moepp said:

Well, not to get too off topic, but it is kinda weird that a tac marine can move and fire a lascannon/missile launcer (in a more effective manner), before a devastator can.

Unusualsuspect said:

The entry on Full auto doesn't say you can fire two basic weapons, but it doesn't matter- a space marine can still shoot two basic weapons on full auto in a round because multiple weapon attacks are handled through the Multiple Attacks Action (crazily enough). This is pretty easy to parse- the only requirement for the full auto action on 239 is that "The attacker must be wielding a ranged weapon capable of automatic fire to take this Action." There then follows text alerting you to the fact that anybody with two automatic pistols may fire two of them at once and directs you to the rules on page 246. This is simply explanatory text pointing you to a different portion of the rules, an assertion that will be borne out by an inspection of the rules on page 246 and the argument following this sentence.

To begin, note the first bullet point on page 246 and the implications- any reasonable weapon can be used for two weapon fighting, which for Space Marines in Power Armor includes all non-basic weapons. Note the third bullet point- a character may use the Multiple Attacks combat Action (quite distinct from the Full Auto or Semi Auto Actions) to attack with both weapons (at a variable penalty). So a Space Marine can shoot two basic weapons a turn (Multiple Attacks just says you attack multiple times and refers you to the Two Weapon Fighting rules on page 246). Note the sixth bullet point- a character may choose different modes of attack with each ranged weapon (single, semi, or full-auto), and by implication can choose the same (don't argue this, it'd be supremely stupid pendantry that wouldn't impress anyone), and may also use suppressing fire. So the multiple attacks granted by the Multiple Attacks Action are independent and can apparently use any attack option that would be valid for one gun, regardless of weather or not they are full or half actions. This is necessarily so, because if we followed your logic about full and semi auto not working for basic guns because they aren't explicitly allowed then how would multiple attacks work? The Standard Attack Action doesn't say anything at all about being able to attack with more than one weapon, pistols or no.

So put it all together. A power armored Space Marine has a Bolter in each hand and wants to shoot them both on full auto. He takes a Multiple Attack combat Action. This allows him to attack once with each weapon at a -10 penalty. He makes his first attack, which he wants to be a Full Auto Burst. Refer to the rules for that attack. Does he run into any issues? He has a fully automatic weapon, so that's taken care of. Go through the rest of the entry- nothing in the text disqualifies him from taking the action (he's firing a single gun this attack) and the resolution mechanics are totally straightforward. Resolve the attack. He makes an attack with the second weapon, again a full auto burst. Again no issues.

Ironically, if you think the pistol text is anything but a reminder, it is more logical to conclude dual pistols can shoot a total of two bursts each round (for a total of four) than that you can't use two automatic basic weapons at once.

I guess each GM will have to decide what they want for their game. I can really see arguments that are valid for each side, it boils down to what is fun for each player group.

Does seem kind of unbalanced to allow dual flamers (basic, and single shot), but not dual full-auto weapons (basic). Although, I admit, the idea of dual full-auto hellfire ammo storm bolters seems overpowered to me also.

Suijin said:

Yes, it´s really GM, or group (ideally this should be consonant) dependant.

I for instance would allow dual basic flamers, but I´d also modify it so that it´s situanional at best (for firing at different targets). I don´t think two flamebursts overlapping eachother would stack in efficiency like two bullets hitting the same target would. According to the rules they do, but that´s something I´d houserule by saying: Anyone target cannot be affected by more then one flame burst per player. A stream of fire is a stream of fire, whether it´s coming from two flamers or just one should be indifferent.

I think despite the woolyness of one bullet point that you cannot fire non-pistol weapons on full or semi auto. The actions refer to each other so you have to meet the requirements for all of them, ie have the two-weapon wielder talent, and if you wish to do more than single shot, they have to be pistols.

If you want them to though, just ask your gm.

As an interesting note look at pistol class description in the armoury: it may be used to make a Standard Attack in melee... no burst fire

I don't see why not. If Marines in PA can fire a bolter single-handed and full-auto, they can certainly do it with one in both hands. Accuracy would obviously suffer, but it doesn't matter if you are in a hurry to put down a Horde...

