inquisitor Should be able to just call Exterminatus Turn 1

Ah! Prodigal Gwar! returns. I trust his judgement. End of discussion eh?

Well I'd like to hear a reply from the affirming side to see if they've got anything to say. Give it another day.

Does the FRFSRF specifically say "Any model with a lasgun" or "Models with any lasgun"? If it is the former then I believe it is only referring to the single gun known as the Lasgun. If it is the latter then I believe it then applies to the Hotshot Lasgun.

My logic being that while the hotshot lasgun may qualify as a type of lasgun, without the qualifier of "any lasgun" then I'm pretty sure the RAI is the same as the RAW as in NO FRFSRF applicability.

As I don't have a codex to look at I'll need that little bit of information before I can decide one way or another.

Lasgun is not a group of weapons, but a single weapon described in the IG book.

As such, any rules that refer to a Lasgun, refer only to that weapon. In order to extend a rule to other weapons (regardless of how close in name they are to a Lasgun) the rule would have to specifically mention them.

Similarily, heavy bolters are not bolters for the purposes of special rules that mention bolters.

MrDrumMachine wrote:As I don't have a codex to look at I'll need that little bit of information before I can decide one way or another.

Here are the relevant parts:

IG Codex p.36 wrote:...models firing lasguns fire three shots, rather than just two. If the unit did not move in its Movement phase they fire two shots with their lasguns at an enemy up to 24" away...

thank you unistoo, since that is the case I'll have to say that FRFSRF does not apply as the sentence would read (if we were talking about a single model rather than multipel) "a model firing a lasgun," which to me means it applies only to the weapon known as the Lasgun.

Well in any case, majority rule voted "no" in the pole above. That's evidence enough for me.

im in the camp that thinks that a storm bolter and a bolter should both be able to take special ammo. thats why i think you should be able to FRFSRF with the hotshot

Bad news for you: Games Workshop is in the seperate-weapon-Stormbolter camp.

Its such a shame a unit of (non-terminator) marines all stormbolter armed would be nice, but its such a big downgrade for sternguard, who're naturally the only ones who can do it.

Really they need to be -5 points for stormbolters...then we might see that option more.

Jack

I think it mainly applies to deamonhunters, whose Grey Knights standard power-armor troops have stormbolters.

Pika_power wrote:Bad news for you: Games Workshop is in the seperate-weapon-Stormbolter camp.

it turns out that im ok with that. all i wanted to give my termie captain's storm bolter hellfire rounds. it seems that you can already do that. with that being the case the hotshot will prolly be FAQ'd saying they cant. i think they should because S3 is garbage. AP3 wont do squat if you fail 90% of the rolls-to-wound

The Angry Commissar wrote:

Pika_power wrote:Bad news for you: Games Workshop is in the seperate-weapon-Stormbolter camp.

it turns out that im ok with that. all i wanted to give my termie captain's storm bolter hellfire rounds. it seems that you can already do that. with that being the case it will prolly be FAQ'd saying they cant. i think they should because S3 is garbage. AP3 wont do squat if you fail 90% of the rolls-to-wound

No, you can buy the hellfire rounds, but you won't be able to fire them.

Gwar! wrote:

The Angry Commissar wrote:

Pika_power wrote:Bad news for you: Games Workshop is in the seperate-weapon-Stormbolter camp.

it turns out that im ok with that. all i wanted to give my termie captain's storm bolter hellfire rounds. it seems that you can already do that. with that being the case it will prolly be FAQ'd saying they cant. i think they should because S3 is garbage. AP3 wont do squat if you fail 90% of the rolls-to-wound

No, you can buy the hellfire rounds, but you won't be able to fire them.

I've wanted to use this for a while ....

Wait... How does a captain get the "special ammunition" wargear? I'm confused.

That's like the 3rd time It has been used because of me. I officially declare this a new meme!

Red_Lives wrote:Wait... How does a captain get the "special ammunition" wargear? I'm confused.

