So I see nothing against this tactic, but I wanted to run it past the forum before trying it in games:

Can you take a twin-linked weapon, and another weapon of the same type on a single crisis suit? In the old codex this was explicity forbidden to do, but the new book harbors no such restrictions.

I want to take a twin linked flamer/flamer suit team for some cheap burning deep strike shenanigans vs horde armies.

input appreciated.

You are an evil evil man if you take that suit, but according to everyone so far it is fine for now, but people think good old GW is gonna spoil the fun and FAQ it (I pray not as my bro plays green tide and I would love to see the look on his face with that suit unit).

What about taking just a flamer and a flamer? it doesn't specifically say anything about buying 2 equal twin-link, only that the second cost is if you buy it twin linked right?

That's true but I want a twin linked one as part of the setup.

Edit: blarg reading comprehension failing me.

Just wana see does anyone else agree that suits can take 2x the same weapon?

I believe you can take 2 of the same weapon.

The rules as worded don't seem to mandate that whenever you take 2 of the same weapon, you must use the second points cost and count them as twin linked.

In the previous codex, this restriction was not covered by the rules regarding twin-linking, but by the statement explaining the armoury which said:

"No model can pick the same item twice"

Since that restriction is not listed in the new armoury, I see no reason you can't select the same item twice.

 Drunkspleen wrote:
I believe you can take 2 of the same weapon.

The rules as worded don't seem to mandate that whenever you take 2 of the same weapon, you must use the second points cost and count them as twin linked.

This is correct. RAW you can. Whether or not GW changes it when they release a proper FAQ remains to be seen.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Drunkspleen wrote:
I believe you can take 2 of the same weapon.

The rules as worded don't seem to mandate that whenever you take 2 of the same weapon, you must use the second points cost and count them as twin linked.

This is correct. RAW you can. Whether or not GW changes it when they release a proper FAQ remains to be seen.

Translation: Use magnets.

 Drunkspleen wrote:
"No model can pick the same item twice"

Since that restriction is not listed in the new armoury, I see no reason you can't select the same item twice.

I would consider that rule to be redundant; you are not normally allowed to pick the same option multiple times, you need explicit permission to be able to do that, rather than a specific restriction to prevent it.

Pyrian wrote:
I would consider that rule to be redundant; you are not normally allowed to pick the same option multiple times, you need explicit permission to be able to do that, rather than a specific restriction to prevent it.

So which other instances of the battlesuit weapon list have that rule? Because it doesn't matter if some other codex says you can't pick an option twice, just like it doesn't matter if some codices have ATSKNF as an army-wide rule. Tau don't have either.

Pyrian wrote:
I would consider that rule to be redundant; you are not normally allowed to pick the same option multiple times, you need explicit permission to be able to do that, rather than a specific restriction to prevent it.

Citation Required

Seriously can you back this claim up at all? It would prevent tau units with access to drones from picking multiples of the same drone type, and render pairs of lightning claws almost impossible to take for other codices.

Given that, I think unless you support your claim with actual rules, I won't be playing that way.

edit: To clarify, you have permission to pick multiple times from the same list, which means you can pick from it without limitation, including the same thing multiple times, a specific restriction against picking the same thing multiple times is needed to prevent it.

The way I see it, you can take a twin-linked and vanilla version of the same gun on the same model, sure, no problems. It'll get pretty expensive to do so though.
There's nothing stopping you from taking all 3 vanilla on the same model either, but this would be stupid as you have no means of firing all 3 at once.

Given those two points, I don't see anything wrong with how it's worded right now.

As far as I can see, it says "...the second is for two weapons (counting as a twin-linked weapon of that type)."

So I see it as fine for a suit to have a TL and standard Burst cannon for example, and a commander with his 4 hardpoints to have two TL BC's.

Seems ripe for an FAQ, but also seems to me it would have been done just as quickly as that overly spammable missile pod change

 Drunkspleen wrote:

Pyrian wrote:
I would consider that rule to be redundant; you are not normally allowed to pick the same option multiple times, you need explicit permission to be able to do that, rather than a specific restriction to prevent it.

Citation Required

Seriously can you back this claim up at all? It would prevent tau units with access to drones from picking multiples of the same drone type, and render pairs of lightning claws almost impossible to take for other codices.

Given that, I think unless you support your claim with actual rules, I won't be playing that way.

edit: To clarify, you have permission to pick multiple times from the same list, which means you can pick from it without limitation, including the same thing multiple times, a specific restriction against picking the same thing multiple times is needed to prevent it.

What Pyrian is asking for is there. There IS an explicit permission to pick the same option multiple times. The only thing making Tau players unsure is that there USED to be an explicit restriction to prevent it.

Deathrain + pathfinder just got ugly. No missile drones but you can still get your missile spam

Or you have a need for dead specials 2 Plasma rifles + ATS= The new Burning Eye Special.

I think suit names are going to get a major overhaul.

I don't think there is a restriction on this except the limits on how much you can buy. Iirc standard crisis suits can take up yo 3 items there so a twin linked framer, and a flamer is 3 items.

That's how I read it as well. This new book allows for ultra specialized suits.

I see no problem with picking the same weapon 3 times. RAW, there's no conflict at all.

My issue comes up with using 2 of the same, non-twin-linked weapons (2 standard plasma rifles or 2 standard missile pods, etc). As much as I would love it, I really don't see how it can be justified.
The line: "...the second is for two weapons (counting as a twin-linked weapon of that type)." seems clear to me. If you purchase two of the same weapon, it counts as a twin-linked weapon of that type.

Best bet for now - don't permanently assemble suits with 2 of the same weapon, and ask permission before using it in a list. I'm a Tau player and I would love for my army to be as powerful as it can...but this is pushing it. Even RAW, there seems to be evidence that you can't do it (let alone RAI).

Unfortunately, there's no definite answer right now and it'll probably be a while before we get one.

Yeah I see valid points on both sides. GW needs to think ahead and make clearer statements or add more statements to support one sided sentences. They must be charged per word printed. paulsongames.com makes a good twin link plasma gun

Btw, it says that twin-linked weapons count as TWO choices for those who missed the note.

Dracoknight wrote:
Btw, it says that twin-linked weapons count as TWO choices for those who missed the note.

That could just be referring to the up to 3 choices written in the suit sections.

anyway magnets all the way

 Purifier wrote:

 Drunkspleen wrote:

Pyrian wrote:
I would consider that rule to be redundant; you are not normally allowed to pick the same option multiple times, you need explicit permission to be able to do that, rather than a specific restriction to prevent it.

Citation Required

Seriously can you back this claim up at all? It would prevent tau units with access to drones from picking multiples of the same drone type, and render pairs of lightning claws almost impossible to take for other codices.

Given that, I think unless you support your claim with actual rules, I won't be playing that way.

edit: To clarify, you have permission to pick multiple times from the same list, which means you can pick from it without limitation, including the same thing multiple times, a specific restriction against picking the same thing multiple times is needed to prevent it.

What Pyrian is asking for is there. There IS an explicit permission to pick the same option multiple times. The only thing making Tau players unsure is that there USED to be an explicit restriction to prevent it.

What used to be does not matter, only what is

Siphen wrote:

My issue comes up with using 2 of the same, non-twin-linked weapons (2 standard plasma rifles or 2 standard missile pods, etc). As much as I would love it, I really don't see how it can be justified.
The line: "...the second is for two weapons (counting as a twin-linked weapon of that type)." seems clear to me. If you purchase two of the same weapon, it counts as a twin-linked weapon of that type.

I agree. I don't think you can have two of the same weapon and not have them twin-linked.

This thread just made my day. The last codex specifically says you can't. This one says nothing of that so I say green light to double plasma gun fun time.

Neroman wrote:
This thread just made my day. The last codex specifically says you can't. This one says nothing of that so I say green light to double plasma gun fun time.

It specifically gives different price for a pair of weapons though. Note that it doesn't say the price is for twin-linked, it says it is for two weapons (which count as twin-linked.)

 Crimson wrote:

Siphen wrote:

My issue comes up with using 2 of the same, non-twin-linked weapons (2 standard plasma rifles or 2 standard missile pods, etc). As much as I would love it, I really don't see how it can be justified.
The line: "...the second is for two weapons (counting as a twin-linked weapon of that type)." seems clear to me. If you purchase two of the same weapon, it counts as a twin-linked weapon of that type.

I agree. I don't think you can have two of the same weapon and not have them twin-linked.

What that statement means is you have two choices for what you can do with two upgrade choices:

Two single weapons at X points.

One twin-linked weapon at Y points which is cheaper than X.

The "counts as two choices" limit doesn't say anything about it being the ONLY way you can do it, it just says that if you take the cheaper twin-linked weapon it takes up two of your upgrade slots even though it's a single item in the table.

 Peregrine wrote:

What that statement means is you have two choices for what you can do with two upgrade choices:

Two single weapons at X points.

One twin-linked weapon at Y points which is cheaper than X.

The "counts as two choices" limit doesn't say anything about it being the ONLY way you can do it, it just says that if you take the cheaper twin-linked weapon it takes up two of your upgrade slots even though it's a single item in the table.

No. There is no permission to buy two of the same weapon separately. If you buy two, you have to use the method specifically described.

 Crimson wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

What that statement means is you have two choices for what you can do with two upgrade choices:

Two single weapons at X points.

One twin-linked weapon at Y points which is cheaper than X.

The "counts as two choices" limit doesn't say anything about it being the ONLY way you can do it, it just says that if you take the cheaper twin-linked weapon it takes up two of your upgrade slots even though it's a single item in the table.

No. There is no permission to buy two of the same weapon separately. If you buy two, you have to use the method specifically described.

Like said earlier, how do you get a pair of lightning claws, or other such arrangements in other codices. The Second option is just a choice to twin link it. It doesn't say you have to twin link it.

Neroman wrote:

Like said earlier, how do you get a pair of lightning claws, or other such arrangements in other codices. The Second option is just a choice to twin link it. It doesn't say you have to twin link it.

The text is quite clear: "...the second is for two weapons." How may weapons were you buying? That's right, two. Then you know what price to use and what rules to apply.

It looks like an Easter Egg, prolly smells like one, but ...

I interpret the structure of things:

XV8 - pays XX points and gets a TL-PR. 2 hard points. Pays another XX points and gets ... another TL-PR. Last two hard points and both TL-PRs can fire because of the inbuilt Multi-Tracker.

Da-yam. I may have to paint up those unused PR bits.

So far, I have equipped a few XV8s with a TL-BC and a TL-MP.

Humph. A 4 shot Deathrain.

Brothererekose wrote:
It looks like an Easter Egg, prolly smells like one, but ...

I interpret the structure of things:

XV8 - pays XX points and gets a TL-PR. 2 hard points. Pays another XX points and gets ... another TL-PR. Last two hard points and both TL-PRs can fire because of the inbuilt Multi-Tracker.

Da-yam. I may have to paint up those unused PR bits.

So far, I have equipped a few XV8s with a TL-BC and a TL-MP.

Humph. A 4 shot Deathrain.

Only the Commander gets the 4 hardpoints, The rest are still only 3, so one Twinlink and one standard on most suits.

barnowl wrote:

Brothererekose wrote:
Humph. A 4 shot Deathrain.

Only the Commander gets the 4 hardpoints, The rest are still only 3, so one Twinlink and one standard on most suits.

Nice catch, missed that.

Ah, being a nooB on a codex again. Hate this.

TLMP/MP suits still get 4 shots - just 2 are twin linked. All for less than half the points cost of an AV12 rifleman dread and far more mobile. I see these configurations becoming popular bar an oppositely ruled FAQ.

Me personally will likely go for a defensive set up:

Missle Pod
Fusion Rifle
Shield Generator

Maybe a bit much on the defense, but i like to be defensive and i can get in range of the melta in case of maps with not much cover and high amount of AP 3.

only annoyance i have about the crisis suits are the "benefits" the bodyguard version gets is rather crappy compaired to the point cost, and i dont really see the advantage of bodyguards than just put in a normal crisis squad of 3. ( unless you want 3 riptides, and pick body guards for your HQ in high point games )

Brothererekose wrote:
It looks like an Easter Egg, prolly smells like one, but ...

I interpret the structure of things:

XV8 - pays XX points and gets a TL-PR. 2 hard points. Pays another XX points and gets ... another TL-PR. Last two hard points and both TL-PRs can fire because of the inbuilt Multi-Tracker.

Da-yam. I may have to paint up those unused PR bits.

So far, I have equipped a few XV8s with a TL-BC and a TL-MP.

Humph. A 4 shot Deathrain.

Only the HQ gets 4 hard points. the rest only get 3 INLCLUDING support systems

Edited for being ninja'd

Now as far as the How many weapos can i put on my suit. I say.......

You can buy them seperately and here is why. Twin-Linked....What is twin linked? a special rule. How is to represented for the Tau? By having 2 weapons purchased in such a way that the special rule of TL takes effect.

Now, where does it say that every time you have 2 of the same weapon its TLed? IT DOESNT. The old dex went out of its way to make sure you knew that you couldnt do what we are debating right now. With the new dex getting the nerfs that it did and the fact that Crisis suits are supposed to be the beesknees, i guarantee that this wont be FAQed because you are meant to be able to grossly customize your suits to any and all purposes.

Thats my 2cents

Wolfnid420 wrote:

You can buy them seperately and here is why. Twin-Linked....What is twin linked? a special rule. How is to represented for the Tau? By having 2 weapons purchased in such a way that the special rule of TL takes effect.

Now, where does it say that every time you have 2 of the same weapon its TLed? IT DOESNT.

Yes it does! Right after it tells you how you buy two of the same weapon in the first place.

Yes the armory specifically says 2 weapons count as a twin linked system.

Really it's a moot argument anyway because twin linking a weapon system for 5 points is ultra efficient.

2 Fusion Blasters on suicide suits might be very beneficial.

For reference, here's the approximate hits of using 1 TL weapon vs 2 non-TL weapons:

BS NON-TL TL 1 0.33 0.305 2 0.66 0.555 3 1.00 0.75 4 1.33 0.888 5 1.66 0.972

Alas, it's probably just an oversight :(

Trasvi wrote:

Alas, it's probably just an oversight :(

It is not an oversight, it is people failing at reading comprehension.

 Crimson wrote:

Wolfnid420 wrote:

You can buy them seperately and here is why. Twin-Linked....What is twin linked? a special rule. How is to represented for the Tau? By having 2 weapons purchased in such a way that the special rule of TL takes effect.

Now, where does it say that every time you have 2 of the same weapon its TLed? IT DOESNT.

Yes it does! Right after it tells you how you buy two of the same weapon in the first place.

No it says what the second price is for. It doesn't say you have to twinlink like the previous codex does. The last codex went out of its way on to say you couldn't. This one doesn't.

Neroman wrote:

No it says what the second price is for.

Indeed. For two weapons.

It doesn't say you have to twinlink like the previous codex does. The last codex went out of its way on to say you couldn't. This one doesn't.

What the last codex did or didn't say is irrelevant. This one tells you how to buy two of the same weapon and what happens once you do. It is pretty clear.

I've been enjoying the heck out of the new codex... and I've had this same question myself.
I've got free minute at work, and a codex in my bag...
My thoughts:
If we buy two of the same weapon, we pay the second cost, and get a TL version. That's what the book says.
What the book doesn't say, is if we can or can not forgo the 5 or 10 point discount on TL and instead pay full price for two singles.
Sure, we can get a TL and a single... but having two singles would open up lots of interesting builds. Good thread, overall. Hooray for discussions!

