Please submit your proofreading suggestions for this chapter here.

Pg 125, Table 6-9 Ranged Weapon, under Solid projectile

Shotgun (Pump-Action) Basic 30m S/–/– 1d10+4 I 0 8 2 Full Scatter 5kg Average
Shotgun Basic 30m S/–/– 1d10+4 I 0 8 2 Full Scatter 5kg Average

I supposed the second Shotgun is the 2 shells capacity double-barrel shotgun as the previous editions.

Pg 125, Table 6-9 Ranged Weapon, under Las Weapons

Triplex Pattern Lasgun Basic 100m S/– /– 1d10+3 E 0 60 Full — 4.5kg Rare

With the description on page 126, the information given comparred to the stats seems to be in contradiction (no reliable quality, no other shooting mode apart from S/-/-)

The description for Bullpup Lasgun is named 'Bullpup' instead of 'Bullpup Lasgun'.

I saw no line on pages 158 - 159 for the Baneblade's Co-axial Autocannon, even though they were mentioned specifically under the Co-axial descriptions earlier in the chapter

Good God you're right! The Co-Ax Autocannon profile is missing. How on Earth did I manage that?

I shall say 'Praise be to the Omnissah' 50 times in penance for my sins…

BYE

Blind Grenade does 2d10X damage, I think it shouldn't do any damage…

Oh, and bring back Variable Settings for Lasguns…

The Eviscerator has the "Razor Sharp" quality, but this is not described in the section for Weapon Special Qualities

Darth Smeg said:

I think they added the info in the last paragraph of the weapon's description (it should be at the top of the follow page) just that it doesnT' cleary states that is the razor sharp quality (that +1 to crit damage)

Pg 127 Hot-shot Laspistol & Lasgun (Lucius Pattern) description.

Line 2 "Hellpistol." should be "Hot-shot Laspistol."

Line 5 "Hellguns…" should be "Hot-shot Lasguns…" .

In addition. Pg 54, Ogryn fluff, reference is made to a "Ripper Saw" but no mention is made in the Armoury, is this intentional?

I think the B.O.N.E. Head Implant should be in the Main Book

Pg 125 Table 6-9

Battle Cannon , Demolisher Cannon and Vanquisher Battle Cannons having a Clip size makes no sense at all, let alone a clip of 12 for the Battle Cannon .

Considering a tank cannon is an artillery gun mounted in a turret that is put on top of a tank chassis, (more or less) they should have the Clip size of 1 as per the Earthshaker Cannon (and in line with all sensibility).

If these changes are made, an appropriate change to reload time, I think, would be sensible as well. Say, a Full Action to reload each of the cannons?

Durandal7 said:

I thought that clip size was the shell amount in the tanks' munition locker..which in itself, is rather a low number.

I agree. The Battlecannon/Demolisher Cannon/Vanquisher Cannon/Baneblade Cannon should not have clips. They should be Clip 1; Reload 1/2 Action.

BYE

Pg 131 Minefield Round description. How large an area does it cover with sub-munitions?

H.B.M.C. said:

I'm not sure 1/2 Action is reasonable, I have been lead to believe it takes somewhere in the region of 4-6 seconds to reload a tank gun.

Regarding their total capacity, Braddoc, I'll check my Imperial Armour book, but I think it lies somewhere around the 12-18 mark. Tank shells are big!

You're right!
It should be a Full Action. Then Rapid Reload has a point when inside a tank, and doesn't make reloads into a Free Action ( ).

BYE

i guess they might be for 40k, I just looked over the M1 Abrams tank; seems like they're hauling 42 rounds for their main cannon…of course keeping in mind that in 40k everything is BIGGER, I still find 12 shells a bit on the low, I would double it at least.

A WW2 Sherman Tank carried 55 or 90 shells.
According to the Lexicanum it carries 40 Shells

H.B.M.C. said:

Gadzooks! I hadn't thought of that! It works so well it's almost as though we planned it!….On purpose!….

Braddoc, Santiago; Having consulted Imperial Armour Vol 1: Imperial Guard and Imperial Navy, I must concur that the loadout for a Leman Russ Battle Tank is indeed, 40 shells.

All righty then.

Page 118, Table 6–5: Random Issue Gear

96–100 A case of 24 servings of High Provender. High Provender is not listed anywhere.

Page 136, under ' Modified Stock'

When a character takes an Aim Action with weapons
modi?ed in this way, he receives an additional +2 bonus on
a Half Action or an additional +4 bonus for a Full Action.

I suppose it is either more damage, or +20/+40 aiming bonus.

Tanks are either enormous size or in case of Baneblade massive but Table 5-6 Size from Traits chapter give size 6 - enormous to Sentinels and size 7 - massive to battle tanks. So tell me please which one is correct (altough I think that Table 5-6 Size makes more sense).

*looks at Table 5-6*

Hmm… that is interesting.

The vehicle sizes in each entry are based upon comparisons or extrapolations from other vehicle rules (ie. Rites of Battle's Land Raider is Enormous). You could make the argument that those vehicle sizes are too small (and therefore so to are the Only War sizes).

Not sure how to approach this one. Massive for the Russ (and variants), Chimera, Hellhound and Basilisk would make sense. Not so sure on the +50 for the Baneblade though.

BYE

In table 6-2, ceasefire gives +30 to checks, but is higher up then the conditions that give +10 and +20.

Pg 146

Mantrap, Line 5. "..and rendering him0 Immobilized."

Man-Portable Lascannon – Page 125

Extremely Rare? That means no Regiment can add it to their standard gear (the limit is Very Rare). That doesn’t gel with established Guard norms. Lascannons aren’t all that rare in comparison to most other heavy weapons. Autocannons, Heavy Bolters, Lascannons, Mortars and Missile Launchers are the norm.

It’s harder for a Guard unit to get a Lascannon than it is for them to get a Multi-Melta or Plasma Cannon (both on page 125 as well). That doesn’t make any sense.

Meltaguns - Page 125

The Meltagun is listed as "Extremely Rare". This doesn't make a lot of sense. Plasma Guns are meant to be the rare ones, not Meltaguns. And why would a Multi-Melta be more common (comparatively) than a Meltagun? I think this is a copy/paste error, as the Inferno Pistol above is Extremely Rare (as it should be).

Ogryn Ripper Gun – Page 125

Ogryn Ripper Guns are as big as Marines. There’s no way a Guardsman should be able to use one without serious training. They should be Heavy Weapons and weigh more than a Heavy Stubber. They really should be 40kg (and Ogryn should have Bulging Biceps as standard to counter-act the new Heavy Weapon status).

Omnissian Axe – Page 132

The damage value is incongruent with previous versions of the Omnissian Axe. Moreover, it does less damage than a Power Sword, and it’s a two-handed weapon. I’d suggest 1d10+7 Pen 7.

BYE