On a SM bike you can shoot mounted weapons either 2 shots 12" or 1 shot the maximum distance no matter your movement.

You can assault after firing a rapid fire wepon.

A plasma gun may fire as if it were a standard rapid fire wepon with all normal restrictions applying... 1 shot at max distance if no movement and always 2 shots no matter the movement.

Thanks,

ender502

Uh.. the RAW say the biker CAN move, fire a heavy or rapid fire weapon AND assault. There can be no disagreement in that point.

Ijust wanted to make sure there was no dsiagreement as to a marines ability (or lack thereof) to fire a non-mounted plasma gun after moving.

As for pistols, no they wouldn't be able to assault. The special rules that allows bikes to fire only applies to rapid fire and heavy weapons, NOT pistols.

ender502

While it makes sense that they would be able to do so, nothing in the rules indicates that this is possible. The "Count as Stationary" bit in the assault rules only allows charges for Rapid Fire and Heavy Weapons. It does NOT supercede the prohibition on charging after double-tapping a pistol.

What is in the rules is that bikes may fire a number of weapons equal to the number of riders on the bike. So, an attack bike can fire 2 weapons and a regular SM bike can fire 1 weapon.

Anyone who says different is either lying or deeply mistaken. The rules are crystal clear.

ender502

Well, you got the page right, at least..........

"An infantry unit that fired twice with pistols or which shot with rapid fire weapons or remained stationary to fire heavy weapons may not charge at all in the Assault phase.

Note: Some rare units always count as stationary when firing rapid fire weapons and some units can move and fire heavy weapons. Such units can charge after firing."

Notice there are three types of shooting that prohibit assaulting. Now notice that the Counts as Stationary bit supercedes the rules for only two of those, ie rapid fire and heavy, but says nothing about pistols. Soooooo...... It works for Rapid Fire and Heavy but not for pistols. Falls into the category of "It doesn't say you can, so you cannot."

Personally, I agree. They should be able to assault, but I can't prove that they are able to assault under the rules.

Please look at p. 53. No where does it say that bikes count as stationary. So, in the context of "bikes" all this "counts as stationary" is nonsense. That rule does NOT apply to bikes.

ender502

Actually, it does not say "they can assault after firing." You may want to read the entire sentence. What the rules says is

" In addition, rapid fire weapons and heavy weapons may be fired if the unit moves and the bike is still allowed to charge into close combat in the same turn."

The sentence is clearly dealing with Rapid fire and heavy weapons. It does not say pistols. It does not say "they can assault after firing."

You are incorrect. It happens. No big deal.

ender502

Please point to somewhere in the BBB that says bikes count as stationary. Give me page number. You can't because there isn't one. Bikes do not count as stationary.

Again, please point to a page number. I am kinda thinking you wont.

ender502

It does not say bikes can assault after firing a heavy weapon.

It says they can assault after firing (anything).

Yes, bikes can move AND fire a heavy weapon. Please show me the rule where it says "Therefore bikes can always assault after firing." There is no such rule. That is your own inference that is in no way supported by the rules. And a poor inference it is.

But, just to be nice, I will re-type the quote that you seem so afraid to refer to....

"In addition, rapid fire weapons and heavy weapons may be fired if the unit moves and the bike is still allowed to charge into close combat in the same turn."

Please explain to me how the above quote (BBB p.53) leads you to believe bike scan ALWAYS assault. The rule does NOT mention pistols. If the rule does not mention pistols then it doesn't include pistols. If you want to add pistols... fine. Go ahead. But you are not following the rules.

As to your second statement "It says they can assault after firing." Please see the bolded quote. You are wrong.

ender502

Quote From BGB Page 36

Note: Some rare units always count as stationary when firing rapid fire weapons and some units can move and fire heavy weapons. Such units can charge after firing.

Oh dear lord. I am flabbergasted.

You have quoted the "counts as  sationary" rule. Congratulations. Please now show, with a quote and page number, how this in any way refres to bikes.

ender502

Yes, bikes can move and fire heavy weapons. Yes, bikes can assault after firing heavy weapons.  The same goes for rapid fire weapons. There is no question about that. Never has been. What they cannot do is charge after firing a pistol twice. That is not included in their rule.

That is the issue at hand. Bikes cannot charge after firing ANYTHING. They can charge after firing rapid fire and heavy weapons as an exception to the normal rules.

Also, you seem to be under the mistaken impression that bikes "count as stationary." They do not. Nowhere in the rules does it say they count as stationary. That is something you made up. Again, please quote a page in the BBB that says bikes count as stationary. i notice you didn't do it in your last post.

ender502

Actually, what the rule says is:

" In addition, rapid fire weapons and heavy weapons may be fired if the unit moves and the bike is still allowed to charge into close combat in the same turn."

No "after firing" is involved with bikes. You are assuming the "counts as stationary" applies to bikes. Please quote a rule that says bikes "count as stationary."

This is the same question I have asked 3 posts in a row and no one has been able to provide the quote. If you can provide the quote that says bikes count as stationary then I will gladly admit you are right. If you can't you must admit you are merely making an inference and your posistion is not supported by the rules.

ender502

After three pages, the basic question people are missing that everytime Ender points out and no-one seems to answer is "does a pistol count as a heavy weapon or a rapid fire weapon".

The sentence is pretty clear count as stationary for firing a heavy weapon or a rapid fire weapon.

If you fire either you can assault.

The sentences are not independent as people try to point out. Why does everyone miss the word "such" in the sentence they are quoting?

"Note: Some rare units always count as stationary when firing rapid fire weapons and some units can move and fire heavy weapons. Such units can charge after firing."

It may not be intent but please, even by simple RAW standards it is saying if a unit can do action A or B then SUCH units can do action C. So, does a pistol fall into action A or B?

You are correct. They are NOT the same and that is the point. One applies to bikes and the other does not. My quote is from the bikes entry. Yours is not.

Again, show me somewhere in the BBB that says your quote applies to bikes. I have requested multiple times and you are incapable of doing it.

This is nota question of opinion. This is a clear question of the rules saying what you are allowed to do. No where do the bike rules say they can assault after firing. Nor does it say that bikes count as stationary. Nor in your own quote doe sit say what units count as stationary.

Your arguement is not supported by the rules and your inability to provide a quote connecting bikes and one of those rare units is evidence of it.

ender502

If memory serves me correctly, in 3rd Ed somewhere (may have been the SM codex) it said something along the lines about the bike being a stable platform for the bolters on the front and could therefore rapid fire if moved - that rule is now superflous. Did not count as stationary but just for the bolters on the front.

Having reread - nowhere in the book or SM codex does it say bikes count as stationary.

I understand that you can't connect the quote to bikes. Your childish response just cements the fact. But, i'll give you another chance. I'll even rephrase to make it easier for ya.

Please point to any portion of the BBB OR the SM codex that says bikes are one of the rare units that count as stationary.

ender502

Oh dear lord.

Actually, what I am saying is that the "some rare units" quote does not apply to bikes. The only quote that applies to bikes is that in the bike section. The bike section never mentions pistols nor does it mention that  bikes count as stationary.

Bikes CAN do the following things....

"In adition, rapid fire weapons and heavy weapons may be fired if the unit moves and the bike is still allowed to charge into close combat in the same turn."

As you can see, no mention of pistols. No mention of counting as stationary.

But to take up your arguement that as quoted "Unless stated in this section, these unit types follow the rules for infantry." Infantry cannot shoot  a pistol twice AND assault. This rule applie sto bikes because nothing in the bike section on P. 53 contradicts this infantry rule. On p. 53 the bike entry does state how rapid fre and heavy weapons can be used by bikes in a fashion unlike infantry.

ender502

From me you get nothing but love. And I don't mean that in a prison sense.. I mean that in a gentle and loving fashion with lots of spooning.

-ender502

Fists fisrt? Sure thing pussycat it's your party. I'm open minded.

ender502

There is no-where that says P1 applies to a bike. Just because a bike in P2 follows part of the rule quoted in P1 you cannot assume or imply intent that the rest of the rule applies. To add anything else to it is basically an intent argument. If they meant it too say "counts as stationary" they should have said so. They didn't so you go RAW.

Ref P1 and P2 have a fatal flaw in the argument:- Just because a bike can fire heavy weapons and rapid fire weapons doesn't make the bike counts as stationary. That rule just means if an attack bike fires its HB/MM (Heavy Weapon) or  a bike fires "rapid fire" weapon (note - not a "rapid firing" weapon from P1 - "rapid fire" is a category of weapon "rapid firing" is an ability of the weapon) it can assault because P2 is fulfilled.

If the passanger fires a plasma gun he is carrying he can assault because P2 is still fulfilled because the PG falls into the category rapid fire weapon.

