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.

I play Charcadons which allow me to have a Boltgun, Bolt pistol, and a CCW. Is it legal for me to fire the Boltgun in overwatch and then claim the extra attack from having a pistol and CCW in the combat that follows?

The weapon you fire in the Shooting Phase/Overwatch has no bearing on what weapon you use in Melee.

Not quite true but close enough. A weapon with a dual profile has special rules but if you are not using one then there is nothing limiting your weapon usage.

From my understanding the rules only specify that you cannot assault an enemy unit after firing rapid fire weapons. In this case you are not assaulting anyone, you are being assaulted, so firing your rapid fire bolters then fighting with your close combat weapons in the ensuing melee seems completely legal.

I don't recall seeing any rules stating that the weapon you fire just prior to the assault phase is the weapon you must use in melee during the assault phase. There are rules however with certain weapons stating you can not assault after firing them (which doesn't affect you here).

The relevant rule is found on page 42 BRB: "Models that shoot with Rapid Fire weapons in the Shooting phase cannot charge in the ensuing Assault phase."

Pg. 45 BRB: "An Overwatch attack is resolved like a normal shooting attack (albeit one resolved in the enemy's Assault phase) and uses all the normal rules for range, line of sight, cover saves and so on."

The unit firing Overwatch is not charging into melee, so there is no restriction about changing weapons once you move to the Assault phase. Just remember that not all weapons can be fired in Overwatch.

From my reading, perfectly legal, and fluffy.

 Deadshot wrote:
From my reading, perfectly legal, and fluffy.

I'm not sure how it's particularly fluffy for a unit being charged to be able to fire boltguns at their attackers and then switch to melee weapons while the guys charging at them can't...

Not sure fluffy is the right word, but I can see a squad of marines dumping their bolter mags into an oncoming attack and then dropping them to whip out a pistol and chainsword/ccw.

 Wolf_in_Human_Shape wrote:
Not sure fluffy is the right word, but I can see a squad of marines dumping their bolter mags into an oncoming attack and then dropping them to whip out a pistol and chainsword/ccw.

Absolutely. The point was just that it's a bit odd that the defender can do that while the attacker can't... but can still do it with, say, a meltagun.

The Rapid Fire assault restriction is just weird.

I guess its just easier to switch weapons when you're bracing yourself to receive a charging enemy than when you're hurling yourself across the battlefield to get to grips with the enemy.

 Ghaz wrote:
I guess its just easier to switch weapons when you're bracing yourself to receive a charging enemy than when you're hurling yourself across the battlefield to get to grips with the enemy.

Sure... but then why only apply it to rapid fire weapons? Is it harder to drop a bolter than a meltagun?

 insaniak wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
I guess its just easier to switch weapons when you're bracing yourself to receive a charging enemy than when you're hurling yourself across the battlefield to get to grips with the enemy.

Sure... but then why only apply it to rapid fire weapons? Is it harder to drop a bolter than a meltagun?

I think the reason is that most assault weapons have a low recoil, like flamers and Meltaguns, or Tyranid weapons, or else have a small enough calibre for the same results. Rapid fire weapons on the other hand have a larger recoil that makes it harder to fire on the move (such as when charging towards a guy to hit him with a chainsaw). And its simpler just to give all rapid fire weapons the same rules and all assault weapons the same rather than rule each weapon individually.

The meltagun is described as making no noise when it fires, perhaps it's a recoil thing. The bolters are supposed to have pretty good kick, even for a marine to notice it. I think the ruling makes sense. Overwatch is a snap shot anyways, which is supposed to represent firing on the move or from the hip. Given that, then it's entirely possible to snap off a couple shots and whip out the old chainsword. And don't forget that the pistol is a melee weapon too, so if you go for the pistol first maybe you can shoot that guy 2 feet away and buy yourself another second to draw your CCW?

Who knows man, it's war.

Honestly...
The option for the Charging Unit to fire Snap-shots, with the clause that the Model can not have fired a weapon during the Shooting Phase, is a good idea! It represents so much from a narrative point of view that we would be seeing when it comes to such charges. Wild shots from both sides as the Charging Unit can not aim the best on the move and the Defending Unit is too busy ******* itself over the pain that is about to occur, already in the process of dropping their weapons to get ready to receive the charge. It just sings for certain heroic scenes....

 Deadshot wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
I guess its just easier to switch weapons when you're bracing yourself to receive a charging enemy than when you're hurling yourself across the battlefield to get to grips with the enemy.

Sure... but then why only apply it to rapid fire weapons? Is it harder to drop a bolter than a meltagun?

I think the reason is that most assault weapons have a low recoil, like flamers and Meltaguns, or Tyranid weapons, or else have a small enough calibre for the same results. Rapid fire weapons on the other hand have a larger recoil that makes it harder to fire on the move (such as when charging towards a guy to hit him with a chainsaw). And its simpler just to give all rapid fire weapons the same rules and all assault weapons the same rather than rule each weapon individually.

this is assuming of course that you're always thinking boltguns as the rapid fire weapon. Lasguns I'm assuming would have next to no recoil, yet they cant be fired and then charge in the same turn. Now they are a long rifle styled firearm so I can see how firing them on the move (especially in a charge) would be wildly inaccurate and make them even more useless than they already are. From a fluff perspective I think it's prettymuch up to us as the players to interpret the rules GW gives us and figure out why some things are the way they are. In this scenario I think it was just easier for GW to say that you can't charge after firing any rapid fire weapons and have us make up our own reasons as to why.

How about this (considering Imperial weapons, since they're the ones I'm most familiar with): Rapid Fire weapons tend to be ones that fire distinct shots that require a degree of accuracy. When firing a bolter, plasma, or lasgun, if you want to hit anything at all you need to stand still and fire from the shoulder. Assault weapons, on the other hand, tend more toward spray and pray. Shotguns and flamers disperse their shots, so precise aiming isn't necessary. The melta is a bit trickier to justify, in part because GW has never really codified exactly how it works. But, if you consider it as a beam that remains active as long as the trigger is depressed, you could treat it like a spray weapon, where waving it around a bit will cause it to hit a target that you haven't sighted in on.

 Bludbaff wrote:
How about this (considering Imperial weapons, since they're the ones I'm most familiar with): Rapid Fire weapons tend to be ones that fire distinct shots that require a degree of accuracy. When firing a bolter, plasma, or lasgun, if you want to hit anything at all you need to stand still and fire from the shoulder. Assault weapons, on the other hand, tend more toward spray and pray. Shotguns and flamers disperse their shots, so precise aiming isn't necessary. The melta is a bit trickier to justify, in part because GW has never really codified exactly how it works. But, if you consider it as a beam that remains active as long as the trigger is depressed, you could treat it like a spray weapon, where waving it around a bit will cause it to hit a target that you haven't sighted in on.

^ This right here... yes.

 Bludbaff wrote:
How about this (considering Imperial weapons, since they're the ones I'm most familiar with): Rapid Fire weapons tend to be ones that fire distinct shots that require a degree of accuracy. When firing a bolter, plasma, or lasgun, if you want to hit anything at all you need to stand still and fire from the shoulder. Assault weapons, on the other hand, tend more toward spray and pray. Shotguns and flamers disperse their shots, so precise aiming isn't necessary. The melta is a bit trickier to justify, in part because GW has never really codified exactly how it works. But, if you consider it as a beam that remains active as long as the trigger is depressed, you could treat it like a spray weapon, where waving it around a bit will cause it to hit a target that you haven't sighted in on.

Which still doesn't explain why the guy charging doesn't have time to shoot and then change weapon, while the guy being assaulted (and who is going to have less time to do it in depending on his reaction time from whenever he notices that he's being charged) does.

Because the charging guy will end up leaving his gun 6" (20 yards or so) behind him as he charges? The guy who stands still drops it at his feet and receives the charge.

 Deadshot wrote:
Because the charging guy will end up leaving his gun 6" (20 yards or so) behind him as he charges?

