5.4 of the bolt shots make it through the shielding - let's round that down to an even 5. Each one must now contend with the vicious 10AP of the Crisis battlesuit. Which it punches through with ease. Each shot now deals 5 damage. 5 shots have gotten through. 25 damage to 15 wound character, down to -10. Given that this is explosive damage, he probably could've easily died one shot earlier.

You forget that the pilot will only take 20% of the critical damage because of the Battlesuit Critical Damage rule.

Might have misread the rule - the way I read it you still GOT the damage, it's just that the effect was rolled from the table rather than the standard chart. If this IS the case the battlesuit is considerably more durable assuming you don't roll terribly (and even then those +10s from 01-30 will add up eventually).

Allow me to put it another way then. In five shots from a bolter, the average SM will do just enough damage to a fellow SM to get them down to 0 Wounds. In the mean time, against a battlesuit which in TT and fluff is more durable and harder to kill, they'll do significant to catastrophic damage with the same number of shots.

Why the **** is this a thing?

Well, in the tabletop, plasma weapons are so much better than bolters that it isn't even funny. In Rogue Trader they're only marginally better and hardly ever worth the risk. Why is this a thing?

Also because Rogue Trader and Deathwatch are extremely poorly balanced in general. If you nab the SM rules from Black Crusade, I'm sure you'll get much closer to what you want.

Regardless, I'd worry far more about what happens when all this overpowered crap ends up in the hands of the players. Then again, if you already play with the Faith & Coin and Lathe Worlds stuff and whatever else has been released lately, then I suppose this stuff is basically nothing.

Fired on Maximal there's no question to me that Plasma weapons are better than Bolters. They actually have improved range and bonus damage - the pistols will do 2d10 + 9 Pen 8 at 40m versus 1d10 + 5 Pen 4 at 30m. The extra die you lose from Tearing is annoying, but you're rolling one extra die and get to keep it, so you'll do more damage on a single shot.

Plasma guns do lose out on mostly not being able to full auto, but if your Space Marine is being hit 5 times by a Bolter then they're probably doing something wrong.

Allow me to put it another way then. In five shots from a bolter, the average SM will do just enough damage to a fellow SM to get them down to 0 Wounds. In the mean time, against a battlesuit which in TT and fluff is more durable and harder to kill, they'll do significant to catastrophic damage with the same number of shots.

Why the **** is this a thing?

Well, in the tabletop, plasma weapons are so much better than bolters that it isn't even funny. In Rogue Trader they're only marginally better and hardly ever worth the risk. Why is this a thing?

Also because Rogue Trader and Deathwatch are extremely poorly balanced in general. If you nab the SM rules from Black Crusade, I'm sure you'll get much closer to what you want.

Regardless, I'd worry far more about what happens when all this overpowered crap ends up in the hands of the players. Then again, if you already play with the Faith & Coin and Lathe Worlds stuff and whatever else has been released lately, then I suppose this stuff is basically nothing.

I don't mind overpowered stuff in RT PC's hands. RT PCs SHOULD, in a sense, be overpowered in terms of equipment. The key is then giving them challenges that they can't simply solve by one application of said equipment after another. But that's beside the point.

All of the rules I have given apply equally to BC marines, and to NPC OW CSM antagonists. You can't deny the stats (though BC marines would, possibly, have slightly lower health, though the BC/OW True Grit would more than make up for that). Plasma weapons...yeah, fair point, but it's an oft discussed point of contention that most people agree is a Bad Thing. So by drawing the parallel, aren't you agreeing with me and saying that the Battlesuit rules are as accurate a depiction of battlesuits as the plasma weapons are of plasma weapons? And as for balance, while I agree on Deathwatch I actually find RT one of the MORE balanced 40krpgs, not veering wildly from TPK to roflstomp as BC does, or being insanely hard to balance without becoming dull like OW (at least, that's been my experience as both player and GM).

