Brand said:

I really don't know what game you played it definitely wasn't DW!

I really don't know what game you played it definitely wasn't DW!

Are you sure that you're playing it? Or are you just playing a series of scenarios where the Dev gets to safely sit back and kill anything that pops up, leaving everyone else jealous because they don't have a big gun? That's certainly not how my games have gone, but it seems to be how a lot of people think a typical game goes.

I think I would have to back Brand up on this. Now, neither of our Assault Marines bother with anything except pistols, so are not really good ranged combatants. They could, however, choose to wield a lascannon, or a heavy bolter and still be competent at range. They are unlikely to be as good as the Devastator due to less invesment in BS and few useful talents, but they are still a threat at range and not really any worse than any of the other non-Devastator specialties. In close combat, however, the Devastator is next to useless. His main purpose (big guns) is rendered moot, he doesn't have any (or at later Ranks has very few) of the important melee talents (Multiple attacks, Wall of Steel etc). He is a useless chump. The Assault Marine on the other hand will devstate anything he can actually hurt, be it Hordes, Elites or Masters.

Now, in Dark heresy and RT melee focussed characters had to spend several turns running towards the enemy to get advantage of this imbalance, so it wasn't really imbalanced. However, with the jump pack the assault marine can usually find itself in combat in the first turn, or maybe the second (Our Space Wolf Assault marine can make nearly 100m in one turn). This wouldn't be true in the case of a huge flat plain of half a kilometre or more, but those kind of combats rarely if ever happen.

Brand said:

"This is not real life" yadda yadda ydadda, poor argument.

Our discussion, of aiming a wea[pm, is a lot closer to real life than you posit. the rules are in place to represent the ability of our characters to do something a person could do in real life, such as shooting a gun, without the need to describe in every minuitae the process. This universe is based in a universe like ours, therefore physics etc shoudl all work as we know them, with the exception of extra physical sci-fi aspects we don't have now (warp, psykers). If it didn't what would it be like, have you ever known any other physics? Have you witnessed a different physical dimension?

Space Marines may be genetically altered but their genetics doesn't alter physics of our reality, which this game system and intelligent property is based upon. No one can hold a gun steady to prevent 100% muzzle rise, machines can't even do it. Marines don't have eyes in their guts, they can't aim from their hips. I know you've seen pictures, you've probably seen Rambo, those things are wrong, you can't be accurate like that. And accuracy is the specific part of this argument we are discussing. You can't simply ignore or shut down our argument in support of your own simply by saying its not real life. Mentioning pictures or a movie, made by people whove made them based on the rule of cool, or holywoods 80% face time rule is rediculous. This kind of crap is made, generally, by people who have no idea how these things work in real life. If artwork is to be the litmus paper on how a certain reality works, what would aliens think of us if all they saw was the artwork we've made over the years? This is akin to bringing in an unqualified witness, with no training or knowledge in the subject matter, into court to counter the testimony of an expert. We are discussing a rule used to represent an action possible in our own world, not artwork. Inappropriate argument.

40K physics are based on our physics, at least those things not extra-physical. Sci-fi fantastical crap like demons, force fields, and psychic powers have nothing to do with aiming a gun or the physics involved. You can't aim something at another something without looking at both somethings. The testimony of artists and those lacking knowledge in a subject is not an acceptable counter argument.

I make it a point to not respond to replies unless they bring a new vailid argument to light, in the intrest of avoiding flame wars and out of control threads. Just FYI if I don't respond.

Thanks for the support, borithan. I often feel like I'm the only one can see this stuff.

herichimo, listen to me. I'm not saying you can be accurate like that in real life. I have never said that. I never WILL say that. Stop thinking about the real world for a moment.

40k physics borrow what they like from the real world and discard the rest in favor of awesomeness. Have you ever thought about how a real drop pod could possibly work, how it could compensate for both high gravity worlds and low gravity? How orbital bombardments can be terribly inaccurate but drop pods can land perfectly in the middle of a mass of enemies? 40k physics are what the writers/designers need them to be. We're talking about a world with teleporters, after all.

SMs are more like the crazy action heroes than real world soldiers. Ever seen Rambo or some of Scharzenegger's old action flicks. Firing from the hip with perfect accuracy, never worrying about ammo...that's kinda how SMs run.

