sayles78 said:

Yeah I really don't think the righteous fury rules were thought all the way through, changing it to re-rolling and adding the damage dice that score 10's seems like an obvious house rule since the current system rewards "crit fishing" behavior to a huge degree and has real problems with nearly and DW weapon since it multiplie damage numbers designed to overcome TB and Armor reduction totals that approach the pool of wounds sitting behind them. Potentially deadly is fun, a nearly 30% chance of having to burn a fate point instantly whenever anybody who can score RF tags you with an Astartes bolt weapon is not so much.

And yeah, as awesome as melee gets I think it'd be pretty hard to deny that a charge attack or a couple of chainsword swings without extra talents just aren't as scary as a full-auto burst from the Bolt Gun or Heavy Bolter with special ammo.

moepp said:

Of course Deathwatch has had it differently, but then if they followed the same stats as Dark Heresy bolt weapons would be absolutely rubbish. Frankly I am incliing towards the idea that Deathwatch just is not compatible with Dark Heresy and Rogue Trader. I know it is not the intention, but I have decided Astartes Bolters have the stats they do purely for game mechanics purposes, and truthfully they are not much more powerful than standard bolters.

I thought only PCs (and important NPCs) got RF?

borithan said:

Yeah PCs and any NPC with the Touched by the Fates (x) quality. This means that PCs aren't likely to just get their heads blown off willy-nilly all the time but does give each (meaningful) attack by a fated NPC something of a "save or die" quality. While the odds are low on any given attack, a nearly 10% chance of triggering RF means characters will eventually get "unlucky" and bite it. And RF pretty does mean you bite it- a bolter shot doing damage in the low 20's hurts, and more or less doubling that up pushes the damage fairly far into the crit table.

On the PC's end it can make things pretty swingy and advantages certain weapons inordinately.

borithan said:

I look at the Astartes/Human Bolt issue as Human Bolters use "Short" Bolt Rounds with less propellant while Astartes rounds are the norm.

There is no reason to primarily rely on melee. I spend all my fate points trying to keep up with the bolter users. It is clearly not balanced.

Let me point out the absolute best way to go if you are an Assault Marine . . . note the build ignores melee . . .
1) Buy Two Weapon Wielder - Ballistic
2) Spend 10-requisition for two bolters
3) If you have points left put chainsword attachments on them for 18-requisition
4) Be better in RANGED combat than everyone else, including the Tactical Marine

A bolter is clearly a superior weapon to any melee weapon (some would say starting melee weapon). Clearly superior in every way. With the rules as is I would expect Assault Marines to have a bolter with a chainsword attachment as standard gear.

An Assault Marine is clearly more effective with a bolter.

The way the rules lean so far away from melee makes me wonder why Space Marines have Assault Marines, and arm them without bolters.

Sure one could argue that a sword is trumped by a gun. But with these rules I see no game mechanic reason to use a melee weapon, besides putting a chansword attachment on a bolter.

-

Furious Assault (listed on page 74 as rank 5, and is described on page 119)
Preturnatural Speed (listed on page 74 as rank 8, and is described on page 124)

Another option to the one presented in the title post would be to make these two abilities into starting talents (or ranked 1 or 2) . . . all this would do is make the number of attacks similar to that of a bolter. The bolter would still get +30 to hit over melee, and 1-4 hits per attack.

I suppose another option would be to give Assault Marines +20 or +30 to WS, and/or double the bonuses gained from raising WS each level from +5 to +10.

Excluding an individual's personal preference toward melee, why should melee and ranged combat be balanced?

It smacks of the same reasoning why a lot of little kids sports in the U.S. have gone to the mediocrity is best model where everyone gets a trophy and they don't get their feelings hurt, over promoting winning. Not everyone is equal. Assault Marines that complain about not doing as much damage as a Devastator or a Tactical Marine, to me, don't understand their job or their mobility.

@darkrose

There is no reason to primarily rely on melee. I spend all my fate points trying to keep up with the bolter users. It is clearly not balanced.

Then perhaps you should not be trying to keep up, but to abandon the field and find your own area to excel. If you're trying to at win ranged combat with a melee-focused career, it's no wonder you're having problems.

@ItsUncertainWho

Excluding an individual's personal preference toward melee, why should melee and ranged combat be balanced?

It smacks of the same reasoning why a lot of little kids sports in the U.S. have gone to the mediocrity is best model where everyone gets a trophy and they don't get their feelings hurt, over promoting winning. Not everyone is equal. Assault Marines that complain about not doing as much damage as a Devastator or a Tactical Marine, to me, don't understand their job or their mobility.