Space marine Chapter Masters or Captains can Take Hellfire rounds at 10pts. "Note that Hellfire rounds can only be used in a bolter"

Red_Lives wrote:Wait... How does a captain get the "special ammunition" wargear? I'm confused.

Captains and Chapter masters may take Hellfire Rounds, but they may only be fired from a bolter. They can buy them even if they have no weapons that can use them. They can even buy them if they take terminator Armour, and thus CANNOT under any circumstances fire them.

well Derp guess i missed that one. ( i mean who takes generic captains or Chapter masters anyway?)

Red_Lives wrote:well Derp guess i missed that one. ( i mean who takes generic captains or Chapter masters anyway?)

No-one, Especialy Chaplains. Blood Angels have Whats his name, and Cassius is CHEAPER than a normal Chaplain with better equipment and stats, so yeah...

Gwar! wrote:

Red_Lives wrote:well Derp guess i missed that one. ( i mean who takes generic captains or Chapter masters anyway?)

No-one, Especialy Chaplains. Blood Angels have Whats his name, and Cassius is CHEAPER than a normal Chaplain with better equipment and stats, so yeah...

your a LIAR!!!

He's 10 points more as a regular chaplain is 115 with a combi flamer and Cassius is 125!!!

All special characters are better then the generic characters. Its why Eldar plays like my self get so much stick for always using Eldrad.

Red_Lives wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

Red_Lives wrote:well Derp guess i missed that one. ( i mean who takes generic captains or Chapter masters anyway?)

No-one, Especialy Chaplains. Blood Angels have Whats his name, and Cassius is CHEAPER than a normal Chaplain with better equipment and stats, so yeah...

your a LIAR!!!

He's 10 points more as a regular chaplain is 115 with a combi flamer and Cassius is 125!!!

Cassiuses Combi Flamer is Master Crafted (+15), has Hellfire rounds (+10), T6 (+Hell if I know) and feel No Pain +(Lots). So yeah, Cassius is cheaper

Except normal chaplains can't take hellfire rounds! So that value turns to X as well!!

Red_Lives wrote:Except normal chaplains can't take hellfire rounds! So that value turns to X as well!!

They can't take Master Crafting either, but I am saying that for +10 points you get so, so much, that Cassius is by and far a Cheaper Choice.

It would make absolutely no difference if you chose to fire special ammunition out of a stormbolter as the ammo has a weapons profile.
using it would change the stormbolter to a rapid fire weapon with the relevant range/strength/ap of the round.
All you've done is make your sternguard 5pts more expensive.
well done!

No!

marv335 wrote:It would make absolutely no difference if you chose to fire special ammunition out of a stormbolter as the ammo has a weapons profile.
using it would change the stormbolter to a rapid fire weapon with the relevant range/strength/ap of the round.
All you've done is make your sternguard 5pts more expensive.
well done!

Except, Errrm, READ THE RULES FOR THE SPECIAL AMMOS!

They can only be Fired out of a Boltgun.

Each special ammunition type replaces the boltgun profile (including boltguns that are part of a combi-weapon) with the one shown here

Boltgun. Not Storm Bolter, Not heavy Bolter. Boltgun.

And from the Hellfire rounds:

If a model carries hellfire rounds, replace their boltgun's profile (including a boltgun on a Space Marine bike) with the following.

See, BOLTGUN!

marv335 wrote:It would make absolutely no difference if you chose to fire special ammunition out of a stormbolter as the ammo has a weapons profile.
using it would change the stormbolter to a rapid fire weapon with the relevant range/strength/ap of the round.
All you've done is make your sternguard 5pts more expensive.
well done!

No by taking a Storm bolter you've made them cost 5pts more and they have not got a "Boltgun" with a standard profile to replace so cannot fire the special ammo

I knew that was coming.

Next someone starts trying to argue stormbolters can use FRFSRF too.