Look at it this way. The DW book says a SM in cover is exposing an arm and his head. Is that how real soldiers do it?

No. You might get a shot at his head unless you've got an elevated firing position or some way to get through/over that cover. Plus, isn't everyone always saying how they don't want to play a game where all their characters do is cower in cover? No, they want to be badasses, because that's what Space Marines are.

This is how you usually see/hear about Space Marines in combat situations. This is what people like to play. Note the lack of careful aiming going on, especially in that second picture. Looks more like Rambo, doesn't it?

herichimo said:

Arguably, they do - the Primarchs have been said to be as much sorcery as science, their existence owing as much to the Emperor's psychic might and arcane lore as to his mastery of genetics. A Space Marine is part of the legacy of that blending of the pseudomagical and the scientific, and consequently isn't purely a "genetically altered" soldier.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

That's one of the areas I really want to learn more about one day. Most of my knowledge of the 40k universe comes from books and games like DH/DW, so most of it is relatively recent, time-wise. I know the basics about the primarchs, Great Crusade, and Horus Heresy but not a lot of the little details.

Ok thx for all your info.my team was surprisely abmushed by 8 tyranids warriors (shrieks) with the flyer ability.( i'm doimg the mission in the back of the core book).I did not know about these rule erratas.But i think by allowing them to use pistol bolters would be just a good balance enough knowing that they are defending themselves with at least a melee weapon in the other hand.

Rakados said:

Yow. Surprised by 8 Shrieks? Did they survive? If so, how big was your party? I try to never throw more Tyranid Warriors at the group than there are members in the Kill-team.

borithan said:

And this is why players should use team-work and screen the big gun, so the big gun can keep shooting. If the AM's are the type to say 'screw you, we're jet-packing over here to kill stuff and let you get ganked', then it's a player issue, not a rules one.

Personally, I'm fine with the Devs sucking in a combat in the hopefully rare situation of them being in melee... because it shouldn't be happening often. At that point, they pull out the boltpistol and hope, or start using the full-defensive action and parry like hell until the AM can bail them out.

As regards the Primarchs; it's mentioned that they don't need anything as normal as mere organs. Obviously Space Marines are far more bound by the rules of reality, though.

And I'm perfectly fine with tweaking the rules just a bit so that no one has to suffer from being a useless weight pulling the team down at times. People will just have to decide what works best for them.

I personally allow semi-auto fire with handguns in melee, but absolutely no use of basic or heavy weapons in such a situation. However, I don't use the point blank to hit bonus.

Siranui said:

Which is pretty much what I do, too. Since there aren't exactly a lot of full-auto pistols, it works out. The extra shot or two are the key since someone like the Dev can choose to get a slight boost to defense by drawing a Balanced weapon or try to actually do some damage by grabbing a pistol and firing a few shots.

Siranui said:

Team-work isn't just a player issue. It can also be a GM issue. If the GM tries to find ways to undo every piece of clever work you have done as a team then that is also a problem. And truthfully I would regard the Assault MArine as the least team reliant specialty. Devastators rely on others keeping them out of melee, the Apothecary is entirely a team based specialty, and all the other ones cannot really reliably dish out the damage enough to stand on their own (ok, Librarian aside, but at least until Rank 3 he really relies on others soaking up enemies Reactions). Assault Marines can dish out enough damage on their own, are no worse at ranged than most other specialties, and are seeking out melee combat anyway. They can go it alone quite easily.

borithan said:

Which is advantageous to the squad as a whole. Being effective on their own (or, in my group, as a pair of Assault Marines fighting away from the rest of the Kill-Team) diverts enemy forces and allows them to tie up foes quickly and provide the rest of the Kill-Team the opportunity to do what they're best at. If an Assault Marine is doing his job well, the enemy doesn't get into melee with anyone else, because the Assault Marine's freedom to move around outside the rest of the squad allows him to range ahead and interpose himself.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

Ideally, that's the case. But a lot of things can keep that from happening. Surprises happen all the time, and if the team never has their plans go awry then what's the point? That's what things like ambushes are for.

As an example of a mission the team had where a ranged-only character would have been a severe liability, one mission I sent a team on had them going to Castobel to venture into some tunnels to hunt a Trygon. A Devastator with no ability in melee would have no reason to go on that mission. The team certainly couldn't protect him from melee encounters Given the number of close-combat fights that occurred, since enemies could quickly reach the party from side tunnels or by bursting from the ground, someone who couldn't fight in melee would have quickly burned through all of his Fate Points. That wouldn't have been a very fun night for the poor player who had to be babysat by his teammates for six hours.

That's why I allow pistols to be used normally, since no one should have to be babysat in this game. It doesn't make Devastators godly in melee; it just makes them capable, sort of how the AM and everyone else is capable at range.

As for my kill team they were2 pc and 2 npc they survived when the devastator came with a thunder hawk with 2 assult marines ,a captain with a power sword.It was my why of getting the late pc dev in the game and balancing the odds since one npc (techmarine) was kia, the other npc (assult marine) was downed in critical 8 with the leader of the kill team a tactical marine down at crit7 leaving their healer on total defense.i rolled the 2d5s and got 8 was it too much for 4 guys?

Rakados said:

That's all very dependent on the situation. The general guideline is that one Elite-tier enemy is worth 1 DW Space Marine. So, if you have a Kill-team of 4, a balanced fight would have been against 4 Shrikes.

That's a good guideline to use. Just make any modifications necessary as the situation demands. If the Shrikes can be easily spotted while they are still a long way from the team, and the team has good long-range weapons, then it's okay to add a few more Shrikes. If the Shrikes get to jump on the team and start close combat immediately, you'll probably want to use one or two less enemies. It's all dependent on the situation. Just remember that you can always bring in more enemies; it's much easier to add more enemies to a fight the players are easily winning than it is to find a solution if you send out too many foes and the team is getting slaughtered.

borithan said:

BUT...As you said, ranged deadliness depends on ranged gear. And surely the AM will not be geared towards ranged combat. He needs good CQC weapons. He may need additional grenades. And other stuff. So I really doubt he'll have a Heavy Bolter with motion predictor on top of that (not even pointing out how idiotic it would seem). So there you have your difference. If an AM only has a pistol (which he should), then he'll be much less deadly than the others at range. Which is to be expected.

Oh, of course, he can get to melee very fast. But if he does, he'll be the only one to face an angry mob of enemies. And remember that charging is not an advantage. So if your Assault charges first into Genestealers, he'll be quite ******. But if he doesn't, they may reach the team. He'll have to take risks, and do the right thing, because no solution will be a total win for everybody. But he can get himself into some risks for the good of the team.

That's where it gets interesting, doesn't it? And now, nobody gives a sh*t to know if the AM is too strong in melee, or if the Dev sucks at it, etc, etc...

I don't really buy the whole 'the AM is nearly as good as the dev in ranged ocmabt' line. Granted the AM can pick up a gun and blaze away on default, but there's still a lot missing... probably starting with the AM having a decent firearm with a scope and lacking decent BS, along with the inability to negate penalties in the same way as the dev. The Dev is going to end up doing a lot more damage at range still, which is fair enough to my mind. If the AM lacks anything in overall killyness (which it doesn't in my experience), it makes it up with mobility.

The AM can negate the 'class disadvantage' by closing to melee with foes, but I've found that they really struggle at extreme range. Tell the AM that the foe is more than a single move-action away by jet-pack and the bottom lip often comes out! And frankly, the GM should sometimes play to PCs weaknesses sometimes. In the same way that we're all happy to gank Devs in melee, I'm more than happy to put teams in sniper-duels at 600m once in a while!

However, a GM that constantly strives to bone his PCs and catch them at their weak range of engagement regardless of the player's plans and precautions is indeed a bit of an issue. Making the players suffer in an artificial manner should be low on the list of things a GM should be prioritising in a DW game.

Brand said:

Do you mean that you simply allow them to be fired in semi-auto mode, or do you also allow the +30 for PB range?

Because although I'm happy with semi-auto, the +30 for shooting at PB range was just going to far, to my mind.

Do you mean that you simply allow them to be fired in semi-auto mode, or do you also allow the +30 for PB range?

They can be fired in semi- or full-auto modes if they have it. Only some pistols have semi-auto modes and almost none have full auto abilities (only the autopistol, IIRC). The best all-around pistol for close fighting under the weapon stats I use is probably the plasma pistol - two shots and very good damage, so even a shooter has a solid chance at being able to hurt enemies up close. Between innate ability and possible factors like enemy size modifiers, a character focused on shooting should still have a good chance of hitting even without a range bonus, which is why the Dev grabbed a pistol (when I had a Dev in my campaign, at least) while the AM still prefers a melee weapon (which is superior to using pistols if you have the ability to take advantage of its defensive ability and increased damage).

I've gone over and over the ranged vs melee ability subject, and the mechanics can't be any clearer. Melee relies mostly on Talents and weapon craftsmanship for bonuses - of the major sources of to-hit bonuses, only Size will likely ever factor in for a ranged-focused character. Ranged bonuses mostly come from Size, range to target, and the mode of fire used - all of which can benefit an AM as easily as a Dev. Personally, the AM in my game always takes at least a regular bolter because of the solid range and incredibly cheap Req cost. That plus things like Tactical Advance and the difficulty in even hitting an AM hurrying into melee (currently at -40 for the AM in my game) and you've got someone who is a threat when in your face or at the other end of the street.

Stormast said:

As far as decent BS: Yes, it costs more to upgrade than a Devastator, but aside from the Devastators the Assault marines often have as good (or barely any worse) BS as the rest of the party.

As far as decent BS: Yes, it costs more to upgrade than a Devastator, but aside from the Devastators the Assault marines often have as good (or barely any worse) BS as the rest of the party.

My group's AM loves the Bolter + Kraken Rounds approach. Aim + Called Shot = lots of headshots at up to 300 meters with no penalties from range. He can kill things at long ranges (only a -10 penalty at 600 meters) and can quickly get into melee if anything gets close; it often gives him the luxury of fighting melee enemies at range and ranged enemies in melee.

Aim + Called Shot at 300 m ?

OK so they're lucky to see the enemy at that distance, but OK...That makes more or less 40% chance to hit his target with the Called Shot. So impressed right now :|

As for quickly getting in melee...Well granted a good AM can easily get around 100m with his Run action, but I wouldn't call it "quickly get in melee" when the enemy is at 300m and reacts in a clever way. You start the fight at 300m it means most of it will take place at range. If they're melee enemies, that's cool for you, but I'm pretty sure the AM will not be the one who shines the most...The Tac and Dev will have better Ranged Talents, better BS and surely better ranged gear, so I hope they'll outshine him. The Librarian can always be nasty, anytime. Hell, even Apothecaries are encouraged to have a little ranged component.

So sure I'd rather see an AM playing the team and shooting at 300m with Kraken rounds, but saying he's good at it is just ignoring the others will have more or less 10 to 20% more chances to hit the targets...

Aim + Called Shot at 300 m ?

OK so they're lucky to see the enemy at that distance, but OK...That makes more or less 40% chance to hit his target with the Called Shot. So impressed right now :|

It all depends on the enemy. If the chances are low, then usually he'll just open fire. If he has time to aim longer, or the enemy's big, you're looking at more like a 70% chance or so to put a bullet through the enemy's head.

As for quickly getting in melee...Well granted a good AM can easily get around 100m with his Run action, but I wouldn't call it "quickly get in melee" when the enemy is at 300m and reacts in a clever way. You start the fight at 300m it means most of it will take place at range. If they're melee enemies, that's cool for you, but I'm pretty sure the AM will not be the one who shines the most...The Tac and Dev will have better Ranged Talents, better BS and surely better ranged gear, so I hope they'll outshine him. The Librarian can always be nasty, anytime. Hell, even Apothecaries are encouraged to have a little ranged component.

So sure I'd rather see an AM playing the team and shooting at 300m with Kraken rounds, but saying he's good at it is just ignoring the others will have more or less 10 to 20% more chances to hit the targets...

But he can hit. He can kill things. He can be very effective, even if he's not the best. He can win shootouts with Tau at 3, 4, even 500 meters or more.

You can't say that about a typical Devastator or other ranged specialist stuck in melee against a melee opponent.