Here is how I limit the unrealistic use of Heavy Weaponry in my campaigns:

Most, or nearly all heavy weapons in fact, are so heavy, bulky or have such a feroucious recoil, that they are beyond the normal man to use, even if he can technically lift it or carry it strapped to his back. This is not something that is mentioned in the DH rulebook, but realistically, there is a reason why not even a Power-armoured Space Marine may carry and use an Assult Cannon and that Guardsmen work togehter in heavy weapon teams in the Imperial Guard (even then, the weapons are eihter mounted on a solid tripod or on a set of wheels.

The legendary "Stonetooth" Harker of the Catachan Devils is probably one of a "a handful" in the whole Imperium who is capable of using a Heavy bolter, without any sort of mount or even a fellow soldier to help him lug this massive gun around.

Listed below is the MINIMUM requirement I use for anyone who wish to be able to be able to carry and use the most common of the Heavy Weapons of use in the Imperium of man, without the use of tripods or other "fixed" placement (normal rules for bracing is not enought).

• Heavy Stubber; require an SB of 4.
• Missile Launcher; require an SB of 4.
• Heavy Flamer; require an SB of 4.
• Heavy Bolter; require the Unnatural Strength (x2), OR the Auto-Stabilized Trait and an SB of at least 5.
• Autocannon; require the Unnatural Strength (x2) and an SB of at least 10 (after all modifications).
• Multi-Melta; require an SB of 5.
• Plasma Cannon; require the Unnatural Strength (x2) Trait.
• Lascannon; require the Unnatural Strength (x2) Trait.
• Multi-laser; requre a vehicle mount (it is just made in the "turret" version).
• Assault Cannon; requre the Unnatural Strenght (x2) trait, a total SB of 12 or more (after all modifications) and the Auto-Stabilized Trait.

Nothing above (except for the Auto-Stabilized trait) influences the normal rules for bracing the weapon in any way.

This is just a suggestion for those GM's who wish to add a bit of realism to the game (in my opinion).

Personally, I don't see this as necessary at all.

Chaplain Uziel said:

Actually, so long as you keep in mind the weight of the weapons (few heavy weapons are less than 40kg, and a character with SB 3 and TB 3 can't carry more than 36kg without suffering penalties), and the rules for bracing (which prevents any fire other than single-shot from an unbraced weapon, and those single shots are at -30), most normal characters can't haul around and use heavy weapons solo... not if they want to carry ammunition and other gear as well, and they certainly can't run around and fire them.

Chaplain Uziel said:

I don't think sweeping generalisations work well here either; Lascannons come in several sizes, afterall, and the one listed in the Dark Heresy and Rogue Trader rulebooks is specifically listed as a "Man-portable Lascannon", as opposed to the bigger ones used by the Astartes (who have the strength and stability to wield something bigger) or those mounted on heavy vehicles.

The same can be said of many heavy weapons - the names are often categories rather than specific weapons, with distinct variants within each category that are different sizes and weights, the lightest of which will be man-portable, while heavier versions are used on vehicles, servitors and post-human supersoldiers.

That aside, I think you've got a bit overboard with some of the numbers - Heavies in Necromunda are able to wield Lascannons and Heavy Plasma Guns (what have since been renamed Plasma Cannons) by themselves, so requiring Unnatural Strength seems a little much, IMO.

Ah, 'realism'. One of the common cries of people introducing arbitrary changes without thinking about how to justify them.

So, here are some questions relating to that alleged realism:

- How did you derive these restrictions ?

- These weapons are all designed as man portable weapons. So why do so many of them require unnatural modifications ?

- Why are these weapons so heavy that someone who replaces his flesh with the best bionics he can find can't use them until late in his career ? (The magos doesn't get unnatural strength until rank 16)

- How can you justify a Lascannon needing the same strength as an Autocannon. ? Both are the same weight, but laser weapons won't be giving much (if any) recoil.

- A plasma weapon is a low ROF weapon that kills through heat. So we are again talking about a weapon with much less recoil than the Autocannon, but this time it's also lighter. So how do you justify its restrictions ?

- The Autocannon kills it's foes through its ammo being heavy and fast (both contributing to recoil). The Heavy bolter is lighter, deals less damage, uses rocket propulsion in its ammo and kills through the ammo exploding. So how do you justify its restrictions in comparison to the autocannon ?

- With Bulging Biceps, FFG has decided that strength 45 represents someone strong enough to fire an unbraced heavy weapon. Why do you think your interpretation is any better ? Look to Dark Heresy page 23 to see what they intended various values to mean, note the example given for 41-45

If you want to add realism, think about how NPCs would react to the person carrying them around.

If you just want to stop people using them, just use GM Fiat and say that they aren't allowed. If your players want justifications, refer to how NPCs would react.

If you want to allow heavy weapons, why aren't the carry capacity rules enough of a limiter for you ?

Lets take the Lascannon as an example:

- 55kg on its own.

- Since he will be a primary target, he wants armour. Add another 17kg for Storm Trooper Carapace.

We are already up to 72kg, meaning a SB+TB of 10 (50 each, so we are already talking about a walking slab of muscle).

- He only gets 5 shots from it, once that runs out he either needs to spend a round reloading (assuming rapid reload) or switch to another weapon. That adds more weight.

- Add a melee weapon and some utility items and he crosses the 78kg limit, so he will need to get strength or toughness to 60 to have enough carrying capacity to be useful when his Lascannon isn't.

Hey, it is just a suggestion. If you don't like it, don't use it. Personally, and I'm guessing that there are many other GM's out there that have players whom are oogling those heavy weapons, or even using them to easily gun down Greater Deamons (reaad the can someone help me with Stats for a Daemon Prince post) and simililar with their Acolytes. To be quite hones, I don't see why some of theese heavy weapons have a weight value at all, such as the Multi-laser or the Assault Cannon. In the whole of the 40k setting, I have never come accross these two weapon systems being used not mounted on a Vehicle, Dreadnough or Terminator Armour. THAT's why I don't think taking weight into account alone is not nearly enough. That's like saying that the recoil of an Assault Cannon is not taken into consideration, just as long as you are strong enough to carry it.

Man portable, doesn't neccessarily mean that ONE man carries it and fires it while doing so. It might as well be intended for a Heavy Weapons team to carry, and use just like in the codex Imperial Guard.

Please don't bring up Necromunda as an example. Don't misunderstand, I used to love that game, but it was in no way realistic in what weaponry gangers could get conceivably get their hands on (as well as maintain), or be able to carry and actually use. If that were the case, I think we'd still se all those as possible heavy weapon options for lone soldiers in the IG Codex. Some of them are, but I imagine they don't the weedyest soldiers for these duties, and the Adepta Soritas who also have SOME heavy weaponry available for single battle sisters have power armour (light or otherwise) to help them out shouldering this burden.

Plasma Cannons are probably the best exampe of weapons which I can never see a ganger getting his paws on. These are very rare, even for Space Marine chapters. Only the Dark angels are even capable of fielding them in a Tactical Squad of ten Marines.

The weight is not enough, and the Bulging Biceps take care of the Bracing problem.

If you looke at the list, those weapon that require the Unnatural Strenght Trait can not be found in any of the 40k codexes as being carried by a lone soldier, with the exeption of Space Marines.

I have never heard or seen evidence of a non SM Asssault Cannon, or a non-Vehhcle mounted Multi-laser either. Has anyone else?

N0-1_H3r3 said:

If you don't aim for a bit of realism in your games, there's going to be hard for the player's to relate to their characters, and you might end up with a bunch of rules which mean very little in the end.

-The restictions were derived from looking through the available Codexes, DH books and then attempting to apply some "common sense" afterwards.

-The defination of Man-portable doesn't neccessarily mean ONE man. It might just as easily mean a team of two men working togheter. Here I used the IG codex as a guide, and if you look at the size of those guns on the weapon teams, they are not excacly small, while still being "man portable". If anyone has seen or read about smaller lascannons anywhere, let me know. I sure haven't, and that's what I have based it on.

-First of all, if you look at the "bionics" availabe in the DH and Rogue trader range, there is only one thing that actually increaases Strength if I am not mistaking, and that is the Synthetic Muscle-graft in RT, which can at good quality grant you the Unatural Strength (x2) Trait. also, if you look at the weaponry that servitors can use in the 40k range (except Praetorian, whom can use all of his size, auto-stabilized trait and Strength anyhow), none of them can use bigger weapons than those I have listed as requiring SB 5 or lesswith or without the Auto-Stabilized Trait (which gun servitor do have btw).

-If you take another look, the lascannon just requires the Unnatural Strength (x2) Trait, while the autocannon require both the Unnatural Strenght (x2) Trait as well as a SB of at leas 10 (after modification for the US (x2) trait). There is potentially a huge difference there.

-Ahh, the plasma weapon. You're right, it probably has no recoil, but have you looked at the Plasma gun on any IG or SM model? It is HUGE and bulky as hell. No way you can conceivaly lug that around with you. Also, this is a weapon that is more or less ONLY found carried by SM's in the army books.

-The Heavy Bolter requres SB 5 and the Auto-Stabilized Trait on account of it's massive recoil and substantial bulk. That it fires exploding ammunition doesn't have any impact on recoil at all. The Autocannon is a much heavier weapon, with a much lover rate of fire. It would require a much stronger man to carry it to begin with, hence the Unnatural Strenght (x2) Trait and the SB og 10. This woul basically restrict it to the likes of space marines (as I think it should).

-Bulging Biceps and an Strength score of 45 to fire A heavy weapon yes. That's like saying that every heavy weapon is the same, or **** close to it. Yousaid it youself, the lascannon has no recoil, while tha autocannon does... I just don't like keeping it THAT abstract. I think that table has become a little outdated with the introduction of Ascension and some of the other additions since its release. Some stats can now enter the 70-80 range at best, and what would you call that? Super-duper Heroic? As a game develops, you might have to make certain modifications, as nearly all RPG's are good examples of. Even WHFRP (v1) came was updated eventually.

Trust me, I regularly ask my players what their character are wearing AND which weapons they are carrying on them (and how they carry them). How they present themselves, (beyond their Fels score) have major complications in my games. Just think about it, if someone showed up with carrying a heavy bolter or even just a heavy stubber for that matter, the crows would most likely feel "quite" uncomfortable and scatter quickly. I imagine Hive worlds in particular to have heavy restrictions on weapons among it's citizens, because of the fear of revolt, revolutions, strong criminal gangs and other "disturbers of the peace".

That "this isn't allowed" solution really doesn't really appeal to me. I don't mid my players using heavy weapons, but then it has to be justified, both stat-wise and it has to fit the setting (it would be perfectly fine in a Warzone for example).

I see the weight table as actually how heavy the weapon is and it just applies as to how hard it is to carry something like that around, securly strapped to your back. Even the Missile Launcer is usually secured on a solid Tripod (if used by SB 3 common soldiers) at least when used.
I realize that for many (me included), the weight of an item and how heavy it is to carry (not to mention aim with) is sometimes hard to imagine, but I have yet to see any weapon made for infantry that weigh even close to the same as the Lascannon, Autocannon, Heavy bolter, Plasma Cannon, Assault Cannon or the Multi-laser (don't really know why they have that weight in the list, it even says in the description that is for vehicles like the chimera) being used without a solid mount of some kind. If you have, plase tell me. Normal sodiers hate carrying an above average basic weapon around even. I have lifted weights for a number of years now, so I have at least some concept of how heavy things might be to lift, if not to carry around all day (couldn't even imagine carrying 60 on my back for long). Theese weapons are so physically big (just look at the IG Codex) that it is obvious (for me at least) that they couldn't be carried around comfortably, even on a man's back.

Having said all this, again, I was just offering up an option for those GM's that wished they had something to throw on the table when one of their players started getting "funny ideas" about his guardsman running around with an assault cannon and pretty much ruining the game (at least I would personally hate tp play with someone who did this).

Bilateralrope said:

Chaplain Uziel said:

Hey, it is just a suggestion. If you don't like it, don't use it.

That doesn't say anything about us telling you why your idea isn't realistic.

Personally, and I'm guessing that there are many other GM's out there that have players whom are oogling those heavy weapons, or even using them to easily gun down Greater Deamons (reaad the can someone help me with Stats for a Daemon Prince post) and simililar with their Acolytes.

There are ways to limit the use of heavy weapons that are realistic. Your suggestions aren't one of them.

That's like saying that the recoil of an Assault Cannon is not taken into consideration, just as long as you are strong enough to carry it.

But bracing and/or bulging biceps are ways to handle the recoil, ways that exist beyond carry limits.

Man portable, doesn't neccessarily mean that ONE man carries it and fires it while doing so. It might as well be intended for a Heavy Weapons team to carry, and use just like in the codex Imperial Guard.

We aren't talking about one regular guardsman carrying one. We are talking about it being carried by someone nearing the peak of what can be done with flesh, or someone with implants to get beyond those limits.

Please don't bring up Necromunda as an example.

Never played it, so I won't.

Plasma Cannons are probably the best exampe of weapons which I can never see a ganger getting his paws on. These are very rare, even for Space Marine chapters. Only the Dark angels are even capable of fielding them in a Tactical Squad of ten Marines.

I have no problems with a gm altering how hard it is to acquire an item, or simply using gm fiat to say that it isn't available. What I have a problem with is you claiming that your modifications are in any way realistic.

Using the income rules in DH, most heavy weapons are out of an acolytes reach. In fact, unless you have a noble born, the only ones that look affordable are the primitive heavy weapons, the heavy stubber and shotcannon. Apart from the shotcannon, they are all rather weak for being heavy weapons.

The weight is not enough, and the Bulging Biceps take care of the Bracing problem.

Lets look at what it takes for an acolyte to get a characteristic to 60:

- Born on one of the worlds that gives a bonus to that characteristic. That gives them 25 to start.

- Roll 15 or more on a 2d10 to get them above 40. Rolling a 20 is a rare chance, so I'll ignore that.

- Purchase all four characteristic advances for it. 1'600 xp if it's a cheap advance for them.

Then they have to get the other one up to 50. So it's doable, but expensive.

Personally I prefer to allow heavy weapons, then use realistic NPC reactions to make players realise why carrying them can be a problem. Unless the acolytes are a simple kill team, they will need to investigate things. Investigations will be hampered by the guy carrying the heavy weapon, causing at least one of several problems:

- Local police forces start asking the acolytes annoying questions, slowing down the investigation.

- Cultists see heavy weapon guy and go fetch their own heavy weapons.

- Cultists see heavy weapon guy and run away.

- Cultists see heavy weapon guy, wonder why cops let him walk freely, guess Inquisition involvement.

- Local police detain acolytes because of the heavy weapon. Acolytes reaveal they work for Inquisition. Cultist spy in cops hears this.

Unlike your suggestions, these are realistic. Use them and you can get players to chose to avoid heavy weapons in favor of those that don't attract as much suspicion.

I have never heard or seen evidence of a non SM Asssault Cannon, or a non-Vehhcle mounted Multi-laser either. Has anyone else?

All the DH and RT rulebooks are published with Games Workshops permission. That makes them look canon, unless you can point to an official canon policy that excludes them.

If you don't aim for a bit of realism in your games, there's going to be hard for the player's to relate to their characters, and you might end up with a bunch of rules which mean very little in the end.

I don't see any realism from your suggestions.

-The restictions were derived from looking through the available Codexes, DH books and then attempting to apply some "common sense" afterwards.

All you are saying here is:

- You looked at various books

- ???

- You have the answer.

Common sense is another one of those things I see people claim to cover parts of their argument that don't fit together. On a related note, read this .

Ideally your answer should allow me to take one of the heavy weapons not on your list, look at the same books as you, then come to the same answer.

-The defination of Man-portable doesn't neccessarily mean ONE man. It might just as easily mean a team of two men working togheter. Here I used the IG codex as a guide, and if you look at the size of those guns on the weapon teams, they are not excacly small, while still being "man portable". If anyone has seen or read about smaller lascannons anywhere, let me know. I sure haven't, and that's what I have based it on.

Don't confuse one average human with a walking slab of muscle.

-First of all, if you look at the "bionics" availabe in the DH and Rogue trader range, there is only one thing that actually increaases Strength if I am not mistaking, and that is the Synthetic Muscle-graft in RT, which can at good quality grant you the Unatural Strength (x2) Trait. also, if you look at the weaponry that servitors can use in the 40k range (except Praetorian, whom can use all of his size, auto-stabilized trait and Strength anyhow), none of them can use bigger weapons than those I have listed as requiring SB 5 or lesswith or without the Auto-Stabilized Trait (which gun servitor do have btw).

Tech-priests also get bionics through their advance scheme. How else did you think that things like "The flesh is weak" worked ?

-If you take another look, the lascannon just requires the Unnatural Strength (x2) Trait, while the autocannon require both the Unnatural Strenght (x2) Trait as well as a SB of at leas 10 (after modification for the US (x2) trait). There is potentially a huge difference there.

It's only reaching 50 strength. If you get access to unnatural strength, you're probably going to be making a high strength character anyway.

-Ahh, the plasma weapon. You're right, it probably has no recoil, but have you looked at the Plasma gun on any IG or SM model? It is HUGE and bulky as hell. No way you can conceivaly lug that around with you. Also, this is a weapon that is more or less ONLY found carried by SM's in the army books.

Are these the same table top models that often have the higher ranked people lack helmets on a battlefield ?

If so, then I can't be sure about how accurate anything derived from the models can be because I would have to also accept such widespread stupidity.

-The Heavy Bolter requres SB 5 and the Auto-Stabilized Trait on account of it's massive recoil and substantial bulk. That it fires exploding ammunition doesn't have any impact on recoil at all.

Compared to the autocannon it does. Recoil is caused by momentum being conserved, so a weapon that deals damage through pure momentum (autocannon) will have higher recoil than a weapon that deals the same damage through other means (like exploding ammo).

The Autocannon is a much heavier weapon, with a much lover rate of fire. It would require a much stronger man to carry it to begin with, hence the Unnatural Strenght (x2) Trait and the SB og 10. This woul basically restrict it to the likes of space marines (as I think it should).

Except we are talking about a human autocanon and heavy bolter, not the space marine variants.

-Bulging Biceps and an Strength score of 45 to fire A heavy weapon yes. That's like saying that every heavy weapon is the same, or **** close to it.

Your rules add more detail, so you can't get away with as many abstractions.

I think that table has become a little outdated with the introduction of Ascension and some of the other additions since its release. Some stats can now enter the 70-80 range at best, and what would you call that? Super-duper Heroic?

Someone who can afford extensive modifications to their body.

As a game develops, you might have to make certain modifications, as nearly all RPG's are good examples of. Even WHFRP (v1) came was updated eventually.

True. But your modifications go way too far to make any sense.

Trust me, I regularly ask my players what their character are wearing AND which weapons they are carrying on them (and how they carry them). How they present themselves, (beyond their Fels score) have major complications in my games. Just think about it, if someone showed up with carrying a heavy bolter or even just a heavy stubber for that matter, the crows would most likely feel "quite" uncomfortable and scatter quickly. I imagine Hive worlds in particular to have heavy restrictions on weapons among it's citizens, because of the fear of revolt, revolutions, strong criminal gangs and other "disturbers of the peace".

If this is the case, why are heavy weapons such a problem ?

That "this isn't allowed" solution really doesn't really appeal to me.

The only difference I see between a gm fiat situation and your rules is that you are trying to hide your ban on heavy weapons behind a layer of arbitrary rules.

I don't mid my players using heavy weapons, but then it has to be justified, both stat-wise and it has to fit the setting (it would be perfectly fine in a Warzone for example).

Yet your rules make using a heavy weapon difficult, even in a warzone.

Having said all this, again, I was just offering up an option for those GM's that wished they had something to throw on the table when one of their players started getting "funny ideas" about his guardsman running around with an assault cannon and pretty much ruining the game (at least I would personally hate tp play with someone who did this).

Those are the kind of players you need to either restrain with gm fiat or kick from your game. Not introduce rules to ruin the game for players who would use a heavy weapon in a more reasonable situation.

Chaplain Uziel said:

This point here is the one that I think is the most pertinent to address.

A Heavy Bolter (Solar pattern, from the Rogue Trader rulebook) - a common enough heavy weapon, and used in various cases by unaugmented humans (a couple of Imperial Guard special characters) and heavy-weapon using Sisters of Battle - has a listed weight of 40kg.

An average human being - remember, characters with characteristic values in the high 40s and above are not average in any way, shape or form - has a natural carrying limit of 36kg before he starts to suffer penalties to agility tests and movement, and risks gaining fatigue. That's not carrying with intent to wield, that's just carrying it around however he can. He can't use the weapon at all in this state - without bracing the weapon (such as on a tripod; that's actually what tripods and bipods do in Dark Heresy - they allow a heavy weapon to be braced anywhere), he can't fire it on full-auto, and a heavy bolter only fires on full-auto. He's already over-encumbered, but one hopper of ammunition isn't going to be enough, so he ideally needs to get someone else to help carry around the gun and the ammo (at 4kg a reload)... at which point, you have a heavy weapons team who need to stop and set up their gun in order to make use of it... which is, if memory serves, exactly what you wanted.

Having enough strength to heft around a heavy bolter by yourself and fire it from the hip (that is, having the Bulging Biceps talent) requires three characteristic advances for an average (Imperial World) human. That's a not-inconsiderable amount of effort required, and all but the extreme minority of the absolute strongest and toughest of starting characters requires at least a little training to get strong enough to do that. It's not a simple feat that anyone can accomplish. Yes, Bulging Biceps takes care of the bracing problem... that's what it's supposed to do. It is, in fact, the entire purpose of that talent.

Similarly, while I fully agree that "man-portable lascannon" doesn't inherently mean that it should be usable by a single man by himself, we are talking about a piece of equipment that weighs 55kg, and consequently is difficult for all but the strongest of normal humans to carry around quickly or for any prolonged period, particularly if you want to fire it more than 5 times, and as a heavy weapon, requires a brief set-up period before it can be used effectively.

Using Ascension as part of the argument hardly makes sense - Ascended characters are, by definition, exceptional human beings, capable of things that lesser mortals may deem impossible. That an Arch-Magos of the Adeptus Mechanicus or one of the Inquisition's finest Stormtroopers or the living weapons of the Officio Assassinorum can obtain normally impossible heights of physical prowess is not only reasonable, it's expected. Even then, 70s and 80s are high-end extremes, rather than easily-obtainable values - a character needs to have started with a value of 40+ (very unlikely) and then spent several thousand XP to achieve a score in the 70s.

I'm sorry, I have to chime in here as well to counter your claims of realism by introducing these rules.

For one thing, your list requires literally super human (thus unrealistic) values to service and operate most of the high end weapons. As someone has already mentioned, there is no logical reason that super human characteristics should be required to fire Lascannons, Plasmaweapons or even Heavy Bolters (Bolters fire self-propelled ammunition. Theoretically, the only recoil the weapon generates is the initial kick to get the bolt clear of the barrel before the rocket ignites.).

Also, you are requiring very high values to fire weapons currently comparable to real world heavy weapons. Heavy Stubbers and Missile Launchers are both examples that I have real-world experience with. Current man-portable machine guns (stubbers) and missile launchers weigh a hell of a lot less then the given values in DH, and they are definitely usable by "normal" people. Especially if braced or bipod mounted, personal strength is almost immaterial when firing such weapons.

To be honest, the "counter" to heavy weapons is in tactics and roleplaying; not in demanding inhumanly high characteristics. Even the current weight system doesn't really suit me since the weight requirements are really, really high compared to current comparable weaponry.

So, as concerns roleplaying limitations, I was pretty straight forward with my gamers when I told them that the campaign was going to be heavily investigation based and they should focus their killing skills on portable and reasonably concealable weapons (pistols and carbine basics, with a shotgun here and there) if they wanted the most freedom of movement. Most of them are old Shadowrun players so they were familiar with this concept and avoided the "Troll-in-the-Van" types of characters (You know the type...the hugely chromed, massively gun toting Troll or Ork who has to hide in the van until the bullets start flying because he's just THAT obvious). This means that as a GM, I know exactly what approximate power level to keep the game at.

Tactically, the counter to heavy weapons is their lack of mobility and that they are high priority targets.

So, if you wanted "realistic" house rules I'd suggest something along the following:

Bulging Biceps: Halves the penalty (-15% rather then -30%) for firing an unbraced HW. Also allows unbraced semi-auto (but not full-auto) fire. This would mean a character would always seek to brace a HW, which is a pretty realistic assumption. Note that bracing is about more then the weight or even the recoil...its about stability.

Bracing: Add the following rule when Bracing:

When bracing, a character is unable to take full advantage of cover due to the ungainly size of the weapon. Unlike basic or pistol weapons, it very difficult to duck in and out of cover while bracing a heavy weapon. When braced, a character receives a -30% chance to any dodge rolls he makes. Furthermore, an attacker is allowed to re-roll his to-hit location one time when firing on a braced character. This re-roll may only be taken if the original hit location was in cover. This re-roll follows all the normal rules for re-rolls.

The exception to this are heavy weapon emplacements, specifically designed for the task. However, such emplacements are typically setup up with specific fire arcs and can only offer their cover benefits against attackers firing from within those fire arcs.

There you go: Two suggestions that realistically play up the weaknesses of heavy weapons, without resorting to inhuman attributes or requirements.

****, couldn't sleep anyway.

Look, I do see from what standpoint your are looking at the situation from, and I'm not saying that either one of us is 100% correct, one way or the other. But I do actually think that the above "guidline" is not to far off, and have based that on all facts found in the various army codexes and other source materials. It dos fit very nicely with the whole of the Imperial Guard, the Battle Sisters (who has light power armour to assist them with strength, and who don't count their armour's weight against them in the first place), as well as the various armed servitors found in the codexes (and teh gun servitor in the DH book) etc.

The intention of this guideline, is by noe means a rule, it is simply an option, and yes, I still think it is as much based on "common sense" as those that have designed the army books themselves must have thought (based on how the various heavy weapons are used throughout the armies). I think it fits that proper heavy weapons have an SB requirement of 4 (Heavy Stubber, Missile Launcher, Heavy Flamer). If you look at the Heavy in DH p.341, this is someone who is above average and who could potentially carry something like this himself. You can offcourse get to carry a lot in the rules, just based on Toughness alone, with a relativly low Strength score, but this does not in my opinion properly reflect what is needed to use a heavy weapon, although you might be equally ably tto carry it strapped to your back while walking a long distance.

What I am saying, is that the carrying table doesn't do a good job in reflecting the actual use of heavy weapons, but yes, I imagine that an Assault Cannon (the terminator mounted one at least) could very well be around 60 kg as stated. That is not what have an issue with (perhaps with the exception of the Multi-laser, which I don't think I have ever seen or mentioned as being something not mouted on a vehicle at all). The weight themselves are for the most part fine.

What I was thinking of, was not for a way to limit Heavy Weapons as a principle, but to make the requirements for the use of the heavier ones greater (especially those with a massive recoil). I wondered about that "Necromunda" idea as well for a long time, but came to the conclusion that the idea there for the use of heavy weapons must have been phased out long ago, which the current codexes sem to support. Also, if you look on p. 170 of the IH, you see the Munitorum Standard heading there. From that as well, I draw the conclusion that nearly all proper weapons made for war, are pretty much the same (they follow a standard), and that the idea of various sizes for heavy weapons (civilian and military) has little merit. I actuallt think that most SM weapon will be Munitorum Standard as well (by that I mean of similar power), with the exception of their Bolt Weapons (but this remains to bee seen).

If you want to go into the characteristic discussion, which I don't see as being all that relevant to be honest, I would ask you to consider the following:
-The above proposal was not to limit the use of HW's among NPC's, but from misuse from PC's. Even veteran players often get tempted in dire situations. That's just the way it is.
-If a player wanted to go for a heavy bolter wielding Guardsman, this wouldn't in fact be so hard under the normal rules. First of all, if Feral Worlder was the selected choice, you'd have an average S of 35 and T of 35 as well. but cosidering how many ways there are to roll a character, and especially if the players are allowed to which 2d10 rolls go whare, it is not unlikely at all, that both stats start at a solid 40. To increase Both Statistics to 50 then, would cost the player around 1400 XP and that's including the Heavy Weapon (Bolt) Talent and Bulging Biceps.
To increase both statistics to 60, would cost around 4000 XP in total. Now, remember, just the starting character here has an SB+TB of 8. That Guardsman is not going to be having problems using any heavy weapon he can get his hands on for long 8he could even get a mighty SB+TB of 12 or more, especially if Ascension was taken into account). So, in practice, if you move away from the idea that players generaly start with average stats etc, it would be a very short while before heavy weapons could be abused. Even some of the careers which have cheap Toughness increases might be able to do so.

I know Ascention characters are way above average, but they are not gods. Far from it. I imagine the likes of Gunnery Saregant Harker Being the equivalent of a relativly High Level Ascended Character, with truly excpetional genes in some regards). Granted, he may not have the Peer/good Reputation Talents, but I don't imagine that all that many Inquisitorial Storm Troopers have either (I think PC's are a bit of an exception). He is as far as I can see, the only human with an S of 4 in the army book, and that's the equivalent of an SM (hence, the Unnatural Strenght (x2) trait.

I figure "man portable" must mean that is is a weapon handled by a two-man team, disassembled, moved and then reassembled in a new location. One then acts as the gunner, while I imagine the othe one act as a spotter and a reserve. Most strong men could carry 55 kg on their back, with some help loading/unlaoding possibly, but the other one would then have to carry the massive tripod etc. Even with no recoil, the weapon iself is very long an bulky, which means is has a very poor weight distrubution of you'd want to carry it at your hip. If you tried to fire something like that from the Hip, even with bulging biceps), I would give a character a substantial BS penalty for even attempting this, especially since it is a single shot weapon, which gives you no chance to readjust you shooting during the attack). holding a 55 kg las cannon up to eye leevel while standing, well, you'd have to be one hell of a strong person to keep the aim even somewhat steady, even just for a little bit. That is how I see it at last, and I can't really do much else to explain why I think using A Lascannon woul require the Unnatrual Strenght (x2) Trait in my opinion. The way the rules are now, it is technically possible to do it with an SB of 3 + TB 5. That just seems more than a litte odd to me.

If I'm not mistaking, there are some pistols (can't remeber if they were hand cannons or bolt pistols right now) that require an SB of 4, not to be penalized on account of size and recoild. I really don't think it a stretch at all to start with a requrement of SB 4 to lug around with the smallest of heavy weapons. They are rarely, if ever, given to the smallest of soldiers after all.

Finally, I havnen't been plagued with Heavy Weapon "misusers" myself, but it is not hard to see what it can allow dark heresy to be turned into, and for those GM's that don't want that type og a game /a GM should have some say in what type of Game he likes to "Host" after all), this is a quick fix solution that is very much in-line with the 40K codexes etc. Those were my guideline, there is no denying that. If people like it or not, that will offcourse depend a lot on who the players are, and what kind of games they favour playing.

When I read of Rank 6 guardsmen with Assault Cannons mowing down the likes of greater daemons, single handed mind you, I personally cringe inside. Without passing judgement, it is my firm opinion that this is not what the setting was primarily made for. It smack of some kind of futuristic D&D game to me then, and THAT I hope it never turns into.

That's really all I have to say on the matter. Thanks for your opinions and time. Now, off to bed again... =P

N0-1_H3r3 said:

Well, respectfully, I just think that you're attempting to curtail something that doesn't really need to be curtailed.

First off, you're attempting to give GMs a tool or set of guidelines that are more complicated then the basics (requirements for each weapon rather then just for the heavy weapon class as a whole), and you're doing it from an artificial point of view of what you consider "realistic". I think that's what I myself and others are having an issue with. Additional complication is never welcome. And even less so when its based on a subjective opinion. Finally, the basic rules in question are not really in need of an urgent fix, in my opinion.

A GM should have no problem controlling or curtailing Heavy Weapons if that's what they wish to do. Especially in DH campaigns a GM can justify or do as they wish. Hell, if a Guardsman gunbunny got too vocal about his precious big guns, his Inquisitor could just transfer him to one of his kill teams and the GM could ask the player to make a new investigator . I think most players would get the hint rather quickly... An Acolyte wanting to carry around Heavy Weapons as default weaponry is clearly not interested in subtlety.

But the current mechanics as they exist do a fine job of supporting this, from both a mechanical viewpoint (their sheer mass) and from an RP view (you just don't carry heavy weapons around as an everyday thing in the setting, even on a war world it would be a touch extreme). In essence and (quite realistically) it means that Heavy Weapons are rarely carried as baseline weaponry by player characters. But they can be stumbled across and put to use over the course of an adventure by clever or desperate PCs. Or they could be provided on a limited basis for a specific scenario. With your system, this possibility is essentially eliminated and you might as well just remove the more advanced heavy weapons from the game until people are just about ready to start playing Ascension.

If that's the level of restriction you wish, you might as well just declare it by GM fiat. Or another option would be to deny characters the chance to train those weapon skills, explaining away that their Inquisitor isn't interested in wasting the resources on getting them trained with the weaponry in question...and that they themselves have not (and won't get) enough chances to train in the field to justify the purchase. The choices are really rather limitless when it comes to limiting HW "abuse".

I do hope that this is not a normal "problem" for GM's but from a rule system standpoint, I absolutly DO thing additional limitations are required. I urge you to read p.215 carefully.

Technically, it is not problem, even for an fresh reqruit (SB+TB of 6) in the Imperial Guard to actually carry (and use) even the heaviest weaponry found in the Imperial Guard. I will even leave the Assault Cannon and Multi-laser out of the discussion, and focus on just the Autocannon as an example. It has a weight of 55 kg (300m,S/2/5, 4d10+5 I, Pen 4, Clip 20, Rld 2 Full). If you look at the rules of moving and lifting, a fresh reqruit can comforatbly carry 36 kg, BUT he is perfectly cabable of pushing himself (with no Tests having to be made) to carrying 72 Kg, for up to a minimum of 3 hours, if he is willing so take Ag Tests at -10 and reduce his Ag-bonus by 1.
So basically, a conscript of the Imperial guard, may according to the rules use the likes of an Autocannon, just as long as he bothers to rest it agaisnt a window frame or something.
Now, I have a question for you. What current-day weapon would you compare the likes of an autocannon with? And can you ever se ANY man being capable of using it without the aid of a tripod and another soldier to help him out with it?

I just wanted to say btw, that I just read through the errata, and the Mulit-laser is now speciafied to have it's weight without the power pack, which I imagine is quite heavy (supporting the fact that it can only be found on vehicles).

Strenght "limitations" is already a conscept that the writers of the DH line has implemented. Just take a look at teh Sacristian Bolt Pistol for one. Yes, it is just a penalty to BS, ut then again, this is just a Pistol as well. It is not in the same league as heavy weapons when it comes to recoil or just pure weight.

The rules aside, I do agree with you on how the GM can handle Heavy Weapons in a DH game. With all of it. These are all valid options. As I've said already, my players are not even attempting to walk around with heavy weapons, so for me it is fortunalty not a issue, but for others, I think it is a good and quite balanced list on limitations, to stop those players who like to abuse gaming systems from getting strange ideas. I do get it that you don't agree, and that is perfectly fine.

But consider this, If this "list" had been included in the beginning, from the author's side, how many do you thing would have problems accepting that players couldn't run around with the likes of Assault Cannons and the like then? I actually do thing that from a pure rule-standpoint, the authors didn't focus much on the use of heavy weaponry when they wrote the book, probably (and rightlyso ) figuring that it wouldn't be much of an issue for most gaming groups.

My view of "realism" is in this case based on what I've found in the various army books, and if you look at the list, there are still numerous heavy weapons that a SB 4 soldier can start using right away, so it is not as if I have attempted to eliminate heavy weapons from the game (they can always be properly tripod mounted and used by anyone with the talent after all).

Bladehate said:

Chaplain Uziel said:

You're forgetting the weight of the rest of the guardsman's gear, and of any ammunition he's carrying; a naked guardsman may have no issue hauling around an autocannon by himself, but add in the weight of his armour and other equipment, and things become more problematic.

Beyond that, the entire purpose of a tripod in game terms is to enable bracing. That is essentially what bracing represents, so claiming that anyone can use a heavy weapon without a tripod, etc is overlooking that the weapon still needs to be braced before it can be used effectively.

I notice that you didn't answer my question of which current-day weapon you would consider an autocannon to be the equal of, both conserning weight and recoil.

Also, a SB+TB 6 Guardsman (or whoever else for that matter), can carry up to a maximum of 78 KG (not comfortably thoug, but only -1 to Ag bonus and -10 to all Ag-Tests). 78kg-55 (autocannon) is 23, which means he could actually wear a full Storm Trooper Carapace (17 kg) and still have 4 Kg to spare. This is an untrained conscript too mind you. So When you claim that the weights of the heavy weapon, is enough of an discouragement rule-wise, I most strongly disagree. There is no chainging my mind on that one.

I'll even give you a worse example. If one Lascannon is 55kg, then one can reasonably assume that a twin-lascannon (such as found on the mighty Land Raider (with a whole other clip capacity I know) is around 110 kg. Technically, according to the rules, someone with "heroic" characteristics (lets say SB 5 + TB 5 for simplicity's sake), is fully capable of pushing himself to carry 157 Kg. This means he can, according to the rules on p,215, carry around a Twin-Lascannon, and he could have worn a full suit of Light Power Armour (with the suit turned off) and still have 7 Kgs of maximim "Exceeded Carry" capability left.

Ah, yes. The Bracing. I do believe I stated that the Guardsman braced the weapon in a window frame (which is probably better tha on a pile of rubble as the excampe on the Bracing description pn p.127. You don't NEED a bipod or Tripod to brace a heavy weapon according to the rules, but even if you assumed a Bipod was mounted (which is more in line with a weapon that you would be able to carry and use, than a tripod), it would still change nothing.

If you still think any of this is "reasonable", and that the rules made by the authors are blanced in any way or form on this issue, well, I don't really rhink I can say any more to convince you otherwise.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

Chaplain Uziel said:

Standard SB3, TB3 Guardsman has a maximum carry, with penalty, of 72kg... OK, we'll work with that.

So, let's look at what a normal Imperial Guardsman should be carrying... The Imperial Infantryman's Uplifting Primer (Damocles Gulf Edition), pages 16 and 17 list the Arms, Equipment and Accoutrements of "all the vital equipment needed by a soldier of the Imperial Guard" which a given Guardsman "will be expected to carry with [him] when on active duty".

