Larger calibre perhaps, or more propellant/explosive in the shells?

Not larger calibre. Normal bolters (according to Dark Heresy) are .75 inch, while according to the 4th edition SM codex SM bolters are .75 inch. They could be longer... but frankly I find that a bit silly. More propellant means more penetration and maybe a little more damage, but not a full dice worth. More signifiacnt damage would be provided by a greater explosive charge, but if the rounds are the same size so there is no space for a larger charge.

Also, the Angelus Carbine, which was meant to use "Space Marine bolts" only has a 2d10 damage.

Face Eater said:

Agreed, the novel authors have (had) a lot of freedom in how to use and apply the background in their books. And the protagonists and also the antagonists are always larger than life in these books, as has been said before. Just look at Gaunts Ghosts and how they even slaughtered khornate CSM in melee (sure, lol).

However, the tabletop is not = the background, the lore. It´s gaming rules that try to capture the background as well as possible, while simultaneously trying to provide a balanced game, while simultaneously trying to sell miniatures. Marines wouldn´t bring much profit if you only needed 10 for an army, would they?

A couple of years ago (as a joke I might add) GW published Space Marine Movie Rules that depicted the marines as they are in the novels (or if they were used in a Hollywood Movie).

I think they were published in WD #300 (or #301) but only in certain countries and I think it was printed on a loose leaflet.

As expected these marines were way OP and didn't belong in a normal TT game.

I'm pretty happy that FFG isn't basing their RPG-line of 40k games on how things are in the TT, because I think it would be pretty boring really. Though I might be a bit biased because I haven't played the TT for ages but I've read a whole lot of the Black Library novels and prefer the marines as larger than life heroes.

I thought the current crop of SM issue boltguns based on the contemporary Godwyn pattern where .998cal, much like the Heavy Bolter which is or is around 1.00cal

From a logistical side, its a nightmare having to re-tool and re-equip everyone with new gear and ammo, but it makes slightly more sense that if you've already gone to the trouble of making an 8ft tall, steroid filled, genetically enhanced, homicidal cretin in power armour that can lift and absorb more recoil than ordinary folks- you may as well make the most of it.

Slightly more pragmatically, its probably not that terrible to refit the marines with different bolters as its not like having to refit literally trillions of imperial guard with a different type of las-gun or something.

Other then the fact that the bolters in all three "games" state it is a .75 calibre, give the same general discreiption of how they work and have remarkably similar art work (like, almost the same picture) for these weapons.

I would say either upgrade the old bolter (from DH and RT) to the same damage as a DW bolter or similar (perhaps 2d10+3 instead of +5) with similar PEN (perhaps 3 or 4 instead of 5) or reduce the damage a Astartes Bolter does to 1d10+7 with a PEN of 6. Give them all tearing.

However, I would change the term "Astartes" from just a descriptive term of the weapon (ie size and design) into also a weapon special quality.

Astartes: Astartes weapons are all considered to be Accurate, Reliable and of best craftsmanship.

I also think Bolt should have its own extra quality representing the explosive nature of the bullet, not Tearing, which does represent that. But I think something more similar to Toxic rules would work better. Though not a toxin of course, but mechanically the rules would be similar.

In the end the decision to make Astartes weapons uber better then all other is a game design reason, a game design based on the stats they gave the space marines. I cna pretty much see it as follows.

Designer One: And All Space Marines have Unnatural Toughness x2?

Designer Two: Yes. And Power Armour.

Designer One: Which is AP 8?

Designer Two: Yes, but 10 in the torso!

Designer One: With starting characteristics of 30+2D10 and modifiers based on chapter?

Designer Two: Correct.

Designer One: For an average Toughness of 40, unnatural x2?

Designer Two: Yes.

Designer One: So a total damage soak of 16 or 18? And how many wounds?

Designer Two: Around 25.

Designer One: So how does a bolter hurt them if its only 1D10+5 Pen 5?

Designer Two: Uhmmm, Astartes bolters do 2D10+5 damage remember?

Designer One: Maybe we should have erratta'd Purge the Uncelan's Space Marine earlier.

Peacekeeper_b said:

Well, the original .75cal SM bolt guns where described as being firing a 4-round burst, which would contribute to blowing the utter **** out of things much more impressively, of course for that to work you'd have to regard the magazine capacity of the weapon as being a representative "pulls of the trigger"... then disregard a whole heap of other contradictory material written/since/before/whatever... yeah f**kit, don't care

Personally if someone asked in-game, I'd just say, they're bigger, better, very high grade materials and ammunition... and not to be used by peons. If they got overly excited and really didn't like that description, then they can go sit outside in the naughty corner for a bit.

I think the culprit is two fold.

1) The game system was never meant to last this long. The percentile system does NOT scale well and even in Ascension and Rogue Trader we see it start to break down badly. To scale up to "marine level" has some issues. It's clear to me that they had to take make some concessions to make things work.