A pistol does not fall into the the category "rapid fire" weapon it falls into the category pistol (which has the ability to fire rapidly" . Not the same thing.

P3 is the same as P1 and therefore fails the test as well.

My Conclusion:  P1 doesn't apply to bikes, although some of the bike rules are similar to "counts as stationary" rules. If  double taps a pistol - P2 & P3 isn't satisfied. A pistol does not fall into the category of heavy weapon or a rapid fire weapon. It falls into the category of pistol. Therefore P2 is not satisfied. If P2 is not satisfied C1 becomes wrong. Therefore if a bike rapid fires a pistol he cannot assault.

I'd prefer it in rule format.

I won't refute your premise or conslusion. Fullheadofhair has done that brilliantly. The only thing that I would restate is where he started.... No where doe sit say P1 applies to bikes. I have been asking for a quote of a rule (not a premise, intent or logical conclusion) that shows that bikes count as stationary for 3 stinking pages. Your post is lovely but does not connect P1 to bikes.

ender502

*click* light back on.

Doh! That isn't the discussion. Please try and keep up. 

Bikes can fire HW and move as well as rapid fire weapons - even assault.

They cannot fire pistols twice and assault because they don't count as stationary (even tho they do have some of the traits).

Don't you dare start the argument again that they count as stationary or, as triggerbaby has said "make a big round O ...."

Now you are just beng a pain in the rear end or are you just trying to make me eat my keyboard?

They can assault of firing HW and rapid fire weapons. No argument there. Not double tapped pistols though.

Argghhh I hate you.  You mere prescence on the internet has stopped looking at porn for 10 minutes - whats with that? (not really just being a drama queen)

Bikes CAN assault after firing a rapid fire weapon because the bike rules say they can.

Bikes CANNOT assault after firing a pistol TWICE because the rules do not say they can.

Bikes do NOT count as stationary because the rules do NOT say they count as stationary.

The p.36 rules quote is part of the counts as stationary rule and NOT the bike rule. There is NO connection between the rules.

 I'll put this in Junior High geometry language for everyone.... The Bike rule and the Stationary rule are triangles that are SIMILAR BUT NOT CONGRUENT. Not all angles and sides are the same.

ender502

Posted By Mr. Bombadidaloo on 08/14/2007 8:16 AM
the conundrums of life surface in mysterious ways my friend

Back on topic, which do you think is better? Baskin Robins's or Cold Stone's mint-chocolate-chip ice cream???

Honestly, I'm torn.

Read p. 122 .... and I quote.... "Marines prefer Baskin Robins Jamocha Almond Fudge for it is the best ice cream to eat whilst firing your bolt pistol into the air and not charging."

RAW guys! RAW!

ender502

The flaw in your arguement is that this is not a game of deductive reasoning. It is a game of rules. Nowhere on P.36 say "If Unit X meets criteria A and B then it is C."

Here is the quote on p.36...

Note: Some rare units always count as stationary when firing rapid fire weapons and some units can move and fire heavy wepons. Such units can charge after firing.

There is nothing that says if the units meet certain criteria than they count as stationary. But, to entertain your arguement (sad as it is) for just a moment... A bike does not meet your criteria 1. Why? Because rapid fire weapns do not always fire from a bike as if they were stationary. Only a mounted rapid fire weapon can fire its full range if moving. A plasma gun that is NOT mounted is subject to the normal infantry rules.

So, by your own arguement, bikes fail criteria A and do not count as stationary.

But why even argue that? It is so far beyond the realm of applicable it is laughable.

The rules for this game are permissive. If it says you can "X" then you can "X." If it does not say you can "Y" then you cannot "Y."

Now, for a change let's look at the way the rules are written.

1. P.53 "Unless stated in this section, these unit types will follow the rules for infantry."

2. P.53 "If rapid fire weapons are mounted on a bike, then they are allowed to fire once up to the maximum range even if the bike moved. In addition, rapid fire weapons and heavy weapons may be fired if the unit moves and the bike is still allowed to charge into close combat in the same turn."

The rules for bikes make several exceptions to the Infantry rules (which they follow unless stated otherwise, see #1) as shown in #2 above. An exception to the rules as they apply to pistold is never mentioned. Hence, there is no exception.

ender502

The flaw in your arguement is that this is not a game of deductive reasoning. It is a game of rules. Nowhere on P.36 say "If Unit X meets criteria A and B then it is C."

