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 I give my Exarch "Fast Shot", can he shoot the icarus lascannon in the ADL twice? If he can, that's pretty awesome. And the other ADL gun would be awesome to shoot twice as well.

First - it depends on how you define "his" weapon. If you define it as the weapon the model comes with/purchases then it won't work. If you define it to be the weapon being used for the attack it works.

Second - you might want to re-read what Fast Shot does as you do not fire the weapon twice.

The gun emplacement rules are clear on this.

You are firing the gun instead of your model's Own weapons.

Happyjew wrote:First - it depends on how you define "his" weapon. If you define it as the weapon the model comes with/purchases then it won't work. If you define it to be the weapon being used for the attack it works.

Second - you might want to re-read what Fast Shot does as you do not fire the weapon twice.

I see, it allows you to fire one more shot.

You can only set your gun or the gun emplacement on fire. Fast shot allows you to set the gun emplacement on fire twice if you choose to.

 Rismonite wrote:
Fast shot allows you to set the gun emplacement on fire twice if you choose to.

Re-read what Fast Shot does.

Eldar Codex wrote:This model always fires one more shot than is normal for his weapon

I've asked in the past wrote:When the exarch uses a quad gun or an icarus lascannon, does this count as 'his' weapon or is 'his' weapon what he brought with him(ie, only his actual wargear)?

This is as far as this one has ever got - it really depends on your opponant. If they're fine with you shooting the same skyfire interceptor lascannon twice at them, then go for it.

IME, most people argue against it - whether its right or not is another matter, they just read it as 'no, its only the weapons the exarch is carrying' as that means they only have to take one shot on their flier instead of two.

Predakhaine: I already answered this question with a requirement to read the Gun emplacement rules in the BRB.

You fire the Gun in a gun emplacement instead of your own weapons.

Fast shot would not allow an additional shot from a gun emplacement(a good thing when the gun emplacement in question is a battlecannon)

 Happyjew wrote:

 Rismonite wrote:
Fast shot allows you to set the gun emplacement on fire twice if you choose to.

Re-read what Fast Shot does.

Oh.. You're right. It looks like he always has to set the gun emplacement on fire twice

 Rismonite wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:

 Rismonite wrote:
Fast shot allows you to set the gun emplacement on fire twice if you choose to.

Re-read what Fast Shot does.

Oh.. You're right. It looks like he always has to set the gun emplacement on fire twice

Read it again...

So it depends on how many shots his personal weapon has and then +1?

 Rismonite wrote:
So it depends on how many shots his personal weapon has and then +1?

Right. Assault 2 becomes Assault 3.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Rismonite wrote:
So it depends on how many shots his personal weapon has and then +1?

Right. Assault 2 becomes Assault 3.

So he sets the gun emplacement on fire three times wow..

 Rismonite wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Rismonite wrote:
So it depends on how many shots his personal weapon has and then +1?

Right. Assault 2 becomes Assault 3.

So he sets the gun emplacement on fire three times wow..

Where are you getting this whole set the gun emplacement on fire thing?

Dont feed the troll.

I didn't mean to be a troll. I just thought it was funny to say. Fire has more than one meaning in the dictionary.

He fires gun emplacement 3 times yes I understand now but honestly thought it was twice3 posts ago

A model with Fast Shot fires one extra shot. If firing an Assault 2 weapon, it is treated as an Assault 3. If firing a Heavy 20 weapon it is treated as a Heavy 21.

 Rismonite wrote:
He fires gun emplacement 3 times

Which gun emplacement?
The Lascannon is heavy 1, quad gun heavy 4
So 2 and 5 respectfully. Assuming the skill works with these weapons.

 grendel083 wrote:

Rismoniteh554220 6086047 fd1e8d23c8aa22d5788db60d361f0e72.jpg wrote:He fires gun emplacement 3 times

Which gun emplacement?
The Lascannon is heavy 1, quad gun heavy 4
So 2 and 5 respectfully. Assuming the skill works with these weapons.

While he is firing the gun on gun emplacement is it considered "his" weapon? If it's "his" then he fires the lascannon twice right?