This includes:

• Attire - fatigues, shirt, undershirt, socks x4, undergarments, greatcoat, rain overalls, combat boots and laces, full body flak armour, webbing, leg gaiters, belt and holsters, bandolier, field rucksack with straps, helmet with micro bead pick-up (Guard Flak Armour, backpack, micro-bead, hostile weather gear, uniform, weapon/gear storage - all items from the rulebook and Inquisitor's Handbook, with a total weight of 19kg)
• Arms and Ammunition - Lasgun, charge packs x4, bayonet/combat knife, autopistol, spare magazines x5, frag grenades x4, lasgun maintenance kit (13.15kg total, again weights taken from the rulebook and Inquisitor's Handbook)
• Tools - 9-70 Entrenching Tool, tool kit, lamp pack (3.5kg total, again weights taken from the rulebook and Inquisitor's Handbook)
• Other items - sandbags x4, mess kit, grooming kit (20.6kg total, again weights taken from the rulebook and Inquisitor's Handbook)

...for a total of 56.25kg of standard equipment that a Guardsman is expected to carry around everywhere. That leaves less than 16 kilos of 'spare' carrying capacity before the guardsman collapses under the weight.... in the summaries at the back of the Inquisitor's Handbook, I count four heavy weapons in total as being within that range, and none of them are commonly issued to the Imperial Guard.

So yeah, I think the weight (and the bracing requirement) is a sufficient impediment to overuse or misuse of heavy weapons. Even if characters aren't carrying as much as a fully-laden Guardsman, they'll still be carrying around more than just a gun and a suit of armour, and all the little things do add up, as I've demonstrated above.

Chaplain Uziel said:

Which assumes that all Lascannons are identical; the Lascannons on a Land Raider are Godhammer pattern, connected not to charge packs, but by armoured cables to the vehicle's generator. The closest equivalent we have to those weapons are the Astartes Lascannons in the Deathwatch rulebook, which are more powerful than the Man Portable Lascannon in Dark Heresy/Rogue Trader, and weigh 75kg each. Consequently, you're making assumptions which are not necessarily true.

As for bracing... it's a matter of GM's discretion (because it's always GM's discretion on final decisions such as these; the game is built that way) as to whether a given location allows a character to brace a heavy weapon, dependant upon the nature of the weapon and the nature of the surroundings. A missile launcher can be brought to the shoulder, but a heavy bolter or autocannon needs somewhere solid and stable, which may not necessarily be prevalent in their current location. A bipod or tripod allows bracing anywhere, which is a boon in such situations. More crucially, bracing hinders further movement - if you go to relocate, you need to either spend another full action bracing the weapon somewhere else, or leave it behind. Between this, and the movement penalty applied to overburdened characters, people using heavy weaponry tend to be fairly slow-moving, or are otherwise extraordinary in their physical prowess.

As far as I'm concerned, absolute and extremely harsh restrictions such as the ones you've suggested are never necessary when practical limitations are in place.

-The above proposal was not to limit the use of HW's among NPC's, but from misuse from PC's. Even veteran players often get tempted in dire situations. That's just the way it is.

Dire situations are the exact time a heavy weapon would be appropriate, if the players have time to get one. So your rules punish them.

An I will have to revise my statement about problem players: Your suggestion does nothing to stop problem players , all it does is increase how much they must invest to use them. But once they have made the investment, the problem player will still be a problem player.

If anything, it would make the problem player worse , because you increased the xp they must invest to use heavy weapons, so they don't as much xp to put elsewhere. By making the player take longer to become a problem

If I'm not mistaking, there are some pistols (can't remeber if they were hand cannons or bolt pistols right now) that require an SB of 4, not to be penalized on account of size and recoild. I really don't think it a stretch at all to start with a requrement of SB 4 to lug around with the smallest of heavy weapons. They are rarely, if ever, given to the smallest of soldiers after all.

With the RAW the only way a player can wield heavy weapons with an SB less than 4 is i they ignore strength and get a very high toughness bonus. The only PCs that this seems likely for are the Orks from Into the Storm, but that's only because they start with unnatural toughness.

Finally, I havnen't been plagued with Heavy Weapon "misusers" myself

- You haven't seen how the RAW restricts heavy weapons.

- You haven't seen how well other peoples suggestions reduce the problem.

- Every other poster comes out against your suggestion.

How many minutes did you spend thinking up these house rules ?

this is a quick fix solution

Quick fixes usually become problems later on. For example, your house rules only delay the time until a problem player gets hold of a heavy weapon, but once he does then they do nothing to restrict him.

that is very much in-line with the 40K codexes etc.

Quick fixes are also often incomplete. For example, you refer to the codexs before using your using your secret methods to produce an answer, but that raises a question: How do you produce restrictions for heavy weapons which aren't in any codex ?

The other solutions to problem heavy weapon players have been tested plenty of times with real players. Your rules, by your own admission, haven't been tested at all.

If you look at the rules of moving and lifting, a fresh reqruit can comforatbly carry 36 kg, BUT he is perfectly cabable of pushing himself (with no Tests having to be made) to carrying 72 Kg, for up to a minimum of 3 hours, if he is willing so take Ag Tests at -10 and reduce his Ag-bonus by 1.

And ?

Not only would such a player be hit by NPC reactions, any decent gm can also hit the group with long travel times on foot to rack up the fatigue followed quickly by combat where he will feel the fatigue. Or throw small groups of ranged attackers at him so he feels the dodge penalty.

I don't think there are many players who will feel that a heavy weapon is worth a -20 penalty to dodge.

I notice that you didn't answer my question of which current-day weapon you would consider an autocannon to be the equal of, both conserning weight and recoil.

What does it matter ?

You have already shown yourself willing to ignore the one person here with actual heavy weapons experiance (Bladehate) when he said:

Current man-portable machine guns (stubbers) and missile launchers weigh a hell of a lot less then the given values in DH , and they are definitely usable by "normal" people. Especially if braced or bipod mounted, personal strength is almost immaterial when firing such weapons.

So I don't see how comparing an autocannon to a real weapon is relevant when you ignore the person most qualified to comment on realism. Why should we trust your theroies on realism over the person with real life experience in this area ?

When fun and realism come into conflict, why should realism ever win ?

I'll even give you a worse example. If one Lascannon is 55kg, then one can reasonably assume that a twin-lascannon (such as found on the mighty Land Raider (with a whole other clip capacity I know) is around 110 kg.

When you mix your houserules (this twin lascannon) with the RAW and find a problem that doesn't exist without your houserule, that is a problem with your houserule, not with the RAW. Especially when we are talking about someone who is planning to play bullet catcher (heavy weapons = more shooting you, dodge penalty = more hitting you).

Technically, according to the rules, someone with "heroic" characteristics

Dark Heresy doesn't use terms like 'heroic' to refer to characteristics, so you are having to make up your own definitions. Do you want to get into an argument about how you define them, or do you want to stick to using terms with agreed meanings so we can focus on your actual point ?

If you still think any of this is "reasonable", and that the rules made by the authors are blanced in any way or form on this issue, well, I don't really rhink I can say any more to convince you otherwise

The RAW has been tested with real players plenty of times since Dark Heresy was released. Both in playtesting and then in a lot more actual play. Given how few complaints show up here, I'd say that they are balanced enough.

You are the first person I've seen who thinks that cost, weight limits and NPC reactions are not enough. But since everyone else disagrees and you haven't tested it, why should we believe your theory over actual gameplay experience ?

N0-1_H3r3 said:

I know it's not stated in the books, but I think it would be safe to consider said sandbags listed weight as full and not empty. Otherwise, that's some seriously heavy fabric.

-=Brother Praetus=-

So, you've nerfed Full Auto heavily, made Accurate weapons completely useless, and now you're on to heavy weapons. It really seems like you just don't like how deadly weapons are in general.

You seem to be ignoring the fact that getting Str 45 and Bulging biceps requires your feral world guardsman, on average, 450 xp + the appropriate HWT training and to be rank 5 (if you elite advance Bulging Biceps before this rank, that's your fault, not the rules). Even if you allow for a 20 in Str, they still need to be rank 5 before they can fire from the hip without penalty.

It's your game, so do what you want, but I'm very glad I don't play in it. I'm not a fan of arbitrary rulings.

Brother Praetus said:

Yeah, I saw that as well. But, even if you say the bag is .5kg each, you're looking at nearly 40 kg of gear the guardsman is carrying before you add the heavy weapon and ammo. That is why they use two man teams. Not because one person can't fire the weapon. It's just too much to carry the weapon and ammo and all their normal gear.

I have nerfed Full Auto a bit yes, but I don't agree that the modifications are heavy, illogical or that they somehow ruins Full-auto weapons at all.. For these reasons:

1. Full Auto Weapons get +20 to BS, and 1 extra Hit pr DoS. Compared to all other weapons (Single Shot and Semi-Auto). Full-Auto shooting, is also typically way less accurate than Single Shot, and Semi-auto Shots, which line up their shots better, typically going for the target's center-mass, and much more easily keep their aim on target throughout the burst. The potentially massive number of additionaly hits (although comparably poorly "aimed"), typically allows for Full-auto Weapons to generate a whole lot more RF's, and still claim the increased chance of causing RF's, on account of the higher BS modifiers involved.

2. I Actually would like to see more Semi-auto weapons being used by players. As it stands now, they are always second best and people never choose them if there is an comparative Full-auto weapon. How often do your players fire their Autogun on just Semi-Auto after all? It is just no incentive to do so, or even go for Semi-Auto Weapons in the game.

3. When it comes to the Talents (Crack Shot and Mighty Shot), Full-Auto weapons benefit from these like no other weapons in the game, on account on the sheer number of hits typically generated. Personally, I think Full-Auto weapons would have a much harder time keeping their aim center-mass on target, and therefore being the typical weapons ably to claim bonuses which I attribute to coming from good shooting (the bullets do have the same velocity after all). This is my main idea for an incentive for more skilled shooters to use more Semi-Auto weapons, over Full-Auto. Not everyone have Mighty Shot or Crack Shot after all.

4. Mighty Shot and Crack Shot are typically not the first Talents a player gets access to, and allowing theese to just favour Semi-Auto and Single Shots, would help to distuingish between between more "professional troops" (like Storm Troopers with their Hellsguns), and relativly untrained rabbly, who typically choose 40K equivalents of the AK-47, which is still dangerous in unskilled hands (but which still become a whole lot more dangerous in skilled hands on accounts of the additinal hits generated).

5. Full-auto weapons have the Suppressive-Fire and Overwatch options as well, making them even better and more flexible still.

