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.

rigeld2 wrote:

Your analogy is wrong.
"Joe, bring me the green boxes."
"I found some yellow boxes, will those work?"
"Nope, only the green ones do. Keep looking."

In your analogy model wearing 2 flamethrowers (yellow boxes) and not subject to gunslinger.

rigeld2 wrote:

A) The Gunslinger rule proves that statement wrong by only giving you permission to fire both pistols.
B) All weapons have that rule, essentially. We know this because each model is permitted to make one ranged attack (barring MCs, Gunslinger, etc) and many models have multiple weapons. Without the option to use a gun in place of a ranged attack, having a ranged attack would be meaningless.

A) No, it only says that i can fire "both" whatever it is. Wich i do.
B) No. Model can shoot one of its ranged weapons in the shooting phase (if its not vehicle). Special rules can allow it to shoot more. Gun cant replace other gun, you just choose witch one to use.

Ghaz wrote:

DarkPhoenix wrote:
Because its codex with rules of the game, not the rules of making English sentence.

The rules are written in English, following the rules for the English language. If the rules are not written following the rules of the English language all we have is a book full of nonsensical dribble. Its those rules that tell us what those groupings of words mean. Again, please provide an argunment that doesn't require us to throw the rules for the English language in the trash.

I follow the rules of common sense. When rules says that "model takes a wound" common sense allow us to understand that its "virtual" wound, while English language say that model made of plastic and not bieng a living creature cant have a wound. Thats why i assume that common sense have priority and English is means to bring rules to our understanding.

Sir, I believe you are depriving a bridge somewhere of your company.

Common sense is not so common, as your arguments prove. The Gunslinger rule does not allow you to fire two Witchfires, nor do the Witchfire rules allow you to use the Gunslinger rules to do so. The RAW is perfectly clear on the matter and your idea of 'common sense' does not change that. You still have nothing to back up your position other than "... because I say so".

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Sir, I believe you are depriving a bridge somewhere of your company.

And i believe i will be mistaken for a troll cos i am too open minded.

 Ghaz wrote:
Common senses not so common, as your arguments prove. The Gunslinger rule does not allow you to fire two Witchfires, nor do the Witchfire rules allow you to use the Gunslinger rules to do so. The RAW is perfectly clear on the matter and your idea of 'common sense' does not change that. You still have nothing to back up your position other than "... because I say so".

You only keep "because i say so" thing, please return when you find actual argument. Nowhere in the codex Gunslinger forbids me to use Witchfire, nor Witchfire forbids me to use Gunslinger.

Be open minded as you like, you can house rule anything but in here and 'normal' games you have to follow the rules.

MarkyMark wrote:
Be open minded as you like, you can house rule anything but in here and 'normal' games you have to follow the rules.

You right - rules, not some added words about pistols.

You don't need to add the word, because it reference the word prior in the sentence.

Both:
A reference to two of something.
Both Boys and Girls.
We are Both gamers.
Both pistols.

DarkPhoenix wrote:

MarkyMark wrote:
Be open minded as you like, you can house rule anything but in here and 'normal' games you have to follow the rules.

You right - rules, not some added words about pistols.

Are you familiar with the grammar term of "antecedent?" The antecedent of "both" is clearly and unambiguously "pistols."

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

DarkPhoenix wrote:

MarkyMark wrote:
Be open minded as you like, you can house rule anything but in here and 'normal' games you have to follow the rules.

You right - rules, not some added words about pistols.

Are you familiar with the grammar term of "antecedent?" The antecedent of "both" is clearly and unambiguously "pistols."

But they dont have to be for rule to work.
Let me explain my stupid logic:
1. "Any models with two pistols"
2. "can fire both in the Shooting phase"
3. "can use a different witchfire power in place of each"
4. "can fire both in the Shooting phase"
5. "Any models with two pistols" - it still have pistols just dont use them.



5a. "cant fire if dont use its pistols?" - nowhere in the rules says this - rejected

3. Is wrong

So at then end if the day you've used 2 Witchfires. Two pistols haven't been used, so the Gunslinger rule never came into play. And the WitchFire rule has also been broken, as two Witchfires have been used without the ability to fire two weapons.
RAW in no way supports this rule abuse (politest word I can think of).
HIWPI: I wouldn't argue, but pack my models up without a word.

 grendel083 wrote:
3. Is wrong

How it can be wrong if its quote from witchfire rule?

DarkPhoenix wrote:

 grendel083 wrote:
3. Is wrong

How it can be wrong if its quote from witchfire rule?

In place of each?
You're not using both pistols (yes the sentence means both PISTOLS), thus voiding the use of Gunslinger.

Basically you're using a Pistol Weapon special rule, without using a Pistol Weapon. Totally out of order.

DarkPhoenix wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

DarkPhoenix wrote:

MarkyMark wrote:
Be open minded as you like, you can house rule anything but in here and 'normal' games you have to follow the rules.

You right - rules, not some added words about pistols.

Are you familiar with the grammar term of "antecedent?" The antecedent of "both" is clearly and unambiguously "pistols."

But they dont have to be for rule to work.

I forgive because it seems like English is not your native language, but you're literally arguing that the English Language is wrong.
It doesn't matter that it *could* be something else, the English language defines the subject as "pistols" so applying the word "both" to literally anything else but that word is flat out wrong. There's no other way to say it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DarkPhoenix wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Your analogy is wrong.
"Joe, bring me the green boxes."
"I found some yellow boxes, will those work?"
"Nope, only the green ones do. Keep looking."

In your analogy model wearing 2 flamethrowers (yellow boxes) and not subject to gunslinger.

Yes, a model wielding 2 flamers does not benefit from Gunslinger.

A) No, it only says that i can fire "both" whatever it is. Wich i do.

No, it says you can fire both Pistols. Do you have any English teacher friends?

B) No. Model can shoot one of its ranged weapons in the shooting phase (if its not vehicle). Special rules can allow it to shoot more. Gun cant replace other gun, you just choose witch one to use.

So a gun can't replace another gun - so which one is "default"? Can you show me the rules about choosing which weapon to shoot with?

I follow the rules of common sense. When rules says that "model takes a wound" common sense allow us to understand that its "virtual" wound, while English language say that model made of plastic and not bieng a living creature cant have a wound. Thats why i assume that common sense have priority and English is means to bring rules to our understanding.

And that's where you're wrong. "Common sense" is anything but common. You can't insert something as subjective as that when interpreting rules - indeed you must read the rules according to the English language first, then you can apply "common sense" to get Rules as Interpreted.
You can make whatever argument for RAI you want, but please say so. What you're saying is demonstrably not RAW.

I hate to inject too much sanity here but.... exactly how many Psychers can be equipped with two pistols? If the answer is zero then whether or not they can fire off two witchpowers is more than a little moot.

I actually can't believe this has gone on for 5 pages.

This seems pretty beardy/cheap to me, Gunslinger states you can fire two pistols, not that you can fire any two weapons/powers. It states you can fire 2 Pistols.

This is common sense, also in terms of Psychic powers, it mentions you can only fire one witchfire power per turn unless the model is able to fire more than one ranged weapon in a turn (this is for the likes of Monstrous Creatures etc).

Now the Psyker can only fire two ranged weapons because they are pistols, the second you swap one of the pistols for a psychic power you would automatically lose Gunslinger, therefore the model cannot fire more than one ranged weapon in a turn, making it not eligble to fire two witchfire powers, whereas something like a Monstrous Creature can fire any two weapons in a turn all of the time and cannot lose this ability as far as I am aware, also this ability is not taken away by changing any weapon to a witchfire power unlike with the pistols mentioned already.

 Rysaer wrote:
I actually can't believe this has gone on for 5 pages.

This seems pretty beardy/cheap to me, Gunslinger states you can fire two pistols, not that you can fire any two weapons/powers. It states you can fire 2 Pistols.

This is common sense, also in terms of Psychic powers, it mentions you can only fire one witchfire power per turn unless the model is able to fire more than one ranged weapon in a turn (this is for the likes of Monstrous Creatures etc).

Now the Psyker can only fire two ranged weapons because they are pistols, the second you swap one of the pistols for a psychic power you would automatically lose Gunslinger, therefore the model cannot fire more than one ranged weapon in a turn, making it not eligble to fire two witchfire powers, whereas something like a Monstrous Creature can fire any two weapons in a turn all of the time and cannot lose this ability as far as I am aware, also this ability is not taken away by changing any weapon to a witchfire power unlike with the pistols mentioned already.

It is a bit beardy.
Gunslinger allows a model to fire 2 Pistols (weapons)

The only thing the witchfire asks about is essentially (can the model fire 2 weapons?)

Gravmyr wrote:
I hate to inject too much sanity here but.... exactly how many Psychers can be equipped with two pistols? If the answer is zero then whether or not they can fire off two witchpowers is more than a little moot.

Chaos Sorcs can, for example.

How many Warp Charges do Chaos Sorcs have?

Edit: Appears to be one but possibly two depending on options in the army.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
It is a bit beardy.
Gunslinger allows a model to fire 2 Pistols (weapons)

The only thing the witchfire asks about is essentially (can the model fire 2 weapons?)

But if you're not using the two Pistol Weapons the model is armed with, you have no permission to use the Gunslinger rule.
WitchFire does ask that the model can fire two weapons. The model however cannot fire two weapons ( because you're not firing two pistols).

Gravmyr wrote:
How many Warp Charges do Chaos Sorcs have?

Up to 3.

 grendel083 wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
It is a bit beardy.
Gunslinger allows a model to fire 2 Pistols (weapons)

The only thing the witchfire asks about is essentially (can the model fire 2 weapons?)

But if you're not using the two Pistol Weapons the model is armed with, you have no permission to use the Gunslinger rule.
WitchFire does ask that the model can fire two weapons. The model however cannot fire two weapons ( because you're not firing two pistols).

This.

And how many points are you investing to do this?

Gravmyr wrote:
And how many points are you investing to do this?

A) Irrelevant.
B) 125 minimum.

To gain the gunslinger rule, a model needs only be armed with two pistols. Thats the only requirement to GAIN the rule.
Having the rule allows you 2 shots with pistols.
Witchfire allows me to substitue any ranged attack i make with a witchfire.

Now, that being said, i do agree with you, that once you use a witchfire power you lose the ability to use another witchfire that turn, because you fired an assualt weapon, not a pistol.
But RAW, you have permission to use two witchfires, but ACTUALLY using one of them revokes the priviledge. Sound about right to you Ovion?

Neronoxx wrote:
To gain the gunslinger rule, a model needs only be armed with two pistols. Thats the only requirement to GAIN the rule.

Not right. The model NEVER has the gunslinger rule. It's a special rule for Pistol Weapons, not models. Pistol Weapons always have this rule, and a model must be armed with two pistols to make use of it.

Having the rule allows you 2 shots with pistols.

Sort of, see above.

Witchfire allows me to substitue any ranged attack i make with a witchfire.

True.

Now, that being said, i do agree with you, that once you use a witchfire power you lose the ability to use another witchfire that turn, because you fired an assualt weapon, not a pistol.
But RAW, you have permission to use two witchfires, but ACTUALLY using one of them revokes the priviledge. Sound about right to you Ovion?

Sounds close enough to me.
Remember, Gunslinger is a Special Rule of Pistol Weapons. Using a Witchfire, you're no longer using the Pistol, but trying to use its rule.

BTW: Happy Christmas all, hope you're all having a good time.

Neronoxx wrote:
To gain the gunslinger rule, a model needs only be armed with two pistols. Thats the only requirement to GAIN the rule.
Having the rule allows you 2 shots with pistols.
Witchfire allows me to substitue any ranged attack i make with a witchfire.

Now, that being said, i do agree with you, that once you use a witchfire power you lose the ability to use another witchfire that turn, because you fired an assualt weapon, not a pistol.
But RAW, you have permission to use two witchfires, but ACTUALLY using one of them revokes the priviledge. Sound about right to you Ovion?

This is about right. You can choose to replace each pistol with a witchfire (so you can "ready-up", as it were, two witchfire powers) but as soon as you use one that is not the Pistol type then you cannot use the second, as you have violated one of the requirements of the Gunslingers rule: "...you can fire both [pistols]."

 grendel083 wrote:

Neronoxx wrote:
To gain the gunslinger rule, a model needs only be armed with two pistols. Thats the only requirement to GAIN the rule.

Not right. The model NEVER has the gunslinger rule. It's a special rule for Pistol Weapons, not models. Pistol Weapons always have this rule, and a model must be armed with two pistols to make use of it.

This part doesn't make sense. If the model NEVER has the gunslinger rule, how can it use it, let alone lose it? Pistol Weapons grant this rule, but they do not have this rule.

Neronoxx wrote:
This part doesn't make sense. If the model NEVER has the gunslinger rule, how can it use it, let alone lose it? Pistol Weapons grant this rule, but they do not have this rule.

Plasma weapons have the Gets Hot! rule. A model does not.

If a Space Marine fires a Plasma Gun, he is subject to the Gets Hot! rule. If he fires a Bolt Pistol, he is not, even though he is still carrying a weapon that has the rule.

Pistol weapons clearly have the Gunslinger rule and a model firing a pistol is subject to that rule. If they are not firing a pistol, they are not subject to the rule at all. Hence, no firing 2 witchfire attacks.

DoW

The gunslinger rule follows basic English rules.

"All models with two pistols can fire both in the shooting phase."

The word 'both' logically applies to something in the sentence, since there isn't a proceeding sentence. It can't apply to the noun 'models', since that refers to all and not two.

There is a noun in the sentence that is defined as two, that being pistols. Therefore, the word 'both' is clearly referring to pistols.

If you change the noun that the word 'both' applies to, then it is no longer the same sentence. Gunslinger only applies to both pistols that the model carries, and since it is specifically referring to pistols, a rule that applies to weapons is not compatible.

There's a fluff reason too, since it is called 'Gunslinger' which refers to wild west two pistol shooting which wouldn't apply to two rifles or two knives. If you think that you have some clever way to make gunslinging apply to magic powers then isn't it clear that you are trying to rules lawyer something more out of the rule than it states?

Clearly we have reached an impasse, as both views are correct.
If you look at it from the Gunslinger Rule, then the weapons can only be pistols.
However, if you look at it from the witchfire rule, then it is entirely possible to switch the two pistols for two witchfires, because the only requirements to fire two witchfires are met.
Both views of the ruling can be completely correct.

It will come down to what person is okay with what or what your TO/opponent says about it.



I for one would just like to imagine that my sorcerer is a badass psyker who is so powerful that he can shoot two witchfires in the same turn. Plus he is so badass that he has two pistols.

Just my two cents.