If it isn't "his" then would you fire the lascannon on the gun emplacement the same number of times as "his" weapon plus one? (So if "his" weapon was assault 2 you would fire the lascannon on the gun emplacement 2+1 times?)

 Rismonite wrote:
While he is firing the gun on gun emplacement is it considered "his" weapon? If it's "his" then he fires the lascannon twice right?

Correct.
Assuming fast shot works with gun emplacements. I don't have the exact wording with me to check.

If it isn't "his" then would you fire the lascannon on the gun emplacement the same number of times as "his" weapon plus one? (So if "his" weapon was assault 2 you would fire the lascannon on the gun emplacement 2+1 times?)

No, it's the answer above. He's shooting this weapon, not his other weapon. One weapon has no bearing on the other.

Yes, fast shot works when a model possessing the rule fires said gun emplacement.

Care to back that claim up?

 grendel083 wrote:

 Rismonite wrote:
While he is firing the gun on gun emplacement is it considered "his" weapon? If it's "his" then he fires the lascannon twice right?

Correct.
Assuming fast shot works with gun emplacements. I don't have the exact wording with me to check.

If it isn't "his" then would you fire the lascannon on the gun emplacement the same number of times as "his" weapon plus one? (So if "his" weapon was assault 2 you would fire the lascannon on the gun emplacement 2+1 times?)

No, it's the answer above. He's shooting this weapon, not his other weapon. One weapon has no bearing on the other.

This is the part that is troubling me;
Gun Emplacement: One model in base contact with the gun emplacement can fire it instead of his own weapon, following the normal rules for shooting.


Eldar Codex wrote:
This model always fires one more shot than is normal for his weapon

The gun emplacement rule uses specific language stating that gun on the gun emplacement -isn't- 'his' (the Exarch's) weapon.. Then the Eldar codex specifies the Fast Shot rule is refering to a weapon that is "his" (The Exarch's).

I'm just not sure how we can say the lascannon on the emplacement is "The Exarch's".

The emplacement, according to the BRB, uses the same rules as guns within, say, a bastion.

Taking the reading of the rules for gun emplacements, guns within a bastion, the wording of Fast Shot within the Eldar Codex, the fact that the Exarch is utilizing the emplacement as the weapon he is firing that turn, essentially making it "his" weapon for that shooting phase, and the (albeit anecdotal) fact that I've personally discussed this with TO's in 4 FLGS in my area for tournaments (because I run the Dark Reaper/Icarus combo), I'm confident it would be allowed and would hold up under scrutiny.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Think of it this way:

Does the Reaper Rangefinder, which denies jink saves, or the exarch power Night Vision, take effect when the dark reaper exarch fires the quadgun or lascannon? An argument can be made that night vision doesn't apply, sure, but what about the rangefinder? If I recall correctly the diction of that section states "shots fired from a model with this piece of wargear" or something close to it, yet reaper rangefinder affects the emplacement.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Specifically it's the part where it says the weapon "follows normal rules for shooting," i.e. would this exarch power normally affect the weapon fired by a model? If yes, then the lascannon/quadgun, and by extension the heavy bolters in a bastion, or any weapon that can be fired utilizing the special powers of said character.

deathmagiks wrote:
The emplacement, according to the BRB, uses the same rules as guns within, say, a bastion.

Taking the reading of the rules for gun emplacements, guns within a bastion, the wording of Fast Shot within the Eldar Codex, the fact that the Exarch is utilizing the emplacement as the weapon he is firing that turn, essentially making it "his" weapon for that shooting phase, and the (albeit anecdotal) fact that I've personally discussed this with TO's in 4 FLGS in my area for tournaments (because I run the Dark Reaper/Icarus combo), I'm confident it would be allowed and would hold up under scrutiny.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Think of it this way:

Does the Reaper Rangefinder, which denies jink saves, or the exarch power Night Vision, take effect when the dark reaper exarch fires the quadgun or lascannon? An argument can be made that night vision doesn't apply, sure, but what about the rangefinder? If I recall correctly the diction of that section states "shots fired from a model with this piece of wargear" or something close to it, yet reaper rangefinder affects the emplacement.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Specifically it's the part where it says the weapon "follows normal rules for shooting," i.e. would this exarch power normally affect the weapon fired by a model? If yes, then the lascannon/quadgun, and by extension the heavy bolters in a bastion, or any weapon that can be fired utilizing the special powers of said character.

