Multitracker wording - Warhammer 40K Fantasy
 

Welcome to Librarium Online!

Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!

Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!


Register Now!

User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    LO Zealot mephistophales's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    withheld
    Age
    31
    Posts
    1,060
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputation
    52 (x3)

    Multitracker wording

    After a fruitless discussion in which most of the players agreed that common sense overrides what it says in the rule book, I bring a question about the new codex here. Here are some examples which came up.

    "The big advantage of twin-linked weapons is that they only count as a single weapon being fired." -4.0 rules p.30

    "It enables the model to fire two battlesuit weapon systems in the same turn." -P. 26 multi-tracker entry in the tau codex

    "A single-mounted weapon counts as a single battlesuit weapon system, and a twin-linked weapon counts as two." -P. 25 tau codex under twin linked systems

    As you can see clearly see, p. 25 says that a twin linked system counts as two systems. So therefore, although only one gun is being fired, two systems are doing the work, and thus two systems are being fired/used.

    Now what does everyone else think? Does the fact that a TL gun always fires as one weapon override the fact that it is using two systems? I believe that may be a correct interpretation.

    The other interpretation is that it does not override it, and therefore you cannot fire it without a multitracker.

    Other people's interpretations are that it goes against common sense as a tau player, and the sense of using a TL gun. I believe this is a weak argument, as the rules don't say what you want just because you want them to. There are plenty of times GW screws up, such as with shield drones (thanks to ostego for pointing that out.)

    After all the debate, i'm going to read it that 4.0 rules override the codex and you are only firing one weapon system instead of two, since a TL is always counted as one.

    Edit- Another interpretation is that they're only referring to filling hardpoints, not shooting. If so then it is worded very badly, and needs definite rewording which I was arguing for from the beginning. I agree they probably are talking about that, but it is in such a roundabout way that it infringes on other aspects of the weapon, such as shooting.

    Last edited by mephistophales; April 17th, 2006 at 22:07.
    win/draw/loss
    76/13/4

    Ask yourself why in the world would you trust a win loss record? Playing them yourself is the only way to tell.

    The true joy in the game is playing down to the last model, no matter the odds.

  2. Remove Advertisements
    Librarium-Online.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    Senior Member Lord Malachi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Thunderdome
    Age
    46
    Posts
    355
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    19 (x1)

    A TL weapon on a Tau battlesuit counts as two weapon systems for purposes of how many "systems" have been bought for the suit. For example, an XV8 suit must have three weapon or support systems on it, so a TL weapon counts as two systems. This has no bearing on the number of weapons for firing (i.e. multi-tracker) purposes. A TL weapon counts as one weapon for firing purposes. A multi-tracker would let you fire a third weapon system, if you chose one, which would actually count as a second weapon for firing purposes.

    The bottom line is that Tau "weapon systems" are not the same things as weapons in regards to shooting. It is simply a poor choice of wording on GW's part. Replace the words "weapon systems" with "weapon slots" or "weapon mounts" and it is less confusing.

    If TL weapons counted as two separate weapons then a Land Raider with a TL lascannon could only fire a single non-twinlinked shot if it moved up to 6". The same would apply to a Razorback with a TL autocannon.
    Last edited by Lord Malachi; April 17th, 2006 at 22:59.
    Just out of curiousity, whats next? Maybe you can make an issue about the fact that GW didn't define the action of 'rolling' a D6 to actually mean dropping it in such a manner as to produce a random result; thus making it perfectly acceptable to just put them down with the face up of your choice?

  4. #3
    No Rest For the Righteous Ebon Hand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Manchester, Ct
    Age
    32
    Posts
    1,138
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputation
    96 (x3)

    I was about to say the same thing as Lord Malachi, and I agree with Meph that weapon systems are not the same as weapons for shooting purposes.

    "Courage is not the absence of fear, it is the conquest of it." -Anon

  5. #4
    Member philheed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Age
    37
    Posts
    78
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    4 (x1)

    "There are plenty of times GW screws up, such as with shield drones (thanks to ostego for pointing that out.)"



    Can someone please tell me what the misunderstanding was for the shield drones or where I can find this discussion?

  6. #5
    LO Zealot mephistophales's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    withheld
    Age
    31
    Posts
    1,060
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputation
    52 (x3)

    Quote Originally Posted by philheed
    "There are plenty of times GW screws up, such as with shield drones (thanks to ostego for pointing that out.)"



    Can someone please tell me what the misunderstanding was for the shield drones or where I can find this discussion?
    Um, it wasn't as much a discussion as a problem. Shield Drones didn't protect properly under fourth edition rules for mixed toughness and saves. It is no longer a problem as they fixed it in the newest codex, in which they had shield drones take on the toughness and save of their owner, when they used to have their own individual toughness and save, which was inferior.
    win/draw/loss
    76/13/4

    Ask yourself why in the world would you trust a win loss record? Playing them yourself is the only way to tell.

    The true joy in the game is playing down to the last model, no matter the odds.

  7. #6
    Member philheed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Age
    37
    Posts
    78
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    4 (x1)

    Oh ok thanks for elaborating!!

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts