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.

If you have 4 puppies and give each of them to a different person, how many have you given away?

 vipoid wrote:
If you have 4 puppies and give each of them to a different person, how many have you given away?

0, I ate them all.

 statu wrote:
I have 4 puppies. I give away 2 of them. I give each puppy to a different person. How many puppies have I given away?

I find people who argue this laughable. It is obvious the intent of the rule. again, use some dang common sense. Look at the Stormsurge. GW would not make a model that has 8 weapons if it can only fire 2. Who would EVER fire a TL flamer/TL burst cannon or smart missile system when you have a str 10 AP2 Large blast and a 4D6 missile launcher.

The SS is balanced ONLY when assuming firing all weapons. If you can fire only 2 it would be ridiculously overcosted.

I'm not making any argument about the intended rules, only the rules as they are physically written in the book. I generally end up changing most of the rules in the book so me and the guy I'm playing with can enjoy the game. Regardless of the intention of the rules, or the model or house rules, as the rules in the book are, a GMC can only fire two weapons a turn, whether that's how people will play it or not is a completely different issue

notredameguy10 wrote:
GW would not make a model that has 8 weapons if it can only fire 2.

Why not? Almost every single space marine has two weapons, but can only fire one.

Who would EVER fire a TL flamer/TL burst cannon or smart missile system when you have a str 10 AP2 Large blast and a 4D6 missile launcher.

Someone who didn't want to fire a Str10 AP2 large blast at a model 3 inches in front of their suit?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:
If you have 4 puppies and give each of them to a different person, how many have you given away?

That's not the setup here, though.

You have 4 puppies, are allowed to give away 2 puppies, and can give each of them to a different person.

 statu wrote:
I'm not making any argument about the intended rules, only the rules as they are physically written in the book. I generally end up changing most of the rules in the book so me and the guy I'm playing with can enjoy the game. Regardless of the intention of the rules, or the model or house rules, as the rules in the book are, a GMC can only fire two weapons a turn, whether that's how people will play it or not is a completely different issue

Again, you cannot make that statement as it is false. The book does not say that. They book says they fire each weapon (each meaning every single one) at a different target. If it followed MC rules and only allow two they would have written BOTH not EACH


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 insaniak wrote:


You have 4 puppies, are allowed to give away 2 puppies, and can give each of them to a different person.

They would have written "both", not "each" in the rule then. Writing "each" clearly indicates more than 2

RAW states that it can only fire two and given just how damn powerful the Tau are right now, not to mention how OP GC are I think that this interpretation is perfectly acceptable.

 master of ordinance wrote:
RAW states that it can only fire two and given just how damn powerful the Tau are right now, not to mention how OP GC are I think that this interpretation is perfectly acceptable.

Sorry buddy, but raw does not say that at all. re-read the rules again

I am glad every tournament I play in uses ITC rules so i don't have to argue with people like you over something so obvious

Again, ITC, White Dwarf, GW customer service, and common sense all say fire all weapons.

notredameguy10 wrote:

 statu wrote:
I'm not making any argument about the intended rules, only the rules as they are physically written in the book. I generally end up changing most of the rules in the book so me and the guy I'm playing with can enjoy the game. Regardless of the intention of the rules, or the model or house rules, as the rules in the book are, a GMC can only fire two weapons a turn, whether that's how people will play it or not is a completely different issue

Again, you cannot make that statement as it is false. The book does not say that. They book says they fire each weapon (each meaning every single one) at a different target. If it followed MC rules and only allow two they would have written BOTH not EACH

Again, how does a rule that tells me what I'm allowed to shoot at suddenly change how many weapons I can shoot? It would need to be worded along the lines of "... may fire each weapon, and at different targets..." in order to fire more weapons than the Monstrous Creature rules allow.

notredameguy10 wrote:

They would have written "both", not "each" in the rule then.

'Both' would be grammatically bad.

'Each' is the correct word for that rule, but it is not in itself a permission to fire every weapon, just to fire every weapon that you are firing at a different target.

Sigh, Im done arguing with people. All games I have ever played allowed GC to fire all weapons, that is how all tournaments play, and that is how RAI is obviously supposed to be, that is how White dwarf and GW employees have said it should be, and thats how the community voted for the ITC by a wide margin. I agree RAW is ambiguous, but trying to argue against RAI is wrong.

This sounds like a wonderful thread for the butthurt babies rules forum.

 statu wrote:
I have 4 puppies. I give away 2 of them. I give each puppy to a different person. How many puppies have I given away?

You heartless monster!

oh, and why the RAI is that they can shoot all the weapons? A dread can shoot all and a MC not. What if GW wants to keep that on the huge versions?
That is a valid argument like any other. No mention the RAW of course.

Also the argument based on "they have a lot of weapons, that means they can shoot all!".................well:
- The defiler had a flammer and an ordenance weapon...That doesnt make sense so I will argue that the RAI is that he has a rule that make him doesnt count the battle cannon as ordenance.... nope (sadly xD). Or in general any tank with ordenance weapon and more other kind of weapons).
- The eldar wraithlord can carry (at least on older book) a lance, a laser and 2 flammers...four weapons!!!!!! That sure means they can shoot all!!!!!...nope again xD
- The warptalons are like a better demoniac version of rapaxes....but dont have grenades....meh, that sure is gw forgot to place them.....sadly no haha
- Characters with several invulnerables saves...or with two FNP saves....
- eldar bikes with battle trance rule even if they cant run
- the option of pay assault grenades for basic I2 orks (is near like a joke haha)
- Slaanesh mark on units like obliterators...they always have a fist (so no reasson of raise I) and cant pay for the FNP option (so no really good point of put the mark....but the mark is not free..........xD


I want to say that we can't use logic on the game. A GMC shooting 2 weapons could hurt someone...but is the rule. And of course they can shoot their weapons to different enemies...just need to choose what of the weapons will shoot hahaha

Franarok wrote:
oh, and why the RAI is that they can shoot all the weapons? A dread can shoot all and a MC not. What if GW wants to keep that on the huge versions?
That is a valid argument like any other. No mention the RAW of course.

Also the argument based on "they have a lot of weapons, that means they can shoot all!".................well:
- The defiler had a flammer and an ordenance weapon...That doesnt make sense so I will argue that the RAI is that he has a rule that make him doesnt count the battle cannon as ordenance.... nope (sadly xD). Or in general any tank with ordenance weapon and more other kind of weapons).
- The eldar wraithlord can carry (at least on older book) a lance, a laser and 2 flammers...four weapons!!!!!! That sure means they can shoot all!!!!!...nope again xD
- The warptalons are like a better demoniac version of rapaxes....but dont have grenades....meh, that sure is gw forgot to place them.....sadly no haha
- Characters with several invulnerables saves...or with two FNP saves....
- eldar bikes with battle trance rule even if they cant run
- the option of pay assault grenades for basic I2 orks (is near like a joke haha)
- Slaanesh mark on units like obliterators...they always have a fist (so no reasson of raise I) and cant pay for the FNP option (so no really good point of put the mark....but the mark is not free..........xD


I want to say that we can't use logic on the game. A GMC shooting 2 weapons could hurt someone...but is the rule. And of course they can shoot their weapons to different enemies...just need to choose what of the weapons will shoot hahaha

Again, every single source has confirmed they shoot all weapons. So stop arguing.

notredameguy10 wrote:

Again, every single source has confirmed they shoot all weapons. So stop arguing.

Well, every source except the one that is actually valid...

 insaniak wrote:

notredameguy10 wrote:

Again, every single source has confirmed they shoot all weapons. So stop arguing.

Well, every source except the one that is actually valid...

And the BRB is debatable for RAW both ways, so you have to look at context to determine RAI.

1.) GC like the Stormsurge have 8+ weapons. They would not be making GC with that many weapons, many of which are terrible like TL flamers, if they did not intend for all weapons to be shot.