Except that the rules for Fast Shot specifiy "his weapon" and the rules for firing from gun emplacements specify that it is used instead of the model's own weapon.

You are correct that shooting the gun emplacement engages the ability of Fast Shot as that is part of the Exarch's normal shooting, however Fast Shot requires the Exarch's own weapon to be used, which a gun emplacement is specifically described as not.

My point is you're splitting hairs when you say that for 2 reasons:

1) The Exarch, would he use fast shot on a bastion's heavy bolter, would use fast shot because the rules under that state it is used as his weapon for that turn. Rules of gun emplacements follow this line of reasoning as well in the BRB

2) Reaper Rangefinder, something that specifically states that it originates from "a model with this wargear," is applicable on a gun emplacement, even though the gun emplacement is, in fact, it's own model, and has it's own stat-line.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The ruling I've repeatedly heard from officials involved in local tournaments is that, for the purposes of fast shot and a gun emplacement, the part of the rule that states "follows normal rules" is more important than the distinction between "his" and "not his" weapon because of the precedent of utilizing emplacement weapons on other fortifications.

Look up the definition of "his".

It means association or ownership. Therefore the Icarus Lascannon is "his" weapon, association, in regards to Fast Shot allowing a second shot.

 Zagman wrote:
Look up the definition of "his".

It means association or ownership. Therefore the Icarus Lascannon is "his" weapon, association, in regards to Fast Shot allowing a second shot.

So this is MY forum, seeing as I am using it?. He is assoicated with his gun, and he owns his gun, for the gun emplacment he is using it instead of his own gun. (Say i was driving around in a stolen car, police wont do nothing right, i am using it after all so by assoication its my car?. Dont think I would try that one to be honest same as I wouldnt try to say dakka is mine.)

Just imagine a exarch on the krakstorm....

deathmagiks wrote:
My point is you're splitting hairs when you say that for 2 reasons:

1) The Exarch, would he use fast shot on a bastion's heavy bolter, would use fast shot because the rules under that state it is used as his weapon for that turn. Rules of gun emplacements follow this line of reasoning as well in the BRB

2) Reaper Rangefinder, something that specifically states that it originates from "a model with this wargear," is applicable on a gun emplacement, even though the gun emplacement is, in fact, it's own model, and has it's own stat-line.

It's not a matter of splitting hairs, it's following what the rules say. Your points are invalid because:

1) The rules for gun emplacements specifically make a distinction between the firer's own weapon and the gun emplacement. Fast shot only applies to the model's weapon. The gun emplacement is fired instead of the model's weapon, thus it is not the model's weapon for the purposes of Fast Shot.

2) The wording for Reaper Rangefinder is completely different, and therefore completely irrelevant.

The ruling I've repeatedly heard from officials involved in local tournaments is that, for the purposes of fast shot and a gun emplacement, the part of the rule that states "follows normal rules" is more important than the distinction between "his" and "not his" weapon because of the precedent of utilizing emplacement weapons on other fortifications.

And if you went back in time and asked the shape of the earth many experts would tell you it was flat. Arguments to authority often don't work because they're still wrong on the relevant issues.

 Zagman wrote:
Look up the definition of "his".

It means association or ownership. Therefore the Icarus Lascannon is "his" weapon, association, in regards to Fast Shot allowing a second shot.

Wrong. "His" is the possessive form of "he". Possessive. Ownership. The model is using the Icarus Lascannon but does not own it; it is still not the model's weapon.

This is why it needs faq'ing.
Because we only ever get as far as the argument stage.

I don't think its possible to reach a consensus on this one.

PS: No one thought the earth was flat, that was a myth
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_Flat_Earth