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.

So, if a monstrous creature is in base to base contact with two emplacements simultaneously, can it fire both of them in the same shooting phase, due to the the creature's innate ability to fire two weapons?

The rules do not cover models that can fire more than one weapon and how they function in regards with gun emplacements.

That's what I was concerned about, since this would most likely only be a question in a game using Stronghold Assault or a game in which two players place their guns oddly close to each other.

Is there any precedent on a monstrous creature firing one of its own weapons (or witchfire) and an emplacement in the same phase?

Since gun emplacements may be fired instead of its own weapon (singular), following the normal rules for shooting.

So in order to shoot 2 separate gun emplacements that are next to each other somehow, the monstrous creature would need to have 2 shooting weapons itself and be in base contact with both gun emplacements.

Interpreting rules found on brb page 105:
- must be in base contact
- firing a gun emplacement replaced a model's shooting weapon
- normal shooting rules still apply (interpreting this as allowing MC's that can shoot more than 1 weapon to shoot 2 gun emplacements if they have 2 ranged weapons to replace).



As for how this is even possible - you'd have to use either a fortification network or at least 2 separate fortifications that allow for the gun upgrades and then place them close enough together but still wholly within 6" of the fortification that purchased it as an upgrade. The latter option is more difficult since gun emplacements, like fortifications themselves, are terrain and cannot be placed within 3" of another piece. Fortification networks would be able to get around this but if you were running a SA mission where the defender can take up to 3 fortifications, large, oval-based MCs like the Wraithknight probably will be the only thing able to be in base contact with 2 gun emplacements that are 3" apart from each other.

That explanation seems sensible to me.

Thank you, Happyjew and Unholyllama.

I would say that's wrong. Proper English means if a model can fire the emplacement instead of it's weapon.

If a model has no shooting weapon then it simply fires the emplacement weapon there is no instead of it's since it has none.

Provided of course the model has a BS and is capable of firing a ranged weapon.