Here is the quote on p.36...

Note: Some rare units always count as stationary when firing rapid fire weapons and some units can move and fire heavy wepons. Such units can charge after firing.

The Quote:

Note: Some rare units always count as stationary when firing rapid fire weapons and some units can move and fire heavy wepons. Such units can charge after firing.

Actually, they would have to meet criteria A and B. They use the conjunctive word AND. If they had meant Or they would have used OR. You cannot ignore the language of the quote.

ender502

A fair criticism.

My point is this.....

P. 53 covers the rules for bike units. The top of P.53 says they are subject to the rules for infantry unless otherwise stated.

P.53 also gives bikes specific exceptions to the rules for infantry.

Theses exceptions are:

1. A mounted rapidfire weapon can fire once to maximum range even if the bike unit moved.

2. The bike unit can move, fire a rapid fire weapon AND charge.

3. The bike unit can move, fire a heavy weapon and charge.

All other rules for infantry apply ( I am not mentioning the moves 12" one and the dangerous terrain tests). I know this to be true because p. 53 says ALL rules for infantry apply... unless otherwise stated,, and here is the kicker... IN THIS SECTION.

ender502

Mr. Bombadidaloo is my new favorite poster.

Yak used to be my favorite poster but he did ascend as has been suggested. Though one day he came to me in the form of a cow. And now I am carrying Hercules!

ender502

Last I heard you have to remain stationary to fire a pistol twice in the first place since the pistol is not mounted on the bike. 

Great thread, glad to be in before lock.

EDIT: removed my assumption.

An odd question... is the p.36 quote a rule or merely an indication that rules will follow? The reason i ask is that the "note" is in the middle of the shooting and assaulting rules. It does not have an "exception" or "bullet" by it like other rules sections.

Presumably, the rare units are defined under the unit rules themselves. I don't think p.36 allows us to use the rules on p.53. Nor doi think the rules on p.53 allow us to use p.36. I think, as I read it yet again, that p.36 is merely a note that there are exceptions to the basic rule. P. 53 reitereates the basic rule (that all infantry rules apply and so do the assaultinga  nd shooting rule on p.36) and then says there are exceptions listed in the Unit Type Rules section. It then gives the exception to the basic rules for shooting and assaulting.

So, is the note on p.36 actually a rule? I know it's an odd question but Janth's last post made me wonder.

ender502

Posted By Janthkin on 08/14/2007 3:37 PM

An odd question... is the p.36 quote a rule or merely an indication that rules will follow? The reason i ask is that the "note" is in the middle of the shooting and assaulting rules. It does not have an "exception" or "bullet" by it like other rules sections.

Gods only know (but don't ask the Chaos gods, 'cause they're too busy weeping over the travesty of the new Chaos codex). The interleaving of fluff and rules and exceptions is disorderly in the extreme. (See, e.g., the "torrent of fire" rules...buried in the middle of a block of text.)

Presumably, the rare units are defined under the unit rules themselves. I don't think p.36 allows us to use the rules on p.53. Nor doi think the rules on p.53 allow us to use p.36. I think, as I read it yet again, that p.36 is merely a note that there are exceptions to the basic rule.

Oooh, my turn!  "Show me a rule, not a presumption!"  (Did I do that right?) 

"Some rare" units are defined in the sentence itself: they are units that either count as stationary when firing rapid fire weapons, OR can move and fire heavy weapons.  We don't have anything else to go on there.  *shrug*

Can we follow the both rules, without breaking either?  I think we can.

Edit: Yes, you did that perfectly. Like I said, it was an odd question.

First, I have to agree that the specific rules will always overrule the general. So, I think P.53 rolls right over P. 36 in terms of the ability to assault after firing. I think that ends the debate personally.

Second, bikes are never defined as rare units.

Third, I am not willing to admit P.36 actually defines a rule.

Fourth, If p.36 does indeed describe a rule, I think the conjunction AND creates a list of preconditions in order to be such a rare unit.

Fifth, if p.36 does not create a list and is really creating 2 seperate conditions (both of which can define a unit as rare and hence can charge after firing) then bikes would not fit as either condition A or B. Bikes do not count as stationary for rapid fire weapons, only those mounted ones. So A is right out. Further, B doesn't work because the rules for bikes charging after firing are not that they might charge after firinga heavy weapon. The rule for bikes include (in the section dispensations for charging after firing a rapid fire weapon AND for charging after firing a heavy weapon. Clearly nota unit that either counts as staionary for fapid fire weapons OR can move and fire. It is entirely different. It can do both.

ender502

Posted By Mr. Bombadidaloo on 08/14/2007 5:30 PM

Posted By ender502 on 08/14/2007 1:06 PM

Mr. Bombadidaloo is my new favorite poster.

