Hello there, this is my first question here. By what I´ve checked, it hasn´t been asked yet.

By whats on page 142 of the rulebook weapons with the flame characteristic automatically hit and go directly to the dodge phase. If not dodged and damaged by the weapon a second agility test must be done or catch flames and sufer fire damage as described in page 260. If the victim catches on fire they must pass a Willpower test to do anything but run and scream.

The discussion that we have with my fellow players is this and let me portray it with an example. First lets say that Brother Ignius has a Initiative of 10 and his chaos warrior enemy a Initiative of 8. Brother Ignius fires first per Initiative over the infidel with his heavy flamer. The Chaos warrior is hit and takes damage, unable to dodge. The question is: The infidel should test agility to se if he catches fire before doing anything else? Or after taking damage he takes his turn as per initiative and in the beggining of his next turn takes the second agility test to see if he catches on fire? By whats written o page 260 "At the begining of each round after the first in wich a character is exposed to the same source of flames he must make a challenging agility test". And thus the confussion.

Could you give an example of when the two tests are made on different situations? If brother ignius has more initiative or if he has less initiative. It seems to me that if the chaos warrior has been hit and taken damage it would be illogical for the chaos warrior to hit back and aftewards in his turn, catch on fire (after testing ag) and then runing on panic (after checking Wp).

If you could please answer this a lot would be clarified.

Thanks in advance!

Brother Ignius said:

In situations in which you are in a burning area, you may have to test to avoid catching on fire each turn, since the fire is always present.

When hit by a flame weapon after failling to dodge the hit you must make an immediate Ag roll or catch fire.

It is made right after the first and if failled you take fire damage, and will take it as long as you are on fire.

So first you shoot at someone with a flamer: does he dodge if yes nothing happens, if no take damage from flamer.

Then if hit make an other Ag roll if it is a succes then nothing more happens, if not take fire damage.

Next round if the area touch by the flamer is on fire all character in the area must take an Ag roll or take fire damage.

Thank you very much for clarifing that point.

The Emperor protects!

You seem to be forgetting another Ag test.

When someone attacks with a flame weapon everyone in the target area gets to roll vs Ag. If successful he is not hit. (this is instead of the attack roll)
After that he gets to dodge if he is near enough to the edge of the fire blast.

If both tests fail he is hit and damage is dealt. If that happens (not matter if he takes any wounds) he has to roll vs AG to see if he catches on fire.

Does a space marine (or other individual) need to worry if they're in environmentally sealed armour and the flames do not get through their armour and so can't damage them? Would they worry about being caught on fire and taking the fatigue loss and damage?

Basically it seems that Space Marines have almost nothing to worry about when it comes to most flamers. And I don't have a problem with that, I just want to be sure of it.

qcipher said:

Yes, Armor conducts heat. Also note that your armor is no longer environmentally sealed if you take damage that exceeds the armour's AP, which a flame weapon is likely to do the first time it hits you.

bogi_khaosa said:

If it exceeds it and gets through I can certainly see it. Conducting heat...possibly I can see that, but the environmental seal should protect against that wouldn't it? They can survive in space which can have enormous heat when facing or exposed to a star even at great distances, light minutes away.

qcipher said:

When it says they can survive in space I don't think it means anywhere in space. If they're near a sun they are going to die.

Astartes armour is regularly enviromentally compromised by laspistols. It's really not that tough.

A DH flamer (I'll use this as the standard for a civilian flamer) does 1d10+4 damage Pen 3. That's going to environmentally breach Astartes armour most of the times it hits.

bogi_khaosa said:

I didn't say anywhere in space, but even light minutes away (such as our astronoauts orbitting earth) there is great heat facing the sun.

But sticking to the question at hand. If the flame doesn't get through the armour in the first place from just their environmentally sealed armour alone, should the character even worry about being caught on fire, taking additional damage or effects? Because if we say yes, then that presumably means even Terminator armour (which was based off of designs intended to allow workers to survive in Plasma Reactors) would not fully protect its wearer from a flamer, of any kind.

And again, if the flame actually damages the character by getting through Armour and TB I have no problems using the RAW. It's when the armour is sealed and powerful enough to shrug off the flame is where I'm concerned.

qcipher said:

I'm pretty sure the armour the Terminator suits are based on was not supposed to protect people working in plasma reactors WHEN THEY WERE ON. Not in the reactor core.

No armour in RAW is strong enough to keep flame from environmentally compromising it. To EC armour you have to exceed its AP, not AP + TB. Terminator armour has AP 14; a civie flamer (using DH) can easily compromise that. Change with it if you wish.

That depends on how you read the Damaging Power Armour section. There is no mention of Penetration in that section so the 1d10+4 can not exceed the 14 AP of Terminator Armour. (I also read it that the battle brother taking damage means that they have to actualy take damage, but once the total wounds lost exceeds the AP then the armour is breached. This means that a las pistol doesnt kill space marines that happen to be fighting in a vacuum or other hostile environment.)

Nathiel said:

I don't think that makes sense. The durability of armor doesn't depend on the toughness of the person wearing it.

bogi_khaosa said:

Yeah i meant to say just the AP, not the AP+TB, thanks.

I have to change that, and I'm not a big rule changer. That just makes no sense if the flame doesn't penetrate the armour by a combination of its damage and penetration that it can catch the person on fire and cause them any worries. This only would apply to environmentally sealed armour though. If the damage/penetration got throut the AP, then the wearer has to worry, even if their TB soaks it.

But simply put, for me, a suit that can survive entry into a planet's atmosphere and exposure to solar heat/radiation without an atmosphere to absorb it, should have no problem with a flamer that isn't intense enough to penetrate it.

What bothers me about the flame rules is that somebody with a TB of 10 (which is a lot of space marines) can be on fire and take no wounds. Something is wrong here. They should do a inimum of 1 wound per round, or something.

bogi_khaosa said:

Astartes flamers do 1D10+4 to someone they set on fire. Not just 1D10 like normal flamers. Perhaps that helps.

Umbranus said:

I know, but my problem is with fire in general, not just Astartes. If you set a blue whale, which probably has a TB of 10 or so, on fire, it's going to feel it. (Assuming it's out of the water at the time. )

Feeling it and being significantly injured by it are two different things.

Kshatriya said:

Given sufficient time, it is going to be consumed by it. As rules stand now, an Astartes with a TB 10 can sit there, on fire, all day long. He will pass out from fatigue, but he will be lying there unconscious, on fire, all day long.

bogi_khaosa said:

You could use the RF rules, which would mean that about every 10 rounds it's gonna do an additional 1D10 which would me enough for most enemies to be injured.

Or in the case of the whale add some vulnarability to fire (not too far fetched for a water living animal) but I see what you mean.