Little Dave said:

Where is the woolyness? Going by the text on page 246 there is absolutely nothing to imply that basic weapons couldn't be used together on automatic fire, and quite a lot to suggest they can be. Multiple attacks use the Multiple Attacks Action, and the attacks taken can explicitly be single, semi-auto, full-auto, and/or suppressive fire in any combination. Aside from the penalties and restrictions listed on 246, each attack is effectively an independent action. It seems asinine to suggest that a "may" clause in the semi and full-auto fire text that instructs you to consult the full rules on multiple weapons on page 264 somehow governs and supercedes the actual rules for multiple attacks laid out on that page. Read it again: a person wielding two pistols may use both attack actions with the Full-auto action- see page 246. This is entirely consistent with page 246- a pistol is definitionally a reasonable one handed weapon for anybody, and each independent attack sub-action* the Multiple Attacks Action allows can explicitly be a full or semi-automatic burst action.

Now what about a Space Marine with Two Weapon Wielder (Ballistic) who wants to use two bolters on full auto? I am in full agreement with you that he needs to meet the requirements of both types of actions. So lets see what happens if he tries to do this. The Two Weapon Wielder talent allows him to take the Multiple Attacks combat Action. This action says you can make multiple attack actions in a single turn and then tells you to see page 246 for details on how that is handled. So we go to page 246 and check to see if the Space Marine meets the requirements. And it appears he does: the bolters are reasonable one handed weapons for him, and per page 246 he can use the Multiple Attack Action to get two sub-actions that explicitly can use different firing modes. He chooses full auto for his first sub-action- does he run into any problems? No, he does not. He meets the lone requirement listed for full-auto burst since he's using ("must be wielding") a weapon with an automatic firing mode. He's also only firing one gun with that particular attack action (sub-action rather), so there's no rules hole and the semi and full auto burst actions have zero trouble handling the attempt. Nothing anywhere in the combat chapter says the Space Marine can't do this, and the rules on page 246 (again the actual rules section relating to multiple attacks) say he can very clearly. A second attack sub-action is no more trouble than the first, and contradicts nothing in the rules because, aside from the BS penalty and requirement to choose a target within 10 meters of the first target, the attack sub-actions are basically handled as independently as attacks on separate combat turns.

The real key to getting this is to simply realize that you're not making multiple attacks as part of a Full Auto Burst Action, you're taking multiple separate attack actions as part of a Multiple Attacks Action that happen to be Full Auto Burst attack Actions instead of Standard Attack attack Actions. There really isn't a fundamental difference with burst fire- in each case the Multiple Attacks Action allows you to make two attack actions in a turn, which you resolve using a specific system described in the entry for each combat maneuver. The system for burst fire just happens to be longer and more complicated than the one for a Standard Attack.

You'll note that this interpretation is completely consistent with all of the text in the combat chapter and contradicts nothing in the combat chapter. The "you can't fire two basic weapons on burst mode" interpretation says that a single "may" clause in the rules relating to burst attacks, which explicitly instructs you to consult the full rules on multiple attacks, somehow supercedes those rules and by tenuous implication disallows something that the full rules on two-weapon fighting suggest should be very possible and contradicts and effectively invalidates multiple sections of bullet pointed rules text in a place the rest of the combat chapter frequently references. Which of those positions seems more reasonable and less "wooly" to you? If I've missed something, I'll be happy to reconsider my position, but from where I'm standing this seems pretty clear cut.

*Obviously "sub-action" isn't a term that actually appears in Deathwatch- I'm simply using it here to make the terminology clearer since we are talking about taking multiple attack actions that are provided by the Multiple Actions combat Action. You can see how that might get confusing.

LGD You may be correct, although it may not be entirely correct. It definately works if the GM and players decide what are Sub-attacks and what aren't.

Edit: I just read your previous post and now I'm detailing exactly what you said. The problem with sub-type attacks is that it makes it seem like I could select multiple attacks, then with my melee weapons select sub-type attacks from there, where really the only reason you can select differant modes with a gun is because of the last bullet.

Ignoring the entire basic weapon argument, if a character is wielding two pistols he may use the full-auto or semi-auto action to fire with both, according to the action- If the character has a pistol in each hand, both capable of Semi/Full-automatic fire, he may fire both with this action. Because of two weapon fighting as per the talent "Both tests made to attack with the weapons suffer a -20 penalty). The character would also normally suffer an additional -20 for his offhand, however with amidextrous, this additional -20 is removed, and the penalty from two weapon wielder becomes -10 to each attack. He gets a fancy bonus with each weapon depending on which action was used (semi-auto +10, full-auto +20) and each weapon attack is rolled.

Now because space marines are able, according to their armor rule Recoil Suppression: "Provides the ability to fire Basic weapons one-handed. Ranged weapons not classified as pistols may still not be used in Close Combat." This means that a space marine may wield two bolters in each hand. In combat- he wants to go full auto with each weapon. He can take the Full Auto Burst Action, but can only attack with one bolter. WHY? If the character has a pistol in each hand, both capable of fully automatic fire, he may fire both with this Action. Thus, his one bolter attacks with his +20 BS skill bonus.

But wait- this doesn't mean he can't fire both weapons. The way I see it is that the character MUST use the Multiple Attacks Action. "This action allows the active character to make more than one attack on his Turn, provided... is wielding a weapon in his secondary hand. See Two-Weapon Fighting, page 246."

So let us go to page 246.

-The Character must use any melee weapons or ranged weapons that can be reasonably used in one hand. Confirmed- because of the armors special rule.

-If the character has the Two-Weapon Wielder talent, he may use the Multiple Attacks combat Action to attack with both weapons, but each suffers a -20 penalty to the Weapon Skill or Ballistic Skill Test. If the character has the Ambitextrous Talent, these penalties drop to -10. According to the this bullet- the character may use the multiple attack actions, but the space marine suffers a -10 to each roll.

-When firing a ranged weapon with each hand, the character may fire each weapon on a differant mode, for example, one on full automatic and one on semi-automatic. When firing a fully automatic weapon in each hand, the character may only lay down one area of supressive fire. Now each attack with the bolter can be chosen to fire fully automatic. Thus- each bolter is firing, on any mode it wants, be it full auto- or semi-auto, standard, suppressing, or called. It is only because of this bullet that allows the character to fire both bolters of fully automatic. He recieves the same penalty for two weapon fighter (-10 for ambitextrous), and the same bonus or penalty depending on the shot (+20 for full-auto).

Now, in my game I'd allow this reasoning to work, although I might discuss with the players to drop the +10 and +20 bonus for firing with semi- or full auto because they are not pistols.

I would imagine, if they wanted to disallow full-auto with the Recoil Supression rule, they would state something along the lines of "Ranged weapons not classed as Pistols still may not be used in Close Combat, or in Full-auto/Semi-Auto fire."

I see, I was wrong then. RAW it is allowed. So all you need is Two-Weapons Wielder (ballistic) to basically double your damage output at a neglectable cost of -10 to hit.

Nice to see that the Assault Marine is the better ranged combatant until the Tactical Marine is Rank 5. And that wielding one ranged weapon "only" RAW makes no sense, has no own benefits at all (a lousy 10 more to hit, lol). This is so munchkin it´s disgusting.

I don´t say this out of being pissed because I was wrong. Well, partly I do, because this is so off to me that I desperately wanted to be right^^, but well, anyhow, here ya go. Can´t wait to see the first people boasting about their double Stormbolter abominations .

Well you have to remember- it's easy to add penalties to firing two basic weapons in each hand. Not to mention that an Ultramarine would **** a break if he saw any marine do this- as it'd probably be out of place in any chapter.

moepp said:

This is easy enough to fix. Do not give out bonuses for firing full auto, nor allow aiming or called shots (except perhaps for one of the weapons, in which case the other is more or less useless). To me, the reason for a Marine to use this sort of a setup isn't because it's So 90's to wield two guns, but rather to cause more damage to a Horde, or because two clips last twice as long.

moepp said:

Well the -10 to hit does mean fewer hits per full-auto, so you won't get as many extra hits as you might expect. It also makes individual attacks easier to dodge and is a lot more ammo intensive. I'd be curious to see all the maths worked out to determine exactly how effective it is.

macd21 said:

Overall for anyone with a reasonable BS it is going to be better. The trade off is like full-auto with a heavy bolter, more ammo wasted. So depending on the GM/scenario, if you have unlimited ammo then it is going to be better to burn it all as fast as you can. As far as it being disgusting, with regular ammo it is not bad, with hellfire ammo it is truly disgusting. Either way, I don't know that it is much worse than 2 basic flamers (2 single shots).

Any class could elite advance two-weapon weilding, it is just less talking to the GM for it.

Some math, if the attack to-hit needs 40 on a 1d100, then 1 hand has a 40% chance of sucess, and 2 hands (at -10% to each hand) will have a 51% chance to hit with at least one gun and a 9% to hit with both. So it is better by a decent amount. Full-auto, short range, red dot laser sight could push the single hand more up to 80% to hit and the 2 hand 91% with at least one and 49% to hit with both. On storm bolter you only need 3 degrees of sucess to get all possible hits. So 50% of the time with a single storm bolter you would have max possible damage (4 hits, 8 rounds of damage due to storm, no wasted ammo). With 2 storm bolters (math is harder) 16% of the time you would hit with all shots (8 hits, 16 rounds of damage from storm), I think it is 64% to have at least 4 hits (8 rounds damage from storm), maybe even higher my math is weak and I'm brain dead right now.

So yeah quite a bit better. You are burning 16 ammo a round though.

macd21 said:

Okay, let´s say we got a rank 1 assault marine and a rank 1 tactical marine. Both have BS 45.

The tactical marine sprays a full auto at his foe, 65% to hit.

The assault marine dual wields bolters, and fires 2 full auto bursts, 55% to hit for each one.

Now what´s better? Since the Assault Marine still has option to only fire one bolter (and thereby not taking the -10 BS penalty) or do whatever he likes. Any combination not firing the other gun or, or using different modes or whatever is possible. The ultimate flexibility.

The guy with one Bolter can fire 1, 2 or 4 shots. He who wields two bolters can fire 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 or 8 shots, with either one or both weapons (dependig on the number shots) at whatever combination of firing modes he likes. The argument of ammo consumption doesn´t count, the two weapons wielder is in full control of how many shots he wants to fire.

Haven´t studied all the talents yet but I simply lean out of the window and say Two Weapons Wielder (ballistic) is the single most powerful talent there is, nowhere else you will find so much gain in a single talent.

The gap between using one basic weapon and using two is huge.I wonder why space marines thoughout the lore carry one bolter when two is basically twice as effective .

But enough of the bitching for now. I´m just a bit pissed that this is yet again another RPG where you have to rebalance every single crap that has something to do with combat.....

moepp said:

You should deduce a pattern by now - it's best to simply make use of common sense and correct things on the fly. You can be sure that there will be no dual boltgun wielding marines in my group of players. I'll allow them to fire a boltgun with the right hand and open a door with the left one but that's about it.

Alex

moepp said:

Yes, he gains more flexibility. But the question I'm posing is how much that flexibility gains him. Having the flexibility to fire twice on full-auto is useless if the marine never uses that option. I think he will use that option, but it might not be as advantages as you think.

Lets look at the above scenario again - the first marine fires once with a 65% chance to hit. But merely hitting isn't the only consideration - there is also how many times he hits. He will, on average, hit one more time with his individual burst than the dual-wielder does. The dual-wielder, of course, gets 2 bursts, so should net an extra hit overall.

So basically the dual wielder has gained the ability to use twice as much ammo to gain a single extra hit.

Frankly, I think this is more for dual pistols.

Even the fluff backs this notion up with Sisters of Battle Seraphims having dual bolt pistols.

SpawnoChaos said:

Dual Pistols is already covered in the full auto and semi auto burst rules. Their "perk" is that you don´t need the multiple attack action to fire both.

You can fire both with a full auto or semi automatic action, using the the benefits of those actions instead (like combining with an agility move for instance).

And this brings up question I have;

Do you get +10 or +20 BS (semi, full) when you´re firing two weapons using the multiple attacks action? Since these benefits are tied to Semi-Auto Burst and Full Auto Burst combat actions which you are not using. Multiple Attacks as per RAW only allows to fire weapons in whatever mode you like, using the respective ROF.

Not sure what to make of it.

It´s kinda unclear which parts of the actions you´re actually using in a multiple attack action. Common sense dictates that you´re not using these actions as a whole, and combine them together, for if you did, you could make two agility moves for using two seperate full auto actions for instance.

On the other hand applying semi and full auto ROF is nowhere else explained than in those actions, which would suggest that the BS bonus comes with it.

moepp said:

The Multiple Attack action allows you to make more than one attack (obviously), but it should be noted that 'Attack' is a subtype of action. Basically it is saying that you can take more than one action, as long as those actions are of the Attack subtype. Thus you could make two 'Standard Attacks', 'Called Shots', 'Semi-Auto Bursts' or any combination thereof. There is no such thing as an attack which also isn't a type of action.

You raise a good point regarding the movement that can be taken with the Full-auto action. Technically I think that by the RAW you're right - as MA allows you to take two Full-Auto actions you should theoretically be able to move twice. However this clearly isn't the intention of the rules and is (I believe) a result of the changes made to the Full-Auto rules in RT. In Dark Heresy you weren't allowed to move and full auto at the same time. Rogue Trader allowed you to combine it with some movement. They obviously didn't consider the possibility that someone could full-auto twice a round to double their movement... I'd houserule it so that you can only do so once.