Greetings, brethern,

I am toying with the idea of having a little harmfull houserule for the case of an active chainsword being destroyed ("shattered") from being parried by an energy weapon.

See, chainswords (these unreal head-childs of a splatterpunks wet dream) are "a chainsaw times 10". Imagine them running, the chain spinning and then this speeded link of ultrasharp machineteeth gets shattered.

Wouldn´t these cut/shattered link(s) being of potential harm to both the wielderd and the one who parried it with a powerblade?

Right at the moment, I am thinking about a 10% chance (01-10 on the "shatter-test") that both combatants are hit with the equivalent of a half damage fragg grenade (damaged halfed after reduction from AP & TB).

What do you say?

I'm thinking that a half damage frag granade is not worth the effort of rolling the die. It's a lot of work for something that will only harm unarmoured combatants, hardly the case often enough to bother when they're otherwise sporting chainswords and powerblades.

It's a neat idea, but would it change anything else than rolling extra dice often enough to bother?

Gregorius21778 said:

Very nice.

@Graspar: as the OP said, it's only halved after AP & TB. So, not at all.

I'm thinking that this will trigger every time, but players can make an agility test to avoid being hit.

But I am going to be using this in Rogue Trader, where their armour + TB will protect them on more than half the damage rolls.

Sounds like too much extra dice rolling for too little an effect to me.

Cifer said:

I'd have to agree with Cifer here. I do understand where you're coming from Gregorius and the effect you're attempting to achieve, but for my personal opinion it's too much stuff to be bogged down with, and slow the game down a bit.

Well, I see your point "technically", but is it really that much extra dice rolling?

The "check for shattering" isn´t a new dice roll. It´s just an extra of interpretation ("If it shatters with 01-10, chain parts start flying"). So "no additional dice roll here".

If this happens you make an additional dice roll (Damage)


I don´t think this a lot of extra dice. But I get your point about the actual damage down. Perhaps I should change the damage to the equivalent of a normal hit of the chainweapon in use.

Gregorius21778 said:

This seems more appropriate to me, without the wielder's Str Bonus added of course. JMHO.

Sister Cat said:

Of course!

So, my intended housrule is now

"If a chainsword (or similiar "long bladed chainweapon"; common sense/GM´s fiat) is "shattered" by a role of 1-10 as per "force field rules"), both combatants get a damage as for the basic damage of said chainweapon (PEN is applied) since they are hit by chainteeth swirling around like shrappnel".

Gregorius21778 said:

Yep. That seems about right, IMHO. Imagine the Acolytes' surprise when their chainsword/axe/whatever explodes around them! *grins*

Gregorius21778 said:

I would think that you could say on a 1-10 the power blade has hit the engine making that explode and both players make a Agility test (halfed for the weilder) or be set on fire.

and give the shatter like penertration half the chain saws to make it that tiny bit more scary..

Modern chainsaws have a things chain brake which will stop the chain if it is cut or hits anything too solid and another thing called chain-catcher which prevents the chain from lashing out and hurting people when it breaks. Is chainswords have anything similar the only real danger is the small pieces of chain which are completely separated from it by the force of the blow. In this case they would probably have enough force to damage unprotected person but not enough mass to penetrate anything heavier than normal jeans. Thus, yes, you can make 10% chance for the wielder to get little bit of damage, but its not like a huge bomb waiting to go off.

As for chainswords being "chainsaw times 10"... Well, its not really needed. Modern chainsaws have by far enough power and speed to cut through metal, concrete or stone if you could just get a strong enough chain and blades at decent price. They actually do sell diamond-embedded chains which you can put into regular rural houshold chainsaw and saw through concrete and bricks. Its just that diamonds are a *bit* costly.

The only safety a person should need when wielding a chain weapon is their faith in the Emperor.

While all that is true. I wonder how a person would design a chainsaw for the specific purpose of being a weapon and not a tool. I'd probably guess that the Imperium couldn't be bothered with all those safety devices and such. But that's neither here nor there...

The idea is cool. It would give people pause when a power weapon wielder squares off against a chain weapon wielder. Especially if that chain weapon is an Eviscerator. I know I'd be ducking for cover.

Chain swords designed to be used with power armor probably don't need a chain-catcher because the power armor will protect the user anyway. Eviscerators certainly don't need it because Sisters Repentia don't want them and their handlers are equipped with power armor anyway. Every chainsword would probably still have chain-break which will stop the chain or flip the gear into neutral to prevent the motor from tearing itself out every time the chain hits something that stops it. When you look at the drawn designs of chainswords you'll see that the bladed chain is only exposed on one side and runs the rest of the way inside a housing. This in itself will act as a natural chain-catcher and is a very powerfull safety feature. The only reason it is not used in modern commercial chainsaws is because many chainsaw users prefer to use the saws in ways which would be hindered by it.