Shooting and Assaulting with Dual Profile Weapons.

[Kristoff]

Okay, in a Tactics discussion taking out Imperial and Wraith Knights, an interesting thought came up that the Necron Rod of the Covenant was nerfed. Supposedly because it has two profiles, one shooting and one assault, and you can only use one per turn.

 

For reference, on page 41 of the BRB:

"Some weapons can be used in different ways, representing different power settings or types of ammo. Some weapons can be used in combat as well as shooting. Where this is the case, there will be a separate line in the weapon’s profile for each, and you can choose which to use each turn."

 

Now, it doesn't specifically say that you can only use one profile per turn, but it could be implied if you were of a mind.

 

The only other weapon (besides pistols and the Gauntlets of Ultramar) I can think doing that are Ork Burna Boyz Burnas, but that weapon also specifically states that it cannot be used for both profiles per turn.

 

So, thoughts?

[Axagoras]

where does it say you cant use it to shoot and assault?

[Kristoff]

where does it say you cant use it to shoot and assault?

 

They are under the assumption that the bolded part:

 

"Some weapons can be used in different ways, representing different power settings or types of ammo. Some weapons can be used in combat as well as shooting. Where this is the case, there will be a separate line in the weapon’s profile for each, and you can choose which to use each turn."

 

implicitly states you can choose one profile each turn.

So the argument comes to the last section which you did bold. It could be reworded to the following "Each player turn, you can choose which profile to use". I added the implicit "profile" noun there and also clarified RAW "turn" to be explicitly player turn.

 

During a Necron player's turn, you decide which profile to use. No rule is in place to say/declare when you do this - just that when there are weapons with 2 separate profiles you are to choose which to use for that turn. Similarly when it's not the Necron player's turn (do you want to shoot overwatch or use the melee profile?).

My own thought is that the subject of that part of the sentence is regarding multiple profiles so reverting it to single just doesn't make sense and they are adding their own words in to it. But that's how I read English.

[Axagoras]

huh, well i guess thats how they work then. thats good to know. Just like how melta bombs dont have the melta special rule

[Kristoff]

huh, well i guess thats how they work then. thats good to know. Just like how melta bombs dont have the melta special rule

Sure it does, half of nothing is still nothing, right? ;)

[Dam13n]

This actually first reared it's head in 6th edition.  Arjac's hammer being the focus of the discussion IIRC.  The rule in 6th edition was much the same, with a strong implication that a weapon with two (or more) profiles could only use one of them per turn.

 

As written, such weapons can use one profile or the other each turn, so once a Krak grenade is thrown by a model (in the shooting phase), that model cannot use it (again) in the Assault phase as it (at least temporarily) does not have an assault profile that turn (due to you, the player, choosing to use it's shooting profile that turn instead).

 

Now whether this was an error to begin with (in 6th edition) and was then just copy / pasted across into 7th, or it was always meant to be that way would probably be an interesting RAI discussion.  Still, it would be a discussion based around guess-work, not facts... so probably not appropriate for the OR, really.

[Kristoff]

This actually first reared it's head in 6th edition. Arjac's hammer being the focus of the discussion IIRC. The rule in 6th edition was much the same, with a strong implication that a weapon with two (or more) profiles could only use one of them per turn.

Near as I can tell, this paragraph was copy & pasted 100% from 6th, and the only implication is what one chooses to see or how one is trained to read such sentences.

 

It wasn't as important in 6th because a unit's shooting was done all at once, so a second profile could not be selected when Shooting.

 

In 7th, every shooting weapon name is done one at a time, and every profile is classed as a different weapon.

 

As written, such weapons can use one profile or the other each turn, so once a Krak grenade is thrown by a model (in the shooting phase), that model cannot use it (again) in the Assault phase as it (at least temporarily) does not have an assault profile that turn (due to you, the player, choosing to use it's shooting profile that turn instead).

Actually, it is not written that way, with the exception of weapons that specifically state otherwise like Ork Burnas and Combi-bolters.

 

No whether this was an error to begin with (in 6th edition) and was then just copy / pasted across into 7th, or it was always meant to be that way would probably be an interesting RAI discussion. Still, it would be a discussion based around guess-work, not facts... so probably not appropriate for the OR, really.

The RAI side, I agree, but as to the written side and facts, I was looking at how people read the paragraph, but also if it can be substantiated anywhere else.

[Dam13n]

Probably a bad example.  Never mind.  What I meant by it was a weapon with both a Melee and Ranged profile (like the Burna, which is probably a better example... though being a filthy xenos weapon, didn't come to me at the time of writing).  Which, if fired in the shooting phase, cannot then be used in the following assault phase.

 

I agree that the rule has somewhat more bearing in 7th with regards to Combi-weapons (for example) and the shooting phase due to the altered way in which that phase plays out in 7th edition.  Especially as it pertains to vehicles (and other models that can fire multiple ranged weapons in a single shooting phase).  Though, to me at least, the cross-phase implications are a little more interesting.

 

I wasn't suggesting that this topic lacks merit from an OR perspective, more that the (somewhat inevitable) offshoot from it (the RAI discussion) would be unlikely to offer anything concrete at the end of it (in other words, think of it as a subtle "keep it on topic" nudge to anyone who might be considering that very tangent).

[Kristoff]

What I meant by it was a weapon with both a Melee and Ranged profile (like the Burna, which is probably a better example... though being a filthy xenos weapon, didn't come to me at the time of writing). Which, if fired in the shooting phase, cannot then be used in the following assault phase.

And yet, the Burna, much like the Combi-Bolter, is specifically called out as only being able to use one profile per turn. If only using one profile per turn was standard, than this is more than redundant. I know that 7th has missed updating changes from 6th to 7th, but this rule didn't change, at least for when dealing with a Ranged/Melee hybrid like Calgar's Gauntlets.

I agree that the rule has somewhat more bearing in 7th with regards to Combi-weapons (for example) and the shooting phase due to the altered way in which that phase plays out in 7th edition. Especially as it pertains to vehicles (and other models that can fire multiple ranged weapons in a single shooting phase). Though, to me at least, the cross-phase implications are a little more interesting.

And it's the cross-phase implications that are in question (though, the same phase implications holds interesting things for the Dreadnought's and Land Speeder's missile launcehrs). The thought that a weapon can only be used once per turn when it's not specified, when others are makes me tilt my head in question.

I wasn't suggesting that this topic lacks merit from an OR perspective, more that the (somewhat inevitable) offshoot from it (the RAI discussion) would be unlikely to offer anything concrete at the end of it (in other words, think of it as a subtle "keep it on topic" nudge to anyone who might be considering that very tangent).

Ah, good point. Some people do like to get carried away. Myself not included of course...

[Axagoras]

huh, well i guess thats how they work then. thats good to know. Just like how melta bombs dont have the melta special rule

Sure it does, half of nothing is still nothing, right?

yep, which is why it is armorbane, and great at killing land raider Achilles, and all the heresy era tanks with armored ceramite now in both loyalist and chaos armieres, anyway enough of the off topic tangent.