I just got my book on Friday, and had a LARP on Saturday. So I still have a lot of rules examination to do.

I am playing an Assault Marine I need to figure out the pros and cons of melee and ranged for Assault Marines, and in general.
(A) Ranged attacks get all sorts of bonuses to hit. Apparently this is not so for melee attacks.
(B) Assault Marines gain Swift Attack (127, a bonus melee attack with a full action attack).
© Melee (Chainsword) damage at the lower levels seems okay 2d10, keep one + ~13, verses ranged (Bolter) 3d10, keep 2, +5.
-----
D) I have Two Weapon Wielder (Melee), I can attack with -10/-10 to each hand (I think). I am thinking that I may need a standard bolter to remain comparably competent. Would you agree?
(E) I am thinking of buying the following weapon for my Assault Marine as Signature Wargear.
(E1) Astartes Bolter [5 Requisition]
(E2) Astartes Melee Weapon Attachment (Chain) [9 Requisition]
(E3) Fire Selector (apparently a limited free-action that switches ammo types) [2 Requisition]
(E4) Telescopic Sight [4 Requisition]

I figure I can use the Astartes Bolter (with access to all the bonuses) with the chain attachment in one hand, and a chainsword in the other. I could then requisition special ammo and switch between them if needed. In addition I could use my Jump Pack to get high-ground, fire with the regular Astartes Bolter, and snipe with the Telescopic Sight.

Would this be more useful than a Astartes Power Axe? An Astartes Power Axe would give me +5 damage over an Astartes Chainsword, and not hinder my parry efforts (-10 to parry) as I have a Astartes Chainsword in my other hand (+10 to parry).

darkrose50 said:

Check out Feat of Strength on page 216. Don't forget Assault Marines special power also.

Bolt Pistol might be sufficient as your task is to jump pack into the jaws of hell. You may want to consider a chainsword/power sword (or two) of better than common quality..

But if you want a Boltgun, no problem either. Power Axe works nicely too. It's largely a matter of style. Unless you want to maximize your melee impact by all means.

Alex

Whats cool, is since the armour allows for 1 handing basic weapons without penalty, I would assume this means that two bolters can be dual wielded, and fired in full auto. While this in particular isn't great with assault marines due to lower ballistic ability, they have rank 1 access to two weapon wielder(ranged), so it would be possible.

Otherwise, you are mostly correct.

I would ask this:

Can you use swift attack, dual wielding a bolter+melee attachment, and a chainsword, and get 2 attacks with one, and one attack with the other (using only the two weapon wielder(melee))?

Can you use swift attack, dual wielding a bolter+melee attachment, and a chainsword, and get 2 attacks with one, and one attack with the other (using only the two weapon wielder(melee))?

I assume you're referring to using the bolter's melee attachment for the second attack. In that case, yes, it appears you can do so.

Cifer said:

Well really, since they're both treated as melee weapons, I don't see why it would be an issue either way. Overall, I'd say its not a bad use of 14 req on any one mission. Get a reasonable ranged gun for long distances, and a pair of melee weapons

Well really, since they're both treated as melee weapons, I don't see why it would be an issue either way.

I was referring to the question of using the bolter's attachment versus the bolter itself.

Personally, I'll probably discourage the use of a bolter with a melee attachment one-handed as it seems rather weird to use a weapon with a pistol grip as a melee weapon without a supporting hand, but that's probably not really important right now.

Assault Marines have:
Astartes Bolt Pistol (146): Damage: 2d10+5 X; Penetration: 5; Range: 30; ROF: S/3/-; Clip 14; Reload: Full; Tarring: +1k0 Damage
Astartes Chainsword (153): Damage: 1d10+13 R; Penetration: 4; Balanced: +10 Parry; Tarring: +1k0 Damage
-
Other marines have (devastators get heavy):
Astartes Bolter - Godwyn Pattern (146): Damage: 2d10+5 X; Penetration: 5; Range: 30; ROF: S/2/4; Clip 28; Reload: Full; Tarring: +1k0 Damage
-
Full Auto Burst (Astartes Bolter): +20 BS, additional hit with each Degree of Success
Semi Auto Burst (Astartes Bolt Pistol): +10 BS, additional hit for every two Degrees of Success
-
It seems very tempting to go for the +10 to hit, and have a much better chance of multiple bullet hits.

Having the Astartes Melee Weapon Attachment (Chain) [9 Requisition]. Would primarily serve as a chainsword, and add the option of firing special rounds when needed. This could, of course, be added to the pistol.

Having the Fire Selector [2 Requisition] allows up to three clips to be loaded at time. This removes the necessity of having to reload twice in combat. This also lets one use special rounds without having to take a turn to switch the clips. This could, of course, be added to the pistol.

KommissarK said:

I would assume a chainsword bayonet would be a melee weapon, and thusly qualify.

Cifer said:

I think it would work. But beyond that perhaps if it is taken as a signature wargear the artificers could figure out a way to increase its viability.

The main problem is that you start with a Chainsword (an okay melee weapon) and a Bolt Pistol (A great gun).

Once you can requisition power weapons, I think the gap will narrow considerably.

