Quadgun Shenanigans!

[CitadelArmyGuy]

First Question is of the garden variety: Can a model fire the Quadgun on Overwatch when being charged? (I think no, but need confirmation)

 

Second Question: The profile for the Quadgun is Heavy 4. When a non-relentless model must move to make base contact with it, will it then shoot only Snap Shots? The gun was stationary, but the rules say a model may fire the quad instead of their own weapon following all normal rules for shooting.

 

Third Question (this is the weirdest one): The rules say a model in base contact can fire the gun instead of their own weapon. Model A is basing the quad, and shoots it. Then in the next player turn, Model B who is an enemy model is basing the quad on the other side (legally more than 1" from any enemy models and not in melee), also chooses to fire the quad. Is this legal? (This has happened in one of my games already, we ruled it this way just for hilarity but I'm genuinely curious for the official ruling).

[dswanick]

First Question is of the garden variety: Can a model fire the Quadgun on Overwatch when being charged? (I think no, but need confirmation)

 

Second Question: The profile for the Quadgun is Heavy 4. When a non-relentless model must move to make base contact with it, will it then shoot only Snap Shots? The gun was stationary, but the rules say a model may fire the quad instead of their own weapon following all normal rules for shooting.

 

Third Question (this is the weirdest one): The rules say a model in base contact can fire the gun instead of their own weapon. Model A is basing the quad, and shoots it. Then in the next player turn, Model B who is an enemy model is basing the quad on the other side (legally more than 1" from any enemy models and not in melee), also chooses to fire the quad. Is this legal? (This has happened in one of my games already, we ruled it this way just for hilarity but I'm genuinely curious for the official ruling).

1. I can't find any reason why it couldn't.

2. Yes.

3. Sounds right, but I'll have to look into it further.

[Panda_]

Without the book accessible, I believe fortifications and terrains special thingies may be use when they are uncontested.

 

3/ Would be no.

[Jolemai]

Pure speculation, but seeing as one army has bought the Quad Gun then surely only that army can use it?

[Jacinda]

Pure speculation, but seeing as one army has bought the Quad Gun then surely only that army can use it?

This is the way we play it. If it is in my Fortification FOC, it is a model in my army. The enemy can not be within 1" unless they assault it. I mean, it's not like you will let the enemy embark in your Land Raider from your Heavy Support slot.

[Morollan]

Pure speculation, but seeing as one army has bought the Quad Gun then surely only that army can use it?

This is the way we play it. If it is in my Fortification FOC, it is a model in my army. The enemy can not be within 1" unless they assault it. I mean, it's not like you will let the enemy embark in your Land Raider from your Heavy Support slot.

 

The difference here is that you cannot 'use' a Land Raider by being in b2b with it. You can with a gun emplacement. The rules do not specify that the owning player is the only one who can use the gun and simply says "One model in base contact with the gun emplacement can fire it instead of his own weapon, following the normal rules for shooting.". By moving a model into b2b with the gun you have fulfilled the rules requirements.

[Jacinda]

Pure speculation, but seeing as one army has bought the Quad Gun then surely only that army can use it?

This is the way we play it. If it is in my Fortification FOC, it is a model in my army. The enemy can not be within 1" unless they assault it. I mean, it's not like you will let the enemy embark in your Land Raider from your Heavy Support slot.

 

The difference here is that you cannot 'use' a Land Raider by being in b2b with it. You can with a gun emplacement. The rules do not specify that the owning player is the only one who can use the gun and simply says "One model in base contact with the gun emplacement can fire it instead of his own weapon, following the normal rules for shooting.". By moving a model into b2b with the gun you have fulfilled the rules requirements.

I can "use" it in the sense that I can embark in it and use it's AV for protection. Check the rules for embarking into a transport. The rules do nort specify you have to own it; you just need to be within 2" of a hatch. Dedicated Transports specify friendly units as part of the restrictions. Ally rules prevent your allies from usong any of your transports. So what is keeping me from hopping into your Land Raider?

 

And I am saying that by moving in to b2b you are assaulting my model and therefore can not fire any weapon.

[Morollan]

But Gun Emplacements are classed as Battlefield Debris, which is terrain. It's not one of your units, unlike a Land Raider.

[Seahawk]

1. Yep, "following the normal rules for shooting."

 

2. Yep, "following the normal rules for shooting."

 

3. Yep, "One model in base contact...can fire it instead of his own weapon."

 

 

For those that say enemy models can't use your fortifications...then how could they possibly embark into your building fortifications? This is allowed, by the way, in the normal rules for buildings.

 

Basically, there is no rule saying you can't enter or use enemy fortifications, and GW has deliberately worded certain objects like the Gun Emplacement and Comms relay. There is no rule of "ownership" here.

[Spacefrisian]

If you buy that quad gun, isnt it part of youre force than? it even has the artilery profile if iam not mistaken.

[Seahawk]

It's part of your model collection sure, but once it's on the table, anyone can use it because it's Battlefield Debris.

[Zedrenael]

1) Yes you can fire it in overwatch instead of firing your own weapon.

 

2) I would not know on this one as the gun did not move as it is immobile and can not be subject to snap shot. Then you have to include a relentless unit. I would think then that they would get to fire at full BS with it then.

