Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner

Tau Rapid Fire

3428 Views 61 Replies 17 Participants Last post by  Ordo Xeno Commander
One of my mates play tau and just to clear up further arguments I need this question answered:

Can fire warriors rapid fire at 30"
I mean, can they get both shots at 30" when every one gets two shot at 12"

Cheers, Kapeesh
1 - 12 of 62 Posts
If you move you *only* get to fire 2 shots at 12", if you stay stationary you have your choice of 1 at max range or 2 at 12"

That;s what makes Tau 'Fish of Fury' tactics so lethal
I don't see why you couldn't decide to just fire once.
The rules say you CAN fire twice at targets up to 12" away, it never says you MUST
It says "Can" it does not say "Must"

I really don't see how you see that it forces you to fire twice. It says you can, which means you don't have to. List like how the force weapon says you 'may' use its special ability, not that you must.

There's no reason within the rules why your guardsmen can't use some basic trigger discipline.

Tell me where it says you *must* fire twice.
I'm not sure what you;re getting at.

The rules don't require you to fire the maximum amount of shots allowed
That quote doesn't do anything to support whether or not you can choose to fire only one shot at 12" it was assuming the squad was going to fire at max.

Nothing in the rules forces someone with a RF weapon to fire both shots. The rules say you CAN fire two shots, not that you must. Period. You can choose to fire one shot if that is what you want. nothing says you must fire every shot you can.

No houserule or player agreement required. It's in the rules.
But that is assuming you want to fire the maximum amount. We're talking about choosing to fire only one shot from your plasma guns to avoid increased overheat

Nobody is confused as to whether you can make 2 shots at 12 or 1 at max...the thread has moved on. Now we;re discussing where (if at all) it says that you absolutely, positively MUST fire two shots at someone within 12" or if you can choose to fire just one.
Yes, you can fire once at targets over 12" away, but that doesn't mean you may ONLY fire once if the target is over 12" away.

bottom line is the rules say you *can* fire twice, under 12" not that you must. And there is nothing which contradicts this. Heavy weaposn say they always fire the max number of times. There's no such demand for RF
If a target is under 12" away you may or may not be able to fire less then two shots but it's irrelevent as you can only hit things up to 12" away if you fire one so why not fire two?
See, this is why you actually need to READ THE THREAD before you start talking.

We're talking about whether you HAVE TO FIRE TWICE under 12" or if you can instead choose to only fire once. Why would you want to fire less? Because Plasma Guns are Rapid-Fire.

You have a Guardsman with a Plasma Gun, shooting at a Marine who is 10 inches away.

Plasma guns have 'Gets Hot!'
If you fire 1 shot it overheats on a 1, if you fire 2 shots it overheats on a 1 or 2.

Your guardsman wears waxed paper for armor.

Do you risk being suddenly four times as likely to suffer a wound, just to get that extra shot, or do you play it safe and only fire once, in the hopes of killing the marine while keeping your plasma gunner alive?

This is why we were talking about whether or not you can opt to fire less than the max amount of times.


If you really really want to fire once at 0-12" I'm sure as heck not going to stop you, kind of a waste imo *shrug*
And nobody's asking whether you would let someone do it.
We're discussing whether it's allowed by the rules.

Maybe you'd be less exasperated about why people aren't getting what you're saying if you'd bother to see what the heck we're actually talking about.
See less See more
But that summary also implies that if you stand still you can fire once at any range up to max.
"Fire twice at up to 12" or remain stationary and fire once at up to maximum weapon range"
No mention of the target having to be further than 12" away in order to fire a single shot.

Which is a compromise I'm willing to live with, but goes against the way some people have been reading the RAW.

Summary sheets are nice, but they're summaries for a reason...it's not the full rules.
But if the summary conflicts with the full rules entry, which do you use?

One would think that the full rules entry takes precedence over the summary sheet since it goes more in-depth
<shrugs> As I said, it's a compromise I'm willing to accept

But I think we can all agree that if the main rule generated this much fervor, it could certainly stand to be specifically FAQ'd
1 - 12 of 62 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.