2.) Super Heavies can shoot all weapons, so it makes sense GC should be able to as well

That is why ~80% of the community voted this way.

notredameguy10 wrote:
1.) GC like the Stormsurge have 8+ weapons. They would not be making GC with that many weapons, many of which are terrible like TL flamers, if they did not intend for all weapons to be shot.

You keep saying that as if GW haven't put redundant weapons on other models before...

2.) Super Heavies can shoot all weapons, so it makes sense GC should be able to as well

Walkers can shoot all weapons, but monstrous creatures can only shoot two.

So it would also make sense for superheavies and Gargantuan Creatures to follow a similar pattern.


Don't get me wrong, I agree that the RAI was most likely that GCs can fire everything they have. But the rules as they currently stand (IMO) don't allow it, and the RAI isn't as clear-cut as you're trying to make out. The most obvious answer (even when you can get everyone to agree on just what that is) isn't always the right one, where GW's rules are concerned.

EDIT Sorry, nothing to see, page late, MOD can delete

The people I play with play GMCs that fire all their weapons.

So, the discussion on how many weapons a GMC can shoot versus why give the the Stormsurge 8 weapons reminded me of this specific chain of rules, if we assume GMC are MCs when shooting:

MORE THAN ONE WEAPON
Unless otherwise stated, 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.

SELECT A WEAPON
First, select a weapon that one or more models in your unit are equipped with. The selected weapon cannot be one that the unit has shot with during this phase.

So, basic rules are one weapon per model, weapons cannot fire twice.

SHOOTING
Monstrous Creatures can fire up to two of their weapons each Shooting phase – they must, of course, fire both at the same target. They may never Go to Ground, voluntarily or otherwise.

So, advanced rules for MCs are two weapons at the same target, weapons cannot fire twice.

GARGANTUAN & FLYING GARGANTUAN CREATURES
Gargantuan Creatures are Monstrous Creatures that have the additional rules and exceptions given below.

SHOOTING
When a Gargantuan Creature or Flying Gargantuan Creature makes a shooting attack, it may fire each of its weapons at a different target if desired.

So, more advanced rules for GMCs are two weapons, each at a target each, weapons cannot be fired twice.

Stabilizing Anchors: In your Shooting phase, in addition to firing normally, a Stormsurge can begin deploying its anchors; from then on the Stormsurge cannot move under any circumstances or make Stomp attacks. In the Shooting phase of your next turn, and in each subsequent Shooting phase, a Stormsurge with its anchors deployed can fire twice. Make the second shooting attack directly after the first has been resolved.

So, specific rules for the Stormsurge are that with anchors down, can fire four weapons, each at a different target, weapons cannot fire twice.

Why are people assuming the Stormsurge can fire the same weapons twice? If GMCs can only fire two weapons, and those weapons cannot be fired twice without specific permission to do so, the Stormsurge with anchors down can fire half of its weapons each turn. If, however, GMCs can always fire all of it's weapons each turn, the Stabilizing Anchors special rule does not necessarily grant the ability to fire each weapon twice, it only grants the model with the ability to fire twice. The second shooting attack doubles the attacks from 2 to 4, just like the MC rules doubled the normal infantry attacks from 1 to 2.

Something to consider.

SJ

"Each" is hilariously ambigous, and works both ways in the English Language. But I'd argue it doesn't mention how many weapons you can shoot, it only allows you to shoot them at different targets rather then having to shoot them all at the same one. Unless I've misread something somewhere on my phone (which is probable).

Edit: can MC's shoot multiple targets? Otherwise it seems to qualify GMC's to do that.

People have said this is a GW mistake, that they do things like add an extra invun save to models all the time. That is not a mistake. If a vindicare assassin shoots your model with 2 invuns, guess what? He still has one if he is using shield breaker. Thats RARELY used, but not NEVER.