Got to agree here - Assault Marines are the most mobile combatants the Deathwatch can field. Against heavily entrenched enemy positions (say, 15 points of cover on most locations), getting into melee may be the most practical solution. In a situation where it's impossible to kill every enemy (multiple small magnitude hordes equipped with heavy weapons), the Assault Marine can get in, take what he's come to take and get out again in as few rounds as possible.

And of course, your boltgun and heavy bolter are completely useless in melee combat, which certain enemies can close to extremely fast - in that case, you'll be reduced to an assault marine minus all the cool talents I mentioned. On the other hand side, trying to slug it out with tau firewarriors isn't exactly a bright idea either.

Cifer said:

Agreed; as was pointed out during the development of Epic: Armageddon, if you want to kill the enemy, use the big guns... but if you want to claim ground, take the objective or overwhelm enemy fortifications, then you need to push forwards and get in close, which is what Assault Marines excel at..

N0-1_H3r3 said:

I'll agree with you on the claiming ground and taking objectives, but nothing beats orbital fire support (like from your friendly Rogue Trader's starship) for overwhelming enemy fortifications.

HappyDaze said:

Unless you need the fortification intact and not leveled.

Bah! Let it be rebuilt better than before! "A True Rogue Trader" is likely to have a hold full of ready-built DIY fortifications ready to drop dirtside in a moment's notice - if you'll just sign the check now please...

Excluding an individual's personal preference toward melee, why should melee and ranged combat be balanced?

To make them both viable options. As of now I do not see a reason to go melee at all. Simply putting a Astartes Melee Attachment [Chain] on a bolter would result in a FAR SUPERIOR set-up.

I find it odd that an Assault Marine taking the Two Weapon Wielder - Ballistic talent, and requisitioning two bolters would be more effective than a Tactical Marine. Using the Jump Pack for positioning, and to gain higher ground could push the +30 bonus routinely seen with bolters to a +40 bonus in subsequent rounds.

It smacks of the same reasoning why a lot of little kids sports in the U.S. have gone to the mediocrity is best model where everyone gets a trophy and they don't get their feelings hurt, over promoting winning. Not everyone is equal.

It smacks of questioning the stupidity of the Deathwatch for not equipping Assault Marines with a Bolter equipped with an Astartes Melee Attachment [Chain]. I mean come on, that is stupid.

In stay of the Deathwatch or Space Marines in general being stupid, I think the rules need to buff up melee weapons, at least in the case of Assault Marines.

Assault Marines that complain about not doing as much damage as a Devastator or a Tactical Marine, to me, don't understand their job or their mobility.

Mobility that would only excessively benefit from a Bolter equipped with an Astartes Melee Attachment [Chain].

If we made one, or more, of the following changes, as I suggested in the first post, then bolters would still be superior. Melee would be less inferior.

A) Assault Marines can make a Pilot (Personal) check as a free-action in order to move up to 20m and make a full-attack, else they can move and make a single attack as normal.

B) Assault Marines can buy the talent "Tenacious Strike (x5)" for 100 XP. This allows the Assault Marine to re-roll a WS attack once per battle as a free-action.

C) Assault Marines can buy "Vicious Slash (x5)" for 100 XP. As a full-attack the Assault Marine damages up-to four areas as per a full-Auto attack once per battle.

No books handy, but doesn't firing a basic weapon one handed cut the range, as per the extra grip in DH?

It doesn't, sadly.

I think people are missing the value of melee being able to lock up heavy/basic weapons from chewing up the party. Or the assault marine's ability to jump in on a horde and pepper it with frag grenades.

Its a matter of function, not so much of sheer damage output.

And on the melee attachment vs. issued chainsword: look at overall requisition cost. Basically, a bolter w/ fire selector and chain attachment is about 3x the cost of a chainsword. And the current loadouts better match TT

ItsUncertainWho said:

Basic weapons normally require two hands, but can be used one-handed with a -20 penalty to hit. While wearing Astartes powerarmor this penalty is negated (Page 140).

I think people are missing the value of melee being able to lock up heavy/basic weapons from chewing up the party.

This can be done, with a much higher effectiveness, with a Bolter equipped with an Astartes Melee Attachment [Chain].

Or the assault marine's ability to jump in on a horde and pepper it with frag grenades.

Based on the Ballistic Skill. So going BS would be better here as well. However I guess putting the lowest roll in WS would be best, as WS normally gets a +30 bonus anyhow.

Its a matter of function, not so much of sheer damage output.

Function that can be better served with a Bolter equipped with an Astartes Melee Attachment [Chain].

And on the melee attachment vs. issued chainsword: look at overall requisition cost. Basically, a bolter w/ fire selector and chain attachment is about 3x the cost of a chainsword.

The standard Bolter comes with a fire selector (see page 146). So 14-points to get a Bolter equipped with an Astartes Melee Attachment [Chain]. It should be 0-points.

And the current loadouts better match TT.

I guess this is part of my argument. I am assuming that the gap in power between melee weapons and bolters is not as evident in the TT version. Someone mentioned Power Fists destroying tanks with one hit in the TT. I do not think that is as possible in the RPG.

I guess this is part of my argument. I am assuming that the gap in power between melee weapons and bolters is not as evident in the TT version. Someone mentioned Power Fists destroying tanks with one hit in the TT. I do not think that is as possible in the RPG.

I just did some calculations. As long as we assume the "one hit" of the tabletop to translate into at least a Full Action worth of attacks (after all, heavy bolters don't get Heavy 10 either)...

The only tank we've got the stats for right now is the Rhino. It's got 25 points of structural integrity (wounds) and a rear armour of 20 (no reason to assume the marine would attack anything else).

A power fist wielded by an assault will generally deal something along the lines of 2D10+17 damage with pen 9, give or take a few points.

Assuming the marine hits with two of his three attacks, he'd deal about 17 damage per attack (already reduced for armour), resulting in a crit result of 9 which is enough to destroy the vehicle. In fact, the marine would probably have to be careful not to push the crit damage up to 11, which would result in an explosion - but then again, he'll probably be able to ignore the 2d10. Using a chainfist or dualwielding lightning claws all but ascertains an explosive result.

Satisfied?

darkrose50 said:

A) Prenatural Speed for lightning attack on a charge (even better than what you had, but high level), or for the single attack you charge with the special ability WIngs of Angels, and you can use Beserk Charge for a to-hit bonus.

B) Blademaster talent

C) Swift Attack/ Lightning Attack and Two-weapon Weilder Melee

Anything else could possibly be bought with an elite advance, but assault marines get all those abilities. With signature wargear they can have a bolter with a chain melee attachment also I believe.

I'm not that convinced that melee is that bad compared to ranged. The differences are mostly situational, if the enemy is far away then ranged is better, but if the enemy is in a cave/space hulk/jungle then they can be in melee before you even see them and melee works out better.

KommissarK said:

KommissarK said:

From the description given, it seems to indicate that the Deathwatch's pattern of bolter includes the fire selector. The cost to add it in is only for other weapons (like the bolt pistol).

Cifer said:

Perhaps. How does that compare to a full-auto bolter burst . . . TT verses RPG?

darkrose50 said:

Every Bolt fired at the Rhino will have the Armor 25/20 applied individually. So a Bolter will hurt a Rhino over time, but rarely will it be able to take a Rhino down in one round without RF.

ItsUncertainWho said:

Should be pretty easy to hit the rhino though, so lots of hits and also likely at least 1 or 2 RF rolls. Pretty rare in the TT game for them to do much without special ammo correct?

@darkrose50

Since I don't personally play the TT, I have no idea how fitting the stats are. However, I'd imagine standard boltguns aren't terribly effective. So...

Standard boltgun: 2D10+7 Pen 5 Tearing (at this point I'd like to point out that I hate, hate, hate you for making me calculate the average damage of a tearing weapon with multiple damage dice... I think it was around 6-7 per die). I'm factoring in Mighty Shot for fairness purposes since I assumed our dear assault marine got the equivalent as well.

The Rhino's armour can have two values now, 24 for front and sides and 20 for rear. Since our tactical and devastator presumably aren't quite as mobile, I'll stick to the front/sides portion.

An average shot will deal... um... around zero damage. You could get lucky and inflict a few points by rolling well, but if the 2D10 result in 12, the whole thing is exactly absorbed by the armour

The heavy bolter would fare a little better: 2D10+12 Pen 6 Tearing would make for average damage of 6 per shot, so a full auto salve would chew it up, but probably not kill it unless the devastator got at least six hits in - during which he'd be a target for the Rhino's storm bolter.

Oh, and I just noticed that the Reinforced Hull trait the Rhino has lets it halve all Critical hits... meaning the heavy bolter would need around 8 to 9 hits while the Assault Marine might have to hit three times, though I'd have to do the latter calculation again.

@Suljin

Should be pretty easy to hit the rhino though, so lots of hits and also likely at least 1 or 2 RF rolls. Pretty rare in the TT game for them to do much without special ammo correct?

Righteous Fury works a little differently against vehicles - you instantly inflict a minor crit against the vehicle instead of adding on damage. These crits would be Jarring Blow (-20 to shooting in the next round), Staggered (may or may not Stun pilot for 1d5 rounds), Weapon Destroyed (guess), Drive Damaged (reduced speed). They don't help destroying the vehicle though.