All I'm trying to say is that I find these rules a little mystifying - I'm not sure who they're for, or how they're meant to help balance things for the GM or players. To be honest, there are far more important issues I could raise, like the fact that this appears to have given the Tau time travel, or the fact that the RT team is continuing its trend of throwing more dice at weapons to make them more powerful despite this clearly not being the case, or the fact that Overcharge seems to be complete and utter bull (+X damage for a slight chance to hurt myself that with FP rerolls and decent quality becomes nil AND no extra ammo cost? Yes please!).

Here's the thing: I think FFG's interpretation of Astartes makes them more durable than in the TT. If so, the stats for armour and Toughness are not way off.

It's my interpretation that in the world of Warhammer, one of the trademarks of being a champion or even hero is having unusually high Wounds or here (in RPGs) Wound Points. If so, then this is where things would need to be rectified: Battlesuit pilots are champions among the Fire Warriors. So if you want to house rule that problem away in the spirit of Warhammer, add Sound Constitution to every Firewarrior rank that doesn't have it and require x Wounds to take the Battlesuit Pilot Career. At least 3 SCs should be required.

If this makes the PC too powerful, well, there need to be some nerfs as counterbalance.

Fired on Maximal there's no question to me that Plasma weapons are better than Bolters. They actually have improved range and bonus damage - the pistols will do 2d10 + 9 Pen 8 at 40m versus 1d10 + 5 Pen 4 at 30m. they're probably doing something wrong.

In DW 1.1, Plasma Pistols and Plasmaguns are underpowered by 1d10 damage. Plasmacannons are fine.

Alex

5.4 of the bolt shots make it through the shielding - let's round that down to an even 5. Each one must now contend with the vicious 10AP of the Crisis battlesuit. Which it punches through with ease. Each shot now deals 5 damage. 5 shots have gotten through. 25 damage to 15 wound character, down to -10. Given that this is explosive damage, he probably could've easily died one shot earlier.

You forget that the pilot will only take 20% of the critical damage because of the Battlesuit Critical Damage rule.

Might have misread the rule - the way I read it you still GOT the damage, it's just that the effect was rolled from the table rather than the standard chart. If this IS the case the battlesuit is considerably more durable assuming you don't roll terribly (and even then those +10s from 01-30 will add up eventually).

No, you don't suffer the critical damage, just roll a result from the table. And you can roll anything between 01 and 80 as losing a few weapons and support systems isn't that a big deal.

Only once a round, though. If someone else shoots you in the same round and you've already rolled on the battlesuit table, it's game over.

Erathia: and then you halve the damage per round based on the fact that the plasma weapon can only fire once every other round. While I myself am a fan of carrying a dozen-or-so plasma rifles with fire selectors just to make sure I can Quick Draw something new when the old one runs out, the logistics are somewhat inconvenient.

Additionally, unless Organgrinder rounds are banned, I'm still putting my money on the bolters.

Alpharius: I'm saying that there are so many things that are messed up about the rules, the fact that the Tau suits aren't overpowered *enough* is the least problem in that pdf. I can't be assed to reply to everything else you said on a case by case basis, but I also want to add that I disagree with you so hard, terminator armour is soft and pasty when compared to my disagreement.

Only once a round, though. If someone else shoots you in the same round and you've already rolled on the battlesuit table, it's game over.

Once each turn and not round.

Oh, right you are.

Only once a round, though. If someone else shoots you in the same round and you've already rolled on the battlesuit table, it's game over.

Erathia: and then you halve the damage per round based on the fact that the plasma weapon can only fire once every other round. While I myself am a fan of carrying a dozen-or-so plasma rifles with fire selectors just to make sure I can Quick Draw something new when the old one runs out, the logistics are somewhat inconvenient.

Additionally, unless Organgrinder rounds are banned, I'm still putting my money on the bolters.

Alpharius: I'm saying that there are so many things that are messed up about the rules, the fact that the Tau suits aren't overpowered *enough* is the least problem in that pdf. I can't be assed to reply to everything else you said on a case by case basis, but I also want to add that I disagree with you so hard, terminator armour is soft and pasty when compared to my disagreement.

To be fair, one of my other issues with 40krpgs is how soft and pasty Terminator Armour really is...but that's an argument for another day.

