In the previous WH40k RPGs, reliable made a weapon 10% less likely to jam. With DH2 it means the weapon does not jam. That seems a reasonable simplification since it drops a die roll that did nothing most of the time (I've never seen a reliable weapon jam while playing).

But why has FFG decided to change which weapons have reliable ?

I'm interested in both fluff and balance reasons.

First, the weapons that changed:

Weapons that have reliable in DH1 and DH2

- Lasgun

- Stub Revolver

Weapons that had reliable in DH1, but lost it for DH2

- Laspistol
- Long-las

- Shotgun

Weapons that didn't have it in DH1, but gained it for DH2 [/i]

- Autocannon

Why were those weapons changed ?

Why is it that a laspistol isn't reliable, but a revolver or autocannon with more moving parts is ?

For DH1, the only las weapon in the core rulebook that wasn't reliable was the lascannon. Fair enough, the weapons operate on similar principles, so would share some parts of their design (like less moving parts than a bullet weapon). With DH2, the lasgun sits as the odd one out. Why is it reliable while other las weapons aren't ?

What does it even mean for a las weapon to jam ?

For SP/bolt weapons I can easily see the ammo getting jammed somewhere and having to be cleaned out. For melta, plasma and flame weapons they need some valve to keep the fuel in the ammo container but let it out as required, which can seize up and render the container useless without damaging the weapon.

But i just can see how a las weapon could stop working without something being damaged before the jam , while the rules say the only cause of damage from a jam is if you roll badly while trying to clear it.

Firing on overcharge means the weapon is unreliable for the shot. In the fluff, it's quite common to call storm bolters temperamental weapons. So why is the laspistol on overcharge more likely to jam than the temperamental storm bolters ?

The Sniper Rifle has also gained Reliable, which is an odd comparison to the Long-las not having it.

I figure it's for balance reasons, and I can live with that, but I do agree that Las weapons, in general, should be more reliable than weapons with moving parts.

Just posting to agree, I don't have any helpful insights.

The Sniper Rifle has also gained Reliable, which is an odd comparison to the Long-las not having it.

I figure it's for balance reasons, and I can live with that, but I do agree that Las weapons, in general, should be more reliable than weapons with moving parts.

I didn't include the sniper rifle as it didn't share a name with a DH1 weapon.

It it's a balance issue, wouldn't it be more faithful to the fluff to give the weapon reliable and make it worse in other ways ?

I'd like to hear what these balance issues are. Otherwise I'm considering just houseruling all the las weapons to have reliable , while dropping it from the sniper rifle, stub revolver and autocannon.

Speaking of the Autocannon: the only advantages the Heavy Bolter has over the Autocannon are ROF (3 instead of 2) and reload time (when both have decent clips already, and the higher ROF means the heavy bolter runs out dry quicker). This, and how rarely I saw jams in DH1*, make me doubt it's a balance issue.

*I never saw a jam survive a fate point reroll.

Should get the devs second look.

The Sniper Rifle has also gained Reliable, which is an odd comparison to the Long-las not having it.

I figure it's for balance reasons, and I can live with that, but I do agree that Las weapons, in general, should be more reliable than weapons with moving parts.

I didn't include the sniper rifle as it didn't share a name with a DH1 weapon.

It it's a balance issue, wouldn't it be more faithful to the fluff to give the weapon reliable and make it worse in other ways ?

I'd like to hear what these balance issues are. Otherwise I'm considering just houseruling all the las weapons to have reliable , while dropping it from the sniper rifle, stub revolver and autocannon.

Speaking of the Autocannon: the only advantages the Heavy Bolter has over the Autocannon are ROF (3 instead of 2) and reload time (when both have decent clips already, and the higher ROF means the heavy bolter runs out dry quicker). This, and how rarely I saw jams in DH1*, make me doubt it's a balance issue.

*I never saw a jam survive a fate point reroll.

Yes, I agree that we should stick to the fluff and balance the weapons in another way. I just worry that there isn't time for it, and in that case I'd rather have a minor fluff infringement than unbalance the weapons.

The imbalance, at least in the case of Sniper Rifles vs. Long-las, is that the Sniper Rifle is hard to justify taking:

Assuming the long-las is always fired on Overcharge, the two weapons have exactly the same clip size, so let's go with that. It's worth noting, though, that the long-las has the flexibility of being able to lower its damage to extend its ammo supply. The Long-las will gain Single Shot, but with a clip size of 3 and the Accurate quality, you won't be doing double-taps with the Sniper Rifle very often, anyway.