I think you missed my point there Gwar!
While the rules are very clear that the rounds may only be fired from a bolter, my point is that even if you could fire them from a heavy/stormbolter, the ammunition has its own profile which would not change thus making it a moot point.

kirsanth wrote:I knew that was coming.

Next someone starts trying to argue stormbolters can use FRFSRF too.

That's ridiculous.


Lascannons can though

People read the rules the ammo has a profile BUT it can only replace a BOLTGUNs profile (including combi-weapons as mention in its rules)

Well sure, they both start with "las".

That makes as much sense as the rest of this, anyway.

( I still think we need a facepalm ork icon /)

hmm that makes sense. i think you should be able to fire them from from a certain storm bolters like captains, chaplains, etc. it would be legit but then you get the people who will buy all their sternguard storm bolters with hellfire which is total cheese.

The Angry Commissar wrote:hmm that makes sense. i think you should be able to fire them from from a certain storm bolters like captains, chaplains, etc. it would be legit but then you get the people who will buy all their sternguard storm bolters with hellfire which is total cheese.

One more time ....

Page "Special Issue Ammunition: Each boltgun-armed model in a Sterguard Veteran squad automaticlly comes with several special ammunition types. //use//. Each special ammunition type replaces the boltgun profile (including boltguns part of a combi-weapon) with the one shown here. //more use rule//"

Page 100 "Hellfire Rounds:
//fluff//. If a model carries hellfire rounds, replace their boltgun's profile (including a boltgun on a Space Marine bike) with the following. //profile//
Note that Hellfire rounds can only be used in boltguns"

... So to recap You CAN NOT use special ammo in stormbolters.

This thread should have been subdivided into 3 smaller threads ages ago...

So far, the topics have ranged from:
Hot-shot lasguns and FRFSRF

to

Terminators and Terminator Armor

to

Bolters, storm-bolters, heavy bolters, etc and special ammo

and
Lacannons and FRFSRF (Ok this one was a joke but still)

I think it is pretty clear- Stormtrooper's HS Lasguns cannot use FRFSRF. That should be end of the thread, if nobody can bring anything new to the table.

1 is this.
2 was done.
3 is simple RAW
4 is this.

The last bit is well... yea. YMDC.

We have been focusing upon the wrong words. I now offically change my stance and the Hot shots Do NOT get the FRFSRF Rule.

This is because the orders rules apply to guardsmen. Stormtroopers are not guardsmen but rather they are adeptus arbites. They are never reffered to as a guardsmen only as storm troopers.

Have fun.

The Angry Commissar wrote:my point was that why would they bother to rename it (other than GW flippancy) if they wouldnt be able to use the order?

I don't think they renamed it... They created the HSlas... Hellgun =/= HSlas. I don't even think hellguns would work with FRFSRF.

As to whether it applies, they say lasguns. So we go into the endless circular argument of RAI and RAW, and the square being a rectangle but the rectangle not being a square.

I personally don't think it applies, since a lasgun is a lasgun is a lasgun with STR3 AP0. A lasgun is defined as a weapon with aforementioned stats in the summary. A hotshot lasgun is not STR3 AP0 and therefore is not a lasgun in the strictest sense of the word.

That being said, I wash my hands of this weirdness.

Rico.

Edit: Fox said it. How did we miss it? Perhaps it was the endless backchatter...

focusedfire wrote:We have been focusing upon the wrong words. I now offically change my stance and the Hot shots Do NOT get the FRFSRF Rule.

This is because the orders rules apply to guardsmen. Stormtroopers are not guardsmen but rather they are adeptus arbites. They are never reffered to as a guardsmen only as storm troopers.

Have fun.

R.I.P.

pages 1-6

That is epic. Leave it to focusedfire to find the loophole we all missed. Case closed, Sherlock.

Beautiful. Can I get a quote to give to people?

