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.

A question...

XV8 Commander has a Burst Cannon and Missile Pod as default wargear and has the option to "replace its burst cannon and missile pod with two items from the Ranged Weapons and/or Support System lists." Plus an additional 2 items from the above lists.

Coldstar Commander has a High-output Burst Cannon and Missile Pod as default wargear and has the option to "replace its high-output burst cannon and/or missile pod with two items from the Ranged Weapons and/or Support System lists." Plus an additional 2 items from the above lists.

This would seem to mean I can choose to replace the Missile Pod from a Coldstar Commander with 2 burst cannons, as well as taking an additional 2, while keeping the high-output burst cannon fro a total of 5 weapons. Is this correct?

Correct, that's what and/or means. You arguably can also replace the high-output burst cannon with two more weapons/systems, for a total of six.

I think RAW it would allow you to take 5 weapons on a coldstar, but its clearly supposed to be 4 hard points. Not sure it can be read to allow 6 weapons. They would have been better off just allowing comanders the ability to take high output burstcannons.
In stead of this silly convention of giving units profile weapons that are replaced.
I dont get why 8th edition codex's are writen in such a backwards manor.

ItsPug wrote:
A question...

XV8 Commander has a Burst Cannon and Missile Pod as default wargear and has the option to "replace its burst cannon and missile pod with two items from the Ranged Weapons and/or Support System lists." Plus an additional 2 items from the above lists.

Coldstar Commander has a High-output Burst Cannon and Missile Pod as default wargear and has the option to "replace its high-output burst cannon and/or missile pod with two items from the Ranged Weapons and/or Support System lists." Plus an additional 2 items from the above lists.

This would seem to mean I can choose to replace the Missile Pod from a Coldstar Commander with 2 burst cannons, as well as taking an additional 2, while keeping the high-output burst cannon fro a total of 5 weapons. Is this correct?

Correct, you could actually take a total of 6.

Replace the Burst Cannon for 2 Weapons.
Replace the Missile Pod for 2 Weapons.
Take two Additional Items.

Of course if the idea was for them to replace the Burst Cannon and Missile Pod for 1 weapon each, they cocked up the rules writing yet again.

I agree with BCB as far as strict RAW.

In a tournament I'd ask the TO though, and in a pickup/casual game I'd limit myself to 4 as that is clearly what was intended.

6 weapons, Ork style. If you have space to glue it, go ahead.

It's a case of English not defining an order of operations well enough.

Both readings are equally valid, so it's perfectly legal to take 6 weapons. Any FAQ that said you could only take 4 would be clarificatory in nature due to the ambiguity of the English language.

Didn't we also have this situation for Chaos Champions already?

This is just going to be the Celestine thing all over again, floats around for a few weeks and gets FAQed and people will get salty. Anyone who glues 6 weapons gets what they deserve (although mostly because they're glueing weapons to Tau).

If it's always been 4, and a grammar hot take suddenly makes it look like 5/6, I'd be inclined to follow Meleti's line of thinking to be on the safe side!

 JohnnyHell wrote:
If it's always been 4, and a grammar hot take suddenly makes it look like 5/6, I'd be inclined to follow Meleti's line of thinking to be on the safe side!

It's always had set weapons, should we apply that logic even though it has new rules? RAW it can be read that you can have between 0 and 6 weapons. I don't think it is intended to be that way though.

 Happyjew wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
If it's always been 4, and a grammar hot take suddenly makes it look like 5/6, I'd be inclined to follow Meleti's line of thinking to be on the safe side!

It's always had set weapons, should we apply that logic even though it has new rules? RAW it can be read that you can have between 0 and 6 weapons. I don't think it is intended to be that way though.

Do what you like, I didn't actually pass judgement either way... just don't get upset if you remodel over a potential grammatical glitch and it turns out to be like the Deathwatch Bolter+Shotgun situation! Feed it in to GW and cross your fingers for clarity in the week two FAQ.

 Happyjew wrote:
It's always had set weapons, should we apply that logic even though it has new rules? RAW it can be read that you can have between 0 and 6 weapons. I don't think it is intended to be that way though.

You used to only hit on a 6 when moving with heavy weapons in the old rules, therefore despite the rule explicitly saying you only get -1 now, you still have to hit on 6's! That's the crazy logic on display here.

The simple fact is that both readings of the rule are correct and valid, and only an FAQ/Errata can change that. Anyone who says otherwise simply isn't following the rules.

It's frustratingly close to being 4 weapons.
-"replace its high output burst cannon and/or missile pod with two items..."
-"replace its high output burst cannon and missile pod with two items..."

Just drop the "or" GW. It feels like a copy/paste mistake when editing. If you're going to charge 40 bucks and spend a year developing the codex, put some effort in.

Or how about they stop pointlessly giving weapons that have to be replace and just give you a clear this unit can take 4 of the following statement like they used to.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
It's always had set weapons, should we apply that logic even though it has new rules? RAW it can be read that you can have between 0 and 6 weapons. I don't think it is intended to be that way though.

You used to only hit on a 6 when moving with heavy weapons in the old rules, therefore despite the rule explicitly saying you only get -1 now, you still have to hit on 6's! That's the crazy logic on display here.