The way I look at it - 2 singles will result in a higher hit percentage than 1 twin link (math above) but also costs 10 points more (except flamers) per suit. So intended by the codex designers or not, the extra points should balance out the increase in efficiency. That said I still feel it is always worth twin linking at least 1 of the weapons unless the suit needs a target lock.

I had similar thoughts. I think paying double points for an extra single would be well worth it.
Whether or not we'll be allowed to (via RAW) remains to be clarified by an FAQ.
None of my local group seems to have issues with it, but people haven't put it on the table in a tournament setting yet.

There is nothing in the statements about choosing weapons from the ranged weapons list that prevents you from choosing multiple versions of the same weapon. It explicitly describes what the 2 different points costs are for and tells you that a twin linked version of the weapon counts as 2 slots, but it doesn't restrict your choice to only a single instance of any weapon. You could arm your commander suit with 4 plasma rifles if you wished, but it would be a bit redundant as they couldn't all be fired Thinking about it though, 2x twin linked flamers would make a nice counter charge unit, especially with Supporting fire on. Probably a waste of a command suitight be entertaining.

I just looked at it myself. It says "where a weapon has two points costs, the first is for a standard, single version, and the second is for two weapons (counting as a twin linked weapon of that type). A twin linked weapon counts as two choices from this list.

So if you take two weapons of the same type it says right after they count as twin linked. At least that's how I see it.

Getting two of the same weapon always results in a twin-linked version. That's what's printed in the book.

The book doesn't cover what happens when you get a third of the same weapon. So that's probably one twin-linked version and one normal.

Don't know if this has been stated but this is the word for word translation of the unit entry.

"Where a weapon has two points costs, the first is for a standard, single weapon, and the second is for two weapons (Counting as a twin-linked weapon of that type). A twin-linked weapon counts as two choices from this list."

Pretty cut and dry, get two weapons, they count as twin-linked.

As for a commander as the rules look like:

1 Weapon - normal
2 Weapons - Twin-linked
3 Weapons - Twin-linked + normal
4 Weapons - Double Twin-linked

( true for any of the others with only 3 slots aswell )

It doesnt say you have to stop at only 2 weapons, but i think the wording as it is mean that if you buy 2 weapons of the same kind it is Twin-Linked, also that shooting weapons doesnt work the same way as additional weapons in assault and gives you a extra "attack" it rather twin-link it.
( i think two pistols would twin-link in shooting, but give +1 attack in assault for example )

 Celtic Strike wrote:
Don't know if this has been stated but this is the word for word translation of the unit entry.

"Where a weapon has two points costs, the first is for a standard, single weapon, and the second is for two weapons (Counting as a twin-linked weapon of that type). A twin-linked weapon counts as two choices from this list."

Pretty cut and dry, get two weapons, they count as twin-linked.

You're right about it being cut and dry, but wrong about what the answer is. If you purchase two weapons at once they're twin-linked and occupy two slots, but there's no rule that prevents you from picking the same single weapon option twice and getting two separate weapons (other than the higher point cost). All they're doing is making a shorter version of the following:

A crisis suit may take 3-4 options from this list:

* Missile pod ----- 600 points
* TL missile pod (counts as two chocies) ----- 900 points
* Plasma rifle ----- 600 points
* TL plasma rifle (counts as two chocies) ----- 900 points
* Seeker missile ----- 350 points
etc

Peregrine, you are wrong. If you're getting two weapons then you're getting two weapons, and have to use the rules provided.

Dracoknight wrote:
As for a commander as the rules look like:

It doesnt say you have to stop at only 2 weapons, but i think the wording as it is mean that if you buy 2 weapons of the same kind it is Twin-Linked, also that shooting weapons doesnt work the same way as additional weapons in assault and gives you a extra "attack" it rather twin-link it.
( i think two pistols would twin-link in shooting, but give +1 attack in assault for example )

2 Pistols is 2 shot is the shooting Phase.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:
Peregrine, you are wrong. If you're getting two weapons then you're getting two weapons, and have to use the rules provided.

Problem is he is using the rules provide. 2 single weapons at a higher point cost vs 1 TL weapon at a lower cost.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Celtic Strike wrote:
Don't know if this has been stated but this is the word for word translation of the unit entry.

"Where a weapon has two points costs, the first is for a standard, single weapon, and the second is for two weapons (Counting as a twin-linked weapon of that type). A twin-linked weapon counts as two choices from this list."

Pretty cut and dry, get two weapons, they count as twin-linked.

Very cut and dry if you buy the lower point cost TL weapons. The question is can you get 2 singles at higher point cost, and I don't see anything that prevents it, and you already have permission to get 3(4) weapons from the list.

 Crimson wrote:
Peregrine, you are wrong. If you're getting two weapons then you're getting two weapons, and have to use the rules provided.

But the way the rule is worded it tells you what you get for the different prices. If you pay the first price you get one weapon, if you pay the second price, you get a twin linked weapon taking up 2 slots. It does not prevent you from buying multiple versions of the single weapon price for one model.

I think what people are getting hung up on is the specific clarification text that existed in the last 2 codices isn't present anymore.

This previous text specifically forbade taking more than 2 of the same weapon type, and stated that purchasing 2 of the same weapon systems always counted as 1 TL'd weapon of that type.

The updated text is "similar" to the last editions' text, but differs in that:

1. It doesn't restrict you to only being able to buy 2 weapons of the same type. I believe this is intended with the way the codex entries are written with the "take up to 3 systems from the ranged weapons list and/or the support systems list" wording. A commander with 2 TL'd Plasma Rifles looks like fun!

2. The new "buying 2 of the same weapon counts as TL'd" text can be read ambiguously, whether intended or not. Yes, you can argue that buying 2 of the same always counts as TL'd, but you can also argue that it was a whole lot clearer in the last edition, and the specific clarification about automatic TL'ing is NOT as clear. It just states the cost of a single weapon and its TL'd cost, which takes up 2 spots

I believe they did not intend you to take 2 single weapons of the same type, but it definitely needs attention in the FAQ, simply for the fact that they did not clarify as well as the last editions. That omission alone is puzzling. Why leave anything to chance?

To me, it is a question of auto-Twin Linking, and it needs an FAQ. I will play it like last edition until I hear otherwise from GW

 Peregrine wrote:

 Drunkspleen wrote:
I believe you can take 2 of the same weapon.

The rules as worded don't seem to mandate that whenever you take 2 of the same weapon, you must use the second points cost and count them as twin linked.

This is correct. RAW you can. Whether or not GW changes it when they release a proper FAQ remains to be seen.

Yes, GW likes to change things rather wildly, don't they.

As a general rule, I wait until +1 month on building weapons where I'm running things that may be dodgy (it isn't really, the rules don't explicitly state I Can't simply take two FG, or 4 PG...) - just in case GW calls shenanigans, like they did with everyone who bought 30 Razorbacks and 90 guardsmen and called it a GK army.

 Flinty wrote:

But the way the rule is worded it tells you what you get for the different prices. If you pay the first price you get one weapon, if you pay the second price, you get a twin linked weapon taking up 2 slots. It does not prevent you from buying multiple versions of the single weapon price for one model.

This would be correct if it said that the second price was for twin-linked weapons. It does not. It says it is for two weapons (which count as twin-linked.) Therefore, if you're buying two weapons, this is the option you have to use.

 Crimson wrote:

 Flinty wrote:

But the way the rule is worded it tells you what you get for the different prices. If you pay the first price you get one weapon, if you pay the second price, you get a twin linked weapon taking up 2 slots. It does not prevent you from buying multiple versions of the single weapon price for one model.

This would be correct if it said that the second price was for twin-linked weapons. It does not. It says it is for two weapons (which count as twin-linked.) Therefore, if you're buying two weapons, this is the option you have to use.

No it isn't. It gives you the points cost and what you get for the points cost. There is no instruction or implication that prevents you from buying multiple choices of either the single or the double weapon entry, i.e. there are 2 ways to purchase 2 instances of a weapon; you can pay the twin linked points cost, or you can pay more for 2 of the single version. I'm sure there is a venn diagram fighting to be drawn for this issue

Flinty, that is just wilfully ignoring what the rules say. Do you understand what 'two weapons' mean? Are you buying two weapons?

I don't know if this complicates things or not: Shadowsun has two Fusion Blasters and permission to fire them at separate targets. Certainly a case of two of the same weapon not being Twin-linked.

Homer

She had those last dex too though.

But Shadowsun has nothing to do with Crisis suit armory at all.

 Crimson wrote:
Flinty, that is just wilfully ignoring what the rules say. Do you understand what 'two weapons' mean? Are you buying two weapons?

I'm not ignoring anything, neither am I adding in assumed implications into the rules. Taking plama rifles on a normal battlesuit as an example, I can take 3 weapons from the list. If I pay 15 points I get one single rifle. If I pay 20 points I get 2 plasma rifles that count as twin linked. But there is nothing anywhere in the weapon selection rules that prevent me from spending 15 points for a single rifle and then another 15 points for another single rifle. The 20 point option is effectively a multi-buy discount with specific attached rules. In the old codex this kind of thing never came up because they explicitly prohibited the purchase of multiple individual weapons of the same type. That rule has not been brought into this edition of the rules. It might get errata'd at some point in the future but currently as it stands there is no such restriction.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I've thought of an analogy. Its like a shop that sells apples. You can buy individual apples for full price, or you can buy a 2 pack for only a bit more than one apple, but you have to eat them in the store. How many ways are there to buy 2 apples?

I really think this is pretty cut and dry here - the codex specifically states that if there are two of the same weapon on a crisis suit, those two combine into a twin-linked captain planet gun. Then you are allowed to use your third hardpoint to buy a third weapon if you so wish, since the other two have already been combined.

1 weapon selection = 1 weapon
2 weapon selections = 1 TL weapon
3 weapon selections = 1 TL weapon + 1 weapon
4 weapon selections = 2 TL weapons

Where does it specifically state that? The weapons list gives 2 prices and does not restrict in what combination you can spend points on the options.

It says if you have 2 weapons of the same type they count as a single twin-linked weapon. So you can't buy 2 seperate single weapons, but you could buy a twin-linked and a single version of the same weapon.

 Flinty wrote:
But there is nothing anywhere in the weapon selection rules that prevent me from spending 15 points for a single rifle and then another 15 points for another single rifle.

So how many plasma rifles you are buying here again?

That's right, two! And the rules tell you how to buy two weapons. You are basically claiming that one plus one does not equal two.

 Crimson wrote:
Flinty, that is just wilfully ignoring what the rules say. Do you understand what 'two weapons' mean? Are you buying two weapons?

Yes, but what you keep ignoring is that the rules give you two ways of buying two weapons: you can buy two at once acting as a twin-linked gun that takes up two spaces, or you can pay more points and purchase the single weapon twice. The ONLY reason this is even remotely controversial is because there used to be a rule in the old codex that banned you from buying two separate weapons. If you don't start with the assumption that the new codex has to work like the old codex then the rules are perfectly clear on the subject: two single weapons are a legal option.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:
So how many plasma rifles you are buying here again?

Two. But I am buying them by getting the single plasma rifle upgrade twice, as I am legally allowed to do since there is no restriction on how many times you can pick a specific upgrade (as long as I can afford to pay the higher point cost of doing it that way).

And the rules tell you how to buy two weapons.

No, they tell you one way of buying two weapons. You can save points by purchasing a single twin-linked gun, but there is nothing that says that two weapons are always twin-linked.

If the rules tell you how to buy two weapons, then that's how you have to do it instead of inventing your own rules.

 Crimson wrote:


What the last codex did or didn't say is irrelevant.

Right, the only reason we are debating what we can or cannot do when the codex clearly DOES NOT say that we cant, is because of what a pervious edition of codex did prevent. The codex no longer explicitly says that we cant. Why would we not be able to? The codex gives us the option to purchase a single and the optiont to purchase a TL set at a discount. It does not say. All models with 2 of the same gun count as TLed. And so they dont!

Peregrine has it 100% right. At least until we get an FAQ anyways

The rules tell you how much the options cost. The rules do not restrict you on which options you purchase. As it is written you can buy a twin linked set or pay more and buy separate weapons. The only rules inventing going on here is the assumption that you can only ever buy 2 weapons as a twin linked set, when the rules do not in fact say that.

Here are the real questions: can you ever fire more than two of these four weapons? Is firing two weapons purchased as TL'd firing one weapon or two weapons?

Homer

Suits have Multi-trackers right? So they can fire 2 weapons.

A twin-linked gun only counts as a single weapon. So a suit could fire 2 Twin-linked weapons, or 2 single weapon.

For reference, Tau Codex

Where a weapon has two points costs, the first is for a standard, single version, and the second is for two weapons (counting as twin-linked weapon for that type). A twin-linked weapon counts as two choices from this list.

 Flinty wrote:
The rules tell you how much the options cost. The rules do not restrict you on which options you purchase. As it is written you can buy a twin linked set or pay more and buy separate weapons. The only rules inventing going on here is the assumption that you can only ever buy 2 weapons as a twin linked set, when the rules do not in fact say that.

So you are basically saying that when rules say: 'this is the point cost for two weapons' you can ignore that when buying two weapons?

 Crimson wrote:

 Flinty wrote:
The rules tell you how much the options cost. The rules do not restrict you on which options you purchase. As it is written you can buy a twin linked set or pay more and buy separate weapons. The only rules inventing going on here is the assumption that you can only ever buy 2 weapons as a twin linked set, when the rules do not in fact say that.

So you are basically saying that when rules say: 'this is the point cost for two weapons' you can ignore that when buying two weapons?

Because its not "this is the point cost for 2 weapons." Its "this is the point cost for two weapons(counts as TLed)." Therfore it DOES NOT state that you are forced to TL your weapons. Just merely giving you the option to get a TLed version if you want one.

Wolfnid420 wrote:


Because its not "this is the point cost for 2 weapons." Its "this is the point cost for two weapons(counts as TLed)." Therfore it DOES NOT state that you are forced to TL your weapons. Just merely giving you the option to get a TLed version if you want one.

No. if they wanted that they would've written that. I.e. 'the second price is for twin-linked weapons.' They did not do that. 'The second price is for two weapons.' (And having two of the same makes them twin-linked.)

synchronicity wrote:For reference, Tau Codex

Where a weapon has two points costs, the first is for a standard, single version, and the second is for two weapons (counting as twin-linked weapon for that type). A twin-linked weapon counts as two choices from this list.

Crimson wrote:

Wolfnid420 wrote:


Because its not "this is the point cost for 2 weapons." Its "this is the point cost for two weapons(counts as TLed)." Therfore it DOES NOT state that you are forced to TL your weapons. Just merely giving you the option to get a TLed version if you want one.

No. if they wanted that they would've written that. I.e. 'the second price is for twin-linked weapons.' They did not do that. 'The second price is for two weapons.' (And having two of the same makes them twin-linked.)

So, tell my why, that when I quote the codex(almost word for word) to defend my sideof the debate, that makes me wrong. Where as you, as it seems, have to alter the sentence structure pretty drastically to defend your side of the debate. Doesnt make much sense to me, and until i get a FAQ that says I shouldnt I will absolutely let people purchase two seperate versions of the same gun since it allows it

Wolfnid420 wrote:

So, tell my why, that when I quote the codex(almost word for word) to defend my sideof the debate, that makes me wrong. Where as you, as it seems, have to alter the sentence structure pretty drastically to defend your side of the debate. Doesnt make much sense to me, and until i get a FAQ that says I shouldnt I will absolutely let people purchase two seperate versions of the same gun since it allows it

I don't have to change anything:

Tau Codex wrote:Where a weapon has two points costs, the first is for a standard, single version, and the second is for two weapons (counting as twin-linked weapon for that type). A twin-linked weapon counts as two choices from this list.

Tau Codex wrote: the second is for two weapons

How is that unclear?



To mean what you think it means it would have to say:

Not Tau Codex wrote:Where a weapon has two points costs, the first is for a standard, single version, and the second is for a twin-linked weapon of that type. A twin-linked weapon counts as two choices from this list.

But it doesn't.

To mean what you think it means it would have to say:

Not Tau Codex wrote:Where a weapon has two points costs, the first is for a standard, single version, and the second is for a twin-linked weapon of that type. A twin-linked weapon counts as two choices from this list.

But it doesn't.

Neroman wrote:

That's exactly what it means!

Yeah, there's your problem. It really doesn't. If it would be written that way, it wouldn't say anything about buying two weapons, letting you free to buy multiple weapons any way you like. However, what the codex actually says, tells you how to buy two weapons (which then incidentally become twin-linked.)

Two weapons are twin linked. The most straightforward reading of the rule supports this. If you have to say "look at it like this" or rearrange sentences from the codex, you are probably bending the rules or outright wrong.

Also when upgrading models the final load-out is what should be tallied for points. No "I buy one weapon, pause, now I buy that same weapon". It's either a plasma rifle, or a twin linked plasma rifle, or a twin linked plasma rifle plus another plasma rifle.

This is the exact reasons many people (American's *cough* :-)) get into bad political debates on the internet.

Speaking from experience here, I've played this game a lot in Ireland and more in America there's a dissonance between how "Europeans (Irish)" and American's interpret the rules.

The difference is this, my Irish team seems to generally go the direction of; 'If the book doesn't EXPLICITLY say that you CAN do something, you CAN'T." My American friends tend to go; 'If the book doesn't EXPLICITLY FORBID it, I can."

Subtle but very different and a large part of the mindset that's showing up in this debate. It won't get clarified because GW probably won't think it's an issue since it doesn't say that you can buy single weapons.

The rules say, two weapons = twin-linked and that's how they'll be run.

 Crimson wrote:
So you are basically saying that when rules say: 'this is the point cost for two weapons' you can ignore that when buying two weapons?

No, you don't ignore it. If you buy two weapons at once you pay the cheaper price, it's a twin-linked weapon, and it occupies two slots. Alternatively, you can buy one weapon, but do it twice. You will pay more points, get two separate weapons, and spend two slots.

 Celtic Strike wrote:
The difference is this, my Irish team seems to generally go the direction of; 'If the book doesn't EXPLICITLY say that you CAN do something, you CAN'T." My American friends tend to go; 'If the book doesn't EXPLICITLY FORBID it, I can."

That's not true at all. The rules explicitly say that you can take two single weapons.

The rules say, two weapons = twin-linked and that's how they'll be run.

Except that's not at all what the rules say. It's what it used to say in the old codex, but the rules in the new codex are different.

 Peregrine wrote:
Alternatively, you can buy one weapon, but do it twice. You will pay more points, get two separate weapons, and spend two slots.

That is an alternative you've made up. The rules tell you how to buy two weapons.

This is a situation quite common in this game: there is a general rule how to do things (buying the weapons from the list), and an exception that pertains specific situation (buying two of the same weapon.) And once the requirements for that exception are met, it applies. You just cannot ignore the exception if you don't happen to like it.

 Crimson wrote:
That is an alternative you've made up. The rules tell you how to buy two weapons.

Again, they tell you that if you buy two weapons at once. You can also buy one weapon and then buy another weapon. Seriously, why is this so hard to understand?

Let's go back to the grocery store analogy: you're looking at the shelf of apples, and you have two packages to choose from:

Package #1 is a single apple for $1.

Package #2 is two apples for $1.50, but they don't look as fresh.

Now, let's say you want to buy two apples. Can you buy two of the nicer ones (at a higher price), or are you required to buy the two-apple package?

This is a situation quite common in this game: there is a general rule how to do things (buying the weapons from the list), and an exception that pertains specific situation (buying two of the same weapon.) And once the requirements for that exception are met, it applies. You just cannot ignore the exception if you don't happen to like it.

Except that it doesn't say that two weapons ALWAYS count as twin-linked, it says that you MAY buy two weapons as a twin-linked weapon. Please try to understand that the restriction from the old codex no longer exists.

It doesn't say that if you buy 2 of the same weapon they are twin linked. What it says is that if you spend 20 points, you get 2 weapons and they are twin linked. If you spend 15 points you get a single normal version of the weapon. In the codex it is even explained in that order. Price first and then what you get for that price. If you choose to pay the single weapon price multiple times then you get the single normal weapon multiple times.

The specific allowance to do this comes from the unit entry where it says make a number of choices from the weapons list. It does not restrict the player in how they make their choices, or require that your choices have to be different from each other. A commander suit could take 4 drone controllers if it wished. Sure it wouldn't be any damn use but you could do it. Similarly it coukd choose 4 independant plasma rifles. Again it would be a waste of points but it is not prohibited by the rules.

 Peregrine wrote:

Again, they tell you that if you buy two weapons at once. You can also buy one weapon and then buy another weapon. Seriously, why is this so hard to understand?

It is not. But I do not get why 1+1=2 is so hard to understand. You are buying two weapons. There are rule for buying two weapons, and you have to use it.

Except that it doesn't say that two weapons ALWAYS count as twin-linked, it says that you MAY buy two weapons as a twin-linked weapon. Please try to understand that the restriction from the old codex no longer exists.

I have never played Tau. I didn't even remember what the old codex said until it was brought up in this thread. It is irrelevant.

The current codex tells you how to buy two of the same weapon and what happens once you do.

That's not true at all. The rules explicitly say that you can take two single weapons.

Yes it is, show me where it explicit states you can take two single weapons.
Excluding Shadowsun, she's a separate thing.

Also, I'm done with this conversation. I quoted the ACTUAL rule that this pertains to - PG 95 - that says buying two weapons makes them twin-linked. If you want to continue to have this argument, go hang out with other stupid/ willfully contrary people and do whatever it is you do that makes you happy. Probably making fun of people on youtube. I hear that pays great.

"Where a weapon has two points costs, the first is for a standard, single version, and the second is for two weapons (Counting as a twin-linked weapon of that type). A twin-linked weapon counts as TWO choices from this lists."

If you are this nit picky and difficult to play against you are a negative player. One I will never play, nor ever want to meet. I'm done with you. Have a good life and get over yourselves.

Again, no it doesn't. It tells you what you get if you pay 20 points. It also tells you what you get if you pay 15 points.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Celtic Strike wrote:

That's not true at all. The rules explicitly say that you can take two single weapons.

Yes it is, show me where it explicit states you can take two single weapons.
Excluding Shadowsun, she's a separate thing.

Under each of the battlesuit entries it tells you how many choices you can make and on what lists. There are no further restrictions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I don't see why this is particularly different to a Marine captain, say, buying 2 plasma pistols. You pay 15 points per pistol and you can fire both of them.

 Flinty wrote:

Under each of the battlesuit entries it tells you how many choices you can make and on what lists. There are no further restrictions.

Yes there is. You just choose ignore it.

I don't see why this is particularly different to a Marine captain, say, buying 2 plasma pistols. You pay 15 points per pistol and you can fire both of them.

Because there is not a specific rule telling us how to buy two plasma pistols that would supersede the normal rules.

 Crimson wrote:
It is not. But I do not get why 1+1=2 is so hard to understand. You are buying two weapons. There are rule for buying two weapons, and you have to use it.

And, again, that's not what the rule says. There is no "must" in that statement, only that you CAN do it that way.

"Any Crisis Shas'ui may take up to three items from the Ranged Weapons and/or Support Systems list."

"...A standard, single version" is an item from the Ranged Weapons list. I am nowhere restricted from this option and I can therefore take it three times if I wanted (note: I could only fire two of the three.)

There is ALSO a twin linked version. The key word here is "version."

It also makes a ton of sense mathematically. If I were to take two missile pods (Assault 2) I would do more damage on average and also cost more.

How much extra damage??? Well, at BS 3 I'm going to average 2 hits. With a twin-linked version with two shots I'll run 1.5 hits on average. This gives us a ratio of 2-1.5 or 4/3

and how much more does it cost??? Well, it would cost 30 points to get two of the single versions of the Missile Pod and only 20 points for one twin-linked version. This gives us a ratio of 3/2

So while it ups the damage output of a Crisis suit by 4/3 it costs 3/2 times more. Thats 8/6 and 9/6 respectively if you want the denominators equal. It seems like damn fine rules to me.

 Crimson wrote:

But I do not get why 1+1=2 is so hard to understand. You are buying two weapons. There are rule for buying two weapons, and you have to use it.

It's not 1 + 1 = 2.

It's A + B = A + B.

You have the option to buy a single weapon multiple times.

 Peregrine wrote:

And, again, that's not what the rule says. There is no "must" in that statement, only that you CAN do it that way.

So do you usually treat point costs as suggestions? It is not 'must' because you don't need to give your suits any weapons at all. If marines 'may' purchase a plasmagun at 15 points it means that the price you gotta pay if you want to get one.

 Crimson wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

And, again, that's not what the rule says. There is no "must" in that statement, only that you CAN do it that way.

So do you usually treat point costs as suggestions? It is not 'must' because you don't need to give your suits any weapons at all. If marines 'may' purchase a plasmagun at 15 points it means that the price you gotta pay if you want to get one.

So you do agree with us. If you pay sufficient points to buy 2 separate weapons, you get 2 separate weapons. If you pay the points for the twin linked version, thats what you get.

 Flinty wrote:


So you do agree with us. If you pay sufficient points to buy 2 separate weapons, you get 2 separate weapons. If you pay the points for the twin linked version, thats what you get.

No. There is a specific rule detailing the buying of two weapons and you have to use it if you're buying two weapons.

 Crimson wrote:

 Flinty wrote:


So you do agree with us. If you pay sufficient points to buy 2 separate weapons, you get 2 separate weapons. If you pay the points for the twin linked version, thats what you get.

No. There is a specific rule detailing the buying of two weapons and you have to use it if you're buying two weapons.

While I'm aware that GW will change this so you're correct, and I agree that that is the RAI, it isn't RAW.

The RAW dictates two entities, each with a separate price:

"A", the singular weapon, costing 100 percent of the price.
And "b" the cost of 150% of the weapon's price.

A+A is 200% of the price, but when bought as B, it is 150% of the price.

Buying Two singular weapons is different to buying 1 twin linked weapon.

Let's for a moment pretend that the sentence in parenthesis about twin-linking wouldn't exist. Would people still think that it would be possible to buy two of the same weapon separately?

The the situation appears to me like this: the book says that this is the price for two weapons. Then when buying two weapons, that's the price you have to use. The bit about twin-linking is just an addition, and do not affect the buying process at all (that's why it's in parenthesis.)

OK, I am SO glad this conversation came up and that the back and forth is redundant without anyone adding anything new really for almost 2 pages...lol (Celtic Strike - I like exalt 1/2 your posts - your grasp of English makes me happy)

OK - so a little English lesson for people who are not getting it - When a statement is in parentheses is IGNORED!!!
---Additional information is enclosed in brackets (parenthesis) if the information is not essential for the understanding of the sentence.
---Use parentheses to enclose words or figures that clarify or are used as an aside.
---a word or phrase inserted as an explanation or afterthought into a passage which is grammatically complete without it, in writing usually marked off by brackets, dashes, or comma

So the sentence from the book is this, following the information above:

When a weapon has two point costs, the first is for a standard, single version and the second is for two weapons.
Two weapons count as a twin-linked weapon of the same type.
A twin linked weapon counts as two choices from the this list.

(If you deny this is the proper way to write this sentence without the parenthesis, take it to an English Major, or a teacher or a professor)

So - If you buy one, you pay the first cost, if you buy two, you pay the second cost.. If you buy two, that ARE TWIN LINKED.

The MAJOR issue is that this does not tell you what happens when you buy 3 or 4, which is why I think there is the most confusion. I even brought this to someone who does not even play, and that is the same interpretation they gave (and they are just as smart as the rest of us)....I just don't see how so few people who speak English don't understand its basics....

 Amaraxis wrote:
I even brought this to someone who does not even play, and that is the same interpretation they gave (and they are just as smart as the rest of us)....I just don't see how so few people who speak English don't understand its basics....

Yeah, first think I did when this debate arose was show the text to my girlfriend, who is an English major and doesn't play 40K (yet.) I did not tell her beforehand what I thought. She came to the same conclusion as me.

As I've noted numerous times though, the sentence is not set up in such a way that restricts you to a single way to buy 2 weapons. You can buy them as 2 singles or pay the lower price to get the TL version. Ignoring the parenthesis doesn't alter the fact that if you pay x you get a single version of the weapon and if you pay y you get a double version of the weapon.

Battlesuits get a number of choices from the weapons list. There is nothing in any of the rules presented thus far that prevents you from making multiple selections of any of the choices available.

Flinty, you are ignoring the rules. If rules say 'this is the price for to weapons' then that's the price you have to use when buying two weapons. How can this be so hard?

 Crimson wrote:
Flinty, you are ignoring the rules. If rules say 'this is the price for to weapons' then that's the price you have to use when buying two weapons. How can this be so hard?

I think in general this is dead...some people will never agree and until either - 1. there is an FAQ or 2. People understand the english language (this is more directed at GW then people on here) - we are at an impasse

I would HIGHLY recommend that if you do place two singles on a suit, that you check with the TO before hand (and your opponents in a friendly game) so that there is no arguments that slow the game down...

 Crimson wrote:
Flinty, you are ignoring the rules. If rules say 'this is the price for to weapons' then that's the price you have to use when buying two weapons. How can this be so hard?

You are correct, its very simple. You get what you pay for. If you pay more, you get more. Your interpretation requires an additional restriction on what may or may not be chosen from the weapons lists that does not in fact exist. You may choose 3 (or 4) weapons from the list and pay the appropriate points. If you choose 2 plasma rifles you effectively have a choice in what to do next. You can pay 20 points and the weapons take up 2 slots and are twin linked, or you can pay 15 points per weapon. There is nothing inherent in the choice rules that insists you have to choose the twin linked version. Just because the 20 point choice is a valid choice does not mean that the choosing 2 of the 15 point choices is invalid.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I think the main difference in opinion comes in how the method of choosing is intepreted. Crimson, I am assuming you see the process as "choose weapons to fill slots and then work out how much this costs". However the rules for choosing weapons doesn't require this approach. You can make 3 or 4 choices from the list. Choice 1 can be single weapon. Choice 2 can be a single weapon of the same type because it is a valid choice in the list. Choice 3 can also be a single weapon of the same type because it is still a valid choice, etc.

 Amaraxis wrote:

Ok - so a little Enlglish lesson
we are at an inpass

Misspellings detracts significantly from your credibility as an authority on the English language. That is to say, if you are so careless with your typing, I am inclined to believe that you are also careless with your comprehension of grammar (and parentheses). (Did you ignore that statement? You shouldn't have.)