I have yet to see ONE PERSON explain to me when you would EVER use the twin linked burst cannon on the stormsurge.

If you can only use 2 guns, when would you use it? Lets pretend you dont want to shoot your main gun for fear of scatter onto your own models. Seems like a perfect time to use the other guns right? Well what else do we have? We have a multiple missile launcher that is str 5 ap 5, 4d6 shots, which average out to 14 shots, that have a decently long range. Then we have the smart missile system. 4 twin linked str 5 ap 5 shots that ALSO ignore cover. Finally we come to the stock loadout burst cannon. 18 inch range, so already shortest range. 4 shots twin linked, same as the SMS. same str and ap as the SMS, but it has no ignores cover. So literally inferior to both alternate weapons in every way.

GMC cannot have weapons blown off like vehicles can, so its never going to be needed for a backup weapon. So when would you use this. And for flavor over the SMS is not valid, thats you choosing to use an inferior weapon for no reason.

So in order for that slot's weapon to even be considered it must be upgraded to an alternate gun.like the airbursting frag projector. At least that is a pie plate that if you get a large group under is more effective than say the SMS. Which means to use it any time you are paying more points than the loadout.

These weapons were meant to shoot together. Its painfully obvious to all but those who dont want to see yet more power creep in the game, which I agree is getting out of hand. But that is no reason to plug your ears and say "LALALA" at something clearly meant to run another way.

Having a bunch of guns doesn't mean anything other than having a bunch of guns.

 Ghaz wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Because GW is famous for logic and clear reasoning. They would do that and they have done that e.g. Wraithlords can have 4 weapons but can only shoot 2.

They also gave Captain Lysander three Invulnerable saves (Terminator Armour, Storm Shield and Iron Halo) when he can only ever use one of them.

Actually, it would make less sense if he DIDN'T have 3 invulnerable saves. Terminator armour grants one stock, thundershield grants one stock, and being a captain, the badge of rank, the Iron Halo, grants one stock. In Lysander's case, GW is being perfectly logical and clear.

The Stormsurge is really for 2k pts games or more. It isn't designed to be a solo unit, but to compliment an army.

That's the main reason why.

Myc wrote:
The Stormsurge is really for 2k pts games or more. It isn't designed to be a solo unit, but to compliment an army.

That's the main reason why.

I think most of these statements are completely false...

Myc wrote:
The Stormsurge is really for 2k pts games or more. It isn't designed to be a solo unit, but to compliment an army.

That's the main reason why.

Weather its balanced or OP like the wraithknight has nothing to do with mechanics. For the points I could take two riptide s and that probably shouldn't occur at less than 2k. Yet you see games with 2 or even 3 at 1500. That dosent mean since you don't like the rules you can limit them to firing one of their two weapons, or overcharging their shields.

 Orock wrote:
I have yet to see ONE PERSON explain to me when you would EVER use the twin linked burst cannon on the stormsurge..

Probably the same sort of situation in which you would use a space marine biker's bolt pistol...

Clearly they fire all weapons. No issue from where I was sitting. Clearly the reference to monstrous creatures applies to firing LIKE them, not AS them. So LIKE Monstrous creatures, they are pointing out that you can fire them and charge etc... They are not a Monstrous Creature so therefoe the permission to fire more than one is not given. It then modifies this to say that it CAN fire them all at separate targets.

This was the intent. So RAW could tangentially be read as "they follow all the rules for firing with a monstrous creature" but thats not what it says. It says when they are firing them, they fire like them, meaning essentially relentless and so on. I get where the RAW crowd is trying to go on it. But I think they are reading into the rule more by suggesting that you should follow ALL the rules for Monstrous Creatures than just the part about HOW they fire WHEN they fire (and WHEN they fire their weapons is aseparate issue from how many).


So as GW has said here, there is definitely ROOM to misinterprate what was meant.

It's also the natural reaction of gamers to nerf their enemies using any rationale they can find. It happens every time a new unit comes out. Every. single. Time.

Shake it off and fire away.