A character is considered engaged in melee if adjacent to his target.

Point Blank range is 2m or less.

How are you not adjacent to someone at that distance? So, how do you adjudicate whether a target is able to get the PB range bonus? Do people have to be in physical contact, pushing up against each other, to be adjacent?

Why do chainswords have such low penetration? It's not like they do much damage (yes they have tearing). Against even the Inevitable GUards in the starting adventure, a chainsword has to do at least 6 damage to hit (1 point). So unless you have (assuming there are any) a talent that bolsters melee damage, such weapons can quckly become redundant.

signoftheserpent said:

I wonder why has the point blank range been reduced from 3m into 2m.

Chainswords are upgradeable with mono, gaining additional +2 to penetration. Also getting a best quality chain weapon is easier than getting a common quality power weapon. Also Venom drip upgrade is doable on chain weapons.

Did you consider the strength bonus into the damage too?

I'll recheck my book, but I believe that a weapon must be Primative to take Mono.

A chainsword does 1d10+3 Pen 3. The Pen 3 drops the guardsman's flak armor to 1 and the +3 takes care of his TB… So you have 1d10+SB Tearing. If you can't muster a roll ofa 2 on two dice, then you need to hang up your big boy Power Armor and go home.

Even a regular human can drop a guardsman on a good roll.

Fenrisnorth said:

Unless it got errata'd, not in BC.

There's a reason chainswords are a starting equipment for combat-oriented Heretics - on the power level of BC, they aren't very good.

Now, that's not to say they don't have a niche. With Mono and a Tox-Dispenser, they become quite formidable, and you can buy Flesh Render to spam a lot of Zealous Hatreds. The last thing also makes them good for CSM characters - with their Strength, damage is much less of an issue, and the extra status effects from ZH are nice.

Well, I looked back to Dark Heresy and it doesn't even need to be Primative there either, so I'm the fool today. I do disagree that the chainsword is useless. After all, you do have an Astartes SB behind it (All the Humans except te psyker have access to power weapons) and you do drop a human on the roll of a two unless they are in heavy armor. Would I want to fight a Carnifex with a Chainsword? Not really, But if I had to, I'd certainly get that Mono on it and make sure I had Swift/Lightning attack and Flesh Render.

That having been said, It is beginning gear, so yes, it isn't top of the line. But it isn't crazily gimped, either.

Fenrisnorth said:

DH Errata

ItsUncertainWho said:

I second this. In the fluff chain weapons usually have mono edged teeth already. More than that, they really weren't the best of melee weapons either. They are a medium between the strength of a Power Weapon and the ease of manufacture of a more primitive weapon.

Curses, I looked in BC, and the errata for that, then in DH, but I stopped before looking at DH's errata. Foolish, foolish me. Unfortunately, they haven't tacked it into BC yet.

Fenrisnorth said:

It's actually not that bad. With the right talents from DW you can lightning attack a Carnifex from full to 0 with a Chain Sword in one attack action.

It takes a hell of a roll, but it's doable.

With an 18TB alone and triple digits of HP, that is indeed a hell of a roll. Is this based off Blood Frenzy, Flesh Tearer and praying to stack Righteous Furies?

ItsUncertainWho said:

Fenrisnorth said:

I'd presume so. I'd also assume that's without the RF errata that DW got, getting it from "reroll and add all weapon damage" to "roll an extra d10".

Man, Righteous Fury was seriously busted in DW prior to the errata. One game our Devastator one-shot a Daemon Prince, another one a Hive Tyrant.

Morangias said:

Both right. Add in an 80 SB, along with all the appropriate combat feats (Crushing blow etc). I joined the game late so the character was handed to my by the GM. He sounded surprised when I got one in one action. Truth be told, I was surprised as well.

If you still have the sheet, I would like to see that, that's just amazing to me.

Don't know if I still have it, but the GM semi-frequents these forums so maybe he'll notice and share it.

Fenrisnorth said:

I simply do not understand how they can not carry established errata that predates even RT (iirc) through subsequent games.

There is nothing about not being able to upgrade Chainswords with Mono in BC, at all.

PnPgamer said:

I had practised combat with various permutations of antagonists all week in preparation to run it. But I missed that. Takes a while to learn all this: I have to keep reminding the players they have Infamy/Fate points to spend. It gpes right over them.

signoftheserpent said:

You misunderstand me, sir. There is nothing in RAW that prevents you from applying Mono to a chainsword in BC. There is nothing in DH RAW either until you look in the errata.

The RT Core book says Mono only applies to Primative weapons.

This is a case of a hasty copy-paste. If you insist, I will submit this to Tim H. and we will get a final say on this.

bit off-topic:

What does RAW stand for?

Fenrisnorth said:

PnPgamer said: