Some melee weapons get d5s for damage, like on that Omnix-Axe (or something like that)

That weapon should be the weapon to end all combats and does a measily 2D5+5 dmg, has less penetration then the sword counterpart and to top it all off, is unwieldy (the sword is ballanced)

I bet that dmg should say 2D10+5, but for the sake of arguemnt: when does a 2D5 weapon roll trigger RF?

the chain-scalpel from the medi-mechandrite does 1D5 Tearing. How do you roll tearing in that case?

A D5 is a D10 where you divide the result by 2 and round up. When you roll a 10 on the D10, you get RF.

I don't see what the problem with the weapon is.

Rolling 2D5 is better than D10, as the range is 2-10, not 1-10. And on top of that you get two attempts at RF. The weapon is also +5 dam and pen 6. SB ontop of that is pretty good I must say.

craigpearson81 said:

the problem is, (if I can recall that properly, I don't have the book at hand) that the sword version, which is buyable, has a dmg, of 1D10 +6 (2 - 11) dmg with 6 penetration, and is ballanced to boot, givin you +10 to parry instead of the axe which gives you no parry at all.

The only unwiedly axes I have seen in the rulebooks are GreatAxes which inflic 2D10 dmg to make up for that.

vogue69 said:

2d5+5 = 11 damage on average, but twice the chance at RF
1d10+6 = 11,5 damage on average

vogue69 said:

The game isn't all about the stats though (not for me anyway). I would much rather my Tech Priest had an Omnisian Axe than a normal power weapon any day.

In the first line of the description is says "A holy icon of the Cult Mechanicum". The benefits in roleplaying terms that can add is worth far more than a few points of damage.

of course it's no all about the stats. but when a fluff description states, that the weapon us just soooo uber, that it can't even be bought and must be handed down from higher ranking cult members as an super great reward, I expect to stats to back that stuff up.

Don't forget the fact that the Uber Axe of the Machine God is supposedly a Glaive (great axe) and as such is the only great weapon in game that does less than 2d10

Emprah_Horus said:

Are you talking about the Omnisian Axe? Because that means it would also be the only great weapon that does not require two hands, and I don't think that's the case.

I have no idea if it is a type-o or not and I keep going either way on that. On the one hand, if it was a 2d10 great weapon (and they forgot to mark it as 2 handed) it would fallow the pattern of power weapons. It even weighs the same as a great weapon and pretty much seems to be the great weapons stat line altered to be a power weapon only with 2d5 instead of 2d10 , but then the only thing that would make it better then other power weapons wouldn't be it's advanced tech, but it's size.

If they had wanted to make a one handed power ax that was better then the other power weapons without being uber, why couldn't they simply give it the standard pen 6 with the tearing trait and 1d10+5 dam instead of 2d5+5 damage? The damage range would remain the same, the chance of righteous furry would remain the same, but an extra and pointless math step (dividing two dice by 2) would be eliminated (why over complicate something?) and it would skew for slightly higher damage thus making it a better power weapon without being too much.

Having the weapon be a tearing weapon instead of a 2d5 weapon seems a hell of a lot more reasonable to me, eliminating an extra seconds worth of figuring out more math in ones head and providing more then just a higher chance of righteous furry and a more predictable damage output (both of which tearing dose as well, just skewed to the higher numbers). Besides, it has a serrated blade, so why not tearing?

Graver said:

Well, after all, it isn't the blade itself that tears into the enemy, it's the power field. And by how Tearing is described, I don't think any power weapon can (or is meant to) have that quality. But it could certainly have the tearing quality when the power field is off, that I have no problem with.

xenobiotica said:

Okay, point taken on the serrated blade, but I was half joking anyway ;-) Hell, I know the serrated blade is there because it's cool ;p

But as far as the description of tearing, to be honest, I don't see why that is an issue. Tearing is simply a mechanic. The description is there to explain it in most normal situations. It was already altered once to include bolters in order to make them more deadly and feel closer to what they are meant to be, it can be altered again and again in order for it to match it's primary purpose of serving as a mechanic to enable a weapon to have a higher chance of doing more damage without increasing it's magnitude.

Tearing's description states that weapons with the trait often use fast moving blades (chain) or exploding shells (bolter). The operative word is "often" showing that such is not necessary, just common. Twinlinked autoguns are tearing, daemonites claws are tearing as are the claws of a bloodletter, etc. If you want to go by description, the core idea of the trait is they are vicious weapons that tear into flesh and bone (which is most weapons really). If power weapons are not vicious weapons that tear into flesh and bone, then how come a Power Fist mentions that when used on an unprotected enemy "they simply erupt in a shower of ruined flesh, as if a grenade had gone off inside of them."? Even the description of power weapons in the core book states that they "...slice through most armour as well as limbs." If these weapons cut through and sometimes shred flesh so easily, how is it out of character for one of their number to have the tearing trait?

In the end, tearing is just a mechanic to increase a weapons likelihood of doing a higher degree of damage without increasing it's magnitude.

Graver said:

Ah, sorry, didn't get that was a joke. =)

All qualities are simply mechanics, but Tearing is described in a way that you could make a case that almost any weapon could have it. With such little understanding of the technology behind power weapons, I fail to see, however, how one power field can be more vicious than another. And the description of the Power Fist is in certain ways simply wrong; a grenade does X damage and all power weapons does E, so they will, according to the critical damage table, catch on fire and burn to death, not explode. Although I think four damage types are too few to describe all types of weapons in the 40k universe, at least when looking at the critical damage tables.

maybe a pulsing power field, making a series small explosions around it, insted of a single long, might be what is needed for a tearing power weapon.

xenobiotica said:

The crit tables, while immensly amusing and trully fun, really can't account for every type of weapon encountered in 40k and what those weapons do. They should really only be used as a rough guideling with the weapon's discription supperceeding what the criticle charts say. After all, just look Tox Spray. Dousing someone in toxic waist I don't think will set them on fire, but it's damnage is E and I don't think power weapons ever set anything on fire prior to Dark Heresy. The crit charats are just a guideline with sugestions about what the penilties and effects mean -it's up to the GM to make it make sense in the naritive. Someone who catches fire due to being doused by a Tox Sprayer isn't on fire but suffering chemicle burns untill they get that stuff off of them etc. It's good to alter the base discription behind mechanics now and again.