Drone Controller:

A drone controller acts as a hub for communications between the operator and a number of drones . A model with a drone controller must take one or two Gun Marker or Shield Drones, in any combination from the Wargear list.

Note, that the old codex does not limit the number of drones controlled by any given controller - it only limits how many drones can be taken as Wargear before any further drones have to come out of a different part of the 40K tabletop FO. There is nothing that prohibits a Commander from taking 2 drones as wargear, and then joining and controlling a Drone Squadron of 8 drones.

That is very clearly not how the rule is intended, and deep down you know that. Now go to your room

Based on what data?

No place in the last two Tau Codex, has it ever said or even implied that a Drone Controller is limited to controlling just 1 or 2 drones, nor has any of the FAQ or errata ever said that the controller is limited to controlling just 1 or 2 drones.

Well off the top of my head the old codex Tau Empire states that if the model with the drone controller dies, the drones attatched to him are immediately removed. By your logic the drones should immediately pass to another model with a controller in the same group.

I don't think its been erratad because most people aren't playing grammar nazi with the codex to boost a flak unit into a body guard of doom I'll concede you can read the rule that way, but I think you'd run out of opponents pretty quickly.

As for implied, I would argue it is implied in the use of the wording 'one or two' if it was intended to be otherwise I would expect the rule to read 'one or more' or to see some evidence of rules for assuming control of stray drones, or drones lost in a unit containing multiple drone controllers. Neither exist.

Twin Linked as taken from The Lathe Worlds supplement from DH

" TWIN-LINKED
A twin-linked weapon represents two identical weapons connected together and linked to fire at the same time, often through one pull of the trigger, increasing both the chances of hitting and the damage that can be caused. A weapon with the Twinlinked Quality gains a +20 bonus to hit when fired and uses twice as much ammunition. In addition, the weapon may score one additional hit if the attack roll succeeds by two or more Degrees of Success. Finally, the weapon’s reload time is doubled."

Twin Linked as taken from The Lathe Worlds supplement from DH

I don't believe that was ever a problem.

so no rules for working out Twin-linking weapon systems,

Never have been anywhere in RT.

If you run pure RAW, if a weapon doesn't come twin-linked, there's no way to make it so.

Other than, you know, puting a laser sight on a lasgun

The problem is that we have no rules to in the game build a twin-linked weapon, for the characters

I had another random though while I was typing the last few messages; do people feel making called shots on a Tau Battlesuit would be possible, considering the pilot is contained entirely within the chest component and their limbs and head don't conform to the relevant positions on the suit itself? Certainly you could shoot at the "head" of the suit, or its limbs, and cause specific damage to the structure, but would they still cause wounds given they're simply treated as armour as the rules suggest? I'm curious as to what people think here.

How about an aimed shot to a battlesuit causes an energy or mechanical feedback within the suit that causes said damage to the actual part of the pilot? It's certainly plausible and is one way to deal with the issue.

Drone Controller:

A drone controller acts as a hub for communications between the operator and a number of drones . A model with a drone controller must take one or two Gun Marker or Shield Drones, in any combination from the Wargear list.

Note, that the old codex does not limit the number of drones controlled by any given controller - it only limits how many drones can be taken as Wargear before any further drones have to come out of a different part of the 40K tabletop FO. There is nothing that prohibits a Commander from taking 2 drones as wargear, and then joining and controlling a Drone Squadron of 8 drones.

Based on what data?

No place in the last two Tau Codex, has it ever said or even implied that a Drone Controller is limited to controlling just 1 or 2 drones, nor has any of the FAQ or errata ever said that the controller is limited to controlling just 1 or 2 drones.

Well off the top of my head the old codex Tau Empire states that if the model with the drone controller dies, the drones attatched to him are immediately removed. By your logic the drones should immediately pass to another model with a controller in the same group.

I don't think its been erratad because most people aren't playing grammar nazi with the codex to boost a flak unit into a body guard of doom I'll concede you can read the rule that way, but I think you'd run out of opponents pretty quickly.