Long-las pros

• Overcharged damage is 1d10+9. Clearly superior to the Sniper Rifle's 2d10. Penetration is the same. Even if we don't Overcharge, 1d10+6 is better than 2d10 on average and then we have a superior clip.
• Reload time is 3 AP vs. the Sniper Rifle's 6 AP. This is huge, with the very limited ammo.
• It's a Basic weapon with a 300m range. That's extremely flexible, compared to the Sniper Rifle that will need Bracing all the time - not great in close combat, which a lot of Dark Heresy ends up being.
• It weighs 5kg vs. the Sniper Rifle's 12kg. That's a big deal for an archetype that probably doesn't want to focus on strength.
• It's completely silent. Again, a very good thing for a sniper.
• It's slightly easier to acquire, and thus slightly easier to get better quality versions and get ammo for.

Sniper Rifle pros:

• Vengeful(8). Definitely a big deal, especially against Elites. An RF chance of 51% vs. the Long-las' 10% is nothing to scoff at. Bear in mind that you will need to set it up, though, and once you've fired your 3 shots you're going to be out of the fight for a while.
• Reliable. With only three bullets in a clip, you don't want to waste ammo. You definitely don't want to spend 6 AP reloading more than you already have to.

It's already difficult to convince people that they should want the Sniper Rifle, unless they're only using it to snipe from a vantage point. If it lost Reliable, it'd be even less appealing.

I'm not saying they can't be balanced. I'm just saying the Sniper Rifle needs something in exchange for passing Reliable to the Long-las, or it'll never be chosen except for very specific purposes (sniping at long distances), and probably not even then since it's so heavy to lug around for a utility weapon.

I'm very much in the "let guns be unbalanced if they are in fluff" camp. Las weapons are so common because they are a good choice, auto weapons are common because they are easy to make. This does not mean sp weapons should not have the different ammo types just that this balance for the sake of balance is not to my taste.

Keep in mind that the sniper rifle also has 100m additional range, and, more importantly, may use special ammunition.

Try Amputator rounds with it to get Felling...for just -20m range. Armour wont help much, also Toughness wont help much - good damage potential, and as said, 51% RF which is the real big deal (also it helps here that it has 2 dices)

If you sacrifice accurate (which currently isnt the big deal anyway), you even could take Dumdum ammunition and increase your chances for RF and average damage further by getting tearing !

As a sniper - I would definitely prefer the sniper rifle currently. Deadly as hell for novice and elites, and still a pain in the ass for masters.

Revolvers, being purely mechanical objects, historically tend to be fairly reliable (semi-automatics now have a comparable reliability factor, but it is still much easier to deal with a dud round in a revolver... just pull the trigger again and the next round should fire).

Now, from what I remember the "shotgun" in DH 1 is double barrelled, breech break, shotgun. Very little to go wrong there (pretty much the only moving parts and the triggers and hammers). However, the shotgun in DH 2 seems to have more in common with the combat shotgun, or maybe the pump-action shotgun. I may be wrong, but I don't remember the combat shotgun getting reliable in DH1. I have to say I cannot remember if the pump action shotgun had it in DH1, as I could see it going either way.

Autocannon? Dunno why that would qualify for reliable at all. I can see the sniper rifle getting reliable if we are presuming a bolt-action weapon or similar.

As to most las weapons losing reliable? Don't know why, but then since they have changed to being more flexible with overcharge maybe they didn't want to make them too appealing over auto weapons (though they have already drastically lowered the ammo capacity for them as well). Don't agree with the change.

I'm very much in the "let guns be unbalanced if they are in fluff" camp...

This is no way to design a game. Options should be as balanced as possible against each other so that there's not an obvious best choice that players are pushed toward.

To answer the OP, DH2 is a different game with different rules, so of course things that at first glance look the same as in DH1 are going to be different. The whole point is to make like items (e.g. laspistol vs. autopistol) comparable in terms of effectiveness while playing differently.

"Unbalanced" Can and should belong to the realm of rarity. This does not mean there's no stronger or weaker weapons, but that weapons of a certain rarity [in certain other games, it's like saying "weapons of a certain magical rating" and so on after all] should all be worth having.

What changes within the rarity is what training a character has, what special abilities they may or may not have for specific weapon categories, whether or not they can carry the **** things, any upgrades or special equipment they may have found that favors [or disfavors, like plasma siphons] specific weapon types, and, of course, the situational circumstances of various weapon types and what they're good at. That's a LOT of stuff to vary without having to toss balance out the window.

This gets us a list of weapons that have different feels, and pick up different fans. A flat 1d10 laspistol is unlikely to harm a human if shot point-blank through their face, so what would be the point in even crafting the billions of them there are? It's a waste of time, money, fuel and lives which could better be spent throwing rocks at the incoming enemies of The Emperor. Useless weaponry gets replaced no matter how backwards a feudal world can be. You don't need a magos to tell you a spear's a better choice than a fire-hardened stick.