How about-
Dakka YMDC: spending six pages of fighting over an issue that can be answered by a single post pointing out the one word in the rules you missed.

focusedfire wrote:We have been focusing upon the wrong words. I now offically change my stance and the Hot shots Do NOT get the FRFSRF Rule.

This is because the orders rules apply to guardsmen. Stormtroopers are not guardsmen but rather they are adeptus arbites. They are never reffered to as a guardsmen only as storm troopers.

Have fun.

You're absolutely right. It is the only order that does not say 'unit' when it gives the description of the command. Someone will still argue that Stormtroopers are a 'type' of Guardsmen, I'm sure. But I think it's a fair point.

------------------------------------
Nitpicking, but Stormtroopers are not Adeptus Arbites. Adeptus Arbites are the police force of the imperium, and not affiliated with the Imperial Guard. It's like comparing the New York Police Department and the 121st Infantry Battalion.

This being said, Stormtroopers, Adeptus Arbites, Commissars, etc. are all products of the same training facility. This is called the Schola Progenium, and is essentially where all the kids of rich/powerful folks get trained (as opposed to enlisting and going to Boot Camp).

DoW

DogOfWar wrote:as opposed to enlisting and going to Boot Camp

People enlist to the Imperial Guard? I always thought they just rounded them up and executed those who refused for Heresy.

I was lied to!

In addition to being the rich/powerful folks, you also get the orphaned kids of the rich and powerful folks in the Schola Progenium.

Gwar! wrote:People enlist to the Imperial Guard? I always thought they just rounded them up and executed those who refused for Heresy.

I was lied to!

'Enlisting' is the preferred terminology, of course...

In addition to being the rich/powerful folks, you also get the orphaned kids of the rich and powerful folks in the Schola Progenium.

You are absolutely correct, sir, I had forgotten that little tidbit. Actually I think it is very likely true that their parents might have to be dead, but I'm not certain.

By the way, do you think models with hotshot lasguns can be given the FRFSRF order?

DoW

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:Beautiful. Can I get a quote to give to people?

How about, "I was wrong."

DogOfWar wrote:Nitpicking, but Stormtroopers are not Adeptus Arbites. Adeptus Arbites are the police force of the imperium, and not affiliated with the Imperial Guard. It's like comparing the New York Police Department and the 121st Infantry Battalion.

Sorry about that. It is that they come from the same place and the Arbites wre represented in 4th ed by Iquisitional Storms. I sometimes slip like that. Thanks for the correc. tion

Hey no worries, thank you for finally finding an argument I find concrete enough to change my mind about FRFSRF. Much obliged!

DoW

DogOfWar wrote:By the way, do you think models with hotshot lasguns can be given the FRFSRF order?

DoW

What other Guardsman unit can take hotshot lasguns? Answer: None

Bolter drill (for lysander) lists each type of bolter out instead of just saying bolters.

Vulkan also specifically lists heavy and normal flamers as being twin linked instead of just flamers.

So hotshot lasguns =! lasguns


Ofc as always some problems with this:

Assault terminators would not be considered terminators then.

Yay GW rules.

Overall I would say that FRFSRF does not work with hotshot las guns.



BTW: Does anyone even use stormtroopers anyways? (I mean come on, they are terrible.)

Actually, we sorted the Terminator issue a while back. I can't be bothered explaining it, so feel free to trail through these seven pages looking.

Ironhide wrote:

DogOfWar wrote:By the way, do you think models with hotshot lasguns can be given the FRFSRF order?

DoW

What other Guardsman unit can take hotshot lasguns? Answer: None

I'm really hoping you're being facetious... because I certainly was.

If not, have a look-see at the title of the thread that started this 7 pages of fun!

DoW

Tri wrote:

The Angry Commissar wrote:hmm that makes sense. i think you should be able to fire them from from a certain storm bolters like captains, chaplains, etc. it would be legit but then you get the people who will buy all their sternguard storm bolters with hellfire which is total cheese.

One more time ....

Page "Special Issue Ammunition: Each boltgun-armed model in a Sterguard Veteran squad automaticlly comes with several special ammunition types. //use//. Each special ammunition type replaces the boltgun profile (including boltguns part of a combi-weapon) with the one shown here. //more use rule//"

Page 100 "Hellfire Rounds:
//fluff//. If a model carries hellfire rounds, replace their boltgun's profile (including a boltgun on a Space Marine bike) with the following. //profile//
Note that Hellfire rounds can only be used in boltguns"

... So to recap You CAN NOT use special ammo in stormbolters.

lol i understood i was just saying....

The Angry Commissar wrote:
lol i understood i was just saying....

I think i had just glazed over at that point and was attack any one going near the idea of them being able to fire it.

DogOfWar wrote:

Ironhide wrote:

DogOfWar wrote:By the way, do you think models with hotshot lasguns can be given the FRFSRF order?

DoW

What other Guardsman unit can take hotshot lasguns? Answer: None

I'm really hoping you're being facetious... because I certainly was.

If not, have a look-see at the title of the thread that started this 7 pages of fun!

DoW

Yeah. I figured the laughing ork would give it away. After 7 pages of arguing and then having someone point out the obivious miss, it's really funny!

Ironhide wrote:Yeah. I figured the laughing ork would give it away. After 7 pages of arguing and then having someone point out the obivious miss, it's really funny!

Amen, my transforming friend, amen indeed.

DoW

focusedfire wrote:This is because the orders rules apply to guardsmen.

There is no such limitation. From the "FRFSRF" special rule: "If the order is successfully issued, the ordered unit immediately shoots at any visible target..." Codex:IG p. 36 (emphasis added).

From the "Imperial Guard Orders" rules: "To issue an order the officer must declare which order he is attempting to use and select a single friendly non-vehicle unit within his command radius to carry out the order." Codex:IG p. 29 (emphasis added).

Neither rule limits this order to targeting units consisting solely of "guardsmen".

The reference to guardsmen comes from the fluff description of the order. It creates no limitation. If you argue that FRFSRF can only be used on units of guardsmen because of its fluff description, you must also be suggesting that the "Incoming!" order cannot be issued to a unit that is not in terrain modeled to represent trenches or foxholes.

-GK

GiantKiller wrote:

focusedfire wrote:This is because the orders rules apply to guardsmen.

There is no such limitation. From the "FRFSRF" special rule: "If the order is successfully issued, the ordered unit immediately shoots at any visible target..." Codex:IG p. 36 (emphasis added).

From the "Imperial Guard Orders" rules: "To issue an order the officer must declare which order he is attempting to use and select a single friendly non-vehicle unit within his command radius to carry out the order." Codex:IG p. 29 (emphasis added).

Neither rule limits this order to targeting units consisting solely of "guardsmen".

The reference to guardsmen comes from the fluff description of the order. It creates no limitation. If you argue that FRFSRF can only be used on units of guardsmen because of its fluff description, you must also be suggesting that the "Incoming!" order cannot be issued to a unit that is not in terrain modeled to represent trenches or foxholes.

-GK

True, but it is of note that this is the only order that specifically mentions 'guardsmen,' fluff or otherwise. That's a strong RAI argument in my book, but only if you feel the RAW isn't clear enough.

DoW

Tri wrote:

The Angry Commissar wrote:
lol i understood i was just saying....

I think i had just glazed over at that point and was attack any one going near the idea of them being able to fire it.

fair enough.

Why is this thread still going when the FAQ answers the question...???


Don't tell me Dakka didn't notice the IG FAQ...

Elessar wrote:Why is this thread still going when the FAQ answers the question...???


Don't tell me Dakka didn't notice the IG FAQ...

We did, but considering only me, you and The Angry Commissar have posted since it came out...

lol wow thanks for telling me it came out guys. i dont feel stupid or anything...