This is just how I houserule them, and there are probably a whole lot of other solutions (which seems to be the indication when one reads here on the forum). The reason I have chosen to do it this way, it that it is a simple way to do it, and I think it serves it's purpose quite well. I try to avoid introducing a whole lot of other modifiers to the game (having to use a calculator to figure out what to roll below is not the way I like to go) and even to avoid chainging what is already written in the rulebook already (if possible).

I will answer about accurate weapons in the relevant thread.

I understand that arbitrary rulings are not always the way to go, but most rules are just that in fact. Even going by weight alone when dealing with the use of heavy weapons, is also an arbitrary ruling, you just have to do the math first.

I'll admit that for some of the weapons I listed, the weight and Bulging Biceps rule might be fine to play with as they are, but I'll never agree that weight, bracing an the Talent required, is enough to justify being able to carry and use an Autocannon (with Bipod) for an average Soldier (Strength 30%, Toughness 30%, total XP 700, icluding the 400 one starts the game with, capable of carrying 78 kg at the very most). The idea of him being able to brace such a weapon in a window frame, and firing this kind of weapon, in Full-auto mode no less, is bordering on the same realism that allows you to kill a 300ft dragon with swords in D&D. An autocannon is not comparable to an 12,7mm weapon (fully automatic), even a heavy bolter fires a larger caliber bullet than that (explosive as well). An autocannon is a typical weapon you would usually find on a light Tank (as the main weapon). When have you ever seen, even the largest of real-life solders fire a full-auto 12,7mm weapon system without a Tripod/Vehicle mount? The only one I have seen that cound do this, was "Roadblock" from the old G.I Joe series, and that was a cartoon character...

I am not out to "destoy" heavy weapons, Full-auto Weapons or Accurate Weapons at all. I would however, like to se the diversiity of weaponry actually being used more. Yes, in my games, Full-auto has suffered a slight setback (for the more elite soldiers), but they are still the typically the best weapons to have around. This has in our gaming group made for a much better game. so there is no need to feel sorry for my gamers. They all have from 15-25 years of RPG gaming experience, and they have not objected. None of us wan't to see the combat aspect of the game turn into just a series of endless machine-gun battles. Unlike most futuristic RPG's, the 40K universe is actually one of the few in which Melee is a good option, and this balance is one of the things which make the players want more or 40K in the first place. If futuristic high-tech guns are always the order of the day, I think my players would actually find other RPG's to play.

Radomo said:

2. I Actually would like to see more Semi-auto weapons being used by players. As it stands now, they are always second best and people never choose them if there is an comparative Full-auto weapon. How often do your players fire their Autogun on just Semi-Auto after all? It is just no incentive to do so, or even go for Semi-Auto Weapons in the game.

I saw players use semi-auto quite often. Mainly because they had reasons to conserve ammo

Personally I preferred a Lasgun to an Autogun for three reasons:

- The Lasgun is reliable, the autogun isn't. So weapon jams were a lot rarer.

- Lasgun ammo is much easier to replenish.

- The Lasgun has twice the clip size, so it will last twice as long if the autogun player is conserving ammo. Longer if the autogun is only fired on full auto.

I understand that arbitrary rulings are not always the way to go, but most rules are just that in fact. Even going by weight alone when dealing with the use of heavy weapons, is also an arbitrary ruling,

The RAW might be arbitrary at first, but it has had years to prove itself in playtesting and actual gameplay.

How do your houserules compare to the RAW in actual playtesting ?

Oh wait, you admitted that you haven't had a problem heavy weapon player, meaning you have no results to compare your testing to.

you just have to do the math first.

- Our math shows doesn't show any problem.

- Our gameplay experiences show no problems.

- Your math only shows problems when you make assumptions that don't fit any gameplay I've heard about.

So how do you justify your assumption that players will be willing to take the dodge penalty and risk fatigue just to carry a heavy weapon ?

How do you justify them continuing to do so after the gm has hostile NPCs prioritise the heavy weapon guy whenever they can because he has the most dangerous weapon ?

How do you justify them continuing to do so after the gm has made it clear how the heavy weapon hinders investigations ?

The idea of him being able to brace such a weapon in a window frame, and firing this kind of weapon, in Full-auto mode no less, is bordering on the same realism that allows you to kill a 300ft dragon with swords in D&D.

Unless the dragon stays in the air, what exactly is the problem with it being killed with swords ?

An autocannon is not comparable to an 12,7mm weapon (fully automatic), even a heavy bolter fires a larger caliber bullet than that (explosive as well). An autocannon is a typical weapon you would usually find on a light Tank (as the main weapon).

You are forgetting about bolters firing rocket propelled ammunition. This means that if a bolter round had the same mass as a regular bullet, the bolter round can cover the same distance with less recoil because it doesn't get all its velocity from the launching charge.

The explosive part means that a bolter round can do the same damage as a heavier regular bullet, because the bolter round has a damage mechanism on top of momentum.

When have you ever seen, even the largest of real-life solders fire a full-auto 12,7mm weapon system without a Tripod/Vehicle mount? The only one I have seen that cound do this, was "Roadblock" from the old G.I Joe series, and that was a cartoon character...

Are you confusing reality with cartoons ?

If not, why even bring up the cartoon ?

If you want to bring up fiction, I'm sure we can find a few action movies to support our side.

I am not out to "destoy" heavy weapons, Full-auto Weapons or Accurate Weapons at all.

Then you are just destroying them through incompetence.

I would however, like to se the diversiity of weaponry actually being used more.

Then spend some time to think of a solution and be willing to listen to the people with relevant experience when they tell you what you did wrong.

As opposed to what you did which is come up with an incomplete solution, then making stuff up or ignoring people when they tell you how bad it is.

This has in our gaming group made for a much better game. so there is no need to feel sorry for my gamers. They all have from 15-25 years of RPG gaming experience, and they have not objected.

If you have a group that experienced, why are you worried about problem players ?

Which part are you making up, you being worried about problem players or your gaming group ?

If you are going to tell us that you have a problem player in your group, that will raise two questions:

- Why didn't you mention him/her sooner ?

- If you can't control him, why is he still in your group ?

None of us wan't to see the combat aspect of the game turn into just a series of endless machine-gun battles. Unlike most futuristic RPG's, the 40K universe is actually one of the few in which Melee is a good option, and this balance is one of the things which make the players want more or 40K in the first place. If futuristic high-tech guns are always the order of the day, I think my players would actually find other RPG's to play.

Why bring up melee at all ?

Melee has always been powerful option with the RAW, if the melee character can get into melee range, your rules don't change that.

I saw players use semi-auto quite often. Mainly because they had reasons to conserve ammo

-Ammo is rarely a problem in most games, as ammo itself has little weight (for simplicity's sake, we rule that Ammo for Pistol and Basic weapons are 0.5kg/clip), and this allows them to have some spare ammo on them without any problem. Ammo is also generally cheap. Technically, if you just use the weight limits for carrying in the rulebook, you may easily bring all the ammo you could concieavably ever need. I'd like to Semi-Auto being used on its combat merit alone, and not just for saving ammo.

Personally I preferred a Lasgun to an Autogun for three reasons:
- The Lasgun is reliable, the autogun isn't. So weapon jams were a lot rarer.
- Lasgun ammo is much easier to replenish.
- The Lasgun has twice the clip size, so it will last twice as long if the autogun player is conserving ammo. Longer if the autogun is only fired on full auto.

-I am a fan of the Lasgun as well in fact (recently posted the Skitarii Tech-Guard Career on another website, which has been tailored to the use of las weapons), but I still don't think it can compare to the benefits granted from having an utogun. Full-auto is SO much better in RAW, and that is before you even include special ammo types like man-stopper bullets or the Mighty Shot Talent, which they benefit enormously from. The occational weapon Jam is a small price to pay for all the damage you can do in a sigle round of combat, and the greatly increased chance in which you actually have to cause that damage in the first place. So I understand why players don't often choose the lasgun over the autogun, but I'm still happy too see that it happens from time to time.

I understand that arbitrary rulings are not always the way to go, but most rules are just that in fact. Even going by weight alone when dealing with the use of heavy weapons, is also an arbitrary ruling,

The RAW might be arbitrary at first, but it has had years to prove itself in playtesting and actual gameplay.

-Strange they missed so much and had to release an errata which intended to fix so many small mistakes and oversights then. Even though the core rules are pretty solid (they were pretty much based on WHFRP, 2.Ed), I seem to recall that the Dark heresy rulebook project was in fact not so long in production, although I can't say this for certain. That still comes down to definition of terms, so it really matters litte. My general impression of companies making RPG's are that they generally don't have that much of an economic backbone, and needs to get things out on the market as quick as possible. Even though I love Dark Heresy, I can't honestly say that I'm satisfied with all the books released, especially those in the beginning. Tale a look at the Dark Eldar in the Purge the Unclean book as an example (just to mention a good one), they can barely hurt a squirrel with their splinter rifles, and actually damaging the likes of a Storm Trooper would be impossible (assuming you don't allow RF for all). Not everything is great, just because it is official. Dark Heresy does generally have a high standard though, and is quite easily adaptable if one does some work on it (compared to many a system) .

How do your houserules compare to the RAW in actual playtesting ?Oh wait, you admitted that you haven't had a problem heavy weapon player, meaning you have no results to compare your testing to.

- Our math shows doesn't show any problem.

- Our gameplay experiences show no problems.

- Your math only shows problems when you make assumptions that don't fit any gameplay I've heard about.

-First og all, that I haven't had the problem with a player myself as a GM doesn't mean that I havent played in a group where this wasn't a problem. Also, I do tend to get the players to use heavy weapons (although saying that it is a regular occurense is overstating it), it is just that it is then usually fired from a Vehicle. Since it is a futuristic game, the Acolytes generally have some sort of transportation available to them (they have a small handfull of vehicles presently). There is precious little of that "we have to cross the spine of the world on foot from LOTR feeling you have in fantasy games", wwhich can get a bit boring after years of gaming. We did however have a Servitor with a heavy weapon (tech priest henchman) for a while, and even with just BS 30, the bonuses from Full-auto and generally Short Range, made him more than usefull enough. He was not overpowered in any way though, but then again, he only had a Heavy Stubber mounted .