Cifer said:

Don't have any books handy, but doesn't recoil supression allow you to shoot basic weapons one handed? Does it actually apply to weapons used in melee? Would you then be able to use other two handed weapons in melee one handed? Like two great weapons?

Not sure about two handers (I doubt it though), but basic weapons can never be used in melee, even if one handed. Still, dual wielding full auto bolters seems particularly nasty.

Or even more:

Assault marine, spend starting XP on both two weapon wielder talents

Assume some mission with at least 28 requisition.

Get two bolter with chain weapon attachments.

At range, you have two bolters, in melee you have two chainswords. Its low melee damage output, but a rank 1 assault marine really can't get anything much better than a chainsowrd (due to renown requirements).

KommissarK said:

I wonder if you can buy both weapon wielder talents, to begin with, or if you are limited to one or the other (until the marine advances on the charts to a point where another two-weapon wielder advance is listed). I am off to check the rules.

darkrose50 said:

I would say since it is two specifically different enteries, you can in fact take both as an assault marine at rank 1. Its not a terrible idea, but I think there are better uses for xp. I'd say the penalties, even with the talents, just are not worth the one extra attack (at rank 1 I mean, WS/BS can get higher and make it much more effective, etc.). Focus on getting more damage output/versatility/skills

KommissarK said:

But firing a weapon on semi or full auto is a full round action, so how would you get to fire both of them?

I guess my original question was that wouldn't a bolter with a chain weapon attachment count as a two handed weapon? Don't you use the weapon with a melee attachment as a spear in close combat?

Personally the ridiculousness the image brings to mind (a marine swinging two full sized bolters around like swords) would result in a quick house rule saying 'no'

Charmander said:

1. The weapon attachments are treated as either combat knives or chainswords, both are 1 handed weapons. (yes, in DH it was a spear)

2. The rules to making a two weapon attack with ranged weapons allow for the firing of a gun in each hand, on either single, semi, or full auto (as per the guns abilities), with the appropriate penalties as per dual wielding (remember the armour allows for basic weapons to be one handed). As per 6th bullet on page 246.

Yes, I find this exceedingly stupid. But as a GM, I know that deep down inside of even the best players, theres a munchkin trying to get out. I am trying to figure out what is the absolute worst/stupid abuse of the core rules as I can find before I let my players find it for me. This way, I can warn them against doing it before they do it themselves.

Although I would prefer to not actually houserule this. Probably the best thing would be to force the melee attachment to be two handed.

KommissarK said:

I have a question about requisitions. Are they given per team of per member ? Like this case, 28 requisition are the assault marne alone or the whole kill team ?

Page 273 under Pooling Requistion "Requistion is divided amoung each Battle-Brother equally . . .." But you can share it, or give it away.

Charmander said:

Recoil suppression does allow you to fire a basic weapon one handed. This does not change it to a pistol class weapon. You cannot use a bolt gun one handed in melee, it is still a basic weapon.

darkrose50 said:

But can I also point you toward p274 which says "...gives a total of 62 Requisition for each Battle-Brother" so I can see where the confusion lies.

As there's as much chance of a Developer answering this query as there is to catch a leprechaun fart in a jar I was hoping one of the play testers could bless us with their knowledge and insight on this one please?

Space Monkey said:

Sure, if you ask here. If you contact them through this form instead, however, you'll get an answer. Generally speaking, Sam, Ross and Mack are too busy dealing with the creation of new books to answer questions on the forums, so a more direct method is more likely to get a response.

True, but I wasn't trying to be offensive, it's just the way my sense of humour works

After all, contacting the Developers isn't necessary when we have so many play testers frequenting the boards, so rather than bothering the Devs and distracting them from pumping out all the books I'm waiting for, I'd rather pick the brains of those who have "fought on the front lines" of the game as it were.

So, any ideas?

I think that one of the major advantages of Melee is also, once you engage, it's very difficult to get shot at. So basically a marine can take 'cover' in a heap of enemies. With the armour and toughness coupled with a good Solo or Squad ability (such as sharing reactions etc), you've got a pretty hefty combo right there. (depending on the number of foes you're facing of course)

And in any case I think an RPG is much more fun when not played at munchkin level, such as dual wielding two bolters, hosing on full auto and wildly stabbing about with the two CC attachments. That's, well, a bit out of the spirit of any RPG I feel. As a GM, I can play a much more satisfying combat with a Marine using his combat knife in interesting ways than I would with a marine kitted out to the limits of the game system.

In any kind of PC rpg game it's kind of normal to tweak a character up to the max of its abilities and scores as you've got an unrelenting program or AI against you, while with a p&p rpg you've got a GM to direct the story and mechanics. The marine with just the knife would be rewarded for inventive use of his weapon and descriptive gameplay; such as cleverly grappling an opponent and slipping the knife between the joints of an enemies armour while keeping him from screaming. And I feel that the one with the dual wielding Bolters & bayonets would look like a caricature '80's Schwarzenegger clone in each and every combat, just playing the numbers without any feeling for the 'story' of the encounter or combat.

I would agree, a bolter with combat attachment is a two-handed weapon.

I would say that if you want a kitted out ranged weapon see how you can improve the bolt pistol.

Running into battle dual-wielding bolters on full auto that have chainswords attached to them and are combi-meltas is exactly the sort of thing Space Marines should be doing.