Switch Theme:

And/or weapon replacement in the codex  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in nz
Stealthy Space Wolves Scout




In ur base, killin ur d00dz

Had a game this past weekend with a fellow Wolves player. One of his units had a wolf guard in power armour with two combi-meltas. Curious, I asked him how that was possible. He pointed to the entry on Wolf Guard in the Space Wolves codex that says "Any Wolf Guard model may replace bolt pistol and/or close combat weapon with:" and then a list of equipment and among them are the combi weapon options. His reasoning was that he had replaced his bolt pistol with combi-melta A and then replaced his CCW with combi-melta B and that made it legal.

Unfortunately I don't own a rulebook myself to check so hopefully I can get a definitive yes or no answer with something to back it up.

I'm not sure if other codices have options for the "replace weapon with and/or etc", I'd assume they would but my question is whether this is legal or not. It seems like a really good option because I know I wouldn't mind having a combi-flamer in one hand and a combi-melta in the other to pop vehicles and scorch the unit inside.

Is this allowed?
   
Made in us
Captain of the Forlorn Hope





Chicago, IL

The something to back it up, you posted.

"Any Wolf Guard model may replace bolt pistol and/or close combat weapon with:"

He can replace bolt pistol with...

He can replace close combat weapon with...

He can replace bolt pistol with a selection, and can replace his close combat weapon with a selection.

Legal under the And/Or language in the rule you posted.

P.S. a lot of codexes have options for the "replace weapon with and/or etc" in them.

However you can not pop vehicles and scorch the unit inside in the same shooting phase, for a few reasons.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/05/13 04:00:22


"Did you notice a sign out in front of my chapel that said "Land Raider Storage"?" -High Chaplain Astorath the Grim Redeemer of the Lost.

I sold my soul to the devil and now the bastard is demanding a refund!

We do not have an attorney-client relationship. I am not your lawyer. The statements I make do not constitute legal advice. Any statements made by me are based upon the limited facts you have presented, and under the premise that you will consult with a local attorney. This is not an attempt to solicit business. This disclaimer is in addition to any disclaimers that this website has made.
 
   
Made in nz
Stealthy Space Wolves Scout




In ur base, killin ur d00dz

 DeathReaper wrote:
The something to back it up, you posted.

"Any Wolf Guard model may replace bolt pistol and/or close combat weapon with:"

He can replace bolt pistol with...

He can replace close combat weapon with...

He can replace bolt pistol with a selection, and can replace his close combat weapon with a selection.

Legal under the And/Or language in the rule you posted.

P.S. a lot of codexes have options for the "replace weapon with and/or etc" in them.

However you can not pop vehicles and scorch the unit inside in the same shooting phase, for a few reasons.


Cheers, just wanted to make sure it was RAW and not RAI before I tried something similar in a tourney and got blasted for it.

My bad on the vehicle popping, I know that wasn't allowed I meant pop it one turn and scorch it the next but I forgot to clarify that.
   
Made in us
Hellish Haemonculus






Boskydell, IL

Pretty sure the majority of players say that yes, yes it is.

I believe that there is a small minority that disagree, however.

Welcome to the Freakshow!

(Leadership-shenanigans for Eldar of all types.) 
   
Made in au
Boom! Leman Russ Commander





Brisbane, Australia

 Jimsolo wrote:
Pretty sure the majority of players say that yes, yes it is.

I believe that there is a small minority that disagree, however.



Don't be so dismissive; remember, last edition a small minority decided that the pretty clear RAW for every entry of PotMS was inccorect, and we had to lose 50% of the effectiveness of that rule as a result.

 
   
Made in be
Kelne





That way,then left

Page 81 of the space wolf codex, and in most books just before the army list is a paragraph explaining how these options work.
It does state that in this case you can replace both item , provided you pay both upgrades
   
Made in us
Heroic Senior Officer





Woodbridge, VA

And FYI, if I'm playing you in a tournament, I will expect you to have a rulebook and a copy of your codex..............

Don "MONDO"
www.ironfistleague.com
Northern VA/Southern MD 
   
Made in gb
Stalwart Veteran Guard Sergeant





Plymouth

im just wondering since this is a direct rules question not a understanding why an answer other than get a rule book and check was even given with the driect admirtance of not owning a rule book. in contradiction of the the forum's rules that we cannot be a replacement for a rulebook or army book

   
Made in be
Kelne





That way,then left

The thing is, this IS a rule question in that the wording has to be explained/ reference given.
This is NOT a "how many points does xxx cost?" , but a "Does THIS work or not?"
   
Made in gb
Stalwart Veteran Guard Sergeant





Plymouth

and if the op owned either rewquired books he would know the answer making it a question

   
Made in be
Kelne





That way,then left

This question is basically relevant for any codex (except maybe tyranids and deamons) so knowing this info is just before the army list is necessary
   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka




Vanished Completely

I, personally, find the choice of And/Or to be... annoying.... It does not create the results that the vast majority, myself included, believe the Authors intended. This is because the literal reading of those sentences make it so you can replace 'A or B with X' or 'A and B with X,' preventing one from replacing A with X before replacing B with X. However there would never be a point in replacing A and B with X, given that you are sacrificing either A or B for no additional gain, so this literal reading can not be the intended outcome. This is why the majority believe the Authors intended for the and/or to mean that A and B can be swapped for 2 X.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/05/15 22:33:37


8th made it so I can no longer sway Tau onto the side of Chaos, but they will eventually turn aside from their idea of the Greater Good to embrace the Greatest of pleasures.  
   
Made in us
Mutilatin' Mad Dok





JinxDragon wrote:
This is why the majority believe the Authors intended for the and/or to mean that A and B can be swapped for 2 X.


Slow down there with that "majority" talk, son. Maybe that's the prevailing opinion in your playgroup, but I've never run into anyone with that interpretation. The only interpretation I've ever seen is that each could be replaced individually, including the right to replace the second one after the first has been replaced, and if you want to replace both with one selection, there's no reason to do so but there's also no reason not to have the option.
   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka




Vanished Completely

I'm a little confused:
Are you saying you have never seen anyone replace both a ranged weapon and a close combat weapon with 2 items from the following list, all on a single model?
Cause that is a very, very, common build and the vast majority here do clearly believe it is a legal one.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/05/15 23:21:47


8th made it so I can no longer sway Tau onto the side of Chaos, but they will eventually turn aside from their idea of the Greater Good to embrace the Greatest of pleasures.  
   
Made in us
Mutilatin' Mad Dok





Oops, I think there was confusion. I was parsing your 2X as meaning that you could only take two copies of the same thing. If you mean two selections from the list, that was what I was arguing for. Sorry about the misunderstanding.
   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka




Vanished Completely

Indeed, 2 X was meant to represent selecting 'one from the following list' twice.

8th made it so I can no longer sway Tau onto the side of Chaos, but they will eventually turn aside from their idea of the Greater Good to embrace the Greatest of pleasures.  
   
 
Forum Index » 40K You Make Da Call
Go to: