This will stir up some commotion. Some answers from Ross Watson:

> 1) Can pistols burst in close combat in DW? (And if yes, doesn't
> that carry a high risk of wildly straying shots?)

No. Pistols fired in melee fire a single shot.

> 2) If no, does that mean this is a DW-specific change or does that
> apply to all of 40k RP?

It applies to Dark Heresy, Rogue Trader, and Deathwatch.

> 3) What actions can be done with pistols in close combat other than
> Standard Attacks? Multiple Attack (if so only 2-handed attacks only
> or does swift strike, etc also apply)? All-out attack? Guarded
> attack? I am asking because page 240 indicates more than standard
> attacks are possible.

Standard Attack (or as part of two-weapon fighting) only.

> 4) Does the answer given to question 3 carry on to all of 40K RP or
> only DW?

It applies to Dark Heresy, Rogue Trader, and Deathwatch.

Will post it to all 3 forums.

Alex

Just like any good "Dark Heresy" fan, I will simply ignore the nonesenssical ramblings of an insane heretic who speaks blasphemous lies.

Quartermus said:

Seconded. There are no rules limiting you to single shots in melee in DH.

As for swift attack+ TWF... 2 of our acolytes are based on that so suddenly disallowing swift attack+twf is pretty harsh. Rereading the rules I notice it says you can Swift attack etc. OR get an attack from an off-hand weapon as a full round action.

Does anyone else here actually play like that? It pretty much makes TWW talent (melee) pretty useless while TWW (ranged) is still awesome since you can even use suppressive fire with one gun and semi-auto with another (for example).

As I said elsewhere, I wonder if it's the last thing we are going to hear on that.

Alex

Friend of the Dork said:

SA+TWF with a pistol isn't actually disallowed, the errata made clear that having both Talents permitted two attacks with a melee weapon and a "single attack" with the pistol as a Full Action. What this statement seems to be clarifying is what was meant by "single attack", which is now given as a single-shot.

Khouri said:

See, I'm fine with that as far as fighting with a melee weapon and a pistol is concerned. However many attacks you can manage with the melee weapon, and a single "Standard Attack" with the pistol has always been how we've done it in this regard, anyway. After all, swinging a slab o' steel efficiently and adjusting for excessive recoil is just not a good combination.

What I have a problem with is it is also intended to apply to the poor schmo stuck in melee who is using a single pistol; let's say an autopistol. Now s/he's limited to single shots in melee as well. I don't like the rule change since it cuts down on some of the effectiveness of noncombat specialists when thrown into the thick of things like that. The character already loses the Point-Blank modifier and any targeting gear on the pistol. Now s/he loses a further option that might A) help them hit and B) dish out enough damage to kill some of the medium-largish threats out there that they may face.

This is one of the few times were I must say I disagree with the official rules clarification/change on the matter.

-=Brother Praetus=-

Brother Praetus said:

Noncombat specialists are supposed to be ineffective when thrown into the thick of things.

Inquisitor sapiens potensque said:

Sure, but the "spray and pray" should still be an option for just that reason. Also, a noncombat specialist rarely, if ever, equates to a noncombatant in Dark Heresy . Every PC knows which end is the business end of some sort of weapon, as well as nearly every NPC.

Here's an example:
The purge of the mutant elements in the underhive was progressing well. Elements of the PDF and Adeptus Arbites were reporting that while resistance had been stiff, very few casualties had been suffered on their part. Somehow, in the turmoil of sweeping advances, cloying smoke and billowing clouds of choke gas, you have become separated from the rest of your cell. Vox communication is steady, but filled with interference. The sounds of gun fire and the cries of pain as the unclean are purged loud and seemingly unending.

Creeping cautiously through the tunnels and warrens, you search for a way to rejoin the others. As you turn the next corner you find yourself face to naval with a monstrous twist hulk wielding a massive chain axe. After both it and your shock fades, it roars a challenge and revs its gargantuan weapon at you. All you have to hand is your trusty autopistol. You open fire, praying to the Emperor that it be enough.

Which seems more the likely; the BANG! of a single shot, or the BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG! of a full-auto burst?

-=Brother Praetus=-

Eh. I'm not surprised; the problem errata has had is it refers to "you may make a single attack" or such along the lines and never specifies if that is meant to be single shot or a single action like using full auto.

Personally I'm out with it just because of the fact that the whole using full auto in melee is generally kind of excessive; it can be thematically awesome but I just feel its kind of wonky to have a melee specialist fall apart in close range versus a ranged specialist just because the pistol user can point two guns and hold down the trigger. In essence, it gives more versatility to the pistol user than the melee specialist.

Rakiel said:

Right. However it poses several problems given that it holds true for all of 40K RP. For example, Assault Marines with Bolt Pistols suck now. Cipher appears? Charge him.

A sensible balance is to allow the application of Swift/Lightning attack. With high strength and skill, melee weapons can do slightly more damage. Still pistols will be more versatile.

Alex

ak-73 said:

By this do you mean allow swift and lightning attack to count towards the pistol? To clarify with an example, if I have a pistol in each hand and have lighning attack can I then fire three shots with one pistol and one shot with another?

To that I disagree. Firing full auto with both has always seemed excessive to me, and in that I agree with Rakiel. Also consider that you can get your dual wielded pistol negative modifier down to zero, but dual wielding hand to hand weapons will always incur at least a -10% modifier to your rolls for some reason. I don't see the need to give more advantages to folks with high BS and automatic weapons. A level 3 Assassin shouldn't be able to (potentially) get 12 hits in hand to hand combat dual wielding autopistols. TBH, that's when our group figured that you actually couldn't fire in full/semi auto in hand to hand, that it must be some kind of mistake, was when someone tried this (they didn't get all 12 hits, but got about 7).

If your example is to allow swift/lightning attack count towards a melee weapon in one hand, and allow a shot with the pistol in the other, I totally, 100%, agree.

And I disagree with Brother Praetus, as he and I have discussed several times already, but I do feel for his situation since his whole character's survival in his current campaign is partially based on him being able to have performed those types of attacks. To that I say 'ignore the rule change now, build your character different in the next campaign' (or if you hate the rule that much, and people in your group aren't dual wielding machine guns, house rule it right out of existence).

Edit: to clarify, in addition to not liking full auto, I think there are enough benefits to ranged combatants, pistol or otherwise, that to allow the inclusion of melee talents to boost your ROF in melee just feels wrong to me.

Charmander said:

Since he said "melee damage", he is obviously refering to melee weapon+pistol not pistol+pistol. He basically said that a SM with chainsword, Lightening attack and a bolt pistol can do pretty good damage compared to one with just a boltgun. I'm not sure if I agree tho since Astartes Bolters are so overpowered, but that's a whole other debate. But if you limit the chainsword to a single attack in melee just because you're using a bolt pistol (with only a single shot too), then the Assault Marine is even more gimped than before.

As for dual wielding and FA firing Autopistols that is already allowed, and at PB range is complete murder. Allowing it in melee removes the +30 bonus so not that bad, but still a great potential for destruction. If you want to balance it I would instead of limiting them to single shots, just remove the +20 full auto bonus when in melee. Still a potential to hit with more bullets, but most are likely to miss the target because of dodging and weaving. In experience though the PCs don't use FA weapons in melee, they use melee weapons (and yes 2 of them have both TWW talents).

Brother Praetus said:

As you're describing things, the twist hulk isn't in melee combat with you yet; it's at point blank range. It's in melee combat when it's swinging its axe inches from your ears.

EDIT: come to think of it, realistically, I think it would be pretty hard to fire a weapon on autofire in melee combat and not hit yourself.

Inquisitor sapiens potensque said:

Or at least spray bullets in all directions into freind and foe alike.

But I agree with the reading, having a pistol in the off hand is as good as melee weapon (baring damage and if parry bonuses are needed) plus gives you a nice flexible ranged weapon. Or PBing weapon, specially if the weapon has auto fire and other weapon is stun baton.

But the poor adept is restricted to single shots he is put out, at least he has the option of a more powerful pistol, at that point it's starting to look not that disimilar in damage to what he would be doing with a single mellee attack.

But on the other hand a gunslinger, with two good autopistols with manstoppers, two attacks at Bs+20, 1d10+4 pen 3 with hits +per degree of success. That is and always had been pretty unbalanced considering he can do the same damage at 30m (farther with talants), much farther with changing weapons where as the guy who's good at hitting things is going to have to cross that ground himself.

I've mentioned it before but I go further:

1. Pistols in melee use Ws. I jsut never agreed that knowing knowing about trajectory, lead wind correction helped to put a pistol barrel up someones nose but that's beside the point here.

2. Aditional attacks (swift, lightning) can be used with a SA pistol, the maximum number of attacks is equal to the SA RoF.

Point 2 might be relavent but really I see it going hand in hand with the fact that you are using Ws for it.

Finally, possible, if you want to allow fully automatic RoF in melee why not treat it as an all out attack in that you loose the ability to dodge.

Brother Praetus said:

Most likely you'll hear the FlapFlapFlap of my sandals as I run screaming like a little girl! Hopefully there will be a building with a door that the huge critter can't get through nearby.

Charmander said:

Okay, given that I play a dual pistol-wielding Scum I might not be a 100% objective but then again this is how we have run out games ever since. Yes, the Pistol does give more flexibility. However my dual power sword-wielding fellow Acolyte (Assassin) does more damage than I do with my Hecuter/Autopistol combo. Also if I have been in a firefight and then get charged by someone, chances are that I am running low on ammo in either pistol. Pistols get specialty ammo, melee attacks get bonuses from talents (hatred, frenzy, etc). It seems balanced: the assassin shoots enemies on range and if he wants to close on in, he drops the rifle, quick draws the melee weapons while charging and let's loose. I don't see that much additional flexibility when using pistols.

And of course we do allow WS-parries of close-combat pistol attacks...

Lastly I favour basing the attacks on BS. The reason for that is that I think that firearms training is more likely to include training on how to use pistols if the enemy gets close than melee weapon training including "Oh yeah, today we're going to show you how to fight in close combat with pistols." It can happen but I think of it as less likely.

Alex

I take issue with this for one very important reason: you can't do Equilibrium.

Mr Adventurer said:

Gun Kata is kinda cool Maybe a special Talent? I can see Assassins pulling this off, and maybe Scum as well.

WS parry vs ranged attacks in melee seems like a good idea, and I would let it parry away multiple hits (it's all or nothing).

And I really don't see how you can hit yourself unless your opponent manages to twist around the pistol, which is essentially done in a grapple situation and not just melee.

Friend of the Dork said:

The opponent doesn't twist around the pistol; you do, in the process of trying not to be hit and trying to aim while moving your limbs this way and than at frantic speeds. It's not even really twisting; it's moving your hand at increments of a few degrees up and down. Just try visualizing it,

The more that I think of this firing full auto in melee combat thing, the less realistic and less even cinematic it sounds. Even in movies people with pistols don't get into straight, extended melee combat with opponents. They try to dodge and disengage so they can shoot effectively.

Inquisitor sapiens potensque said:

It all sounds extremely clumsy, even more so if he actually has a weapon in the off hand. Try envisioning a Space Marine with chainsword and bolt pistol:

He shoots at the enemy, enemy closes, SM chops with his chainsword and then shoots 2-3 bolts into his chest. That's semi auto but still forbidden by these rules.

Now normal shooters without melee weapons will of course try to move backwards to get out of harms way, as they have a range advantage and to prevent the enemy to interfere with their shooting, but that doesen't mean they will pause to flip fire mode to single shot, they are likely to fire short bursts whenever they can to ward off the enemy and maybe hit. Losing the bonuses seems appropriate (even the FA one) but firing only a single controlled shot doesen't.

Friend of the Dork said:

In the example though how does he shoot 2-3 bolts into the chest of the enemy just like that? Melee, as expressed in the rules, is theoretically a swirling mass, right, that's where the penalty to shoot into melee comes from. It's supposed to represent that you're busy moving, twisting, dodging, feinting, etc. The closeness of hand to hand is also why the fleeing rule exists. Your example is cinematic in a sense but in most cinematic moments (at least that I can think of) the bullets into the chest usually happen due to the guy being stunned or some other such moment of vulnerability.

But honestly to me this doesn't seem like a realism issue (as the full auto rules aren't all that realistic) it seems like a balance issue. Some indicate they play with the old rule and don't have issues. I can just say from my experience, expecially early on, autopistols became the hand to hand weapon of choice - pop some manstoppers in there and you've got a nice 1d10+2 pen 3 attack up to 12 times. Then that person graduates to a couple of nice s/3/- bolt pistols, and while their attacks are reduced their pen and damage goes up. This player doesn't have to put anything into strength or WS, and they're close in or better than hand to hand than their companion with a sword. And they're still good at range because they've dumped a ton into BS. But as always, YMMV, and people have indicated they've done this for a while without it feeling overpowered. If it works in your game, it works in your game.

From a realism perspective, pistols just plain don't work in hand to hand, let alone on full auto. If they did they'd train soldiers and cops to use them that way unstead of using their weapons as clubs or using their fists, elbows, heads, and everything else. So that, to me, isn't really part of the discussion.

@Gun Kata: Most of the images I recall of gunkata, save for maybe one, don't involve hand to hand combat. To me it feels more like an outrageously high initiative, sruprise rounds, and a ridiculous number of attacks per round outside of autofire. Don't get me wrong, it was a fun movie, but would rest firmly in the hands of ascended assassin types

Face Eater said:

Where is the +20% from? Red Dot Sights only work with single shot so that doesn't work, PB is +30 and it doesn't count in melee so that doesn't work, good pistols don't add to the attack roll (while good melee weapons give +5%), nor do autopistols have the accurate trait, nor would it stack for them anyways.

And:

Face Eater said:

No offense, but a dual power sword wielding assassin should not be compared to a Hecutor/Autopistol paired attacker. They are entirely different power levels - power swords are a late game weapon while you literally can start with Autopistols and Hecutors really aren't that great anyways. If your running around with Manstoppers I 'spose they aren't that bad, but I still would much prefer a good ol' Carnodon myself if we are just speaking of that price and type range.

Ranged weapons can be dropped to Free Action reloads fairly easily so the ammo issue doesn't become a big one (fire selectors + rapid reload for basic weapons, duplus clips + rapid reload for pistols). Melee attacks and pistols are roughly comparable % wise.

ie: Two melee weapons = -10% penalty, +10% for hatred makes it 0, +10% for best quality weapons - the price of a best quality mono sword becomes roughly comparable to many rifles and pistols. Pistols get +0% for dual wielding them, +0% for being in melee, but depending on the shot type it pulls ahead of the +10% that melee gets - +10% tied if they use semi-auto, +20% if they use Full Auto, +20% if they use Red Dot Sights and aim (viable with things like Carnodons or what not, arguable that it could work with Dual Shot), and +30% if they take a step back into PB.

This is combined with the average pistol having, lets say, a range of 30m. It has a much better range of threat than a melee weapon does. Melee weapons get some advantages like Lightning Attack (each attack is counted as a separate one, therefore Dodge must be used for *each attack* as opposed to relying on a single one and DoS like Ranged Attacks), and Blademaster letting them re-roll attacks (though this *only* applies with swords and knives), but pistol users get other advantages as well - like Hip Shot letting them make a Full Action move and a single attack. If we continue to treat Single Attack's as meaning they can make any attack motion (not just Standard Attacks), this means that a pistol user could keep Full Moving toward the target and firing off Full Auto bursts while they get progressively closer (or backing away from the target coming at them), and than finally engage the target at their preferred distance. Hell if you want to be even a larger ****, nothing is stopping you from using one of your pistols to keep up Suppressive Fire while the other Full Auto's away for damage. Bonus if you can get them close enough for PB, but once they charge you you lose the ability to Suppress them.

So largely you can get a character that, as Charmander says, via focusing on just raising their BS instead of WS to hit and STR for damage, can be very effective in both melee, short range, and longer ranged encounters. Its kind of nuts. I'd venture personally I may let a character who is using only one pistol attempt a SA/FA attack in melee, but as soon as you are trying to use two pistols or combine it with lightning attack or any talent that says you "may make one attack" (ie: stuff like hip shoot) you can only make a single shot. Can this screw over ranged characters who get stuck in melee? Sure I guess, but that's like pointing out ranged combat screws over melee characters because they can't stab it. Doesn't mean we should attach rifles to everyone's blades.

As a side note, since hurr durr I cannot edit:

I would posit that the whole "characters may not full auto in melee" is not even that huge of an issue when it comes to ranged characters; the entire approach a melee character has on you gives you successive benefits towards hitting you, and even a 30m ranged pistol can fire up to 120m away. If they are so worried about someone getting close, they have the option to attach Exterminators on damned near anything (does it roll 1d10 for damage? Than it can be attached), and setting someone on Fire is a *GREAT* way to dissuade them from their current course of action; and naturally this means grenades and fire bombs are always effective as well.

Than there is stuff like Suppressive Fire. Suddenly, they probably aren't so keen to charge in anymore. Especially if you want to be full on ****. Two pistols? Full auto pistols? Attach an exterminator, use one to suppress him, than while still pinned keep up Full Auto as long as you can - if he reaches cover, use the exterminator since flamer attacks ignore cover, and as long as he is Pinned he cannot make the Full Action required to even test to act normally or put the fire out.

Rakiel said:

First of all, you quoted me, not Face Eater. Secondly, the two power blades actually were gained by said assassin on the 2nd second scenario we played, an official DH scenario at that. I am sure a lot of Acolytes have gotten hold of these. Thirdly, I think Hecuter's are just fine.

Rakiel said:

No bonus for sights in close combat, sorry. Since we're not allowing auto fire in melee, no bonuses for that either. Melee weapons get all kinds of bonuses from hatreds and frenzy over blade master and so on. Also better quality weapons and balanced weapons do help.

I am saying that if you run it this way, pistols have the edge of being good at range and being useful in close combat. Melee weapons still is a bit more effective if you allow pistols using swift and lightning strike.

And careful about taking a step back into PB - Disengage is a Full Action, taking a step back is a Half Action and gives the enemy a Standard Attack free hack. It's not viable.

tl; dr: pistols + swift/lightning attack makes pistols very useful but isn't op. Not allowing it makes melee weapon wielders overwhelm pistol wielders in cc (if that's what you want...).

Alex

ak-73 said:

Indeed, I know I quoted you. I thought I left a note there incase that fubar'd but evidently I deleted that. Hm. Troublesome, oh well. Essentially I just stole the quote bracket and didn't pay enough attention to the efidm thing, since I haven't dredged into how I have to pull up each individual name. I blame silly forum functions. Really FFG, there are far better forums to use. :<

That aside. Uh, I am assuming Power Blades are Power Swords. If not than they are slightly less sword-y and more blade-y in which case I simply say thats bollocks and wash my hands of it. Power Swords are late game melee gear, if power blades are power swords and they are given in the second scenario they are .. Still late game melee gear. I mean, really, what else are they going to upgrade to? There isn't much in choice once you get that. Just because the group got them early doesn't stop them from being otherwise - nothing stops your GM from giving you all best quality power armor in the first campaign after all.

In the same vein I'll largely ignore the pro/anti hecutor argument, it comes down to personal preference. They just an autopistol with reliable, a slightly smaller clip and the Reliable trait; throw them some manstoppers and they have decent PEN. Carnodons are accurate hand cannons and can use manstoppers as well, but have only 1 PEN under Manstoppers with its default shots. Essentially it comes down to whether you value the accurate trait or full auto, and I value accurate more than full auto, while I assume you are vice versa. It really fundamentally doesn't matter, but I am just saying, it *really* doesn't compare to a Power Sword, assuming Power Blades are anything like that. I kind of wish you had given me the stats or the adventure so I can look at it, because nothing I really can say about that currently - I was just going off the original text saying that he had Power Swords. But oh well, cest la vie.

As for the rest... Wut? There is absolutely nothing stating you may not use sights in close combat. Literally. I just double checked the text entry and errata; sights only require that you make a single shot. The distance is not distinguished, and unlike Accurate, Aim is not a requirement either. As long as you make a single shot, you may take the +10 from RDS.

The entire argument about the bonuses being listed is pointing out what happens *if you allow autofire and what not in melee, it makes pistol users to be on par or above par with melee users*. Thats the entire point of me listing the benefits, because it points out how bloody silly it can get if you *do* allow those to be used in melee, as many are advocating here. Even if you *do not* allow those, they take *no penalty* for firing when in melee. Melee weapons inherently have a -10 penalty if you are dual wielding them, and this is not changed until you hit Ascension and can receive Storm of Blows. Hatred and Best Quality weapons are counted into my bonus listing (for a maximum of +10WS overall, which means its equal to single firing with a RDS). Frenzy can get you up to +20WS, but honestly, while Frenzy is great for early on it becomes pretty crap for late game. You *MUST* make All Out Attack, you *MUST* move towards the target, you *MAY NOT* cancel Frenzy until combat ends. If you get a second talent you can parry while under the effects of Frenzy, or if you get the other talent you can spend your parry to instead make another attack. It turns you into a combat monkey, but it largely becomes too situational because it can very easily get you killed. If you want to include it you may, but I don't know anyone that keeps using Frenzy past early ranks. Speaking of parry, that is all that is increased by Balanced or Defensive weapons, and honestly if you wanted to munch-kin some fun times, all it takes is someone having forearm weapon mounting and they can hold a Defensive weapon the entire time to maintain their Parry bonus. Or if they don't want to sacrifice the range, they may simply Quick-Draw and parry when they need to - as long as its not a 2h weapon than rules support it, though its honestly just daft thematically. Balanced does *not* affect attack rolls.

I'm somewhat confused what you mean when you say you allow pistols to use Swift and Lightning Strike. They may already use it, its included specifically in the RAW. Do you mean that pistols can make attacks in this method? Well, sure, you can do it as an improvised weapon. Do you mean they may make single attacks (ie: three shots with one pistol, one shot with the other)? Well, no, that goes against RAW since it specifically states that you may make three *melee* attacks. It does allow you to make a single attack with a pistol, and usually what that has created an issue over is people interpreting that as meaning a single *shot* or a single *attack* ie: allowing semi/full auto. In which case I can't see why in gods name you would say that melee weapons have it better? Yes, sure, if your saying that a guy with two pistols has Lightning Attack, thats just daft. However if you mean a guy with Lightning Attack, a pistol and a melee weapon you can open some craziness. So he can make three attacks with his sword, and than he can unload Full Auto into the guys chest. If Full Auto is being allowed that's +20BS roll, and exactly how many hits can we pull off from this? Well, assuming we are sticking with just a Pistol why not give him the Hecutor - that's up to *6* hits now, 5 more than he could of possibly even made if he was simply using two melee weapons. So yeah, I'm honestly not really sure which way you're arguing but I believe that covers all facets.

Disengage is a Full Action, you can make an Acrobatics test to make it a Half Action. The Dual-Pistol users tend to be Scum and Assassins, both of who can get access to it. If its another class? Sure, no issue. Standard Attack is not even specified which is why I made a point of that - it simply says you may make a *free attack*. Does this mean you can take damage? Yes. There is no question of that. You also have reactions to use to avoid this. Does this mean that you would now count in PB, which can be important for things like Scatter weapons, since you get +30 from that range, and since your firing single shot you get +10 from RDS? Yeah, it is important, since +40BS can really help that Scatter hit a few more times.

Once more I am still kind of confused about what you mean with the pistols using ss/ls. We know that pistols are allowed to fire in them, the rules specifically state how pistols can be used in conjunction with it. If we are allowing them to be used with ss/ls as Standard Attack style actions we inherently change the way that some of these things function (ie: every ATTACK requires a dodge, as opposed to every degree of success), making it so that pistols are more likely to land a hit - though they should be around the sweet spot of only being able to hit 3/4 times or its theoretically more possible for the pistol user to score more hits otherwise. If you are talking of letting them do semi/full auto it gives them a whole crap ton of hits. If you are talking of not letting them make use of ss/ls, than .. Well, we know the rules flat out say they can.

And, yes, I do kind of believe that melee specialists should overwhelm ranged specialists in combat largely. Its, you know, specialization. A ranged specialist I assume should shoot better than a melee specialist, and vice versa. However even than that's why I made the second post - there is a HELL of a lot the ranged specialist can do to muck with a melee guys day - though I did make an err. I forgot that Pistols cannot use an exterminator. Oh well, fire bombs are still open, bolt weapons can use inferno shells, and I do believe you can simply pistol grip a basic weapon in your other hand and use it all the same. Huzzah.