RAW allow weapons to be carried up to your encumberance value with no penalty. I asked a Guardsman at the end of our session what he had as weapons.

1. Autogun
2. Lasgun
3. Lascarbine
4. Flamer
5. Chainsword
6. Axe
7. Knife

Now he is within his Enc stat but I think some real life may have to come into play here.

I don't want to come up with a hard and fast rule but I'm thinking that most people can have two basic weapons on them "stowed" & accessible, one over each shoulder PLUS they can have one in their hands/slung to the front.

Pistols and small melee weapons are really without limit but within reason. Large melee weapons should be limited to a couple, unless they want to carry them in the place of basic weapons.

Heavy weapons need to be carried at all times really...

Of course the players can still bring the other weapons along it's just that they are in backpacks, cases and they cannot benefit from things like the Quickdraw talent & take 3-4 turns to get them ready.

I want the players to think about their characters, what they look like, what they are carrying. Rather than no matter where the fight occurs they have always got the full selection of weaponry.

It is the Doom Vs Halo method of handling weapons.

What do you think? How is it handled in other games?

Don't forget ammo! Each clip adds 10% to a weapons weight. For big weapons, that rapidly adds up

I follow RAW because the players generally gear theirselves up with more than weapons, and apparently the pistol is the new trend (only one person generally carries a basic weapon in my group). They generally limit theirselves to what is okay. I was a little iffy with the group assassin before having 6 knives, two swords, a compound bow, etc. The only other close thing to "crazy weapons" my group had was the group Arbites having three pistols, but that ain't too much in my opinion, because only one was a big pistol (Stormchild) and the others were small dinky things.

But really, if it's that silly, there was a "slot" idea that I saw before on here somewhere (sorry, I can't give credit because I don't remember whom posted it). Basically, it was something along the lines of 5 slots for weaponry. Heavy takes up 3, Basic takes up 2, Pistol takes up 1, Melee Weapon takes up 1. Mix and match to your taste!

What would YOU do if you saw a man in armour, a back full of rifles and pistols on every spare bit of cloth?

Personally if it were i in that situation i'd call the Enforcers and or the Arbites then i'd contact the local news teams, geta bowl of popcorn and watch the show....

The problem here is that the rules confuse ENCUMBRANCE with WEIGHT.

Consider 8kg of bricks. Well distributed in pouches, backpack, etc. you could carry them easily with very little encumbrance.

Consider an 8kg matress. Carry that is going to encumber you seriously.

Both wieght the same, but have significantly different encumbrance implications.

So, abandoning the RAW enc. system as you have is a sensible idea. Imposing common sense limits on what can be carried makes perfect sense and what you've proposed is workable.

You could, in theory, carry 3 rifles accessable on your back (2 slung in an X across the back, one down the center), matching shorter rifle style weapons (carbines) on each thigh (for 2), plus pistols at both hips, 2 at the small of the back, and depending on their size, another six down the chest (and that's not including the obligatory 2 derringer style guns on forarm mounts ), any of the non-pistol mount areas would be fine for a sword as well, plus the obvious hip sheath for a long blade, daggers in boot tops or strapped to the side of the boot, and a rifle or other 2 handed combo out and ready to go (rifle could be carried on a sling over the shoulder for "convenient" carrying). Carrying capacity significantly increases if he's using a backpack (nothing to stop you from filling the backpack with goodies and THEN strapping guns to it with anything from rope to duct tape). That's carrying space on a fit human body for 15 weapons of varying sizes. If you want to see a good if silly but realistic movie version of "guy with a ton of guns" check out Hot Fuzz.

Would it be comfortable for me? Heck no, but I'm not a trained, professional mercenary or soldier or a sci-fi hive ganger or whatever else someone festooned with weapons on a 40k game may be.

