As I understand it, all three Plasma Weapons will have a +10 modifier in situation (a) , with an additional +30 due to being in Point-Blank Range, but will suffer a -20 modifier due to the target being Engaged in Melee?

I am unsure about situation (b) . Are there any modifiers for shouting out of Melee? Or are the negative modifiers the same as situation (a) ?

With situation © you would have a +10 modifier due to making a Standard Attack, and would not gain any bonuses from Point-Blank Range, but would you still have a -20 penalty from your target being Engaged in Melee? Also, the Plasma Gun and Plasma Cannon would not be able to be used in those attacks, as their Class does not explicitly mention that they can be used in close range?

A) That's correct.

B) IIRC you can never fire out of close combat -- you are too busy not being stabbed to take careful aim at a target outside the melee.

C) Basic and Heavy weapons can only be fired when you aren't being engaged by someone. Pistols can be used in close combat and ignore the normal range bonuses for point blank range, as you said. However, you don't take a -20 penalty for your target being engaged -- that only applies if they are engaged by someone other than yourself.

Basically, the pistol is treated just like a close combat weapon, but you attack with Ballistic Skill rather than Weapon Skill.

I don't recall anything that says you cannot fire out of close combat. I'd be inclined to allow it but with a -20 penalty due to the melee confusion and not being stabbed as you said.

This would only be limited to pistols though as you are still considered to be engaged in melee with the enemy combatant. I don't see any way you could bring your lasgun around and fire on a different target if someone's swinging an axe at your head.

B) IIRC you can never fire out of close combat -- you are too busy not being stabbed to take careful aim at a target outside the melee.

I don't recall anything that says you cannot fire out of close combat. I'd be inclined to allow it but with a -20 penalty due to the melee confusion and not being stabbed as you said.

This would only be limited to pistols though as you are still considered to be engaged in melee with the enemy combatant. I don't see any way you could bring your lasgun around and fire on a different target if someone's swinging an axe at your head.

I think the passage covering this was in the 1st edition DH rulebook but was never included in the second edition of the rules. It's consistent with the table top game rules, which FFG often uses as inspiration for their RPGs. I'll check when I have access to the hard copy of the rules at home.

B) IIRC you can never fire out of close combat -- you are too busy not being stabbed to take careful aim at a target outside the melee.

I don't recall anything that says you cannot fire out of close combat. I'd be inclined to allow it but with a -20 penalty due to the melee confusion and not being stabbed as you said.

This would only be limited to pistols though as you are still considered to be engaged in melee with the enemy combatant. I don't see any way you could bring your lasgun around and fire on a different target if someone's swinging an axe at your head.

I think the passage covering this was in the 1st edition DH rulebook but was never included in the second edition of the rules. It's consistent with the table top game rules, which FFG often uses as inspiration for their RPGs. I'll check when I have access to the hard copy of the rules at home.

I'll double check later when I get home. First edition did explain this, but I do not remember if 2.0 did or not. I can safely say though, that all the RP follow that rule set (rogue trader, Only war, Black Crusade), so its a safe bet. If a player really wanted to shoot outside of their melee combat, I'd allow it, but grant whoever they are engaged with an easy +30 free attack action.

B) IIRC you can never fire out of close combat -- you are too busy not being stabbed to take careful aim at a target outside the melee.

I don't recall anything that says you cannot fire out of close combat. I'd be inclined to allow it but with a -20 penalty due to the melee confusion and not being stabbed as you said.

This would only be limited to pistols though as you are still considered to be engaged in melee with the enemy combatant. I don't see any way you could bring your lasgun around and fire on a different target if someone's swinging an axe at your head.

I think the passage covering this was in the 1st edition DH rulebook but was never included in the second edition of the rules. It's consistent with the table top game rules, which FFG often uses as inspiration for their RPGs. I'll check when I have access to the hard copy of the rules at home.

I'll double check later when I get home. First edition did explain this, but I do not remember if 2.0 did or not. I can safely say though, that all the RP follow that rule set (rogue trader, Only war, Black Crusade), so its a safe bet. If a player really wanted to shoot outside of their melee combat, I'd allow it, but grant whoever they are engaged with an easy +30 free attack action.

Normally you can make one attack per turn, it can be a Swift or even Lightning attack that inflicts multiple hits but you can't attack multiple times, unless with special talents: Devastating Assault comes to mind.

So basically what I am saying is that when you allow ranged attacks from melee, but they trigger a free attack, this leads to the character making the free attack to be able to make two attacks that turn. It does not seem wrong at first but imagine the theoretical situation that he is engaging multiple targets and they all decide to shoot out of melee, he would get to make an absurd amount of attacks.

That and the fact that you were never able to shoot out melee in 40k TT makes me want to rule that. I don't like rules that break the one attack per turn, without any talents being needed.

Just my 2 cents.

Make it take their Reaction to do so. Take that extra attack, go ahead. We'll see how the goons who want to see how pulped your head can get when introduced to a warhammer take the opportunity.

As per Popdart's Logic - I agree!

I don't recall anything that says you cannot fire out of close combat. I'd be inclined to allow it but with a -20 penalty due to the melee confusion and not being stabbed as you said.

He even goes as far to say you can't shoot "two handed" guns while engaged or being attacked in Melee...

Some players will like that - but - I can see a lot of them NOT liking it - personally I like that second caveat as well - I watch a lot of "shooting" vids on youtube from military vids to private gun enthusiasts...

Now as per "attacks of opportunity" (from DnD); I love D&D's game mechanic herein - tho El Jairo brings up a good point about "Devastating Assault" which had to be earned - point is if you have to build up towards being able to have multiple "reactionary attacks" then so be it!

Back to basics - so we all get ONE SINGLE "reactionary attack" by game default (that's great too) - it'd be the player's choice how and when to use that single attack when its not their turn (goes back to PnP RPGs being a thinking person's game - and not one you can cheese like a video game)...

FIN

Stay GAMING

Morbid

My idea of granting the free attack is based off the combat rules of engagement. Personally, I wouldn't allow it, as it would annoy my players (mooks or bosses shooting at other player while engaged would be really cheesy... But attacking outside or more than once a turn is not without precedent: if you run past, touch, or try to leave melee combat, every enemy you do so with on your turn (or anyones turn) is granted a free attack against you/them. Costing them nothing and putting you/them at risk. I just figured that since it was kinda similar, (entering or leaving melee or in this case, quasi leaving/ignoring melee) it would make sense to apply the same or similar penalty.

Technically the free attack is only granted when enemies that are engaged with melee leave the immediate engagement. My interpretation of the rule is that you can move around your opponent to engage another opponent and not suffer a free attack against you provided you don't leave your current engagement. The idea of a threatened space and an attack of opportunity (to borrow of D&D-ism) only applies if you leave the engagement entirely and doesn't really consider if you keep your opponent at arm's length and move around them.

Of course this is nitpicking on my behalf but consider the idea of someone using a whip that is a melee weapon with a range of 3m while they are engaged in melee combat. Nothing in the rules seems to indicate that you cannot use your whip to attack an opponent that you are not currently engaged with which I think is reasonable and can be applied across to firing a pistol at someone other than your immediate foe. Consider another alternative where a tech-priest really wants to open a sealed door but is currently distracted by the crazy mutant with claw hands. The tech-priest would be ignoring combat to use a skill and I would apply penalties to reflect the distraction of a violent enemy but I wouldn't go to the extent of letting the enemy get a free attack. A free attack seems unnecessarily harsh in my view.