Which stops him from using his melee weapons... how?

 insaniak wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:
Because the charging guy will end up leaving his gun 6" (20 yards or so) behind him as he charges?

Which stops him from using his melee weapons... how?

Hr doesn't want to lose his weapon for a number of reasons. Space Marines Boltguns are venerable weapons and it offends the Machine Spirit to drop it like that? Same with Battle Sisters. Eldar don't have a lot of resources due to their dying-race thing. Tau rely too heavily on their weaponry, Nids and Necrons are unable to drop it (built in or programmed not to). Imperial Guard get shot for losing their weapon.

Yet the defenders don't have to deal with the same issues, why?

 insaniak wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:
From my reading, perfectly legal, and fluffy.

I'm not sure how it's particularly fluffy for a unit being charged to be able to fire boltguns at their attackers and then switch to melee weapons while the guys charging at them can't...

I don't see how a marine biker rides through a pile of difficult/dangerous rubble, takes one hand off the handle to pull out a grenade from his pack, pull the pin with his teeth while helmeted, throws the frag grenade, pulls out a chainsword, drive towards and ram units behind a fortification, and not fall off, is particularly fuffy. I know marines have more than one liver but they probably need 5 hands for that.

 milkboy wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:
From my reading, perfectly legal, and fluffy.

I'm not sure how it's particularly fluffy for a unit being charged to be able to fire boltguns at their attackers and then switch to melee weapons while the guys charging at them can't...

I don't see how a marine biker rides through a pile of difficult/dangerous rubble, takes one hand off the handle to pull out a grenade from his pack, pull the pin with his teeth while helmeted, throws the frag grenade, pulls out a chainsword, drive towards and ram units behind a fortification, and not fall off, is particularly fuffy. I know marines have more than one liver but they probably need 5 hands for that.

Well the rest of it is bonkers, but the fortification bit isn't. Tbe biker entry in C:SM even makes not of how robust the bikes are, driving through walls and barricades at full pelt with neither injury or impediment.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JinxDragon wrote:
Yet the defenders don't have to deal with the same issues, why?

Because they arn't moving anywhere?

You mentioned crimes for disrespecting the machine spirit, how one would be executed for doing anything which could lead to the damage or loss of a weapon and a few other things. Things which are equally valid for both sides, as a Space Marine dropping their bolter to receive a charge is just as disrespectful as one dropping it to better carry out said charge. Even dropping the gun right at one's feet could cause it to be lost or damaged during the next few minutes of fierce assault as the enemy pushes you back a few feet and trample it into the dirt....

JinxDragon wrote:
You mentioned crimes for disrespecting the machine spirit, how one would be executed for doing anything which could lead to the damage or loss of a weapon and a few other things. Things which are equally valid for both sides, as a Space Marine dropping their bolter to receive a charge is just as disrespectful as one dropping it to better carry out said charge. Even dropping the gun right at one's feet could cause it to be lost or damaged during the next few minutes of fierce assault as the enemy pushes you back a few feet and trample it into the dirt....

You can then pick it up and try to appease the machine spirit later. Or rather than drop it, stow it? Space Marines for example can maglock in their weapons to their armour, other armies could have a sling.

Which returns to the whole problem of both sides having that capability, regardless if they are charging or defending.
The Rules are not always the best for narrative purposes....

JinxDragon wrote:
Which returns to the whole problem of both sides having that capability, regardless if they are charging or defending.
The Rules are not always the best for narrative purposes....

Except that the charging unit has left it 20ft behind, or is now running with a gun strapped to their leg or slung over their shoulder while charging with a chainsword and bolt pistol like a maniac.

The defending Models whom drop their weapons are not going to remain still either, like wise leaving their weapons many feet behind themselves as well.
Or they too would have it swinging around on the strap and getting in the way during Melee.

JinxDragon wrote:
The defending Models whom drop their weapons are not going to remain still either, like wise leaving their weapons many feet behind themselves as well.
Or they too would have it swinging around on the strap and getting in the way during Melee.

Why would they not remain still? They arn't going anywhere yet? At most they move a few feet as opposed to 20 odd feet?