I'd say "I love you too" here, but apparently you're not a fan of MCC ice cream, and that's where I draw the line in relationships, so....



....Anyway now that you agree the quote from p. 36 means "or" not "and" (or at least I think you agree....) I hope you can at least see then on what I base my argument; I don't want you to feel like I'm just attacking you for the sake of argument; the very wording in that one quote is where I base my entire argument.

...However! After reading these recent explanations and references of how some rules override others, I am inclined to see it more your way. The only thing that has me worried here is are you trying to override a specific rule with a blanket rule, when specific rules are by nature meant to override blanket rules?

...When I was a little boy I had a very soft and fuzzy blanket my grandma made me. But it was stitched together loosely with lots of "holes" between the threads, so specific things like, oh, my toes, could fit their way right through it. So you can see where I'm coming from!

Actually, I don't believe in the great and might "or." It's just a rhetorical device.

"A is correct!"

"No, it's not."

"Well, if not A then B is correct"

"No, it's not"

Then on to C, D and eventually E.

I think the bike rules are more specific than the charge rules. P.36 is "Declaring Charges". It applies to everyone. P. 53 are bike rules which apply only to bikes. Everyone strikes me as less specific than bikes.

ender502

Logic. You are trying to apply logic to a GW rules dispute? Man o man you ar eway off the market. My answer is very much a legal one. If the conditions are A or B then the unit must be A or B. A we dealt with quite nicely. But P.53 cannot be B. It is B + C. It does contain B. But it is B + C and p.36 makes no mention of B + C. Only A OR B.

But I don't actually believe it is an OR. Considering the word doe snot appear on the P.36 quote.

Here is a good one for ya...

This assumes bikes count as stationary because they can charge after firing a heavy weapon. But if they are stationary then they would be able to fire a rapid fire weapon it's full distance even though they moved as well. Why? Because that is what the infantry rules say they can do and we know the infantry rules apply unless otherwise stated. But we know that a biker cannot always use a rapid fire weapon as if stationary. The only logical conclusion is that bikes do not always count as stationary in the same manner as they do for heavy weapons and mounted rapid fire weapons. Held rapid fire weapons and pistols would be treated differently.

So, no pistol double tap.

Of course, I don't believe in the "or." I think the more specific bike rule overides the more general p.36 note.

ender502

Actually, the specific bike rules on p.53 do not say that at all. You are referring to the note on p.36.  You are claiming the p.36 note (that applies to every unit if it is indeed a rule) overides the more specific (only applies to bikes) p.53 rule.

That's just silly. The more specific rule always overides the more general.  

ender502

DarlonGob-

I agree 100% and you did say it first. Iunderstand the other sides points even though I don't agree. There are several logical incongruities involved with the "counts as stationary" arguement. You found the biggest.

BTW, there is only 1 instance I can imagine the pistol double tap would ever come up as an issue... That's where you had a veteran bike sergeant with plasma pistol within 6" of a target unit. Double tap with pistol and plasma guns and then charge. It is unlikely but... there ya go.

ender502

The specific overrides the general ONLY in the case of the rules being in conflict.  The rules are NOT in conflict.

If the bike rule said that it cannot assault after firing pistols twice, then it would be in conflict and more specific.  Lacking a specific rule about pistols from bikes, we go to the general rule, which is anything that can move and fire heavy weapons can assault after firing, full stop.

That's the most cogent arguement so far. The problem is that p.36 does not apply to bikes. You keep forgetting the conjunctive word AND used on p.36. That creates a set of conditions that bikes do not meet. So it does not apply.

BTW, I still do not buy into the idea that p.36 actually describes a rule. But if it did it can only be said to apply to the specific exemptions... rapid fire and heavy weapons.

But, even assuming there is no conflict between the bikes rule and the  p.36 note you STILL have a problem. The more specific pistol rules negates p.36. According to the pistol rule you cannot charge after double tapping.

ender502

Yes, please.

(i.e., agree to disagree)

Yeah! More debates for the debate god! Rhetoric for the rhetoric throne!

ender502

Now you're just plugging your ears and screaming "I can't hear you".

