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.

Under Wazdakkas rules, it clearly states that "when wazdakka uses a turbo boost, he may still fire his Weapons that turn."

This is a debate at my local gaming store, as one of our judges indicated that he may only fire one of his weapons. In the rule it clearly states he may fire his "weapons" plural. What is anyone else's thoughts on this?

Can't he normally shoot several weapons?
But yeah weaponS would hint at being able to shoot several of them

No he can't fire several normally.
And he has more than one weapon, so saying he can fire his "weapon" (singular) would be wrong.
Nothing in his rules allows for firing more than one weapon per turn.

He can fire his weapons. This is a permission to fire any of his weapons and turbo boosts.

He cannot fire ALL of his weapons. The use of weapons is correct in that he has more then one. It only means that any of the weapons is able to fire and none or individually restricted, It does not however mean he can fire more then one weapon. GW could have written he can fire "a weapon" and it would have been much more clear, but "can fire his weapons" is insufficient to give him permission to fire more weapons then he normally can.

But reading from his character description is "in a turn wazdakka turbo boosts he may still fire his weapons." Wouldn't they have just put "May fire a weapon if they meant that? Codex trumps core rulebook for character special rules correct? Even if a character can normally only fire one weapon, wouldn't "weapons" indicate more than one.

Not attempting to argue, just trying to understand why they worded it so poorly! :( haha

 Kans! More Kans! wrote:
But reading from his character description is "in a turn wazdakka turbo boosts he may still fire his weapons." Wouldn't they have just put "May fire a weapon if they meant that?

That would allow him to fire weapons he doesn't actually have... 'Yes, yer'honour, an Inferno Cannon is a weapon, and the rule says he can fire a weapon...'


The wording as is lets him fire any of his weapons. The normal shooting rules still prevent him from firing all of his weapons.

Codex trumps core rulebook for character special rules correct?

Only where there is actually a conflict.

Even if a character can normally only fire one weapon, wouldn't "weapons" indicate more than one.

No. It just indicates that he has more than one.

Not attempting to argue, just trying to understand why they worded it so poorly! :( haha

Because they don't believe in adequate proof-reading or play-testing before release, and the janitor is too busy scrubbing the floor in Bugmans to update the FAQs with any sort of regularity.

Thank you, at least it clears that up! Anyway fireing his heavy 4 str 8 AP 4 dakka cannons after moving 24" is nothing to scoff at! I like him a lot, and think ill try him out!