Now, about a power weapon being more viscious then anouther: in the discrip[tion of the Onisian Ax it states that "these fearson weapons have no equal amogst power weapons." Now, that either means they a better then the other power weapons or they are worse. Given the rest of the discription, I'm going to assume that the previous as opposed to the latter is true, that the ax is trully better in some way then all other power weapons. What dose it mean to be better? What makes it better? Is it because it's bearer is seen as a blessed figure and a furious incarnation of the Machine God's power in war by other falloowers of the Machine God? No, that wouldn't make the ax a cut above all other power weapons as it's not the ax which is seen as so much more awsome, but the bearer -the ax is mearly a badge in this case.

It can't be because the weapon has defensive capabilities above and beyond that of other power weapons mostly on account of it actualy being inferior to all other power weapons in this catagory since it can't be used to parry. That only leaves us with two options -one, it is better then all other power weapons because it is more lethal then all other power weapons or it is better then all other power weapons because it is a swiss army power weapon. While I'll conceed that it being a swiss army power weapon could be what makes it better then all other power weapons, I don't think thats quite enough to warnet stating that it has no equil amongst power weapons. It would have to be a bit more lethal then the other power weapons. I say this because not only dose it have to make up for it's lack of defensive capabilities in comparisons to other power weapoins but alos because stating that it has no equals amongst weapons indicates that it is better at doing what they, as weapons, do. Now, what do weapons do? They defend and they kill. We've already established that the ax dose not have supperior defensive capabilities therefor it must be better at killing then the other power weapons. If it's better at killing, I think that would make it more viscious then other power weapons.

Arguments for one power weapon being more viscious then anouther asside, as it really is a moot point in regaurds to the ax, saying that it is a 1d10+5 (tearing) would be about equal to what it's already listed as (2d5+5), only in a much more ellegant fashion. Granted, 1d10+5 (tearing) will skew for a couple of points higher damage on average then 2d5+5, but that fits with it's discription and would trully make it a cut above the other power weapons without going overboard. But the real reason to use tearing as opposed to 2d5 is simplicity.

Taking two numbers, deviding each by 2 (rounding up), adding the results together, then adding five to the total is rather clunky and a touch more time consuming then taking two numbers, choosing the highest, and adding five to it. The end results will still be in the same range (except in the rare instances where two ones are rolled in tearing damage) but the end result when using tearing is arrived at far easer and a with less effort then when using 2d5 while leaving the chance of rolling a rightious furry the same. Beyond that, if the statline for the ax had read 1d10+5, tearing, none would look at that and wonder if it was a type-o much like 2d5+5 seems to be. If it's not a type-o, it's just plain clunky which is a shame when there's a far more elegant solution to achive the same results built into the system.

++++++++++

Oh, and pardon my pittiful spelling and dyslexia, but disabling my popup blocker so I can post spell-checked text into the window has really become too big of a pain in the ass to do continue to do everytime I post something as I can't seem to keep fantasyflightgames on the whole added to my exceptions list any longer.

xenobiotica said:

While the book may or may not state that it requires two-hands (not sure as I don't have my book on me right now), I think the fact that it is mentioned as a Glaive and that virtually every tech-priest model I've ever seen is holding a two-handed axe/glaive supports the argument that the Omnissian Axe would also be two-handed.

I'm not going to argue for or against more damage, but just on the roleplay aspect. If you saw a tech-priest with mechadendrites waving about charging at you, would you be more fearful of a large two-handed glaive glowing with power, or of a one-handed axe glowing with power?

So, RF triggers on a 0 even on a d5. But does it add another d5 damage, or d10?

Cardinalsin said:

If I remember from the book correctly it adds another d10 damage.

I honestly think it should trigger on a 9/0 for d5 rolls because they do actually have 5 sided dice that you can purchase, my group has a few. On those you have a 20% chance of RF, giving you an even greater chance of rolling RF with the Omnissian Axe

I am pretty sure the book says that you would just roll another D5. Just a stab in the dark since I am at work. It should be in the RF section of combat.

Khorne-ucopia said:

Nope. Even with a d5 if you trigger RF you add a d10.

The Righteous Fury is independent from the weapon's damage - it's always 1D10, whether you orignially rolled 1D10+x, 5D10+y or 2D5+z.

Yup D10... I read over it last night. I will retract my previous staement and lament my lameness...

On the wording that its a weapon without an equal...think from the eyes of who will be receiving it. A Tech-Priest. It's a power weapon, it cuts things nicely, Its a huge honour, AND its an omni-tool (+10 tech-use). Even if they have a different power axe, the other axe is not an omni tool, and it is not a ceremonial axe. If your a stat-monger, then sure, this axe may not get you excited. If you like utility and take pride in your Tech-Priest, this should be a goal of any servant of the Omnissiah.

Thaddius said:

Truer words have not been said....I love my tech-priest and the events he went through to gain his Omnissian Axe. My next goal is dragon scale and then he will be ready to hunt down the hereteks that he loathes with a passion

Whether it does the most damage or not, it still can invoke fear into any enemies that recognize what it means (dark mechanus especially)