The simple fact is that both readings of the rule are correct and valid, and only an FAQ/Errata can change that. Anyone who says otherwise simply isn't following the rules.

Ah, that magic last line rears its head again. The point being made by a couple of folk is not that only one interpretation exists, it's simply that there's no harm in being cautious for two weeks lest you have to reglue and repair your models. After the FAQ of it still looks like you can have twelvety weapons, go nuts. We know how the Deathwatch situation turned out, so wait and see before you proclaim everyone as wilfully wrong. Patient and polite beats proclaiming everyone wrong only to have an FAQ invalidate hastily built units.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
The point being made by a couple of folk is not that only one interpretation exists, it's simply that there's no harm in being cautious for two weeks lest you have to reglue and repair your models. After the FAQ of it still looks like you can have twelvety weapons, go nuts.

In the Vior'la preview, the implication appears to have been that the XV86 can take four weapons, so I certainly wouldn't assume six weapons is what GW intend[s/ed].

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/03/09/tau-empire-preview-viorla-septgw-homepage-post-3/ wrote:Previously, this aerial attack battlesuit had a fixed weapon set of a missile pod and a high-output burst cannon, but all that is changing. Now, you’ll be able to arm all four hardpoints on your Commander as you please, allowing for an array of powerful builds. What’s more, as all of these weapons have the Assault or Rapid Fire type, with the Vior’la Sept Tenet, you’ll be able to effectively move 40″ every turn and fire without penalty! We’d recommend equipping your Vior’la Commander with four fusion blasters for the ultimate tank hunter.

Dandelion wrote:
It's frustratingly close to being 4 weapons.
-"replace its high output burst cannon and/or missile pod with two items..."
-"replace its high output burst cannon and missile pod with two items..."

Just drop the "or" GW. It feels like a copy/paste mistake when editing. If you're going to charge 40 bucks and spend a year developing the codex, put some effort in.

Not quite. That change would mean you had to change both or neither, while presumably the intention is you can change only one if you wish.

Try:

-"replace its high output burst cannon and/or missile pod with one item each..."

 Lord Damocles wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
The point being made by a couple of folk is not that only one interpretation exists, it's simply that there's no harm in being cautious for two weeks lest you have to reglue and repair your models. After the FAQ of it still looks like you can have twelvety weapons, go nuts.

In the Vior'la preview, the implication appears to have been that the XV86 can take four weapons, so I certainly wouldn't assume six weapons is what GW intend[s/ed].

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/03/09/tau-empire-preview-viorla-septgw-homepage-post-3/ wrote:Previously, this aerial attack battlesuit had a fixed weapon set of a missile pod and a high-output burst cannon, but all that is changing. Now, you’ll be able to arm all four hardpoints on your Commander as you please, allowing for an array of powerful builds. What’s more, as all of these weapons have the Assault or Rapid Fire type, with the Vior’la Sept Tenet, you’ll be able to effectively move 40″ every turn and fire without penalty! We’d recommend equipping your Vior’la Commander with four fusion blasters for the ultimate tank hunter.

Seems obvious to me too, but get ready for "WHC Community isn't Rules" and "RAW is always right until changed" type responses.

Stux wrote:

Dandelion wrote:
It's frustratingly close to being 4 weapons.
-"replace its high output burst cannon and/or missile pod with two items..."
-"replace its high output burst cannon and missile pod with two items..."

Just drop the "or" GW. It feels like a copy/paste mistake when editing. If you're going to charge 40 bucks and spend a year developing the codex, put some effort in.

Not quite. That change would mean you had to change both or neither, while presumably the intention is you can change only one if you wish.

Try:

-"replace its high output burst cannon and/or missile pod with one item each..."

Or better yet
- replace its high output burst cannon with one item...
- replace its missile pod with one item...

Stux wrote:

Dandelion wrote:
It's frustratingly close to being 4 weapons.
-"replace its high output burst cannon and/or missile pod with two items..."
-"replace its high output burst cannon and missile pod with two items..."

Just drop the "or" GW. It feels like a copy/paste mistake when editing. If you're going to charge 40 bucks and spend a year developing the codex, put some effort in.

Not quite. That change would mean you had to change both or neither, while presumably the intention is you can change only one if you wish.

Try:

-"replace its high output burst cannon and/or missile pod with one item each..."

Yeah if High-Output Burst Cannon was on the Ranged Weapons list you could just change it to and. As it is they need to split it into two singular entries.

People need to stop being idiots. Of course he can only have 4 weapons. Every single commander EVER in Tau are able to have 4 hard points. Stop trying to bend the rules.

It's so obviously only 4 hardpoints that I don't even try to dispute this.

Stop trying to cheese the game.

notredameguy10 wrote:
People need to stop being idiots. Of course he can only have 4 weapons. Every single commander EVER in Tau are able to have 4 hard points. Stop trying to bend the rules.

It's not bending the rules, it's doing the exact opposite, it's following the rules.

It's horribly written but so obviously 4 total.

if the tau faq in a week or so doesn't address it, it is very likely any major tournament will rule that 4 weapon points doesn't = 6 weapon points.