So how do you justify your assumption that players will be willing to take the dodge penalty and risk fatigue just to carry a heavy weapon ?

-They probably wouldn't if they were going on long journeys on foot (since Fatigue builds up), but since the heavy weapon in question could easily be tranported longer distances in a Vehicle, they wouldn't get fatigued at all most likely. In the unlikely event that this happened, the Psyker could take care of that with Dull Poin anyway. The -10 to Ag test is no worse than that for wearing a Poor quality Armour.

How do you justify them continuing to do so after the gm has hostile NPCs prioritise the heavy weapon guy whenever they can because he has the most dangerous weapon ?

-That is a question which may a have a lot of factors in it, depending on the whole situation, depending on who the enemies are, terrain, etc. Not everyone will recognize the weapon for what it is before it is too late for one thing (especially Beastial Targets and such), and many don't have the range to match heavy weapons at all and might be gunned down before closing the distance. The other players might also still be the more immedaite threaths from the NPC's view (such as one closing in with a chain axe or a flamer, etc), which would make it unrealistic to alway pick on the heavy weapon guy. Also, once fired, an autocannon would leavy most enemies duck for cover if they were smart in the first place.

How do you justify them continuing to do so after the gm has made it clear how the heavy weapon hinders investigations ?

-They know this, and I've answered to my view on that clearly before. This is probably the major factor to keep this in check, but that has very little with the reality of basing the use of an assault cannon on the weight table alone. Nothing at all really. The original post was meant for those GM's, who couldn't justify saying no to one or more of their player's wish to run around with the likes of an Assault Cannon. There is simply no RAW rule against it. In my personaly view, it is better that the players know what they can reasonably expect to be ablo to carry and use as early as possible, so that they don't spend XP on something that they can not use (other than mounted from vehicle or tripod) anyway. The topic was never intended to include any debates on the Heavy Weapons in social situations aspect at all. That is as far as I'm conserned, a whole other matter.

Unless the dragon stays in the air, what exactly is the problem with it being killed with swords ?

-where to begin. That would probably best compareto you in SWAT armour being killed with an angry smurf with a toothpick. You'd probably just roll over him and crush him to a pulp, leaving you with a nice broken toothpick on your west...

An autocannon is not comparable to an 12,7mm weapon (fully automatic), even a heavy bolter fires a larger caliber bullet than that (explosive as well). An autocannon is a typical weapon you would usually find on a light Tank (as the main weapon).

You are forgetting about bolters firing rocket propelled ammunition. This means that if a bolter round had the same mass as a regular bullet, the bolter round can cover the same distance with less recoil because it doesn't get all its velocity from the launching charge.

-I'm not actually. I know this. But Bolt Weapons still have a massive recoil, leaving only a very few able to use something like a Storm Bolter. I might be mistaking here, but I seem to recall something about Grey Knight in Power Armour using suspension technology to be able to use Storm Bolters. They are in any case, usually only used by Terminators, and that's not because of their weight alone .

The explosive part means that a bolter round can do the same damage as a heavier regular bullet, because the bolter round has a damage mechanism on top of momentum.

-Agreed. But an autocannon is still not a 12,7mm equivallent. The closes weapon to that is probably the Ortlack or Ursid-Pattern Heavy Stubbers found in RT.

When have you ever seen, even the largest of real-life solders fire a full-auto 12,7mm weapon system without a Tripod/Vehicle mount? The only one I have seen that cound do this, was "Roadblock" from the old G.I Joe series, and that was a cartoon character...

Are you confusing reality with cartoons ? -Just making a point, which I think you understood perfectly well...

If not, why even bring up the cartoon ? -see above...

If you want to bring up fiction, I'm sure we can find a few action movies to support our side. -go ahead, don't think you will find may with the kind of bulky WW 2 inspired weaponry used in DH being used by a lone soldier without any bracing, but it might be fun too see anyway.. .

I am not out to "destoy" heavy weapons, Full-auto Weapons or Accurate Weapons at all.

Then you are just destroying them through incompetence. -Thank you. That was meaningful. If you know anyone with competent with heavy weapons like that you can find in the 40K setting (which can support your view that I'm wrong when I claim that the bulk of them can't be used just based on wight and Bulging Biceps), let me know. I do think that the makers off the codexes, specifically the IG codex are agreeing more with my than you as to whom can run around with Assault Cannons, Mulit-lasers, Lascannons, Plasma Cannons, autocannons and even Heavy bolters. The gunnery Sargeant Harker is a good exaple to what I based my idea around, and claiming that I am incompetent regadrind weapons which we have very litte to compare them with today, is just redicolous. Who does?

I would however, like to se the diversiity of weaponry actually being used more.

Then spend some time to think of a solution and be willing to listen to the people with relevant experience when they tell you what you did wrong.

- I'm more than open to other solutions, but so far people have just nitpicked and claimed that basing using such weapons on the merits of weight and bulging Biceps is good enough, which I think most people who has followed the 40K setting for a while and who take the time to look atthe weight rules, will deem unsifficient. Who has relevant experience with the likes of even the likes of a Heavy bolter? Just because someone here might have fired an M60 or something in the army, that is not really relevant. Even I have fired an M60. doesn't make me any kind of expert regarding anything more than the use of a heavy stubber.

As opposed to what you did which is come up with an incomplete solution, then making stuff up or ignoring people when they tell you how bad it is.

-If I ignored anyone, I apoligize. Making stuff up? where does that come from??

This has in our gaming group made for a much better game. so there is no need to feel sorry for my gamers. They all have from 15-25 years of RPG gaming experience, and they have not objected.

If you have a group that experienced, why are you worried about problem players ? -At present, the players are at rank 5-6, and haven't had the chance to train the skills they like etc for a while (being in the middle of the Haarlock campaign), but I would rather let them know early as to what that can or can't do as early as possible, than to have them spend XP in reach of an "unnatainable goal". Unless they somehow get their hands on a suspension unit or get the Muscle Graft (good quality) cybernetic, they won't be running around, playing Rambo with a autocannon any time soon.

Which part are you making up, you being worried about problem players or your gaming group ? -Making up? Where does this come from? Aren't I allowed to have an opinion about a set of rules on even just reading them alone?

If you are going to tell us that you have a problem player in your group, that will raise two questions:

- Why didn't you mention him/her sooner ? -I don't. And I won't. But I'd like that to be on the merits of the rules, and not just my opinion of what anyone is able to use or not. I just want some rules that give the players some expectations which are in line with the general use of Heavy Weaponry in the 40K universe, as being portrayed in nearly all litterature, pictures and various 40k games out there.

- If you can't control him, why is he still in your group ? -I'll never thorow a player out of a group, just because he's not thinking the wy I am. We are all different, with varying opinions being the norm. I'd rather make a guideline/rule which the player's all know about, and are in agreement of before it even becomes an issue in the group.

None of us wan't to see the combat aspect of the game turn into just a series of endless machine-gun battles. Unlike most futuristic RPG's, the 40K universe is actually one of the few in which Melee is a good option, and this balance is one of the things which make the players want more or 40K in the first place. If futuristic high-tech guns are always the order of the day, I think my players would actually find other RPG's to play.

Why bring up melee at all ?

Melee has always been powerful option with the RAW, if the melee character can get into melee range, your rules don't change that.

-No they don't. wouldn't change that for the world eiter. It is that "IF" thay is the key in my book. If just about anyone is capable of using the most powerful of heavy weaponry, then Melee might become less and less of an aspect in the game, as fewer and fewer actually make it that far. There has been some complaint on the forum of psykers, especially the damage dealing ones being to powerful and that they can often ruin things (well, al least do more harm than good gamewise). At least they are limited by the dangers of using their powers, as well as the range of most of them. I can't really imagine that most games would be enriched by ading someone with an Assault Cannon in their hands on top of that. Buy hey, that is just my opinion, and I'm sticking to it!

Finally, I just want to say that none of us are "experts" in 40K, so I think everyone's opinion has the right to be heard. This whole discussion has just been a whole waste of time, as nothing constructive has come out of it at all. Why people even bother spending their time on the House rules section just to tell people they are wrong, I don't get at all. Constructive critisism, or even coming up with an idea of your own is fine. After all, if you don't like the idea, and you don't want anything to do with it, just leave it alone and let people whom agree in the first place get a chance to help out instead.

I'm not going to bother spending any more time justifying my view in this case. This is it. It's been a fantastic waste of time, instead of what I hoped could be a valuable source of constructive input from fellow gamers. I imagined that that was what this part of the forum was for after all.

You are comparing Astartes bolters to human bolters, they are not the same thing. All Astartes bolters, normal, heavy and storm, are heavier and more powerful than the regular human kind. I also notice you are pointing to codexes for support, but you seem to be ignoring all the Heavy Bolter toting Imperial Guards that have appeared through the years. This shows that it is fully possible to carry around a heavy bolter and fire it without bracing, at least if your are exceptional. And the characters where not chosen by the Inquisiton for being run of the mill...

Also, while I agree that some people have been rude, you it is very unfair to say " This is it. It's been a fantastic waste of time, instead of what I hoped could be a valuable source of constructive input from fellow gamers. I imagined that that was what this part of the forum was for after al l .". Most people have been giving you constructive critisism, they just haven't agreed with you. Being constructive is not saying that you are right, its pointing out where you are wrong.

Chaplain Uziel, since I see you are active in the thread discussing semi/full auto house rules, I will leave that argument to the other thread.

Now for your points on heavy weapons:

-Strange they missed so much and had to release an errata which intended to fix so many small mistakes and oversights then

That's because they realised that they had made a mistake and wanted to fix it, or they decided that they didn't like some of the rules Black Industries created. Two big points stand out here:

- The existence of an errata shows that FFG is willing to listen to criticism.