As for implied, I would argue it is implied in the use of the wording 'one or two' if it was intended to be otherwise I would expect the rule to read 'one or more' or to see some evidence of rules for assuming control of stray drones, or drones lost in a unit containing multiple drone controllers. Neither exist.

Cali, if you don't mind, I'll break your post into sections and answer each in turn.

Well off the top of my head the old codex Tau Empire states that if the model with the drone controller dies, the drones attatched to him are immediately removed. By your logic the drones should immediately pass to another model with a controller in the same group.

Incorrect. The limit is how many that can be taken as Wargear and since those drones are taken as Wargear for a specific model, they are treated as any other piece of Wargear and must be removed from the table when the model dies.

But there is the further issue in that those drones that are taken from the heavy support slot ( sniper team ), do not get removed when the model with the drone controller dies - they just revert to their basic stats. Drones that are taken with vehicles are only removed, if they have not dismounted from the vehicle when the vehicle gets destroyed - if they have dismounted before their vehicle is destroyed, then they are treated as seperate drone squadron.

I don't think its been erratad because most people aren't playing grammar nazi with the codex to boost a flak unit into a body guard of doom I'll concede you can read the rule that way, but I think you'd run out of opponents pretty quickly.

You would be disappointed in what actually happens then.

Most players don't even bat an eye. The only time I really have an issue, with someone raising a fuss, is when they don't expect it, and then I hand them the codex and ask them to point out the rule that prohibits a commander with a drone controller from joining a drone squadron and controlling them.

As for implied, I would argue it is implied in the use of the wording 'one or two' if it was intended to be otherwise I would expect the rule to read 'one or more' or to see some evidence of rules for assuming control of stray drones, or drones lost in a unit containing multiple drone controllers. Neither exist.

But the wording "one or two" in the Tau codex is only used in connection with the number of drones specifically taken from the Wargear List.

" A model with a drone controller must take one or two Gun, Marker, or Shield Drones, in any combination from the Wargear List ".

If the drone controller was only allowed to control one or two drones, it would say so, but it doesn't. As I have quoted before the entry doesn't specify controlling just 1 or 2 drones, but leaves it open with: "... .. a number of drones . "

So we have had 2 different Tau codices in a row, that support drone controllers being able to control more than just 1 or 2 drones, and the newest one goes out of it way to say it, and we have zero errata to limit a drone controllers to just 1 or 2 drones.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong about the drone sniper team, as the drone controller doesn't effect the stats of the drones in any way. The increased ballistic skill comes from them having targeting arrays, which is a separate upgrade. Can you quote exactly where it says they remain? The entry under drones in the wargear section clearly states 'If the model with the drone controller is killed then all his drones are removed at the end of the [phase] in which he died ' . Given the sniper team has a drone controller, this seems to apply here. I admit to not having the FAQ on hand though, and I do notice the stats are different in the unit entry than from the armoury. Was this clarified at a later time?

The vehicle thing comes from the fact gun drones can 'link' which is described fluff wise quite clearly for the gun drone squadron. I've always understood this to represent that the drones on the devilfish aren't controlled by a drone controller (it is not listed as having one anywhere) they simply link together once detached.

In 5th edition there is not really a huge amount of benefit to the distinction on who is controlling the drones from memory (shield drones are the only one to take 'as user' when it come to toughness, and it confers no benefit to the other types of drone so saying a commander assumes control of a drone team actually just puts the drones at a greater risk if the commander dies) so perhaps it was not erratad because its a pretty moot point.

I'll meet you half way on this one. I believe there are circumstances where an upgrade marked as 'Drone controller' can and does control more than two drones (the sniper team, shadowsun) so clearly its possible. However I remain unconvinced that before 6th edition there is any evidence to support that the DC available to crisis/broadsides can control more than two. Again I refer you to the lack of rules governing such circumstances I outlined before.

Nope. In 6e, Drone Controller let's the drones use the bearers BS instead of their own. Sniper drones on their own have typical drone BS (terrible), while the drone controller has sniper-level BS. This makes the marksman a priority target. Similarly, that marksman can deploy alone with up to a total of nine drones- don't suggest it, as I like having spares in case of enemy snipers, but it is feasible.

I attribute the Drone creep over time to a slow advancement of networking. Initially, Drones were only either fielded with controllers or in networked groups of four or more. It wasn't until 6e that the drone controller mod actually affected the drones, making a Drone-controller Crisis leader in a Drone squadron a big deal, so in 6e there was apparently a quantum leap in software.

The way I figure it, if you weren't supposed to be able to use more than two drones, Swarm Protocols wouldn't refer to your Intelligence Bonus for how many can gain the bonus. Even if FFG expects that Tau never increase their Intelligence, that's 2-3 drones at a minimum.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong about the drone sniper team, as the drone controller doesn't effect the stats of the drones in any way. The increased ballistic skill comes from them having targeting arrays, which is a separate upgrade. Can you quote exactly where it says they remain? The entry under drones in the wargear section clearly states 'If the model with the drone controller is killed then all his drones are removed at the end of the [phase] in which he died ' . Given the sniper team has a drone controller, this seems to apply here. I admit to not having the FAQ on hand though, and I do notice the stats are different in the unit entry than from the armoury. Was this clarified at a later time?

Part of the problem may come from the fact that I first started playing 40K, about the time when the previous Tau codex came out ( 4th Ed rules? ), and as such did not have any preconceived idea of how Tau should be played.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong about the drone sniper team, as the drone controller doesn't effect the stats of the drones in any way. The increased ballistic skill comes from them having targeting arrays, which is a separate upgrade. Can you quote exactly where it says they remain?

That was true in the previous codex, but not in the current codex.

As I am loathed to put my self in a position where GW could nail me for copyright issues with the newest rules ( I doubt that they would do anything about the last rule set ), you will please pardon me not typing out the entirety of the Drone Controller entry in the current codex, but paraphrasing instead.

Pg. 68 is where it spells out that all the drones in a unit with a drone controller are under control of the drone controller, and use the BS of the person with the drone controller and that in the case of multiple drone controllers in a unit, they are used by the controller with the highest BS that can be used ( which is probably why you see a discrepancy - the drones themselves only have a BS of 2, but because of the drone controller they use the BS of the person with a drone controller ).

In the case of the Sniper Teams, there is no Targeting Array ( I don't see them listed any more ), the Marksman has a Drone Controller, a BS 5, a Markerlight, and a pistol. As for where it says that sniper drones are not removed if the Firesight Marksman is killed, I refer you to the Sniper Drone Team entry, on Pg 46 of the same codex, more specifically the last half of the last paragraph.

The Tau FAQ for 6th Ed, actually eliminated a few of the things that markerlights could do in 5th Ed, but without adding any new units, they brought most of the rules inline for what they did with the newest Tau codex.

The vehicle thing comes from the fact gun drones can 'link' which is described fluff wise quite clearly for the gun drone squadron. I've always understood this to represent that the drones on the devilfish aren't controlled by a drone controller (it is not listed as having one anywhere) they simply link together once detached.

In 5th edition there is not really a huge amount of benefit to the distinction on who is controlling the drones from memory (shield drones are the only one to take 'as user' when it come to toughness, and it confers no benefit to the other types of drone so saying a commander assumes control of a drone team actually just puts the drones at a greater risk if the commander dies) so perhaps it was not erratad because its a pretty moot point.

Now, a Shield Drone, confers a 4+ Invulnerable Save.

I'll meet you half way on this one. I believe there are circumstances where an upgrade marked as 'Drone controller' can and does control more than two drones (the sniper team, shadowsun) so clearly its possible. However I remain unconvinced that before 6th edition there is any evidence to support that the DC available to crisis/broadsides can control more than two. Again I refer you to the lack of rules governing such circumstances I outlined before.

I grant that it might be obscure, but I am still of the belief that the phrase ".... a number of drones", signifies more than just 1 or 2, otherwise they would have specifically said "1 or 2" or "only up to 2 drones". As for a lack of rules, we all know that GW works on the premise that unless something shows it's self to be an actual game balance problem, they don't normally rule it.

