This is something I saw in the book since DH first print and was never adressed on this forums. Please, fix the range rules in the combat section.

Going RAW targets that are beyond two times the listed range of a weapon are considered being at Long Range, which means that a Lasgun suffer the penalties for long range if the target is over 200 meter.

The rules also mention that a targets over three times the listed distance are at extreme range. As a conquence the same lasgun applies extreme range penality at over 300 meters.

There are two problems with this set up. First there's no maximum range, second the long range band is actually pretty small.

Taking the Lasgun from the above example it range bands are short 50/standard 200/ long 300; everything behind long is extreme range.

Elsewhere the long range is defined as being up to 2 times the listed range and extreme as 4 times.

Using our friend the Lasgun this means: short 50 / Standard 100 / Long 200 / extreme 400.

Can you please check and fix this, please?

p 185 defines Extreme as: "Targets that are at a distance of more than three times the range of a character’s weapon"

p120 states: "Weapons cannot be fired at targets more than four times their range distance away."

Are there other pages that state otherwise?

I'm actually perfectly fine with the ranges. Especially since firearms today could be used at those ranges.

Woodclaw said:

H.B.M.C. said:

Maybe it's just me, but it seem to me that the rules in the weapon chapter and the rules in the combat chapter are contradictory.

The weapon chapter states that long range is up to 2 times the listed range and extreme range is between 2 and 4 times the listed range.

The combat chapter stated that long range is beyond 2 times the listed range and extreme range is beyond 3 times the listed range up to X.

It's a lack of proofreading. It's always been 'over' the range. So So long range on a 100m weapon is 201-300m. Extreme being 301m+ etc.

Frankie said:

If you go by the combat chapter yes.

If you go by the equipment chapter a 100m weapon has a long range of 101-200 and an extreme range of 201-400.

Like I said, that's a matter of proofreading.

If it's a matter of proofreading, then it still needs to be fixed, right? But you're suggesting it gets moved to the proofreading section?

I recognize that the previous books had inconsistent definitions of what each range was (especially between the armoury and the combat chapters).

Right now though I see:

Armoury:

Short = < 1/2 listed range

Long = > 2x listed range

Extreme = >3x - 4x listed range

Combat:

Point blank (+30) = < 2m

Short (+10) = <1/2 listed range

Long(-10) = >2x weapon range

Extreme (-30) = >3x weapon range

Now, I'll admit, alot of these things are implied (knowing that long range covers from 2x - 3x listed range takes a bit of reading and logic), but nothing is inconsistent. Max range of a weapon should probably appear in the description of extreme range.

I've stumbled over the same thing and my problem mainly is… what's the "range" value good for?

Right now, it's a number that is used nowhere in the game itself - you only calculate from it, but the number itself has no meaning. It's a little like saying "Your character usually has a starting strength stat somewhere between 10 and 20. Add double the tens digit to melee damage. If you want to take a test on strength, double its value and roll under that with a D100". Would anyone do that? No, strength is the value that is used for a normal test directly. In the same way, I think Range should be not a number you can only work from ("1/2 times range is short range, 2 times range is normal range, 3 times range is long range,…"), but a number with a meaning itself.