Jump to content

las-plas razor and weapon destroyed


stephane4985

Recommended Posts

I just saw that in the rule book faq

 

Q: When a Damaged – Weapon Destroyed result is

rolled and a weapon is destroyed are any built-in,

combi or co-axial weapons attached to it also

destroyed? (p61)

A: Yes.

 

So I was wondering what happens when you destroy a turret on a razorback that contains a lascannon and a TL plasma cannon. Are they not considered co-axial weapons, since they are on the same turret? Are they both destroy or only one of them?

Just to make it totally clear, the plasma gun is not a co-axial weapon to the lascannon. Neither is it inbuilt or in any way related. It is a separate weapon, as the C:SM FAQ makes clear, but because they are two separate weapons the BRB FAQ wouldn't apply to them anyway.
To expand on this in a related issue I know a dreadnaught usually has a gun arm and a ccw+stormbolter arm. In this case I guess if i get a weapon destroyed result I have to remove an entire arm, i can't just remove the stormbolter correct?
To expand on this in a related issue I know a dreadnaught usually has a gun arm and a ccw+stormbolter arm. In this case I guess if i get a weapon destroyed result I have to remove an entire arm, i can't just remove the stormbolter correct?

 

Correct. I believe the wording used in most marine codeci (codexes?) is "built-in" when referring to the underslung weapon on the DCCW.

I presume that both weapon are mounted on the Turret? If that is the case then GW's SM FAQ is very very wrong. They are indeed co-axial by the definition of the term which is a main weapon with a secondary weapon mounted in such a way that it uses the same line of fire in order to draw a target.

 

However, since the info in both FAQ's are in the Q&A section which GW considers "soft" rulings. So ultimately I'd say you should discuss with your opponent.

 

 

Off topic, there are a lot of words that are spelled differently between the Brits and the Americans, armour/armor and daemon/demon to name a couple more

In 40k, "Co-axial" is a rule that ONLY exists in APOCALYPSE, and specifically where the unit entry states it (like certain FW tanks and certain superheavies)

The FAQ states that on a SM razorback, they are TWO separate weapons, not built-ins and not co-axial (even if in reality they might be called such).

 

Reality and 40k do not have anything in common. Please don't try to shoehorn reality into the game, it only ends badly.

I presume that both weapon are mounted on the Turret? If that is the case then GW's SM FAQ is very very wrong. They are indeed co-axial by the definition of the term which is a main weapon with a secondary weapon mounted in such a way that it uses the same line of fire in order to draw a target.

 

They don't have to be on the same turret. I've seen some conversions where there's the lascannon on the turret and a twin-linked plasma gun where a pintle mounted storm bolter would be. Just because someone modelled the plasma gun and lascannon together on the same turret doesn't mean it's co axial in game, it needs to be said so in the rules. The Codex says it's a lascannon and a plasma gun, no mention to co axial, therefore they aren't co axial, they are separate weapons, and the C:SM FAQ is therefore very, very right.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.