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

Howdy everyone. Now please accept this as what it is - pure rules abuse. I'm not saying this is fair, or how the rules were intended. I'm asking whether, RAW, you can justify why I can't do this.

With that disclaimer out of the way, this is my example.

Techmarine is within 2" of his Thunderfire Cannon, as he should be. BRB pg46;


"The crewman [Techmarine] cannot fire any weapons they are carrying...."

Now, the Techmarine is also in base to base contact with the Quad Gun. BRB pg105;

"One model in base contract with the gun emplacement can fire it instead of his own weapon, following the normal rules for shooting."

Now, the Techmarines "own weapons" are the boltgun, flamer and plasma pistol - not the Thunderfire Cannon (that is a separate artillery piece). He is fulfilling the criteria to fire both weapons, that being, not firing a "weapon they are carrying" and also not firing "his own weapons".

So, with that in mind, can my Techmarine fire both the Thunderfire Cannon and the Quad Gun, at the same unit obviously?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Have a picture!

This is a very interesting question and I would really like to go into depth over it, but I running on so little sleep that I am sure I will miss something important. A quick review of the rules does seem to point to this being plausible. A flick through the FAQ hasn't changed any of the wording or addressed this in the question section, from what I can see. This has me fairly intrigued as it might be yet another rule that doesn't clash well with the poorly written gun encampment. In any case I think I shall keep an eye on this thread and see what other people think, but it is a very interesting concept and if I had more brain power available I might really enjoy toying with this idea.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Okay, I know I wasn't going to touch it but I did a quick flick through the book. The key to breaking this argument might lie on page 51, in the More then One Weapon rule. The limitation on shooting with a single attack might be enough to remove this loophole from play but again, can't focus enough to form a good argument either way.

A model may fire only one weapon per turn unless it's an MC or vehicle.

Now I thought about that too.

It states;

"Unless otherwise stated, if a model has more than one Shooting weapon, he must choose which one to shoot"

I would argue that the Techmarine is firing neither of the "weapons he has". Neither of them are on his profile, they're both separate weapons.

The point of difference being a Space Marine, he "has" a boltgun and a bolt pistol. He can't fire both.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
After a lengthy Facebook discussion we have boiled it down to this;

It says that you can fire the Quad Gun "instead of his own weapon"

This means that, RAW, if you don't have a shooting weapon to be the "instead of" you can't fire the Quad Gun.

The Techmarine isn't eligible to fire any of "his weapons" due to the Thunderfire Cannon. If you can't fire a gun, you can't do something instead of firing a gun.

Unfortunately for this scenario, it means the Techmarine can't fire the Quad Gun too.

BUT

It does open up a huge can of worms.

For example, Captain Lysander (or any Assault Terminator) do not have any shooting weapons, they can't use the Quad Gun instead.

This gets even worse when you look at the Witchfire psychic powers - they say that you use a Witchfire instead of making a shooting attack. Demon Prince without a gun? Can't use Witchfire attacks.

I don't think the gun emplacement requires it to be a shooting weapon, so you can fire it instead of shooting with a hammer if you like. Shooting weapons and close combat weapons are pretty similar in a rules-technical sense - they are mainly distinguished by close combat weapons having the Melee special rule. So from a technical point of view, I don't think there's anything wrong with eschewing shooting your Thunderhammer in favor of the Quadgun. It shouldn't be any different than a Heavy Bolter devastator marine model firing a (non-Heavy) gun emplacement after moving.
Or what I'm trying to say is, being barred from firing your regular weapon (it's Melee) doesn't bar you from firing a Gun Emplacement weapon.

But, on a different variation of this....

at double force org, you could have two defense lines. A monstrous creature could park between two quad guns and shoot both.

Doubtful this would ever happen, but food for thought.

 Green is Best! wrote:
But, on a different variation of this....

at double force org, you could have two defense lines. A monstrous creature could park between two quad guns and shoot both.

Doubtful this would ever happen, but food for thought.

Especially since the defense lines cannot be within 3" of each other.

120mm base says they don't have to be.

Didn't say it couldn't happen. Just adding on to the unlikelihood of it happening.

It says that you can fire the Quad Gun "instead of his own weapon"

In this case he can not fire his own weapon so he can not fire the gun either.

Right, but if it's the rule that of you can't fire a gun you can't fire the Quad Gun instead, what about Assault Terminators?

Are they prohibited from firing Quad Guns?

 AG. wrote:
Right, but if it's the rule that of you can't fire a gun you can't fire the Quad Gun instead, what about Assault Terminators?

Are they prohibited from firing Quad Guns?

It is not a rule that if you can't fire a gun you can't fire the Quad Gun instead...

Why would they be prohibited from firing Quad Guns, they do not have a rule prohibiting it.

"one crewman that is within 2" of a gun in the Shooting phase can fire it." (46)

"If a model has more than one Shooting weapon, he must choose which one to shoot - he cannot fire both in the same Shooting phase" (51)

These quotes tell us that a model can only shoot with one weapon in the shooting phase. Some models have exceptions, like MC's.

The Artillery crew does not have an exception.

 AG. wrote:
Now, the Techmarines "own weapons" are the boltgun, flamer and plasma pistol - not the Thunderfire Cannon (that is a separate artillery piece).

On what are you basing the idea that the Tfire being a separate artillery piece makes it not 'his weapon'...?

So let's use the entire quote, rather than selecting the parts you want and ignoring the rest.

"One model in base contract with the gun emplacement can fire it instead of his own weapon, following the normal rules for shooting."


The words "instead of his own weapon" are critical here. If the model doesn't have their own weapon to fire, they can't do something instead of firing it.

In terms of the Thunderfire Cannon being seperate thing, the unit composition is as follows;

One Thunderfire cannon
One Techmarine gunner

They are seperate.

 AG. wrote:
The words "instead of his own weapon" are critical here. If the model doesn't have their own weapon to fire, they can't do something instead of firing it.

In terms of the Thunderfire Cannon being seperate thing, the unit composition is as follows;

One Thunderfire cannon
One Techmarine gunner

They are seperate.

This is incorrect. A model is not required to have a weapon in order to fire the Quad gun.

Can you clarify as to why? Seeing as RAW, they do.

I love this stuff...
Cannot wait to check rule book at home.
Really going to look for wording like "cannot fire his own weapon".
Fantastic topic, especially since I have those models.

 AG. wrote:
The words "instead of his own weapon" are critical here. If the model doesn't have their own weapon to fire, they can't do something instead of firing it.

Sure they can. The simple fact of not having a weapon means that they can't fire it. So doing something that they can only do if they don't fire their own weapon is perfectly acceptable.

I disagree.

Here's the process;

Model wants to fire Quad Gun.

He must fire the Quad Gun instead of making a shooting attack

He elects not to shoot

He fires the Quad Gun.


If you don't have a shooting attack, you may not elect not to make one.

I think they are viewing it in the same way Vector Striking Heldrakes are ruled. Heldrakes only have one weapon, and the Vector Striking rules states that they are considered to have fired a weapon the following shooting phase. However, because they have four weapon slots, they are capable of having that rule count towards one of the empty weapon slots and still fire the lone weapon. This goes for flying monstrous creatures without weapons as well, or else they wouldn't be able to Vector Strike either.

The logic does work in this case as well:
All models with a ballistic score have at least one shooting attack. If they are not armed with a weapon, they still have this one shooting attack but simply lack the weapon profile to use it. If a rule was to state X is substituted for shooting a weapon, they can opt to have that count towards their non-existent weapon. If something gives them a weapon profile, then they would be able to opt to use that profile over their non-existent profile.

Guess the simplest way to put it is the lack of a weapon doesn't automatically mean you can never make shooting attacks, you just have to find the right situational rules that grant you a weapon profile.

 AG. wrote:
He must fire the Quad Gun instead of making a shooting attack.

If he doesn't have a shooting attack, then he is always going to be not making a shooting attack. Which satisfies the rule, He is not making a shooting attack, and so can fire the Quad Gun instead.

 insaniak wrote:

 AG. wrote:
If you don't have a shooting attack, you may not elect not to make one.

If he doesn't have a shooting attack, then he is always going to be not making a shooting attack. Which satisfies the rule, He is not making a shooting attack, and so can fire the Quad Gun instead.

Another example unit may choose to run instead of shooting. So by AG's logic a model that cannot shoot cannot run.

I think the rules are pretty clear that you cannot shoot the Thunderfire Cannon and a Quad Gun with the same Techmarine.

If, as everyone is agreeing to, you don't have to be eligible to fire a gun to instead fire the Quad Gun then I would say the rules are pretty clear that he can fire both.

Please provide written rules as to why he can't.

I think what people are saying is that being eligible to fire a gun is not the same as actually having a gun.

Again I submit that RAW the only requirement is that you have a weapon, and everybody is considered to be armed with a close combat weapon at least. The fact that you can't shoot with that weapon is irrelevant, in the same way that a Big Mek with a Shokk Attack Gun (Ordnance) can still snap fire with a Gun Emplacement after moving, even if he is barred from shooting his regular weapon.

A.G.,, you don't appear to have addressed this question:

 insaniak wrote:

 AG. wrote:
Now, the Techmarines "own weapons" are the boltgun, flamer and plasma pistol - not the Thunderfire Cannon (that is a separate artillery piece).

On what are you basing the idea that the Tfire being a separate artillery piece makes it not 'his weapon'...?

Which is kind of important to the issue...

 AG. wrote:


In terms of the Thunderfire Cannon being seperate thing, the unit composition is as follows;

One Thunderfire cannon
One Techmarine gunner

They are seperate.

This is where I address that issue.

Nope, that doesn't answer the question. I get that they're separate models. But how are you concluding that the weapon is not the Techmarine's?

tgjensen wrote:
the same way that a Big Mek with a Shokk Attack Gun (Ordnance) can still snap fire with a Gun Emplacement after moving, even if he is barred from shooting his regular weapon.

Why are you firing Snap Shots with a Weapon Emplacement after moving?

The Thunderfire Cannon is not listed in his Wargear.

Thus, it is not his.