In addition to the good "common sense" ideas above, I'd like to add this: My players like to carry around a few big bags with extra shotguns, a flamer, a needlerifle, some explosives etc just in case. As long as the weapons are properly packed and stowed, I find the encumbrance rules are enough to limit them. But getting hold of them during combat is tricky to say the least, I usually require a full round action to get the wanted item out of the bag, and then count the weapon as if it was jammed, requiring a successfull BS-test to get it fully operational. It has given a few nice and dramatic scenes where the party is being supressed into cover by longrange heavy weapons while the sniper frantically tries to pass his BS-test to get his long las operational. It also rewards the party that spends effort to scout out their enemy and thus have time to grab the right gear before the encounter.

Fideru: As for pistols being the flavour of the month for your adventurers, it is probably an effect of how you design your encounters. Generally, modern warfare firefights is done on distances of several hundred meters. This is not true for most RPG-fights, wich mostly take place in a range where melee combat is an option, and thus makes pistols a very favourable choice. If you want to challenge your players in new areas of expertise, place them in a firefight with a bunch of heretics on the other side of a 300m wide and pretty empty plaza, have them attacked by rooftop snipers or have them defend an outpost against tyranids that come rushing over a big plain (starship troopers style). Less of the dungeons and indoors, and more maneuverability, clever use of cover and long range firesupport.

Mellon said:

First, thank you for the ideas and being helpful, I want to say that first and foremost.

But to clear up the situation on my encounters, I always try to do something different. It doesn't seem to bother the guys when they only have pistols and are being fired at by a Marksman 500 meters away. They just bunker down and let someone else deal with it. It's going to be brutal next session, because there's now only one guy with a weapon that shoots over 150m, and is going to be the prime target with them stuck in an alleyway.

I still just don't see the logic of only packing lots and lots of pistols from a meta-game perspective and an in-game perspective, especially since everyone doesn't have TWW (Ranged), Ambidextrous, Gunslinger, so using more than one at once is preposterous at best!

Fideru said:

It seems you are doing very clever encounters indeed. I'm sorry for assuming you had fallen into the easy close-is-cool-trap. *a bit ahsamed*

Maybe your players just want to give their pursuers reason to quote boondock saints:

Detective Greenly: What if it was one guy with six guns?
Paul Smecker: Why don't you let me do the thinking, huh, genius?

;-)

Mellon said:

Bloody amazing movie (disclaimer: in my opinion), have my special edition dvd right beside my DH stuff.

And you know what, I probably should.

Thanks for all the posts & comments. My players have "reviewed" their weapon carrying and they have sorted it out. It's good as when I separate them from their luggage we get a bit more roleplay and planning as to what they think they are going to face.

In real life very rarely will you have any armed person with more than 1 weapon (maybe a pistol as well). My son is in the armed forces and he generally carries around only his rifle or a LMG. He will not carry more than that because it's too much to carry. Especially with water, rations, spare ammo, body armour, communication gear etc that he has to carry.

A simple solution is to let the player describe how he's carrying all the stuff. If he manages to convince you and it's within encumbrance limits, more power to them!

In real life very rarely will you have any armed person with more than 1 weapon (maybe a pistol as well). My son is in the armed forces and he generally carries around only his rifle or a LMG. He will not carry more than that because it's too much to carry. Especially with water, rations, spare ammo, body armour, communication gear etc that he has to carry.

I take it your son is not a member of a secret governmental organization waging a more or less hidden war against the foes of mankind, is he?

Baldrick said:

It all depends on the unit really, when I was deployed in Iraq I regularly carried my M16 with a shotgun slung over my shoulder along with the squad radio, spare ammo for both weapons, water, etc. It isn't unheard of, nor difficult to carry multiple weapons IRL so I can't see why it should be difficult in 40K. The acolytes do not have to carry water, rations, comm gear regularly either (microbeads aren't very heavy either). Its really all about conditioning the body to being able to carry that much (represented in DH by your combined Str+T giving your carrying capacity)

If someone can lift six rifles and not be encumbered they are probably large enough to do so in the first place. Not to mention the other factor of looking suspicious. Always remind them that what they look like can effect the world around them just as much if not more so than anything they say.