One example might be when the new Tau codex originally came out, there was absolutely no prohibition against a Crisis Suit taking 2 identical weapons, just a point cost for taking a single weapon and a point cost for taking a twin-linked weapon of the same type, but there was no rule stating that you could take 2 of the same type either. This lead to purist claiming that you could not take two single weapons of the same type, it either had to be just one weapon or a twin-linked weapon. This lead to some really nasty debates, until GW FAQed that there was nothing wrong with Crisis Suits taking two single weapons of the same type.

As I said before, there should be a practical limit to the number of drones that can be controlled in the RPG, but I also believe that the practical limit has already been set in the TCG, in that there is no real advantage to taking drones without taking at least 1 level of Drone Handler, and even then you are limited to controlling the number of drones equal to your INT bonus, and as such tends to be self limiting.

(...)there is no real advantage to taking drones without taking at least 1 level of Drone Handler, and even then you are limited to controlling the number of drones equal to your INT bonus, and as such tends to be self limiting.

50 Intelligence and GQ Cerebral Implants says 10 drones. Eleven attacks a round, huh?

I use BC traits, so no- only 7 drones, for 8 attacks. Still good.

Greg, I am completely aware of the rules in 6th edition. However, I have only been talking about the 5th edition codex in all of my posts. Any reference to 6th edition is irrelevant because I stated in my first post that there had been recent changes, not least of which is what drone controllers actually do. In 5th ed they allow you to take drones, in 6th ed they allow drones to fire at users ballistic skill. The rules between codices have changed dramatically because of this. My argument is that this ruling has not been supported for as long as you think it has with reference to your comment "since when did drone controllers only allow for two drones" (i.e before sixth edition) so I am only discussing the previous codices. Please don't change the subject.

A shield drone has always conferred a 4+ invulnerable save. So this is not a change. The difference is that now a shield drone has a base Toughness of its own, whereas previously they assumed the toughness of the user so as not to cock up majority toughness of the unit. Shield drones are infinitely worse in 6th edition.

As for the example with Crisis Suit weapons, that seems to be a hold over from previous editions. Some people see a change like that and err on the side of caution because Crisis suits have never been able to take two single weapons before, despite people really wanting them to be able to. I'd imagine many players assumed they couldn't if the rules were unclear in the spirit of sportsmanship.

The other type of player are the people who insist that the riptide can be joined as a unit because it has the ability to take drones. Now that is something they really need to FAQ

Sniper drone team in 4th ed consisted of a guy with a Drone Controller and three sniper drones. This is a case of pre-6th allowance of more than two drones per drone controller- but I'm pretty sure he was also modeled with a fairly substantial comms-array thing, which may have been an advanced, nonstandard drone controller.

Sniper drone team in 4th ed consisted of a guy with a Drone Controller and three sniper drones. This is a case of pre-6th allowance of more than two drones per drone controller- but I'm pretty sure he was also modeled with a fairly substantial comms-array thing, which may have been an advanced, nonstandard drone controller.

That big thing in front of the Firesight Marksman is the networked markerlight.

Also, in the novel Shadowsun, one Fire Warrior officer controlled some 20+ drones without a drone controller, using only his wrist mounted tactical computer.

I found the Tau PC Guide to be a bit lacking in the customization process of the PC creation, and thus I have added very simple characteristic modifiers to accompany each Classified Competance. This should add a little more balance in showcasing the Tau's perceptive ability to put each individual warrior along the path that they are best able to stride. Thus making the PC more likely to have been chosen from a young age to pursue that competance.

In addition to the listed actions each character gets with their Classified Competance, add the following:

+ Adept Machinist, +5 Int
+ Dauntless Bulwakr, +5 WS
+ Exemplar of Unity, +5 Fel
+ Finder of Ways, +5 Per
+ Precise Hunter, +5 BS
+ Wind Strider, +5 Ag

Right now this list is super simple and obviously very straightforward. Thoughts?

And yes, I realize my last post had absolutely nothing to do about drones and how many can be fielded. Do I need to sit in time out?