 Elric Greywolf wrote:

 Amaraxis wrote:

Ok - so a little Enlglish lesson
we are at an inpass

Misspellings detracts significantly from your credibility as an authority on the English language. That is to say, if you are so careless with your typing, I am inclined to believe that you are also careless with your comprehension of grammar (and parentheses). (Did you ignore that statement? You shouldn't have.)

I never said I was the authority - I do my research. I also specifically stated that if you don't believe me - take it to a professional on English. In addition, your logic is extremely faulty in that stating that spelling errors (or in this case, a PoS laptop keyboard) equates to an inability to grasp basic grammar. that is the same as saying 'You didn't add up the points on your army properly, therefore you don't know how to play your army'

The Crisis suit may take up to three items from the ranged weapons, signature systems, or support systems.

The top of page 95 reads "These lists detail the points values of various items..."

Each weapon is an item. I can have three.

this is really an interesting debate. I'll be putting a single of the same gun on multiple arms for now and slapping a third of that same type on as a magnet option so that if some one disagree with the 1-and-1 interpretation I'll just take 1 T/L and 1 normal and call it a day.

The RAW debate aside, I am also fairly sure that GW intended that two weapons always get twin-linked, and that is the way it will be clarified in the FAQ. If you could have two separate weapons, this would create a situation where from WYSIWYG standpoint two different configurations look identical. I'd assume they'd want to avoid that.

 Crimson wrote:
The RAW debate aside, I am also fairly sure that GW intended that two weapons always get twin-linked, and that is the way it will be clarified in the FAQ. If you could have two separate weapons, this would create a situation where from WYSIWYG standpoint two different configurations look identical. I'd assume they'd want to avoid that.

I'll likely model T/L Weapons on the same arm in my config, unless I want the third gun on their heads I guess, lol

I'd probably do the same although FW went in a different direction with the xv-81 by mounting the TL SMS on the backpack. I like that config and I've never had anyone be confused about any weapon arrangement once you explain what your modelling scheme is...

 Crimson wrote:
The RAW debate aside, I am also fairly sure that GW intended that two weapons always get twin-linked, and that is the way it will be clarified in the FAQ. If you could have two separate weapons, this would create a situation where from WYSIWYG standpoint two different configurations look identical. I'd assume they'd want to avoid that.

That is a distinct possibility, but if so then why did they bother changing the really rather precise text from the previous codex?

 Flinty wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
The RAW debate aside, I am also fairly sure that GW intended that two weapons always get twin-linked, and that is the way it will be clarified in the FAQ. If you could have two separate weapons, this would create a situation where from WYSIWYG standpoint two different configurations look identical. I'd assume they'd want to avoid that.

That is a distinct possibility, but if so then why did they bother changing the really rather precise text from the previous codex?

Well it IS Games workshop, they tend to miss things or change things without thinking it through (vehicle sms vs burst cannon )

 Flinty wrote:

That is a distinct possibility, but if so then why did they bother changing the really rather precise text from the previous codex?

I don't know. They do this from time to time. They reword a rule and people assume it has changed, even though they just said it differently. And to me it seems precise enough; maybe it did to Vetock too? But of course this thread is evidence enough that they have to clarify what they actually meant.

Just for the sake of completeness in the discussion, the text for the Crisis Suit entry in the army list uses the word 'may' select up to three items from the Support Systems and/or ranged weapons lists, not 'must'.

The use of the word 'may' in this sentence makes it permissive, whereas 'must' (like in the old dex) would have made it a requirement.

So in fact you may take nothing or three of the same type of wargear, or weapon for that matter.

The text under the Ranged Weapons clearly states that a weapon costs X points. If you desire a TLed weapon it costs Y points. I believe this brief little paragraph in the Dex contains a redundancy which is causing the disagreement. The only thing that is abundantly clear is that a TL weapon counts as two choices, not that two of the same weapon automatically and will always count as a TLed version of said weapon.

To paraphrase the redundancy that I see;

'...two weapons...'

and

'...two choices...'

That is the redundancy.

It's almost like GW was so worried about the possibility of people arguing over whether or not a TLed weapon counted as one choice or two that they totally missed the possibility of people arguing over whether or not you could take 2 single versions of the same weapon.

I for one believe that the wording in the back half of that paragraph is an over clarification regarding the total number of options a suit takes, and does not actually restrict you from taking two single versions at a higher point cost than one twin-linked version.

Ultimately though, I do think it needs an FAQ as the wording is so clunky that it creates this ambiguity.

On a side note, what do you guys think of running a suit with only one or two options (remember 'may') instead of the full three in smaller points games in order to save points for use elsewhere?

(edited for grammar)

 Shas'O...Crap wrote:

On a side note, what do you guys think of running a suit with only one or two options (remember 'may') instead of the full three in smaller points games in order to save points for use elsewhere?

It's a valid option. I've almost decided on an entire two-option unit - a few guys with Plasma/Fusion and then a CnC suit with Puetide/CnC/Onager attached to Farsight for a deepstrike surprise.

synchronicity wrote:For reference, Tau Codex

Where a weapon has two points costs, the first is for a standard, single version, and the second is for two weapons (counting as twin-linked weapon for that type). A twin-linked weapon counts as two choices from this list.

The more and more I read this statement, the more and more I find myself in the camp that says you can take two single choices. This, of course, isn't to say that the other argument is not valid. I can see where they are coming from and what they are trying to say.

However, I see it as this: I can spend X amount of points, get as many single weapons as my slots can carry OR I can spend Y amount of points and get a discounted, bundled and twinlinked version of that weapon. They are forced to work together in concert and take up two slots but I am spending fewer points overall.

Arguing over what GW had intended with these rules at this point is well, pointless. The more and more I read people trying to angrily justify their perspective the more and more everyone starts to look like religious zealouts who disagree on what their deity intended with the teachings. None of you know for sure what was intended by this writing and nobody will more than likely ever know. If you are in my camp (Two single weapons option), you will more than likely have to ask your opponent before the game if this is okay before you play until there is an errata. Because of this, I feel the argument will have to be set at a stalemate until an FAQ comes out to clarify it and, unfortunately, that could take a while :<

Reading the RAW it speaks only of point values.

Where a weapon has two points costs, the first is for
a standard, single version, and the second is for two
weapons (counting as a twin-linked weapon of that type).
A twin-linked weapon counts as two choice from this list.

This doesn't say anything about what you can or can not take, it simply tells you that to utilize the second points choice is to take two weapons which count as a twin-linked system. It doesn't prohibit you from taking two single choices of the same item, or tell you that taking two must use the second value. It simply gives you an extremely efficient way to Twin-link your systems, if that's what you want. I understand everyone's concerns over suits running around dual Fusion Blastering//Plasma Rifling, but until GW explicitly states yes or no this is a pretty clear cut case of there's no rule specifically against it.

So I just care about running Suits with TL BC/ BC (paying 15 / 10 respectively for them) to make a Hailstorm build:

Commander (upgrades)
-Airbursting Frag
-BC
-Drone Controller
-Shield Drones
-Extra special toys

Crisis Suits
-TL BC/ BC
-TL BC/ BC
-TL BC/ BC
-6x Gun Drones

So I can have 40 S5 shots, 24 Twin Linked plus the Airburst. Death by a million cuts, but really I just wanna roll a bunch of dice with some mechs.

Is that a legal load out considering I'm paying the 15/10 for the Crisis Suits?

So it would seem...

 TheKbob wrote:
So I just care about running Suits with TL BC/ BC (paying 15 / 10 respectively for them) to make a Hailstorm build:

Commander (upgrades)
-Airbursting Frag
-BC
-Drone Controller
-Shield Drones
-Extra special toys

Crisis Suits
-TL BC/ BC
-TL BC/ BC
-TL BC/ BC
-6x Gun Drones

So I can have 40 S5 shots, 24 Twin Linked plus the Airburst. Death by a million cuts, but really I just wanna roll a bunch of dice with some mechs.

Is that a legal load out considering I'm paying the 15/10 for the Crisis Suits?

I don't want to rain on anyones parade, but how are you going to fire those extra suit weapons without a Multi-Tracker?

On pg 98, it says that a commander may take up to 4 ranged weapons and/or support systems.
On pg 68 it says " A model with a multi-tracker can fire an additional weapon in each shooting phase ".

Does this mean that it you don't have it, you are limited to using only one ranged weapon ( twin linked or not ), regardless of how many the suit actually has?

If this is true and I'm understanding things correctly, then this looks like a major shift from the previous Tau codex, where ( IIRC ) there was nothing as far as the suit's available slots, could stop you from shooting all your weapons in the shooting phase.

 Chopper Greg wrote:
I don't want to rain on anyones parade, but how are you going to fire those extra suit weapons without a Multi-Tracker?

On pg 98, it says that a commander may take up to 4 ranged weapons and/or support systems.
On pg 68 it says " A model with a multi-tracker can fire an additional weapon in each shooting phase ".

Does this mean that it you don't have it, you are limited to using only one ranged weapon ( twin linked or not ), regardless of how many the suit actually has?

If this is true and I'm understanding things correctly, then this looks like a major shift from the previous Tau codex, where ( IIRC ) there was nothing as far as the suit's available slots, could stop you from shooting all your weapons in the shooting phase.

Page 70 of the Tau codex (ARMOUR), the first paragraph not in italics.

 Chopper Greg wrote:

 TheKbob wrote:
So I just care about running Suits with TL BC/ BC (paying 15 / 10 respectively for them) to make a Hailstorm build:

Commander (upgrades)
-Airbursting Frag
-BC
-Drone Controller
-Shield Drones
-Extra special toys

Crisis Suits
-TL BC/ BC
-TL BC/ BC
-TL BC/ BC
-6x Gun Drones

So I can have 40 S5 shots, 24 Twin Linked plus the Airburst. Death by a million cuts, but really I just wanna roll a bunch of dice with some mechs.

Is that a legal load out considering I'm paying the 15/10 for the Crisis Suits?

I don't want to rain on anyones parade, but how are you going to fire those extra suit weapons without a Multi-Tracker?

On pg 98, it says that a commander may take up to 4 ranged weapons and/or support systems.
On pg 68 it says " A model with a multi-tracker can fire an additional weapon in each shooting phase ".

Does this mean that it you don't have it, you are limited to using only one ranged weapon ( twin linked or not ), regardless of how many the suit actually has?

If this is true and I'm understanding things correctly, then this looks like a major shift from the previous Tau codex, where ( IIRC ) there was nothing as far as the suit's available slots, could stop you from shooting all your weapons in the shooting phase.

No, he's fine. Each suit has two weapons so he's fine in that department. Multitrackers come standard on crisis suits along with black sun filters so he can easily fire both the weapons he has on each of his suits.

 Peregrine wrote:

Pyrian wrote:
I would consider that rule to be redundant; you are not normally allowed to pick the same option multiple times, you need explicit permission to be able to do that, rather than a specific restriction to prevent it.

So which other instances of the battlesuit weapon list have that rule? Because it doesn't matter if some other codex says you can't pick an option twice, just like it doesn't matter if some codices have ATSKNF as an army-wide rule. Tau don't have either.

Don't we need permission to take an item twice?

Tunafinch wrote:
"Any Crisis Shas'ui may take up to three items from the Ranged Weapons and/or Support Systems list."

"...A standard, single version" is an item from the Ranged Weapons list. I am nowhere restricted from this option and I can therefore take it three times if I wanted (note: I could only fire two of the three.)

There is ALSO a twin linked version. The key word here is "version."

It also makes a ton of sense mathematically. If I were to take two missile pods (Assault 2) I would do more damage on average and also cost more.

How much extra damage??? Well, at BS 3 I'm going to average 2 hits. With a twin-linked version with two shots I'll run 1.5 hits on average. This gives us a ratio of 2-1.5 or 4/3

and how much more does it cost??? Well, it would cost 30 points to get two of the single versions of the Missile Pod and only 20 points for one twin-linked version. This gives us a ratio of 3/2

So while it ups the damage output of a Crisis suit by 4/3 it costs 3/2 times more. Thats 8/6 and 9/6 respectively if you want the denominators equal. It seems like damn fine rules to me.

ლ(ಠ益ಠლ) But at what cost?!

Except there is no limiting word or phrase. There is nothing that says, "may take A" or "may take one". Simply that you can chose 3/4 Items, depending on unit, from the lists provided. I can't recall seeing anything that ever says you can't take more than one. Of course I could be wrong. It just happens that taking more than 1 of an item doesn't help you in most cases.

Regarding points costs. It lists two options. One for a single version, the other for 2 weapons counting as twin linked. There are no rules saying you HAVE to buy the second choice. There is no line saying this is the only way to get two weapons. Its very blatant, X points for weapon, as a single weapon, and X points for two, counting as twin-linked.

 YotsubaSnake wrote:

 Chopper Greg wrote:


I don't want to rain on anyones parade, but how are you going to fire those extra suit weapons without a Multi-Tracker?

On pg 98, it says that a commander may take up to 4 ranged weapons and/or support systems.
On pg 68 it says " A model with a multi-tracker can fire an additional weapon in each shooting phase ".

Does this mean that it you don't have it, you are limited to using only one ranged weapon ( twin linked or not ), regardless of how many the suit actually has?

If this is true and I'm understanding things correctly, then this looks like a major shift from the previous Tau codex, where ( IIRC ) there was nothing as far as the suit's available slots, could stop you from shooting all your weapons in the shooting phase.

No, he's fine. Each suit has two weapons so he's fine in that department. Multitrackers come standard on crisis suits along with black sun filters so he can easily fire both the weapons he has on each of his suits.

Fair enough.

Does that mean if a commander takes an additional multi-tracker, he can then fire a third weapon?

 Chopper Greg wrote:


Fair enough.

Does that mean if a commander takes an additional multi-tracker, he can then fire a third weapon?

No such options and multiple specific rules anyway.

There is no option to take a multi-tracker anymore
>< Ninja'd

 Desubot wrote:

 Chopper Greg wrote:


Fair enough.

Does that mean if a commander takes an additional multi-tracker, he can then fire a third weapon?

No such options and multiple specific rules anyway.

Multiple specific rules only applies to special rules, not special wargear.

A man with two bolt guns can fire both, after all.

 Scipio Africanus wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

 Chopper Greg wrote:


Fair enough.

Does that mean if a commander takes an additional multi-tracker, he can then fire a third weapon?

No such options and multiple specific rules anyway.

Multiple specific rules only applies to special rules, not special wargear.

A man with two bolt guns can fire both, after all.

2 Bolt pistols yes. 2 bolt guns, no.

Neroman wrote:

 Scipio Africanus wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

 Chopper Greg wrote:


Fair enough.

Does that mean if a commander takes an additional multi-tracker, he can then fire a third weapon?

No such options and multiple specific rules anyway.

Multiple specific rules only applies to special rules, not special wargear.

A man with two bolt guns can fire both, after all.

2 Bolt pistols yes. 2 bolt guns, no.

But that's under its own gunslinger rule no?

anyway this inst about multiple rule so lets get back on topic.

I would say that the new codex layout is not as compact as it could be, making it harder to keep track of things like this - as such I'm not a fan of it from this perspective.

I think it is far better than the 5th edition Codices I own. The summary in the back having all the special rules is fantastic for ease of play: you can get all of the game rules for building the army from pages 95-108 of the book, and all of the in-game as-you-play rules from only the last 5 pages. A lot better than my Nids codex which sometimes required 7 pages in different sections of the book to play a single unit....

