Gunslinger and Wall of Death

[doom-kitten]

I'm not sure if this has been asked before, but here goes, if I have a model wielding two hand-flamers, they would benefit from Gunslingers as they are pistols. However would the model roll on a single d3 in Overwatch or 2d3 due to having two flame templates? I'm not sure if this has been FAQed by GW and would appreciate some helpa

[Nabterayl]

Gunslinger would not apply to Overwatch, as it specifies that models with two pistols can fire both "in the Shooting phase." Overwatch does not occur in the Shooting phase, clearly - though if there were any doubt, page 21 points out that "An Overwatch attack is resolved like a normal shooting attack (albeit one resolved in the enemy's Assault phase)," which I think we have to read as meaning that Overwatch is resolved as a normal shooting attack except that it occurs in the enemy's Assault phase. However, if you did have a single model able to fire two flamers, that model would roll 2d3, as Wall of Death says to inflict d3 hits if "a Template weapon fires Overwatch" - as opposed to, for instance, any Template weapons firing Overwatch.

[evilamericorp]

"An Overwatch attack is resolved like a normal shooting attack (albeit one resolved in the enemy's Assault phase)," which I think we have to read as meaning that Overwatch is resolved as a normal shooting attack except that it occurs in the enemy's Assault phase.

If overwatch is resolved like a normal shooting attack, why wouldn't you be able to fire two pistols? Of course the gunslinger rule says you can fire them both in the shooting phase, that's when you normally shoot weapons. It's not going to say you can fire them both in the movement phase. The rule doesn't say you can only fire two pistols in the shooting phase. Overwatch is resolved like a normal shooting attack, and models armed with two pistols can normally fire them both.

[Nabterayl]

Applying Gunslinger to Overwatch has two consequences that I disagree with:

1. It reads "All models with two pistols can fire both in the Shooting phase" as having the same meaning as "All models with two pistols can fire both."
2. It reads "An Overwatch attack is resolved like a normal shooting attack (albeit one resolved in the enemy's Assault phase)" as having the same meaning as "An Overwatch attack is resolved like a normal shooting attack."

What, then, are we to make of the phrases "in the Shooting phase" and "albeit one resolved in the enemy's Assault phase?" According to your reading, those phrases don't add anything to the rules in which they appear.

As we lawyers like to say, when interpreting a written rule, we must give meaning to each word if possible and avoid a construction that would render a term surplusage. I know there are people on this board (and presumably elsewhere in the 40K community) who don't hold to that, but ... well, for a variety of reasons, I do.

[Sainhann]

Applying Gunslinger to Overwatch has two consequences that I disagree with:

1. It reads "All models with two pistols can fire both in the Shooting phase" as having the same meaning as "All models with two pistols can fire both."
2. It reads "An Overwatch attack is resolved like a normal shooting attack (albeit one resolved in the enemy's Assault phase)" as having the same meaning as "An Overwatch attack is resolved like a normal shooting attack."

What, then, are we to make of the phrases "in the Shooting phase" and "albeit one resolved in the enemy's Assault phase?" According to your reading, those phrases don't add anything to the rules in which they appear.

As we lawyers like to say, when interpreting a written rule, we must give meaning to each word if possible and avoid a construction that would render a term surplusage. I know there are people on this board (and presumably elsewhere in the 40K community) who don't hold to that, but ... well, for a variety of reasons, I do.

Quite simple GW is not very good at writing rules.

So we will now have the RAW individuals who will be stating that they can only do that during the shooting phase and that Overwatch is not during the shooting phase so in that case they can only shoot with one pistol.

But I am a RAI Rules as Intended and would allow those models which have two pistol shoot during Overwatch.

Come on not many armies can field models with two pistols and while Gunslingers might sound cool all and all you would be far better off having something that can reach out and touch someone.

[SacredChao]

Quite simple GW is not very good at writing rules.

So we will now have the RAW individuals who will be stating that they can only do that during the shooting phase and that Overwatch is not during the shooting phase so in that case they can only shoot with one pistol.

But I am a RAI Rules as Intended and would allow those models which have two pistol shoot during Overwatch.

Come on not many armies can field models with two pistols and while Gunslingers might sound cool all and all you would be far better off having something that can reach out and touch someone.

The only problem with "Rules as Intended" in some cases is that sometimes the Rules that GW Intended are different than the Rules you Want. It is very clear that it says shooting phase, in the same way a Monstrous Creature can only shoot 2 weapons in the shooting phase.

"An Overwatch attack is resolved like a normal shooting attack" Firing 1 Flamer Pistol when you have 2 is still a normal shooting attack. Seems to me utilizing the Gunfighter rule is actually more an exception to being a normal shooting attack than being normal. Most models can only fire one weapon per turn, thus this would be the normal. Just because it's "normal" for a monstrous creature or guy with 2 pistols to fire both weapons, does not mean that is what they mean by "normal shooting attack".

Now this is all very subjective, since GW does not define the word "normal" or "normal shooting attack". So when rules questions hit my gaming group, unless it's unanimous, I play with the most detrimental ruling to me, that way when it's FAQ'd in my favor, it gets better for me

[Nabterayl]

But I am a RAI Rules as Intended and would allow those models which have two pistol shoot during Overwatch.

Well ... sure, but is that how you actually read the rule? doom-kitten didn't ask what I would allow The question was what the rules say. Like you, and presumably like doom-kitten as well, the way I play isn't governed solely by what the rules say.

So ... I'm curious, what's behind your intuition that GW added "in the Shooting phase" and "albeit one resolved in the enemy's Assault phase" without intending them to affect the sentences in which they appear? Is it the intuition that, if a man or woman can fire two pistols at an enemy who isn't charging him or her, he or she would also be able to fire two pistols at an enemy who is charging? Or do you disagree with me that those phrases mean anything at all?

[OrksOrksOrks]

So, in affect, Gunslinger should say "allows you to make a normal shooting attack with 2 pistols in a single shooting phase", that would clear that up, no?

[Sainhann]

So, in affect, Gunslinger should say "allows you to make a normal shooting attack with 2 pistols in a single shooting phase", that would clear that up, no?

Depends, because there will still be individuals who will question it.

If you want it cleared up it should have stated "Gunslinger if a model has two pistols it can shoot with both of them" no other conditions other than that the model needs to have two pistols. Which for me would mean that it needs to have a pistol in each hand because I am also a WYSIWYG individual as well.

Very few armies can field large units of gunslingers any way.

But because GW is kinda vague when it comes to rules writing you will run into individuals who will see the RAW far differently.

[OrksOrksOrks]

either way, I don't think one extra pistol shot is going to be that important anyway! certainly not enough to get in an in-game argument over! But then, maybe I credit some competitive players with too much spirit. I think as we're supposed to be playing a nice cool cinematic game now, a guy blazing away with his pistols as the horde of slavering monsters closes in to slice him up works nicely and I'd allow anyone to fire both pistols, RAW be dammed.