- Heavy Weapons are one of the things that has not changed.

Since heavy weapons remain unchanged, doesn't that give them a stronger position than the things which have changed ?

I seem to recall that the Dark heresy rulebook project was in fact not so long in production, although I can't say this for certain. That still comes down to definition of terms, so it really matters litte. My general impression of companies making RPG's are that they generally don't have that much of an economic backbone, and needs to get things out on the market as quick as possible.

The general case doesn't matter, only the specifics of Dark Heresy. So:

- How long was Dark Heresy in production for ?

- How much did Dark Heresy have in its budget ? Note that Black Industries was part of Games Workshop.

Even though I love Dark Heresy, I can't honestly say that I'm satisfied with all the books released, especially those in the beginning.

Do you notice a change in quality when FFG took over ?

(I'm just curious here, if you ignore this question I will not bring it up again).

Tale a look at the Dark Eldar in the Purge the Unclean book as an example

Black Industries dropped the ball on their stats. But that doesn't say anything about the heavy weapon rules.

First og all, that I haven't had the problem with a player myself as a GM doesn't mean that I havent played in a group where this wasn't a problem.

How did the GM in that group deal with the problem player ?

How did the player afford to buy the heavy weapon in the first place ?

Since it is a futuristic game, the Acolytes generally have some sort of transportation available to them (they have a small handfull of vehicles presently). There is precious little of that "we have to cross the spine of the world on foot from LOTR feeling you have in fantasy games", wwhich can get a bit boring after years of gaming.

Fair enough. All I can say to this is that there are locations in 40k where a personal vehicle isn't an option, but if your group wants to avoid those areas a GM can easily do so.

but since the heavy weapon in question could easily be tranported longer distances in a Vehicle, they wouldn't get fatigued at all most likely. In the unlikely event that this happened, the Psyker could take care of that with Dull Poin anyway.

If the problem player is relying on the vehicle to avoid fatigue, that is best avoided with their Inquisitor sending them on a mission where the vehicle can't come along. Such as deep in a hive cities tunnels.

For the psyker, I like to house rule that healing powers and dull pain can not be cast at fettered strength so there is always a risk (the player could chose to only roll 1 die, but if it's a 9 it triggers a phenomena). Then there is the option of testing for fatigue just as an ambush occurs, so that the psyker has to chose between casting dull pain or fighting the enemies.

Also, when the psyker player misses a session, the heavy weapons guy can't avoid the fatigue.

The -10 to Ag test is no worse than that for wearing a Poor quality Armour.

Where are your players getting all this wealth from ?

A -10 penalty to dodge is still something that will get serious consideration.

-That is a question which may a have a lot of factors in it, depending on the whole situation, depending on who the enemies are, terrain, etc. Not everyone will recognize the weapon for what it is before it is too late for one thing (especially Beastial Targets and such)

How do your PCs keep getting the cases involving primitive worlds, non-sentient critter infestations and/or idiots ?

and many don't have the range to match heavy weapons at all and might be gunned down before closing the distance.

If the group can't fight the heavy weapon in the open, they will either disappear, or get into close range before fighting starts (remember, they know the PCs are suspicious, but the PCs are sent in to identify the cultists so the cultists get to pick the battleground). The only times this wouldn't happen is if they are idiots or the PCs arrive and start killing everyone.

The other players might also still be the more immedaite threaths from the NPC's view (such as one closing in with a chain axe or a flamer, etc), which would make it unrealistic to alway pick on the heavy weapon guy.

If the enemies are too far away to threaten the heavy the heavy weapons guy, how can PCs be close enough to attack them in melee ?

Also, once fired, an autocannon would leavy most enemies duck for cover if they were smart in the first place.

Only if they were stupid enough to let the suspicious new people pick the battle location.

-They know this, and I've answered to my view on that clearly before. This is probably the major factor to keep this in check, but that has very little with the reality of basing the use of an assault cannon on the weight table alone. Nothing at all really. The original post was meant for those GM's, who couldn't justify saying no to one or more of their player's wish to run around with the likes of an Assault Cannon.

How can I interpret this as anything other than : If you need this house rule, you suck as a gm ?

There is simply no RAW rule against it.

This is the stupidest justification I have ever seen for a house rule. Especially if the problem player is a rules lawyer. But a rules lawyer can't argue with NPCs taking believable reactions.

In my personaly view, it is better that the players know what they can reasonably expect to be ablo to carry and use as early as possible,

The RAW does this. Your house rule doesn't because there are heavy weapons not included in your list. So I'll use this as an argument against your house rule.

The topic was never intended to include any debates on the Heavy Weapons in social situations aspect at all. That is as far as I'm conserned, a whole other matter.

If you are proposing a solution to a problem (Problem players with heavy weapons) then wouldn't other solutions to the same problem be worth discussing ?

-where to begin. That would probably best compareto you in SWAT armour being killed with an angry smurf with a toothpick. You'd probably just roll over him and crush him to a pulp, leaving you with a nice broken toothpick on your west...

That will just give more force to his stabbing motion, assuming he hasn't found himself a hollow that the dragon can't fit into.

-I'm not actually. I know this. But Bolt Weapons still have a massive recoil, leaving only a very few able to use something like a Storm Bolter. I might be mistaking here, but I seem to recall something about Grey Knight in Power Armour using suspension technology to be able to use Storm Bolters. They are in any case, usually only used by Terminators, and that's not because of their weight alone.

Honn covered this one. Besides, a storm bolter is a basic weapon.

- I'm more than open to other solutions,

How can this be true when your response to another solution was: The topic was never intended to include any debates on the Heavy Weapons in social situations aspect at all. ?

but so far people have just nitpicked and claimed that basing using such weapons on the merits of weight and bulging Biceps is good enough,

Where are the problems with the weight limit and bulging biceps ?

which I think most people who has followed the 40K setting for a while and who take the time to look atthe weight rules, will deem unsifficient.

If most people will agree with you, why haven't any of them posted in this thread ?

Could it because your belief is wrong ?

Making stuff up? where does that come from??

Lets scroll up your post to when you said: think most people who has followed the 40K setting for a while and who take the time to look atthe weight rules, will deem unsifficient.

- Assuming that players will be willing to take -20 to dodge just to carry a heavy weapon.

- That twin lascannon you made up.

There may be more, but I'm not going to look for them now.

but I would rather let them know early as to what that can or can't do as early as possible, than to have them spend XP in reach of an "unnatainable goal". Unless they somehow get their hands on a suspension unit or get the Muscle Graft (good quality) cybernetic, they won't be running around, playing Rambo with a autocannon any time soon.

A simply no to the heavy weapons is a lot more certain that saying that they might be able to use them, if you let them have specific gear.

-Making up? Where does this come from? Aren't I allowed to have an opinion about a set of rules on even just reading them alone?

I accused you of making this up because revealing your gaming group came out of nowhere because you tried to use them to justify your changes, while also trying to use problem players to justify the same changes. Those points contradict, especially when you admit that you don't have a problem player.

-No they don't. wouldn't change that for the world eiter. It is that "IF" thay is the key in my book. If just about anyone is capable of using the most powerful of heavy weaponry,

Heavy weapons have several major issues in using them:

- Only some classes get the talents.

- They attract a lot of unwanted attention.

- They are very expensive.

then Melee might become less and less of an aspect in the game, as fewer and fewer actually make it that far.

Only if the melee wielders are start the battle at long range. Lets look at how melee users can deal with that problem:

- Hard to kill enemies that will be able to survive until the reach melee range.

- Swarms. Some will make it.

- Living in conditions that reduce how far anyone can see. Such as cramped habs, twisty tunnels, etc

- High speed/Teleporters/Jump packs

- Lots of cover to hide behind.

If the melee wielder can't do something like that then either they are too stupid to live ( especially if the melee wielder tries to show off ), or the players outsmarted them and deserve the reward of an easy battle.

I can't really imagine that most games would be enriched by ading someone with an Assault Cannon in their hands

Agreed. It's just that accessing one with the raw is already difficult. I just disagree on how you plan to prevent it, I stop people getting hold of them by simply telling them that they will not be allowed any heavy weapon without a good reason. Then, even if they managed to get 7'000 spare thrones *, they will not get hold of one.

*3'500 if you want a weapon that jams on every miss

Finally, I just want to say that none of us are "experts" in 40K, so I think everyone's opinion has the right to be heard.

I don't see anyone asking the mods to silence you.

This whole discussion has just been a whole waste of time, as nothing constructive has come out of it at all. Why people even bother spending their time on the House rules section just to tell people they are wrong, I don't get at all. Constructive critisism, or even coming up with an idea of your own is fine. After all, if you don't like the idea, and you don't want anything to do with it, just leave it alone and let people whom agree in the first place get a chance to help out instead.

We have been telling you what is wrong with your house rule so that you can fix it and suggesting other ways to solve the problems you claim this house rule is intended to solve. What more constructive criticism do you expect from people who don't like the house rule ?

Chaplain Uziel said:

Well,much of the point of a missile launcher is to give a normal person access to an awful lot of firepower, as their whole design is as such as not to produce any recoil (or very limited recoil). I would get rid of a SB requirement for a missile launcher, or at the most make it 3. The only consideration is how much they (and their ammunition) weigh and the rules already take care of that.

Also, many things that "heavy stubbers" represent are entirely portable by one man. Yes, the .50 cal-a-like from the current GW models would be a hard push for one guy to carry, and pretty much impossible for him to fire, but if you look at Necromunda models and other things "heavy stubbers" also include things like MG34s, M60s and similar. These, while being a pain in the ass to carry long distances, are explicitly designed to be portable enough for one man to carry and fire (even if his mates have to help him out if he wants a decent ammo supply). If we look at the "water-cooled heavy stubbers" of the Deathwatch intro games the increase in damage they get in fact suggests that the Heavy Stubber as in DH is in fact one of these lighter types.