 

3) It specifically says that you do not own a gun emplacement (battlefield debris) that anybody can benefit from it. So yes you can deepstrike Marbo in on it outside an inch of the enemy and blast somebody away like a flyer/manticore =] (speaking from experience).

[Brother captin Braddok]

I would agree that any infantry model (friend or foe) could use the gun. But I thought that only one model could control it. So if a friendly model is in base contact, they control it until removed. In the same respect that only one unit can be in a bunker. It's logical, but is this not the case?

[Morollan]

I would agree that any infantry model (friend or foe) could use the gun. But I thought that only one model could control it. So if a friendly model is in base contact, they control it until removed. In the same respect that only one unit can be in a bunker. It's logical, but is this not the case?

 

"One model in base contact with the gun emplacement can fire it instead of his own weapon, following the normal rules for shooting."

 

If two models from different sides are in contact with the gun (and not within 1" of each other) then each could fire it on his own turn. If using it on Interceptor mode you could shoot it in your opponents movement phase, he could still shoot it in his own shooting phase but nobody could use it in your next turn.

[Brother captin Braddok]

@Morollan

From a Cinematic point of view ( which is what I thought GW was going for) it doesn't seem thought out. I'm just picturing an Eldar punching a Marine in the face while he aims and fires the gun, then the Marine doing the same to the eldar. But if that's the general consensus I'll go with it. Still need to get a few 6th ed games under my belt

[Captain Idaho]

Well you can't use an emplaced weapon from fortifications as overwatch, as stated in the FAQ for the rulebook:

 

Q: Can occupied Fortifications fire Overwatch from their emplaced

weapons? (p114)

A: No.

 

and then also says this which confirms the Agegis Defence line counts the same as a fortification:

 

Q: Can you shoot at a gun emplacement attached to an Aegis

defence line? (p114)

A: Yes – see page 105 for a gun emplacement’s profile.

 

So no you can't fire a Quad Gun as Overwatch. Sorry all.

[Morollan]

Emplaced Guns and Gun Emplacements are not the same thing. Both have separate entries in the rules (pg 96 and 105 respectively)

[Captain Idaho]

Why would one rule for emplaced weapons not be applicable to both situations for emplaced weapons to be used?

 

Sure they work slightly differently, but they are still emplaced weapons and FAQ has confirmed emplaced weapons from fortifications (and Defence Lines are bought as fortifications) can't be used for Overwatch.

[Morollan]

Why would one rule for emplaced weapons not be applicable to both situations for emplaced weapons to be used?

 

Sure they work slightly differently, but they are still emplaced weapons and FAQ has confirmed emplaced weapons from fortifications (and Defence Lines are bought as fortifications) can't be used for Overwatch.

 

The point is that they are not emplaced weapons. They are weapon emplacements. Different things so the overwatch FAQ does not apply and the other FAQ is not relevant.

[Captain Idaho]

An emplaced weapon is another way of saying a weapon emplacement. If we're going strictly RAW, then English language doesn't differentiate between the two.

 

I can see the argument of "weapon emplacment" and "emplaced weapon" spelt with a capital, but I think it's a minor loop hole to justify it in this circumstance. It's an weapon bought with a fortification that is fired by a model in base contact. It fits the description of both emplaced weapons and weapon emplacements.

[Seahawk]

The problem is that GW decided to make them categorically different.

 

Gun Emplacements (p.105) are Battlefield debris, and as such they are simply weapons on the battlefield that anyone can "pick up and use". Right now there are only two: the Quad-gun and Icarus lascannon. They have an artillery statline and so can be destroyed. They do not have the option for automated fire.

 

Emplaced Weapons (p.96) are built-in to buildings. They have automated and manual fire modes. They do not have an artillery statline and cannot be attacked or destroyed unless the building they're on gets destroyed. Right now they're just the heavy bolters on a Bastion, and all the weapons on a Fortress of Redemption.

 

 

So, the first FAQ answer says that units in a building can't use the building's guns to shoot Overwatch, which makes sense. The second just says what everyone already knew: if it has a statline, it can be shot. Neither of them say that you cannot use Gun Emplacements to shoot Overwatch. It doesn't matter that both are included in fortifications; they are very different beasts altogether.

[Captain Idaho]

I suppose that is the case, but I think it won't be long before GW FAQ it, since intent seems to be clear here, at least to me. :)

[Seahawk]

Same for us. Remember, you can't think in English grammar rules with GW rules, you have to think in GW speak ;). The intent is clear that only one type of gun can't be used while the other can. :D

[Captain Idaho]

Same for us. Remember, you can't think in English grammar rules with GW rules, you have to think in GW speak ;). The intent is clear that only one type of gun can't be used while the other can. :D

 

Touche :D

[Kierdale]

After Zedrenael's mention of Marbo I made a thread linking to this one over on the Boot Camp to share the idea with IG players and BF110C4 just brought up a good point: a quad gun has Interceptor. Anyone coming out of reserves (such as Marbo or -B&C relevant- outflanking marine scouts or other) could be shot at via the Interceptor rule. It's times like that when your opponent roles all 6s too...and Marbo insta-dies :)

 

Then again, if they fire it via Interceptor to hit your scouts/whatever (on second thoughts: wouldnt want to risk Marbo getting wasted) they can't use it to shoot down your flyer in their next turn, right?