All your arguments have been shown to be garbage.  Yet, you keep stating them over and over again.

I notice you don't quote the entire post. Typical, you have a future at FOX News.

The problem with what you have just said is that it is not useful at all.. My 9yo can call others arguements garbage.

We disagree. Fine. I happen to be right. You happen to be wrong. Example after example has shown how your arguement is based on 1. words not in evidence in the book 2. how it is superceded by both the pistol and bike rule 3. how it is questionable how the p.36 note is even a rule.

The tide of evidence is against you. Play how you want but from what I can see you will be playing wrong.

Ozymandias (sp?) The only reason I can see for the double tap would be a vet sergeant with plasma pistol.

ender502

Now that is almost as delicious as Jamocha Almond Fudge. Good job. So, we could rephrase the question.... "Must a bike remain (or count as) stationary in order to fire a pistol twice?"  I think the answer would have to be "Yes, a bike must remain (or count as remaining) stationary in order to shoot a pistol twice."

Well, like infantry he COULD remain stationary (actually not move)  AND double tap. No problem there.

But does he count as stationary per p.36 note? I don't think so. The bike doesn't count as stationary when firing rapid fire weapons. That's why he can't always fire a single shot at max distance from a rapid fire weapon. He only has that as it concerns mounted rapid fire weapons. Such are not mentioned on p.36 and seem to be a very specific exception.

That was a great example Bombadidaloo. Usually examples run just way off topic but that was perfect. I am not sure which way you were edging in your post but no matter it was a great post.

So, can you see where I am going with why I don't think the bike "counts as stationary?"

ender502

Posted By Mr. Bombadidaloo on 08/15/2007 9:03 PM
Yeah, in all the confusion of debate, I forgot that it does not specifically mention bikes count as stationary for all purposes of fire. Whoops... Still, would you say that the assassin would be able to assault in the example I gave?

And... *blush* thanks for the 'praise' Took me a while to find a 'good' reason to post something new in this thread <3

I think the assassin could move AND shoot twice but could not assault. His rule is very specific to what it allows him to do with a pistol. But it doesn't give an exemption for charging after firing the two shots.

EDIT" Bomnadidaloo you dirty $^&(&^... it was YOU that asked the damn pistol question on post #2! You are the cause of all this misery. Now where's my ice cream?

ender502

Alas we probably are ready for lock. Though i disagree with you 100%. I think Janths arguement is logical but does not involve the RAW at all.

But let me ask you Yak, do you think the biker can move, double tap AND charge? That is the issue.

Oh, and I think the issue is exceptionally important to anyone that uses bikes. So that would be... me?

Lock away as you see fit.

ender502

We at least agree on that. That has been my major issue the whole time...grrrr... How many pages of posts wasted?

Ah, Yak's mere presence is like a debate High Colonic! I feel cleansed!

(though he only agrees with Janth because I won't name the baby after him)

ender502

Beat you to it you evil Mr. Bombadidaloo! Here's rainbow sherbert in your eye!

Well, at least we agree that bikes can't move, double and charge.

ender502

Unless you want to say that the heavy weapons rule is more specific than the rule about units that can move and fire heavy weapons.

Ummm... the rule for pistols is for ... pistols.

ender502

Oh, i get the point. Your contention is the unit rules override the weapon rules. I agree wholeheartedly. But pistols are never mention in the bike unit entry. Mounted rapid fire weapons, rapid fire weapons and heavy weapons are mentioned. No pistols.

Are you ready Abbot....First base!

ender502

Wrong, pistols are NOT mentioned on p.36. Nor are they mentioned on p.53.

ender502

Not my fault he won't admit he is wrong.

ender502

*cough*  Page 36 BGB

'An infantry unit that fired twice with pistols or which shot with rapid fire weapons or remained stationary to fire heavy weapons may not charge at all in the Assault phase.

Note: Some rare units always count as stationary when firing rapid fire wapons and some units can move and fire heavy weapons.  Such units can charge after firing'

Clear linkage between double-tapping pistols preventing you from assaulting and units that can move and fire heavy weapons being able to assault after firing.

All on page 36, which as a matter of fact DOES mention pistols.

I believe it's you that needs to admit that you were wrong.

The p.36 note does not enunciate a rule. It is mearly a note about exceptions that may or may not apply to specific units.

ender502

Hey abbott! Third base