2) The games don't base their math off the table top games. They have to build off the novels and make rules that feel right for that. In the novels Space Marines are just better at everything all the time in every way. If a guardsman can open a soda then a space marine can open a car door and flood a city in Royal Crown. If an Inquisitor can interrogate a prisoner the Space Marine can lick his cheek and know who is 3rd grade crush was.

Frankly it's time for a whole new system, but I'm betting if FFG did that we would get a WHFRP system, so I'm not gonna start asking for a reboot any time soon.

ShatterCake said:

Acension is bad fr more reasons then just the percentile system, and I disagree with the overall notion that the problem with the bolters is based on the percentile system. Damage doesnt use the percentile system, it uses the standard additive/subtractive random dice system that has been used by RPGs since daddy D and D came out.

And yes, while a revised 40K Rpg runs the risk of being @$$ violated the same way WFRP was, there is a strong chance that a revised 40K Rpg may be of the same general core system with enough tweaks to make it work better.

Peacekeeper_b said:

I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I'd personally hang up my keyboard and stop writing for FFG if 40kRP took the WFRP3 direction - I've got nothing against the WFRP3 rules, but they just don't inspire me like WFRP2 and 40kRP have.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

Heh, I only know WFRP1.

Alex

N0-1_H3r3 said:

I meant same general core system as DH, RT, DW currently use. If it went to 3E mechnics, Id be happy as well, as I wounldnt be buying any new books from FFG then.

Yeah I didn't mean the "percentile system" as in just the percentages, I should have been more clear and said "the current system." It just doesn't work very well for making harder enemies harder but still killable for higher level characters.

Space Marines being much better than depicted in the TT is hardly new. It's the standard in the fluff and was how they were statted up in the Inquisitor game. Like it or not, this is the canon interpretation of how 'ard SMs are meant to be and has been for a while. The TT is not meant to reflect the reality of the setting, it's just a set of rules designed to make a fun game.

As for the 'incompatibility' of the different games, I don't see it. The Genestealers from Final Saction are not really more powerful than the ones in the CA, they're just simplified to make them easier to run - especially important for a Demo adventure. The CA ones are basically more complicated (and quite possibly the more dangerous of the two). As for why their boltguns are better, the answer is simple: because they are a different, better model. The technology levels throughout the Imperium vary vastly. The Astartes boltguns are simply made using the best bolter-making tech the Imperium has available, whereas the other models are inferior copies. SM bolters use handwaviumite metal for the guns and unobtainium cores for the bolter shells along with technobabbloil for the propellant fuel to make extra-nasty weapons. Since all of this dates from the Dark Age of Tech the Imperium doesn't know how any of it works anyway.

ak-73 said:

I have both and I can tell you they are basically the same game. 2E really just brought Warhammer FRPG back in print and tweaked it a little. Even if you didn't like the minor changes, the supplements were very transferable between the two editions. Not the drastic changes WFRPG3 did. Not that I've had the money to try the new one, but not being able to flip through a book at the game store makes me too cautious to $60 without playing someone else's copy first.

macd21 said:

That has always bugged me. "The TT is not meant to reflect the reality of the setting, it's just a set of rules designed to make a fun game." Fact is the TT is first, was first, will always be first, while the novels and everything else is based on the TT. While I do not mind the overall notion that SM are more powerful in representation then they are in TT, I dont thing the RPGs reflect the novels very well either. There needs to be more X-Factor where common joe actually has a chance to survive a fight one on one with a Space Marine or a CSM for that matter, which happens in Guant novels, Commissar Cain novels, Cadian Blood and other novels. Sure, Ascension would allow you to build a psyker who could kills SM left and right and so forth, but the games as they are do not equate that.

Give everyone the Righteous Fury ability and you improve the odds a bit (1 in 10 hits does double damage more or less) and ditch the archaic, clumsy critical system. Maybe even remove TB as a soak and just add double its value to wounds. Or have Unnatural Toughness not apply to damage soak but instead adds directly to bonus wounds.

Peacekeeper_b said:

I'm not really an expert on the novels but from what I have heard the novels are not a consistent canon either. Novels about the Space Marines will make them better than novels about Imperial Guards where lesser enemies will have a fighting chance.

Essentially every GM has to pick his own interpretation of the 40K universe. And the more it diverges from the FFG interpretation the more work they will have to put into custom-tailoring the setting. I'm fortunate that in this case my interpretation doesn't differ drastically from FFG's; I have been less fortunate in other games/settings (Rifts, Shadowrun, etc.).

Alex

ak-73 said:

While there is certainly differences in the novels, some things remain fairly consistent (at least in recent history) across the fluff - such as the fact that Space Marines are superhuman monsters who can shrug off las shots, rip people's limbs off etc. This is particularly true in the TT fluff, if not the rules, which, again, are balanced so as to sell minis.

There are extremes, of course. You'll find references where a marine was taken down with a toothpick and a bad attitude by a Catachan with a grudge and you'll see stories where Space Marines take pick up warhound titans and throw them into orbit. Both extremes will be used by people arguing that DW marines are too powerful or too weak. But there is a well established middle ground that defines the commonly accepted power level of marines... and it doesn't resemble what is found in the TT rules at all.

macd21 said:

Those monsters! How dare they try to sell their products to people.

None of the codexes or rules books say they can shrug off lasgun shots, why would it? And so they join the necrons, tyranid warriors, genestealers, ogryns, daemons, ork nobz... all of which more than capable of ripping someones arm off. But space marines should have better stats because of it?

To be honest I'm not wholy disagreeing with the direction that FFG have taken in tanslating SM to the system. They are awesome and DW Space Marines are more awesome, that comes across well. There's a few, purely mechanical choices, that I don't agree with or doesn't mesh up with previous rules IMHO.

But the obvious thing is till those bolters, if you can give me a good reason why they should do more damage than a human grade HB then I might be placated but it just doesn't make sense. Sure do more damage than a normal bolter but a heavy bolter?.

And when all of the basic weapons have that problem then you get a whole batch o problems.

I was reading Nemesis last night and read the part where the Garantine fights an Astartes. The author goes out of his way to say that the Astartes has a larger bolt round than the Eversor's Executioner's Pistol bolt round. For what it's worth.

Just to comment on all the people whinging about the Astartes Bolter...

(These stats are from memory, so please don't burn me for errors)

Astartes Bolter 2d10+5, Pen 5, Tearing

Ascended Storm Commando using his Hellgun 2d10+4, Pen 2, Tearing

Comparable character levels...

wgerrard said:

I am assuming you mean Whinning not Whinging and Storm Trooper not Storm Commando.

But I am also certain the Hellgun only does 1D10 damage, but does have a PEN of like 7 or so, which makes sense.

In table top (yes I know, different game, different rules) the weapons look like this.

Bolter

S4 AP 5 Range 24" Rapid Fire

Hot Shot Lasgun (most recent version of the hell gun)

S3 AP 3 Range 18" Rapid Fire

Previous editions of the Hellgun were only AP 5 but had 24" ranges.

And the argument isnt about Hellgun against Bolter, its Bolter against Bolter.

Especially when a Astartes Boltgun does better damage then a "civilian" Heavy Bolter. In table top Boltguns and Boltpistols have the same damage profiles (S4 AP 5) and heavy bolters have a better profile (S5 AP4 IIRC may still be AP5). The issue at hand is inter game cross-translation and in setting differences in models. Now we basically just have to accept that Deathwatch (and Ross, and everyone involved in the game since at least Purge the Unclean) have a unhealthy bad on for Space Marines.

Astartes brand is better then non astartes brand, the books say so. There just isnt any reason why really given or any true background to support it.

As we have seen, the TT to RPG conversions have to be thrown out for several reasons. The first, is because the game has virtually ignored them (which is a shame). For example, a 1 Wound Tactical Marine from the TT game translated into the RPG has 20 some wounds, while a 2 wound ork fromTT hasabout 18-22 wounds.

In the end it was a game decision for the design that was made. And we may disagree with it, but it is only one of many questionably decisions made by FFG since acquiring the 40K/Fantasy GW contract and overall not nearly as bad as some of the doozies they have made.

Peacekeeper_b said:

Overall I am satisfied with the rules and the book; I still give it 8.5 out of 10. What I dislike is that the whole book has a feeling of being a bit of a rush job in the end. The lack of clarity on some rules (squad mode, psy), the absurdity of the new Righteous Fury, the silly damages of plasmaguns and melta guns, etc. And I don't even want to mention the item quality glitch on the GM screen. It seems to me that they had a deadline and they had to keep it by all means.

This rush job thing is shooting FFG really in the foot. I hope that upcoming material will avoid adding to the impression by all means because otherwise it would start to tarnish the image of Deathwatch.

As for questionable decisions, it depends on what you mean. Let's face the fact - there is many different interpretations of the 40K universe possible. Realistic vs cineastic. Tabletop vs Novels. Not to mention making the whole thing work as an RPG. I am lucky that FFG's interpretation is similar to mine. If it hadn't been, I wouldn't have complained too hard (because one has to settle for one itnerpretation in the end) but instead started to apply changes.

If someone for example wants a near-TT experience, I wonder why they don't look for like-minded people here and start collectively to create an unofficial supplement ' The Real Deathwatch' (as in Realistic).

Alex

ak-73 said:

But what is the realistic approach is being debated whether the novel and the fluff written in the rulebooks (because the space marines are alot more badass in the those than their stats indicate) is closer to what space marines are supposed to be or is tt. Me personally I always viewed TT as the toned down version for balance and scale.

Maybe this is why Astartes weapons do more damage...

www.ultramarinesthemovie.com/news