[ntaw]

Farbeit for GW to appropriately word things, but they don't picture things for sale on their sites that can't legally be taken in-game and used regardless of how imbalanced. I'd wager that 'fire each weapon' overrides 'fires two weapons' as much as 'can fire each weapon at a different target' overrides 'must be at the same target'.

 

[ntaw]

^ cuz, you know. Tau really struggle on the table top.

...not that I'm a fan of the SM dex really.

 

[ntaw]

^ so those people are happy to replace half the sentence and not the whole one? I mean I understand why the interpretation exists, but would GW really release models that come stock with more weapons than they are allowed to use?

 

[ntaw]

It's the exact same wording for super-heavy vehicles, except that super-heavies are counted as stationary and stationary vehicles get to fire all of their weapons. I totally get where the 'each refers to the aforementioned two' side is coming from but I think it's splitting hairs over GW's newest installment of 'power creep'. We might not have a precedent set for it with Gargantuan Creatures not yet having more than two weapons at a time (not sure about any potential FW precedents set, I know they like their big models) but I just can't see GW releasing a model that has five weapons stock but can only fire two per turn.

EDIT: As a disclaimer that I'm sure you're aware of (but maybe not the casual reader), I don't play either of these armies and don't actually care one way or the other. I just like talking about this stuff :drinks:

 

[ntaw]

Time for 8th edition! :laugh:

Frig, or maybe just a FAQ that's relevant to current issues. I sent GW FAQ an email the other day and got the ol' automated response.