As previously pointed out i think you are allowed to pick 3-4 of the same weapon, its just that the text try to empahize that ever 2 weapons of the same kind becomes a twin-linked.

Would be fun to have a Dual TL-Missilepod commander just for the heck of it.

It doesn't say that two weapons becomes twin-linked it says that utilization of the secondary points value IS a twin linked item and counts as two of your item choices.

Anbutou wrote:
It doesn't say that two weapons becomes twin-linked it says that utilization of the secondary points value IS a twin linked item and counts as two of your item choices.

It still doesn't say that. It says that second point value is for two weapons.

I disagree with crimson's reasoning.

The qualifier at the beginning of the sentence in question clarifies that the paragraph is referring to how to use the second point value.

However, I do agree that you can't take items from the list multiple times - the reasoning is simple: it never tells you that you can. The rules tell you to take X number of items from the list. I do not find it to be implied that this means you can take multiples of each item on that list.

Since there is no specific permission to take the same item multiple times, you can't.

I don't think you need specific permission to take the same item multiple times- although I think it is already there in the case of TL weapons. You can take 3 items for Crisis suits. So chose a weapon (say a Missile Pod)- that's one. Choose another- say another Missile Pod for a TL Missile Pod - that's two. Have you broken a rule by choosing the same item twice? Now say you want to choose a third item from the list. Choose a third Missile Pod. What rule have you broken? The second and third choices are being made in accordance with the permission given to you, all are on the list of options and nothing restricts you from doing that. The Missile Pod doesn't disappear from the list once you have chosen it once... If it did then how would you be able to take a TL one at all?

You've not selected 3 items from the list, but rather 1 item 3 times. You only have permission for the former.

A Missile Pod is an item on the list. I went through the item selection process three times. What rule did I break? I propose that would break no rule and it was actually done iaw with the permission already given.

But just so I understand your thinking a little more clearly, can you explain how you would select a TL weapon of any type? How would you do that without selecting the same item 2 times?

Specific permission to take a tl is given as covered in this thread.

And a TL weapons is two of the same weapon... so there you go.

You didnt break a rule, I just think you inferred something that the text is not necessarily implying.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And again the same page gives you explicit permission to do so, which is the only reason you can.

I don't think I am inferring anything. I am just following the permission given to me. I slect and choose three items from those available.

Nope that is selecting 1 item 3 times. Agree to disagree imo.

Okay we can certainly agree to disagree. But just to ask one more question of you... How does selecting 1 item 3 times go against the permission that is given to us?

Because you only have permission to select 3 items on the list. I think the disconnect is that you see a timing ( I pick this then this then that) where I dont. You go down the list and select up to 3. You dont go down the list up to 3 times, making a selection each time (given my understanding).

I think that might be inferring something that isn't there... How do you select three items unless you do it sequentially? You pick one, then pick a second, then pick a third... Does it tell us that the previous pick is no longer available once we have chosen it the first (or second) time?

Not saying you are wrong, I just think you are placing a restriction on yourself that isn't there. And the idea of that restriction is actually undermined by selecting a TL weapon... But that's just my $.02... Maybe someone else has another insight or some other reference to cite?

I understand what Dracos is saying (I'm not sure I agree.) If on a lottery ticket you need to choose seven numbers out of 39, you cannot choose number 28 seven times, that's not choosing seven numbers.

 Crimson wrote:
I understand what Dracos is saying (I'm not sure I agree.) If on a lottery ticket you need to choose seven numbers out of 39, you cannot choose number 28 seven times, that's not choosing seven numbers.

A lottery ticket is not a relevant argument imo. What tells us that an item disappears from the list of available choices once we have selected it once (or twice) as it would on a physical lottery ticket? There is no wording there (that I have seen) to even imply that. We don't fill out a lottery ticket when selecting suit options. And the permission given for option selection doesn't restrict us in that fashion (as it did in previous codex). Selecting 1 item 3 times is within the permsiion given and, absent a restriction, then it seems you can do that. Now, this could certainly be FAQ'd away, but as it stands now, I think RAW allows it.

So can I give a Leman Russ tank twelve hunter-killer missiles then?

 Crimson wrote:
So can I give a Leman Russ tank twelve hunter-killer missiles then?

Except that the Leman Russ entry says a hunter killer missile costs 10 points per model, which implies a limit of 1 per tank. The new Tau codex has nearly the exact same wording of the previous codex except it removes the line that says a suit cannot take 3 of the same weapon system. Which means I have to ask, was it in a FAQ someplace for the 4E codex that you could only take 1 of a weapon or 2 for a twin linked, and could not take 2 of the same single weapons? I know I was always told I could take 1 or twin link 2, but this discussion makes me think 2 single weapons should have been possible before.

 Crimson wrote:
So can I give a Leman Russ tank twelve hunter-killer missiles then?

No, but you can give a Chaos Lord a pair of Lightning Claws.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

hokieseas wrote:
Which means I have to ask, was it in a FAQ someplace for the 4E codex that you could only take 1 of a weapon or 2 for a twin linked, and could not take 2 of the same single weapons?

It was in the codex.

Top of page 25, start of the Battlesuit Armoury section: "No model can pick the same item twice"

 Drunkspleen wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
So can I give a Leman Russ tank twelve hunter-killer missiles then?

No, but you can give a Chaos Lord a pair of Lightning Claws.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

hokieseas wrote:
Which means I have to ask, was it in a FAQ someplace for the 4E codex that you could only take 1 of a weapon or 2 for a twin linked, and could not take 2 of the same single weapons?

It was in the codex.

Top of page 25, start of the Battlesuit Armoury section: "No model can pick the same item twice"

Ah yes, thanks.

I'd love to be able to have Suits with 2 MPs and Velocity Trackers, as 12 S7 Shots against Flyers would be nasty! But until the FAQ states you can, I'll take what my current loadouts, which state it as it used to be.

hokieseas wrote:

Except that the Leman Russ entry says a hunter killer missile costs 10 points per model, which implies a limit of 1 per tank.

That is a dubious interpretation. And in any case, SM vehicle upgrades don't say that, so Marines can have unlimited amount of HK missiles (and unlimited amount of multi-meltas on Land Raiders)?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Drunkspleen wrote:

No, but you can give a Chaos Lord a pair of Lightning Claws.

Why? And can SM Captains have unlimited amount of Auxilary Grenade Launchers? (They can be fired in addition to another weapon so you can probably fire multiple.)

EDIT: Oh, this is good one! Can I give DE Archon multiple Shadow Fields so when one breaks, he still has a backup?

OK - the whole limitations with what weapons can and cannot be taken is covered in another thread and really people are going to stick to their guns about what can and what cannot be taken.

Now - What is explicitly allowed with the new codex (no way to argue them):

A single Weapon
A twin linked weapon
Two different weapons
three different weapons
A twin linked weapon and another weapon (same or different)
Two twin linked weapons (same or different) - commanders only

Now - the one that is up in the air is:
two of the same weapon, not twin-linked

Arguments:
For allowing this: that because you can purchase one weapon at the listed, they believe that you can just pay that price twice and have two identical weapons that are not twin linked. They believe that them becoming twin-linked is optional that they can choose.

For NOT allowing this: english is english - the first price is for 1, the second price is for 2 of them. just because it follows with a parenthetical, does not negate that you are purchasing two weapons. Following the rules, when you purchase two identical weapons that are not already twin linked, it makes them twin linked, whether you want it to or not.

I am of the against, and so are most of the people who are do not even play the game but know the english language, interpret it as the second (not allow two of the same, none twin-linked weapons). Regardless of what we all think, until the FAQ comes out - whether or not you can take that setup is up to the TO in the tournament or your opponent in a normal game - and ALWAYS check with them before you start.

Personal note - If you tried to put two non-twin-linked identical weapons on the table, i would tell you fix it or not play....

I offer a compromise! People can buy the weapons separately but they still count as twin-linked! Everyone happy now?

 Amaraxis wrote:
OK - the whole limitations with what weapons can and cannot be taken is covered in another thread and really people are going to stick to their guns about what can and what cannot be taken.

Now - What is explicitly allowed with the new codex (no way to argue them):

A single Weapon
A twin linked weapon
Two different weapons
three different weapons
A twin linked weapon and another weapon (same or different)
Two twin linked weapons (same or different) - commanders only

Now - the one that is up in the air is:
two of the same weapon, not twin-linked

Sorry but please don't make declarations like this as if you have some sort of authority as to what is up for debate.

As noted earlier, imo, the italicized options are not legal. That is to say, a suit can never purchase two of the same weapon except in the case of a twin-linked version which counts as two choices.

 Crimson wrote:
I understand what Dracos is saying (I'm not sure I agree.) If on a lottery ticket you need to choose seven numbers out of 39, you cannot choose number 28 seven times, that's not choosing seven numbers.

The problem with that annology, is that once you fill in the blank for number 28, that no longer is a valid choice because the blank for it is filled in, and you can not fill it in again - or rather you could, but it wouldn't actually give you any chance of winning the lotto.

On the other hand, if you are given a list of 17 numbers, and told that you are given two numbers already and that you can make 3 more selections from it, without any further rules or instructions to the contrary, there is nothing in the world that says that you can't choose the same number 3 different times, other than an option that if you select it twice you can choose to double that number if you want, giving you a slightly larger range of numbers to work with.

Nothing saying that you have to double that number, just that you have the option.

The analogy was flawed no doubt - the inability to take the same number twice in a lottery is probably more of a product on how stupid it would be, leading the people running the lottery to not have any support at all to address the concept (i doubt they can even enter the same number twice on a ticket if they wanted to, for example).

However, you are still told to pick X items from the list with no further permission to pick an item twice.

The item doesn't disappear or anything like that, it simply appears on the list once. Since it only appears on the list once, you need permission to pick it more than once. I don't find the wording in the codex to support the idea that one can pick the same item multiple times.

Mind you, its doesn't say you can't either. But this is permissive, you need permission not restriction.

I don't find permission implied by the text of 'taking up to 3 items' from the list.

 Dracos wrote:


I don't find permission implied by the text of 'taking up to 3 items' from the list.

Yeah, I might agree with you if it said you may take up to 3 different items from the list, but it doesn't make that restriction (or anything like it aside from the 2 weapons counting as TL). Yes, the old codex had words to that effect, but those words, and anything resembling them, are conspicuously absent in this codex...

 Dracos wrote:

 Amaraxis wrote:
OK - the whole limitations with what weapons can and cannot be taken is covered in another thread and really people are going to stick to their guns about what can and what cannot be taken.

Now - What is explicitly allowed with the new codex (no way to argue them):

A single Weapon
A twin linked weapon
Two different weapons
three different weapons
A twin linked weapon and another weapon (same or different)
Two twin linked weapons (same or different) - commanders only

Now - the one that is up in the air is:
two of the same weapon, not twin-linked

Sorry but please don't make declarations like this as if you have some sort of authority as to what is up for debate.

As noted earlier, imo, the italicized options are not legal. That is to say, a suit can never purchase two of the same weapon except in the case of a twin-linked version which counts as two choices.

Don't make declarations like you are an authority. There is nothing in the game that prevents you italicized items - therefore there is not need to have special rules to say that they can. All it says is that you get to pick 3 items - says no where that you cannot. Also - it specifically states that you can take a twin-linked weapon and it counts as two choices. it does nto say that you are limited to two of the same weapon max.

Also - this is YMDC - and YES there was an immensely long debate about this before (and has since been buried). until it is FAW'd it is up to everyone's own decision what they interpret.

Beast wrote:

Yeah, I might agree with you if it said you may take up to 3 different items from the list, but it doesn't make that restriction (or anything like it aside from the 2 weapons counting as TL). Yes, the old codex had words to that effect, but those words, and anything resembling them, are conspicuously absent in this codex...

So I can give DE Archon two Shadow Fields and LR Crusader six Pintle-Mounted Multi-Meltas and fourteen HK missiles?

 Crimson wrote:

Beast wrote:

Yeah, I might agree with you if it said you may take up to 3 different items from the list, but it doesn't make that restriction (or anything like it aside from the 2 weapons counting as TL). Yes, the old codex had words to that effect, but those words, and anything resembling them, are conspicuously absent in this codex...

So I can give DE Archon two Shadow Fields and LR Crusader six Pintle-Mounted Multi-Meltas and fourteen HK missiles?

Sorry I thought we were talking about the Tau codex here and what IT actually says, not what a plethora of OTHER codecii say about other completely unrelated things that have their own rules and selection criteria...

 Crimson wrote:

Beast wrote:

Yeah, I might agree with you if it said you may take up to 3 different items from the list, but it doesn't make that restriction (or anything like it aside from the 2 weapons counting as TL). Yes, the old codex had words to that effect, but those words, and anything resembling them, are conspicuously absent in this codex...

So I can give DE Archon two Shadow Fields and LR Crusader six Pintle-Mounted Multi-Meltas and fourteen HK missiles?

Why do you keep referring to wargear which you can't take multiples of? You need to look at wargear which you can take at least two of in a unit, like 2 Thunder Hammers on a Captain/Wolf Lord or 2 Daemonblades on an Inquisitor, you can even take 2 plasma pistols on an inquisitor as you can replace both the bolt pistol and chainsword for a plasma pistol each, these are valid examples. stating wargear which you know you can't take multiples of isn't going to help you win your argument.

Beast wrote:

Sorry I thought we were talking about the Tau codex here and what IT actually says, not what a plethora of OTHER codecii say about other completely unrelated things that have their own rules and selection criteria...

It is not unrelated, it is perfectly relevant. If we assume that you can take multiples of same item unless it is specifically forbidden, we then must apply that principle to other codices as well. (And then the game breaks.)

Precedent seems to be that GW assumes that you cannot take multiples of same item unless explicitly given permission to do so.

 Drunkspleen wrote:

hokieseas wrote:
Which means I have to ask, was it in a FAQ someplace for the 4E codex that you could only take 1 of a weapon or 2 for a twin linked, and could not take 2 of the same single weapons?

It was in the codex.

Top of page 25, start of the Battlesuit Armoury section: "No model can pick the same item twice"

So we have a case where the 4th Ed Tau codex and the 5th Ed Tau codex, very explicitly say you can not choose the same weapon twice, and the 6th Ed Tau codex doesn't.


Now either this was a mistake on the part of Games Workshop, in which case they will FAQ it, to say that you can not choose the same weapon twice, or it is not and you can choose the same weapon twice.

Given that they very explicitly say you can't in previous versions, until they FAQ the 6th Ed Codex to explicitly say you can't choose two of the same weapons, there is nothing saying that we can't - it's also likely that they might be waiting to see if it's an over powering issue. In either case, given the precedent of the 4th and 5th Ed Tau codexes of expressly forbidding the use of 2 single weapons of the same type, until it's expressly forbidden in the 6th Ed Codex by a FAQ, it's not illegal to have two single weapons.

 Crimson wrote:

Beast wrote:

Sorry I thought we were talking about the Tau codex here and what IT actually says, not what a plethora of OTHER codecii say about other completely unrelated things that have their own rules and selection criteria...

It is not unrelated, it is perfectly relevant. If we assume that you can take multiples of same item unless it is specifically forbidden, we then must apply that principle to other codices as well. (And then the game breaks.)

Precedent seems to be that GW assumes that you cannot take multiples of same item unless explicitly given permission to do so.

That sounds a lot like you are arguing RAI... We are explicitly allowed to take 3 item from a list for Crisis suits... In what way does it break that permission if I choose the same item 3 times? Your other (irrelevant) examples are for items that you are NEVER granted permission to pick more than 1 of. Crisis suits specifically ARE granted permission, by the wording, to have 3 items and they conspicuously (by neglect or design) left out any restriction on choosing the same item more than once (as they had in the past)... So, imho, until it is FAQ'd to the contrary, RAW says you can in fact choose one, two or three of the same weapon on a Crisis suit...

 GoDz BuZzSaW wrote:

Why do you keep referring to wargear which you can't take multiples of?

And why I cannot take multiples of them? It is not specifically forbidden. That's my whole point. People keep saying that the Tau can take multiples of same weapon because it is not specificly forbidden.

You need to look at wargear which you can take at least two of in a unit, like 2 Thunder Hammers on a Captain/Wolf Lord or 2 Daemonblades on an Inquisitor, stating wargear which you know you can't take multiples of isn't going to help you win your argument

You can take two of certain weapons, because you're given explicit permission to upgrade your both your pistol and CCW. There is no such special allowances in Tau codex, besides the option for two-weapons at lower point cost (which them become twin-linked.)

Specifically shadow field is 1 per army.

The best example, without my SM codex handy, is the captain taking the Aux grenade launcher.

If you can select the same line item multiple times, IIRC there is nothing else preventing a billion Aux grenade launchers from being taken.

Taking 3 items on a list is not the same thing as taking a single item on the list 3 times.

Since those are not analogous, you need explicit permission to do so. You don't have it, so you can't.

 Crimson wrote:

 GoDz BuZzSaW wrote:

Why do you keep referring to wargear which you can't take multiples of?

And why I cannot take multiples of them? It is not specifically forbidden. That's my whole point. People keep saying that the Tau can take multiples of same weapon because it is not specificly forbidden.

You need to look at wargear which you can take at least two of in a unit, like 2 Thunder Hammers on a Captain/Wolf Lord or 2 Daemonblades on an Inquisitor, stating wargear which you know you can't take multiples of isn't going to help you win your argument

You can take two of certain weapons, because you're given explicit permission to upgrade your both your pistol and CCW. There is no such special allowances in Tau codex, besides the option for two-weapons at lower point cost (which them become twin-linked.)

Well, for starters in a LR it says you can take A multi melta (which refers to it being a single multi melta) I've not looked at the DE codex recently, but I'm pretty sure there would be no point in taking 2 shadowfields, and it doesn't say you can take more than one in the first place (whereas in Crisis suits it says you can take more than one of the same weapon), so i still think your points are a bit off.

Where does it say a crisis suit can take more than one of the same weapon (other than for twin-linking cost)?

Crisis suits say you can take three in total, just as many other character and vehicle options say you can take any i.e. unlimited amount of items. Neither of these wordings address taking multiples of the same item at all, merely the total number of items selected.

(And 'a' changes nothing. Yes, it is 'a hunter-killer missile', but that doesn't mean I cannot take same selection several times.)

IIRC the SM book says
"may take any of the following:
[...] - a hunter killer missile .... 10pts"

So something close to that.

If you can take the same line item multiple times, the SM book is saying that a single HK missile is 10pts, but there is no restriction on how many times you can elect that option.

Just a quick question, instead of citing pre 6th ed codexs, how are the 6th ed codexs written in cases like this? Im sure dark angeles can take hkm right?

It specifies for vehicle wargear they can take up to one of each item.

 Happyjew wrote:
It specifies for vehicle wargear they can take up to one of each item.

Interestingly enough, Tau vehicle equipment section doesn't say this...

 Crimson wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
It specifies for vehicle wargear they can take up to one of each item.

Interestingly enough, Tau vehicle equipment section doesn't say this...

Most likely because there is no benefit to purchasing multiples of the same item. A vehicle with 2+ Sensor Spines doesn't give the vehicle anything 1 Sensor Spines gives.

But a vehicle with multiple disruption pods gets multiple +1 bonuses to cover saves...

 Desubot wrote:
Just a quick question, instead of citing pre 6th ed codexs, how are the 6th ed codexs written in cases like this? Im sure dark angeles can take hkm right?

DA Pred(random Tank sampling with access to Vehicle equipment): "May take items from the Dark Angels Vehicle equipment lists"

DA Vehicle list: "A model may take up to one of each of the following:"

The Tau Lists say nothing of the sort anywhere on them.

But then the items on the Tau vehicle list are all some variant of "A vehicle with [this Item]". So taking multiples is self restrictive(to do so simply wastes points), but it is possible to put 1000 darksun filters on your devilfish; but you get no benefit from that extra 999 points spent.

Tau Support Items are also All "model with" or "in a unit that contains at least 1". So again self restrictive, but possible

It is only the weapons that should have their own specific restrictions if they were intended to be restricted.

As to the "A chaos Lord can have a pair of Lightning claws" argument, those are both individually purchased at the cost of another item(trade BP and CCW both in And/Or configuration); so that argument is invalid.

 Dracos wrote:
But a vehicle with multiple disruption pods gets multiple +1 bonuses to cover saves...

Correct. A vehicle with Disruption Pods gets +1 to cover saves. A vehicle with 120 Disruption Pods gets +1 to cover saves (and yes this is (theoretically) possible in a 2000 pt army).

I'm not sure why a model with multiple d-pods wouldn't get multiple +1 cover saves. Then again I'm at work and don't have my codex with me. Where does it say that it does not stack? There is nothing that implies you don't apply the special rules for each item you purchase - even if they are multiples of the same item.

please cite your source on '120 d-pods only give +1 cover'

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
Just a quick question, instead of citing pre 6th ed codexs, how are the 6th ed codexs written in cases like this? Im sure dark angeles can take hkm right?

DA Pred(random Tank sampling with access to Vehicle equipment): "May take items from the Dark Angels Vehicle equipment lists"

DA Vehicle list: "A model may take up to one of each of the following:"

The Tau Lists say nothing of the sort anywhere on them.

But then the items on the Tau vehicle list are all some variant of "A vehicle with [this Item]". So taking multiples is self restrictive(to do so simply wastes points), but it is possible to put 1000 darksun filters on your devilfish; but you get no benefit from that extra 999 points spent.

Tau Support Items are also All "model with" or "in a unit that contains at least 1". So again self restrictive, but possible

It is only the weapons that should have their own specific restrictions if they were intended to be restricted.

As to the "A chaos Lord can have a pair of Lightning claws" argument, those are both individually purchased at the cost of another item(trade BP and CCW both in And/Or configuration); so that argument is invalid.

Neet. thanks for the explanation.

Though we still have no definitive answer to the tau question

 Dracos wrote:
I'm not sure why a model with multiple d-pods wouldn't get multiple +1 cover saves. Then again I'm at work and don't have my codex with me. Where does it say that it does not stack? There is nothing that implies you don't apply the special rules for each item you purchase - even if they are multiples of the same item.

please cite your source on '120 d-pods only give +1 cover'

If you go by the summary in the back, they grant Stealth (did not notice that until just now).

A vehicle with a disruption pod has +1 cover save.

If the vehicle has 120 d-pods does it have a d-pod? Yes. Just like if you are within 12" of 30 models with SitW you only add +1D6 to your Psychic tests.

Nothing that you've quoted limits the number of times you apply the +1 cover save. Certainly you've fulfilled the qualifier of "a model with a d-pod" but then you fail to apply the special rule the number of times it appears. I see no reason to do that.

edit: This is getting a bit off track though. I'm playing devils advocate to illustrate that it is no commonly acceptable or intended to be able to take multiples of single line items unless expressly stated.

 Crimson wrote:

hokieseas wrote:

Except that the Leman Russ entry says a hunter killer missile costs 10 points per model, which implies a limit of 1 per tank.

That is a dubious interpretation. And in any case, SM vehicle upgrades don't say that, so Marines can have unlimited amount of HK missiles (and unlimited amount of multi-meltas on Land Raiders)?

Except it says may take "A" which means singular.

Neroman wrote:

Except it says may take "A" which means singular.

Yes. And then you take 'a hunter-killer missile' several times, just like you can take Tau weapons several times! (Or not.)

Except that you are told to make three choices from a list without restriction to taking multiple single weapons of the same type, as you are explicitly forbidden to, in the 4th and 5th Ed Tau codex's.

 Chopper Greg wrote:
Except that you are told to make three choices from a list without restriction to taking multiple single weapons of the same type, as you are explicitly forbidden to, in the 4th and 5th Ed Tau codex's.

That doesn't matter. Either lack of special restrictions means multiples of the same item can be taken (up to the number of total items allowed, may that be three or infinite) in every codex, or it doesn't. So if Tau can take three plasma rifles, them SM can take infinite number of HK missiles. There is not specific restriction for this in in SM codex.

I'm jumping in sort of late here, but I wanted to address the OP.

The language in the codex is ambivalent, that's the problem.

What hasn't really been talked about is the first part: "...the first is for a standard, single version..."

This implies that the two point costs given are for two "versions" of the weapon, a single, standard version and two weapons (counting as twin linked).

It does not denote any restrictions on how many of either "version" you can take on a given model, except as given by their 'hard point' limit, which on regular Crisis suits is 3.

Saying "the rules are clear" is, at this point, getting into the RAI. Trying to claim definitively that this poorly-worded sentence is clear and needs no FAQing is silly. Obviously it does; many people have had this same question, have read the passage many times over and scoured the book for clarification, and a lot of these people are pretty smart.

I'd be surprised if they intended for people to be able to rock 2 of any weapon system on a given crisis suit, whether it's two singles or a single and a TL. I did some mathhammer with missile pod spam and it's a brutal setup. You do pay a lot of points for it, however, and Crisis suits aren't as durable as their models look.

That said, I hope I'm wrong, because specialization is as fun as diversity.

Alrighty! I'm gonna have to post this again, because everyone here is inferring things that aren't said. This is the rules VERBATIM from the book, and this is the only thing that's said about your choices. You tell me where this tells you that every instance of two weapons is twin linked, or where it details what you can and cannot take.

Where a weapon has two points costs, the first is for
a standard, single version, and the second is for two
weapons (counting as a twin-linked weapon of that type) .
A twin-linked weapon counts as two choices from this list.

 Dracos wrote:
Nothing that you've quoted limits the number of times you apply the +1 cover save. Certainly you've fulfilled the qualifier of "a model with a d-pod" but then you fail to apply the special rule the number of times it appears. I see no reason to do that.

There is a limit, and it's a very simple one. Read the rule (NOT the summary version in the back, which is not the official text of the rule):

A vehicle with a disruption pod has +1 cover save.

So it's a simple check: does a vehicle have a disruption pod? If yes, +1 cover. Having multiple disruption pods doesn't make any difference because all you're asking is "do I have a disruption pod", just like if I asked you "do you have any coins in your pocket" it wouldn't matter whether you have one coin or a hundred coins. The only situation where multiple disruption pods could ever be relevant is if there was a hypothetical effect that destroyed vehicle upgrades, in which case a vehicle with multiple disruption pods could have one destroyed and still get the +1 cover bonus from the remaining one.

For multiple disruption pods to stack you'd have to have something like:

A disruption pod grants +1 to a vehicle's cover saves.

In that case multiple disruption pods would each grant +1, up to a maximum of a 2+ cover save. However, that's very different from the actual rule.

 Crimson wrote:
That doesn't matter. Either lack of special restrictions means multiples of the same item can be taken (up to the number of total items allowed, may that be three or infinite) in every codex, or it doesn't. So if Tau can take three plasma rifles, them SM can take infinite number of HK missiles. There is not specific restriction for this in in SM codex.

There is a specific restriction, and it's in the formatting. You go down the options list one bullet point at a time deciding whether or not to take that upgrade (and if so, which of its options to choose from). You only make the choice once for each bullet point, but each choice may involve buying multiple upgrades at once.

(This is why you can't take up to three upgrades and then take up to three upgrades again.)

 Crimson wrote:

 Chopper Greg wrote:
Except that you are told to make three choices from a list without restriction to taking multiple single weapons of the same type, as you are explicitly forbidden to, in the 4th and 5th Ed Tau codex's.

That doesn't matter. Either lack of special restrictions means multiples of the same item can be taken (up to the number of total items allowed, may that be three or infinite) in every codex, or it doesn't. So if Tau can take three plasma rifles, them SM can take infinite number of HK missiles. There is not specific restriction for this in in SM codex.

The Fallacy here is that you have an inherent limit in the Space marine codex: "You may take any of the following:" and then there is a list, once you have selected an item from the list you have exhausted your permission for that particular item.

Case in point; you Take a HKM; You have now used up the permission to take the HKM as it was a single item of the list.

In the case of the Tau Weapons you are given the option to take 3 items, there is no restrictions stating you cannot make all 3 selections the same exact item, and you are given no qualifiers to take "any Item".

The Lottery ticket argument is fallacious for the same reason that taking 1000 darksun filters isn't an option oft taken; it does not help you in any way; furthermore while the computer may kick back a Power ball ticket with 7 13s; it is not expressly forbidden(just stupid). A Pick 3 however can be chosen as 6-6-6 because each number there is picked from a separate bin with all numbers available(also you are picking 3 numbers that are the same number and thus invalidates the argument).

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
furthermore while the computer may kick back a Power ball ticket with 7 13s; it is not expressly forbidden(just stupid).

Off topic, but no, it isn't. A winning number with all 13s is exactly as likely as any other combination of numbers, the only "stupid" part would be that you're more likely to split the jackpot with other winners since all-13s is going to be a common pick.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
furthermore while the computer may kick back a Power ball ticket with 7 13s; it is not expressly forbidden(just stupid).

Off topic, but no, it isn't. A winning number with all 13s is exactly as likely as any other combination of numbers, the only "stupid" part would be that you're more likely to split the jackpot with other winners since all-13s is going to be a common pick.

It depends on the Lottery machine used and how the numbers are picked; the Power ball(or maybe it was mega Millions) that is available in Ohio uses a single machine filled with only 1 of each ball numbered 1- its maximum number; in that case it is entirely impossible to win on a ticket with all 13s. The more I think about it the more I am certain it is mega millions that uses that number selection method(and also has a much lower starting payoff, thus the higher odds of winning).

 Peregrine wrote:

There is a specific restriction, and it's in the formatting. You go down the options list one bullet point at a time deciding whether or not to take that upgrade (and if so, which of its options to choose from). You only make the choice once for each bullet point, but each choice may involve buying multiple upgrades at once.

The formatting in SM vehicle upgrades and in Tau weapon chart is pretty much identical.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

The Fallacy here is that you have an inherent limit in the Space marine codex: "You may take any of the following:" and then there is a list, once you have selected an item from the list you have exhausted your permission for that particular item.

Case in point; you Take a HKM; You have now used up the permission to take the HKM as it was a single item of the list.

Why? Tau weapons are exactly similarly single weapons on the list (except if they're twin-linked.)

In the case of the Tau Weapons you are given the option to take 3 items, there is no restrictions stating you cannot make all 3 selections the same exact item, and you are given no qualifiers to take "any Item".

There is no such restriction in SM book either! you just assume that there is, because we know that that's how it is supposed to work. SM codex gives no upper limit to total number of upgrades, Tau dex does. Neither affects the number of duplicate items you can take.

 Crimson wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

There is a specific restriction, and it's in the formatting. You go down the options list one bullet point at a time deciding whether or not to take that upgrade (and if so, which of its options to choose from). You only make the choice once for each bullet point, but each choice may involve buying multiple upgrades at once.

The formatting in SM vehicle upgrades and in Tau weapon chart is pretty much identical.

Unless we are just ignoring posts that clearly explain the differences...



No, still not even a little.

Space marine Codex is: "take any of the following"

Tau Vehicle entry permissions is: "May take items from the Vehicle gear List"

Tau Battle suits are: "May take 3 Items from ranged weapons and or Support systems lists"

For SM you are permitted to take each Item in only 1 Instance.

For Tau Vehicles you are allowed open-ended Plurality(that self regulates).

For Battlesuits you are allowed to make a set number of choices without any restriction other than those specified.

'Any' does not automatically denote one. If I can take any foods from the buffet table, I can take two cupcakes.

Also, wargear entries do not contain such wording, so even by your logic Captain can take unlimited amount of auxilary grenade launchers.

 Crimson wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

There is a specific restriction, and it's in the formatting. You go down the options list one bullet point at a time deciding whether or not to take that upgrade (and if so, which of its options to choose from). You only make the choice once for each bullet point, but each choice may involve buying multiple upgrades at once.

The formatting in SM vehicle upgrades and in Tau weapon chart is pretty much identical.

Exactly. Each bullet point in the options list can be taken (or declined) once and only once. Each bullet point may contain the ability to take multiple upgrades ("up to x models in the unit may ... ", "replace pistol and/or chainsword with ... ", "take up to six of the following", etc). So:

Tau can take two plasma rifles because the bullet point says "up to three choices" and there is no limit on choosing "single plasma rifle" two times in those three choices. However, you can NOT repeat the bullet point and take "up to three choices" a second time.

C:SM can NOT take multiple HK missiles because the bullet point only gives you one.

DA can NOT take multiple HK missiles because their Tau-style vehicle upgrades list specifically says "up to one".

Peregrine, why can I not select the same line item multiple times out of the SM codex but I can the Tau codex?

You have the option to pay 10 points for a hunter killer missile. If there is no limit on the number of times you can select an option in a list, then there is no reason you can't select the hunter killer multiple times - you have permission to take "any".

This is not different in any substantive way from the way the options in the Tau codex are presented.

You can't have it both ways. Either you can select items on options list once (unless otherwise specified), or you can select them any number of times.

The way I've always seen it done is the former: not once have I seen a rhino with 4 hunter-killers.

edit: I'm trying to be objective - I'm going to be playing Tau for the next while so I'm arguing against my best interests here. I just can't justify making the leap to allowing multiples of the same item when its not explicitly stated.

 Dracos wrote:
Peregrine, why can I not select the same line item multiple times out of the SM codex but I can the Tau codex?

Because you can NEVER select bullet points in the army list entry more than once. You CAN select items in a "choose from the following upgrades" table more than once, but marine armies either say explicitly "up to one" or the upgrades replace one of the model's existing items (so you can only replace something once).

You can't have it both ways. Either you can select items on options list once (unless otherwise specified), or you can select them any number of times.

It's not having it both ways, we're talking about two different things.

Options in the army list entry marked with a bullet point are taken (or declined) once and only once.

Options in a table of upgrades (where a bullet point item says "pick from the table") can be taken up to the stated limit (if any) on how many you may have.

 Peregrine wrote:

Options in the army list entry marked with a bullet point are taken (or declined) once and only once.

Options in a table of upgrades (where a bullet point item says "pick from the table") can be taken up to the stated limit (if any) on how many you may have.

Cite your source please.

 Dracos wrote:
Cite your source please.

The source for the first is overwhelming and undisputed precedent that it has worked that way for as long as I can remember. Demanding a source for this makes about as much sense as demanding a source for the rule that you can't play with loaded dice.

The source for the second is the table specifically saying how many times you may pick something from it. Some say "up to X items", some say "up to Y of each", some say "replace A and/or B with one of the following".

So basically you created a difference where none exists in the rules. : /


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Remember I agree with you that you can't take multiples. I just see no reason the Tau weapon list is any different.

 Dracos wrote:
So basically you created a difference where none exists in the rules. : /

No, there IS a difference in the rules. Let's say I have a table with some apples and pears on it. I tell you the following:

1) You may take up to three pieces of fruit.

2) You may take an apple.

3) You may replace your banana or orange with a piece of fruit from the table.

With option #1 you may take any of the following {apple}, {apple, apple, pear}, {apple, pear}, etc, since the only limit is that you can't exceed three items.

With option #2 you may take one apple, and unless you're deliberately trying to maliciously interpret my offer you aren't going to take a dozen apples and say "ha, I just picked the option twelve times".

With option #3 you can take {apple}, {apple, pear}, {pear, pear}, etc, but you can not take {apple, apple, pear} because you have run out of things to replace.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dracos wrote:
Remember I agree with you that you can't take multiples. I just see no reason the Tau weapon list is any different.

It's different because the Tau codex explicitly states that the bullet point option (which you can only take once) grants you up to three sub-choices from the upgrade list, just like a single bullet point for a C:IG veteran squad lets you upgrade up to three models to carry special weapons and they don't have to be different ones.

That is not analogous. The analogue is

1)You may take up to three fruit from THE FRUIT LIST

2)You may take any of the following fruit from this list

Neither statement implies that you may take the same line item of fruit multiple times.

 Dracos wrote:
Neither statement implies that you may take the same line item of fruit multiple times.

Except #1 does imply that you can take it multiple times (up to the limit of three total). That's why, for example, the DA vehicle upgrade list explicitly says you can only take up to one of each item. Without that statement you could take an unlimited number of HK missiles. The Tau codex, on the other hand, does not contain any such statement.

I completely disagree. That is something you are inferring. The statement is completely neutral on the topic of taking multiple of the same items. It makes no reference one way or the other.

/shrug

 Dracos wrote:
I completely disagree. That is something you are inferring. The statement is completely neutral on the topic of taking multiple of the same items. It makes no reference one way or the other.

Therefore we go with the default of how it works in English: if something says "you may take up to X of the following" you can take something twice.

And, again, this is why some of these lists explicitly say "one of each". If what you were saying is correct then there would be no need to make an explicit statement.

On one hand, we've had two codexes that specifically prevented this outcome from happening, thus the lack of any language detailing what we can and can't take leaves a pretty clear message on one end. It would also be very nice to thoroughly
customize our suits to be response teams to exactly what we need. Full on fusion blasters for your heavy hunters, full on plasma for your anti-meq, missile spam for aerial vehicles, I honestly want to try out burst spam too, that'd be awesome.

 Peregrine wrote:

And, again, this is why some of these lists explicitly say "one of each". If what you were saying is correct then there would be no need to make an explicit statement.

DA a Dex says that but SM, doesn't! Also 'up to three' in Tau book is the total number of items, and has nothing to do how many times the same item can be chosen.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Dracos wrote:
I completely disagree. That is something you are inferring. The statement is completely neutral on the topic of taking multiple of the same items. It makes no reference one way or the other.

Therefore we go with the default of how it works in English: if something says "you may take up to X of the following" you can take something twice.

And, again, this is why some of these lists explicitly say "one of each". If what you were saying is correct then there would be no need to make an explicit statement.

Personally I'm just wondering how many times Peregrine is going to have to repeat his completely sound logic in the face of random opinions. I now know why he has 4000 posts, he doesn't give up like I would. Personally I don't think it's RAI to have multiple copies of guns, but it's definitely RAW. There is nothing stating that you can't take 3 (or on a commander 4) of the same weapons. The RAI argument however is not really worth getting into, GW has on multiple occasions done things that don't make RAI sense.

Voodoo, the problem is in "theres nothing disallowing it"

We have a permissive ruleset. That means we are allowed to move our models, to shoot and kill our opponents models.

There has to be something allowing it, rather than a lack of something disallowing it.

Now, here's my take:

If there is no restriction on duplication and I have permission to take multiple items from that list, then I may take duplicates. As there is no such restriction, I may take duplicates given permission.


The problem again is permission. The rules don't say I Can't is never a sound argument with permission.

There's two sides to this debate. Side one says there's nothing that details any sort of rules about what you can choose out of the list, except that you can choose up to three items. That's it. GW knew what they were doing when they restricted it the last two, they know what they're doing when they didn't on this one.

The other side says GW must have forgotten to print it, how could they allow this? The thing about this is that this Tau codex supersedes all other rules sources. So your complaints about taking 150 auxiliary grenade launchers or whatever else you want to cram in there is pretty much pointless. The codex says take three, the codex doesn't place any restrictions on what you take. Until GW releases a FAQ and addresses this, the RAW are perfectly clear, take three, nothing else said. Your RAI or whatever else you call these examples really are pointless.

Anbutou wrote:
The other side says GW must have forgotten to print it, how could they allow this?

This is exactly it. The "no two weapons" side's argument pretty much comes down to "it worked this way in the last codex, therefore it must work this way in the current codex". If Tau were a brand new army without obsolete assumptions to get in the way we wouldn't be having this discussion.

 Peregrine wrote:

This is exactly it. The "no two weapons" side's argument pretty much comes down to "it worked this way in the last codex, therefore it must work this way in the current codex". If Tau were a brand new army without obsolete assumptions to get in the way we wouldn't be having this discussion.

That's not true. I did not even remember what the old book said before I was reminded in this thread. I merely think that when they write that this is the price for two weapons, it is the price they meant to be used when buying two weapons. This is certainly the way most people without prior knowledge of the rules would parse that paragraph.

I'm not sure that reducing people's opinions like that serves any purpose but to try and build some sort of authoritative position.

Its fine that you read it that way - I've explained quite clearly why i don't agree.

Disagreeing or agreeing with anyone is fair, but there is no need to employ such tactics. I don't think there is a single person who said "it worked this way in the last codex" - or even anything close to that.

 Dracos wrote:
I don't think there is a single person who said "it worked this way in the last codex" - or even anything close to that.

It isn't necessarily an explicit argument, but the fact that you couldn't do it in the previous codex is what started the whole controversy. Since it was something that was previously banned and there's no explicit statement saying that things changed it stands out to some people as "exploiting RAW over RAI" since clearly GW intended it to continue working the way it used to work. And then they start looking at other interpretations that are more in line with what they expect it to say, and find the "ambiguity" in the statement.

If, instead, there was no previous Tau codex then most people would probably not see any problem at all with taking two single weapons of the same type.

Don't make me quote your previous statement on this same page, you reduced everyone's argument who disagrees with you in this thread to that.

 Dracos wrote:
Don't make me quote your previous statement on this same page, you reduced everyone's argument who disagrees with you in this thread to that.

I said it pretty much comes down to that, not that there's absolutely no other disagreement. There's argument about supposed "ambiguity" in the statement, but we wouldn't be having this conversation if there wasn't an older version of the rule giving the impression that taking two copies of the same weapon is somehow "unfair" or "not intended". Without the memory of the old rule to give you the idea that there could be anything wrong with taking two single weapons there is nothing at all in the current rule that would suggest that it works that way.

And in that, you're wrong.

You don't get it, I want it to work this way. I want to build my 2x missile pod/intercepter crisis suits, and a 2x fusion blaster bodyguard for shadowsun.

But, I have to be able to point where in the rules this is permitted. There is literally no where in the rules that is explicitly telling you you can take 2 of the same weapon. The rationale you are using is an inference at best. To me, the inference required is not sufficient to give permission to do so.

"Pretty much comes down to" is a reduction of someone's argument, which you've done to attribute an absurd claim to those who disagree with you.

Certainly, some people have been influenced in their reading. But you don't know who and to what extent - its pretty much an ad hominem to attribute that statement or thought process to anyone when you have no insight into their thought process.

 Dracos wrote:
There is literally no where in the rules that is explicitly telling you you can take 2 of the same weapon.

You can take up to three items from that list. This is plain English, when you say "up to X from this list" you are including duplicate choices by default. That's why some similar lists explicitly say "no duplicates", if they didn't say it explicitly then you could take duplicate choices.

Also, did you know that there's no explicit statement that you can take multiple copies of the same unit in your army? If you think that crisis suits with two plasma rifles are illegal then you'd better not be bringing two units of fire warriors.

"Pretty much comes down to" is a reduction of someone's argument, which you've done to attribute an absurd claim to those who disagree with you.

It's not absurd at all. Right from the beginning this discussion has been framed as a question of whether or not the rule has changed. In fact, it would be absurd to suggest that "it worked like that in the last codex" isn't having an impact.

Certainly, some people have been influenced in their reading. But you don't know who and to what extent - its pretty much an ad hominem to attribute that statement or thought process to anyone when you have no insight into their thought process.

You might want to go re-read what an ad hominem is before accusing me of one.

 Dracos wrote:
And in that, you're wrong.

You don't get it, I want it to work this way. I want to build my 2x missile pod/intercepter crisis suits, and a 2x fusion blaster bodyguard for shadowsun.

But, I have to be able to point where in the rules this is permitted. There is literally no where in the rules that is explicitly telling you you can take 2 of the same weapon. The rationale you are using is an inference at best. To me, the inference required is not sufficient to give permission to do so.

The permission is explicit in the wording for the various crisis suit entries (commander, bodyguard and crisis teams) where it says you can take either 3 or 4 items from the ranged weapons list, depending on unit type. A single weapon is 1 item. You are permitted to take 3 or 4 of them.

Also its nice to see that my fruit stand analogy struck such a chord

I've used the term ad hominem correctly. You've attempted to solidify your argument by subtly attaching an absurd belief (that the previous codex rules have any relevance) to all who oppose your opinion.

The absurd claim is that someone actually is arguing that the previous codex has relevance. And you certainly did do that.

Again, the entire basis of our different readings is that we disagree "plain English" contains within it an implication that when offered a list of items and given the option to take more than one, you may select the same option multiple times.

I do not find it implied, while you do.

Do you have an authoritative source which supports your claim?

The most compelling argument so far is actually bringing up the ability to select the same codex unit entry multiple times - I can't find permission to do that anywhere (admittedly I didn't look that hard). Given that, I now have a good reason to infer that you may select the same item multiple times. Thank you.

 Dracos wrote:
I've used the term ad hominem correctly. You've attempted to solidify your argument by subtly attaching an absurd belief (that the previous codex rules have any relevance) to all who oppose your opinion.

No, you've used it incorrectly. Even if it was an absurd claim (which it isn't) it would be a straw man, not an ad hominem.

Do you have an authoritative source which supports your claim?

No, because it's just basic English. In every context outside of 40k if you have a list/collection/etc of items and someone says "take up to X" you can take the same thing twice. If you go to a restaurant and your meal comes with three side dishes from a list it's entirely reasonable to say "bread and double corn" (and if anyone disagrees, it's because they think it's bad manners, not forbidden). If a game store is having a two for $10 sale on used games then you can get two copies of the same game (one for you, one for your friend). Etc. The only time you can't is when there's a rule saying that you can't have duplicates.

Its nice that you have local conventions, but keep in mind that not everyone lives in the area you live, and there is such a thing as different conventions with regards to language.

If you want to discuss further what makes what you said an ad hominem, send me a private message. I'll help you out.

 Dracos wrote:
Its nice that you have local conventions, but keep in mind that not everyone lives in the area you live, and there is such a thing is a different conventions with regards to language.

If there are any conventions GW follows the same ones that I do.

When you can choose "up to X" units from each FOC section you can choose multiple copies of the same unit, and GW feels that this is perfectly clear and specifically granting permission to do so would be redundant.

When you can choose from a list of options and you are limited to one copy of each option GW explicitly says "only one of each", and considers this a necessary statement to make rather than a convenient (and redundant) reminder of something you should already know.

The only "problem" here is the assumption that the Tau list has a "no duplicates" rule and GW's failure to explicitly state one is an accident rather than a deliberate choice.

I can't speak for anyone else (and you should probably stop doing so as well), but my only issue was that the convention you have described was not known to me (the menu example would prompt a clarifying question from anyone I eat with - not an assumption) and didn't find it was being used commonly by GW until you pointed out where else they use it.

 Crimson wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

This is exactly it. The "no two weapons" side's argument pretty much comes down to "it worked this way in the last codex, therefore it must work this way in the current codex". If Tau were a brand new army without obsolete assumptions to get in the way we wouldn't be having this discussion.

That's not true. I did not even remember what the old book said before I was reminded in this thread. I merely think that when they write that this is the price for two weapons, it is the price they meant to be used when buying two weapons. This is certainly the way most people without prior knowledge of the rules would parse that paragraph.

They didn't write the price for two weapons.... Here's the rule. Again.

Where a weapon has two points costs, the first is for
a standard, single version, and the second is for two
weapons (counting as a twin-linked weapon of that type) .
A twin-linked weapon counts as two choices from this list.

I'll clarify, and hopefully this will be the last time I have to post this thing. This rule talks about one specific circumstance. The circumstance is when you choose to utilize a twin-linked weapon system. It doesn't say that every two weapons is twin linked, it says that if you choose to twin link an item, you pay the second point cost, and it's two choices, and represented by two items. In the absence of rules against it in the permissive ruleset which we operate in what's the confusion? I understand the desire to see GW address this, but to say that it's something you can't do when they give you three choices and say nothing else about it... Who's speaking for who?

 Peregrine wrote:

When you can choose from a list of options and you are limited to one copy of each option GW explicitly says "only one of each", and considers this a necessary statement to make rather than a convenient (and redundant) reminder of something you should already know.

Except this is not true. Space marine captain is probably not intended to be able to take multiple aux grenades, nor their tanks be able to take multiple HK missiles. Yet, there is no 'only one of each' anywhere.
Wolf Lords can take 'up to two' fenrisian wolves. It does not say you can take only one of other pieces of wargear (granted they'd do nothing if you could); here it is assumed to be the standard position that you can take only one unless specifically told otherwise.

Now, I'm not actually arguing that this definitely proves that you cannot take multiples of the same item in Tau codex, merely that there is not a consistent policy in GW writing that would let you infer it either way. Considering that it is clearly intended that you can take multiples of the same drone, I'd say it is safe to assume that you can take multiples of the same weapon too. Except that there is specific rule concerning taking two of the same weapons that you have to follow.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Anbutou wrote:
and the second is for two
weapons

So this is not telling you what price to use when buying two weapons?

I'll clarify, and hopefully this will be the last time I have to post this thing. This rule talks about one specific circumstance. The circumstance is when you choose to utilize a twin-linked weapon system.

Not true. It talks about buying one or two weapons. That is the sircumstance the rule covers. Thing about twin-linking is an addition in parenthesis, and does not alter the meaning of the sentence when it comes to buying these weapons.

It doesn't say that every two weapons is twin linked, it says that if you choose to twin link an item, you pay the second point cost, and it's two choices, and represented by two items. In the absence of rules against it in the permissive ruleset which we operate in what's the confusion? I understand the desire to see GW address this, but to say that it's something you can't do when they give you three choices and say nothing else about it... Who's speaking for who?

It tells you how to buy two weapons. You have a general rule (buy three weapons), and specific clarification (here's how you buy two weapons.) When in that specific situations (buying two weapons) you have to use the rules for that situation. You cannot just ignore it if you don't like it.

The rule is to state that a suit has two of the same weapon on the one suit I.e. a flamer on each arm or a plasma or a etc. NOT a TL on each arm.

 Crimson wrote:
Except this is not true. Space marine captain is probably not intended to be able to take multiple aux grenades, nor their tanks be able to take multiple HK missiles. Yet, there is no 'only one of each' anywhere.

The "one of each" is that each bullet point is a single "take or not take" decision. You can't go back and make the yes/no choice multiple times.

Except that there is specific rule concerning taking two of the same weapons that you have to follow.

The specific rule does NOT say that you MUST take two weapons in that way, it just says that IF you take two weapons using the cheaper option they are twin-linked. Please stop claiming that there is any "must" statement in the rules.

 Peregrine wrote:

The "one of each" is that each bullet point is a single "take or not take" decision. You can't go back and make the yes/no choice multiple times.

Just like each Tau weapon is separate bullet point you can take or not (until you've got up to three you're allowed.)

The specific rule does NOT say that you MUST take two weapons in that way, it just says that IF you take two weapons using the cheaper option they are twin-linked. Please stop claiming that there is any "must" statement in the rules.

When you may purchase plasma pistol for 15 points, it does not mean it you can purchase it at any other point cost. You can either purchase it or not; those are the choices. When the codex gives you a point cost for a thing (two weapons), that's the point cost you have to use when buying that thing (two weapons.)

 Crimson wrote:
Just like each Tau weapon is separate bullet point you can take or not (until you've got up to three you're allowed.)

No it isn't. The bullet points in the army list and the items in the upgrade list are formatted entirely differently. One is a list of yes/no questions, one is a menu of choices that you can take up to X items from.

When the codex gives you a point cost for a thing (two weapons), that's the point cost you have to use when buying that thing (two weapons.)

Exactly. If you are buying two weapons you pay the cheaper price and get a twin-linked weapon that takes up two of your choices. What you keep missing is the fact that there is absolutely nothing preventing you from taking one weapon, and then taking one weapon again.

After 8 pages, how about just waiting for FAQ and play it as your local group/friends/TO rules it?

It's not game breaking in either case.

 Crimson wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

When you can choose from a list of options and you are limited to one copy of each option GW explicitly says "only one of each", and considers this a necessary statement to make rather than a convenient (and redundant) reminder of something you should already know.

Except this is not true. Space marine captain is probably not intended to be able to take multiple aux grenades, nor their tanks be able to take multiple HK missiles. Yet, there is no 'only one of each' anywhere.
Wolf Lords can take 'up to two' fenrisian wolves. It does not say you can take only one of other pieces of wargear (granted they'd do nothing if you could); here it is assumed to be the standard position that you can take only one unless specifically told otherwise.

Now, I'm not actually arguing that this definitely proves that you cannot take multiples of the same item in Tau codex, merely that there is not a consistent policy in GW writing that would let you infer it either way. Considering that it is clearly intended that you can take multiples of the same drone, I'd say it is safe to assume that you can take multiples of the same weapon too. Except that there is specific rule concerning taking two of the same weapons that you have to follow.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Anbutou wrote:
and the second is for two
weapons

So this is not telling you what price to use when buying two weapons?

I'll clarify, and hopefully this will be the last time I have to post this thing. This rule talks about one specific circumstance. The circumstance is when you choose to utilize a twin-linked weapon system.

Not true. It talks about buying one or two weapons. That is the sircumstance the rule covers. Thing about twin-linking is an addition in parenthesis, and does not alter the meaning of the sentence when it comes to buying these weapons.

It doesn't say that every two weapons is twin linked, it says that if you choose to twin link an item, you pay the second point cost, and it's two choices, and represented by two items. In the absence of rules against it in the permissive ruleset which we operate in what's the confusion? I understand the desire to see GW address this, but to say that it's something you can't do when they give you three choices and say nothing else about it... Who's speaking for who?

It tells you how to buy two weapons. You have a general rule (buy three weapons), and specific clarification (here's how you buy two weapons.) When in that specific situations (buying two weapons) you have to use the rules for that situation. You cannot just ignore it if you don't like it.

You're RAI'ing the heck out of this. There's logic in play here too. You can utilize two different points costs. There's a choice, The first points cost is for a single item, the second is for a twin linked item which must be represented by two weapon models in order to be legal on the table. You have three choices, and you aren't restricted in ANY WAY from choosing the first value multiple times. It doesn't say that if a weapon is chosen twice utilize the second point value and it's twin linked. It says that the second cost is for two weapons that counts as twin linked. That's it. It doesn't talk about buying one or two weapons anywhere in there. Did you read the preface? It talks about points costs. Utilizing one points cost gets you weapon A at it's normal profile. Utilizing the second points cost gets you weapon A - Twin linked which must be represented by two of the weapon models, and utilizes two of your choices.

By your logic I can pretty much take any rule in the game, exclude the first part of the rule and then play with that brand new definition. ATSKNF now doesn't specify space marines! Ha! I mean, that's pretty much what I'm reading here.

 Peregrine wrote:

No it isn't. The bullet points in the army list and the items in the upgrade list are formatted entirely differently. One is a list of yes/no questions, one is a menu of choices that you can take up to X items from.

The only difference in formatting is because some codices use armoury type of formatting and some don't. There is no inherent difference that would alter their function. Now I'm not saying that this actually should limit how you can buy Tau weapons, merely that the consistency and clarity you imagine is not actually there.

Exactly. If you are buying two weapons you pay the cheaper price and get a twin-linked weapon that takes up two of your choices. What you keep missing is the fact that there is absolutely nothing preventing you from taking one weapon, and then taking one weapon again.

And then you are taking two weapons! (1+1=2, check from a math professor if you don't believe me.) You are trying to weasel from using a rule provided for specific situation pretending that if you buy first one weapon, and then second, you are not buying two weapons. Are you similarly ignoring all other further instructions that may be in armories? Oh, the Chaos Lord entry said I can have artefacts, so I just ignore this pesky clarification concerning the specific situation of buying this axe that I need to have a Mark of Khorne!

Yes, you can have three weapons, and then the weapon entry further specifies the procedure of buying two of the same weapon. And that's the way you have to do it. It is not a suggestion, it is a rule.

If you can't take two of the same weapon then why can you twin linking them now?

 Crimson wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

No it isn't. The bullet points in the army list and the items in the upgrade list are formatted entirely differently. One is a list of yes/no questions, one is a menu of choices that you can take up to X items from.

The only difference in formatting is because some codices use armoury type of formatting and some don't. There is no inherent difference that would alter their function. Now I'm not saying that this actually should limit how you can buy Tau weapons, merely that the consistency and clarity you imagine is not actually there.

Exactly. If you are buying two weapons you pay the cheaper price and get a twin-linked weapon that takes up two of your choices. What you keep missing is the fact that there is absolutely nothing preventing you from taking one weapon, and then taking one weapon again.

And then you are taking two weapons! (1+1=2, check from a math professor if you don't believe me.) You are trying to weasel from using a rule provided for specific situation pretending that if you buy first one weapon, and then second, you are not buying two weapons. Are you similarly ignoring all other further instructions that may be in armories? Oh, the Chaos Lord entry said I can have artefacts, so I just ignore this pesky clarification concerning the specific situation of buying this axe that I need to have a Mark of Khorne!

Yes, you can have three weapons, and then the weapon entry further specifies the procedure of buying two of the same weapon. And that's the way you have to do it. It is not a suggestion, it is a rule.

This is not a yes/no question here. If we're weaseling around it then you're drawing clarity out of thin air. It's an extremely ambiguous statement to try and utilize the simple answer you're trying to get out of it. It speaks of twin linking weapons but offers no grand statement saying that every two weapon combo utilizes the second point list and is twin linked, there's no statement saying that you cannot take multiple of the same item, there's nothing but explaining how the first/second point value system works. Nothing else. I understand if you don't want it to be true, but until we get a FAQ that shines some light here, there's no way to definitively prove either side.

Here is a question. Can a Crisis Suit take three of the same weapon - one twin linked and another not twin linked ?

That's literally what this thread is about. Way to read it.

Just my two cents,
It says if there are two points costs then the first is for the standard single version.
From that, I gather that if I pay the first cost I will get one standard plasma rifle.
It also goes on to state that the second points cost is to buy two of a weapon ( counting as twin-linked).
From that it is very clear that if I opt to use the second points cost I will buy two plasma rifles but these to count as one twin-linked plasma rifle.

Because there are no restrictions like there was in previous editions on buying the same item multiple times I can purchase the standard single version twice using the first points cost. Because I used the first points cost I follow the rules for that, which would mean two standard plasma rifles unlike if I bought the second points cost and got two plasma rifles that counted as one twin-linked weapon.

IXLoiero95XI

Dozer Blades wrote:Here is a question. Can a Crisis Suit take three of the same weapon - one twin linked and another not twin linked ?

There are 8 full pages devoted to bickering about that very question....

No, actually, 8 full pages of bickering are about whether or not I can take two plasma rifles and utilize them as individual weapons. The twin link one weapon take another example is pretty much undeniably accepted. Nothing says no, you're following what the book says about twin linking, and you've got the three systems limit.

Anbutou wrote:
[
This is not a yes/no question here. If we're weaseling around it then you're drawing clarity out of thin air. It's an extremely ambiguous statement to try and utilize the simple answer you're trying to get out of it. It speaks of twin linking weapons but offers no grand statement saying that every two weapon combo utilizes the second point list and is twin linked, there's no statement saying that you cannot take multiple of the same item, there's nothing but explaining how the first/second point value system works. Nothing else. I understand if you don't want it to be true, but until we get a FAQ that shines some light here, there's no way to definitively prove either side.

I'd be glad to be able to equip two of the same weapons independently, I just don't think that's intended nor that is what the rules say. However, I agree that regardless of how clear each of us thinks the wording is to one way or to another, it is obvious it is not clear enough and needs a FAQ; these nine pages of disagreement should be enough proof of that.

I think its unclear enough to need a FAQ entry. The paragraph does not make it clear that if you go with two of the same weapon you can elect to pay for two non twin linked weapons or if the twin linking is a requirement. However, I do not this its unclear at all that you can select the same weapon multiple times. No other codex has put such a restriction on a list with out explicitly forbidding it.

FAQ is up with some sort of explination (could still have been clearer in my opinion) It Speaks of 3 but not 2.

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m3170231a_Tau_Empire_v1.0_APRIL13.pdf

How do people interpret this?

It explicitly says a Crisis can be equipped with 3 non TL burst cannons. Implying that 2 non-twinlinked is totally legal.

Thats my opinion anyway

 Messy0 wrote:
FAQ is up but its still ambiguous in my opinion on weather you can take 2 Single Weapons. It Speaks of 3 but not 2.

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m3170231a_Tau_Empire_v1.0_APRIL13.pdf

How do people intemperate this?

IT explicitly says a Crisis can be equipped with 3 non TL burst cannons. Implying that 2 non-twinlinked is totally legal.

In my opinions thats /thread.

I was staring at the FAQ for 10 minutes trying to figure out if I was just missing something or if it was new or what. But the FAQ clearly states you can take 3 (non-twinlinked weapons) if you want. Taking 2 non-twinlinked would make sense, as the above says...here is a copy and paste for people who don't like clicking...

"Q: Can I take three of the same (not Twin-linked) weapons on my
Crisis suit? (p100)

A: Yes. Remember though that a Crisis battlesuit can still only fire a maximum of two weapon systems per Shooting phase. For example: A Crisis battlesuit could be equipped with three (non Twin-linked) burst cannons, or one Twin-linked burst cannon and one (non Twin-linked) burst cannon, so long as you pay the appropriate cost in each instance. In either case,
make sure your opponent is aware how you have chosen to equip such models at the beginning of the game."

Is this new? Its not in magenta like the other stuff, but if this has been up, how have people been arguing for 8 pages?