Las Weapons aren't just ultra-common because they're cheap - there's powerful ones as well, but the ubiquitous ones are rugged, reliable, and "Good enough" for the majority of purposes the elite hammer of the Imperium will need a weapon for. They're not, after all, the weapon of the lowly PDFs, they're the weapon of the Imperial Guard.

I've suggested some niches for weapons, given many do in fact believe that weapons should have their place. Las weapons should certainly be more resilient to damage and almost immune to jamming. They're also lasers, you'd think they'd be a little harder to dodge than when you toss a grenade [grenades are also notoriously easy to dodge given their blast ratings vs one's agility]. This is certainly less offensively impressive than "Explodes inside of you", but should prove to be a boon when dealing with Eldar [sure he's fast, but at least he can't hop AROUND the incoming shot if it's a laser once you've fired - that's gotta be worth a -10 or so ya think?], or anything that forces you to try and block hits with your gun lest you block it with your face. You don't want to bayonet a plasmagun, but that lasgun could save your life.

So someone with the backing to do more than have what's handed to him on the field could still want to pick a lasgun - perhaps a high-intensity, somewhat rare model not used by the guard due to production being in the six rather than ten digits, but they would have reason to PICK a lasgun - because it is reliable, because it hits reliably, and because perhaps your last one didn't fail you when someone came at you with a chainsword. Choosing the Las would not be 'wrong'.

Speaking of which I'd like to see a significant parry bonus on ranged weapons to make it tempting to risk it for a block instead of dodge... Of course the damage is almost a certainty for it...

I'm very much in the "let guns be unbalanced if they are in fluff" camp...

This is no way to design a game. Options should be as balanced as possible against each other so that there's not an obvious best choice that players are pushed toward.

To answer the OP, DH2 is a different game with different rules, so of course things that at first glance look the same as in DH1 are going to be different. The whole point is to make like items (e.g. laspistol vs. autopistol) comparable in terms of effectiveness while playing differently.

Taken to its logical extreme "Options should be as balanced as possible against each other so that there's not an obvious best choice that players are pushed toward" would need poor and best craftsmanship weapons should have no best choice. I doubt you think this so I think we need to communicate better. Please use MagnusPihls first post for context on my use of balance.

The imbalance, at least in the case of Sniper Rifles vs. Long-las, is that the Sniper Rifle is hard to justify taking:

If you're getting into a combat where the raw damage of the long-las vs sniper rifle matters, would you take a long-las, or would you take some other weapon with a higher ROF ?

If the range comes into it, the members of your party who aren't carrying sniper weapons are going to be annoyed at not having any options.

The long-las being silent is another thing that doesn't fit with the fluff. The crack of a las weapon comes from the las beam heating up the air. That shouldn't be something that can be silenced, unlike the gas coming out a gun barrel. Also, silenced doesn't mean completely silent, just quieter.

Still, keeping reliable on the sniper rifle isn't a problem if the las weapons have it.

Weapon quality is fine. I did say "like-weapons", which best quality vs worst most certainly is not, so your point is moot. Anyway...

The Sniper Rifle has also gained Reliable, which is an odd comparison to the Long-las not having it.

I figure it's for balance reasons, and I can live with that, but I do agree that Las weapons, in general, should be more reliable than weapons with moving parts.

This is an example of 'Makes Sense' game design. It Makes Sense that a weapon with few or no moving parts would be Reliable compared to the relatively complicated mechanisms involved in traditional firearms.

The problem is that it isn't really game design. Assigning rules to things because it feels like they should have them is rather thoughtless. What does giving the Long-las Reliable do to the balance of weapons? How does that affect its average damage? How does it affect the balance compared to other sniper-type weapons? Is one obviously better now?

None of those important questions are even considered in Makes Sense game design. Weapon stats should be set using math to back them up, or at least taken into consideration. Setting things based on what "feels right" or "makes sense" is not game design.

Weapon quality is fine. I did say "like-weapons", which best quality vs worst most certainly is not, so your point is moot. Anyway...

The Sniper Rifle has also gained Reliable, which is an odd comparison to the Long-las not having it.

I figure it's for balance reasons, and I can live with that, but I do agree that Las weapons, in general, should be more reliable than weapons with moving parts.

This is an example of 'Makes Sense' game design. It Makes Sense that a weapon with few or no moving parts would be Reliable compared to the relatively complicated mechanisms involved in traditional firearms.

The problem is that it isn't really game design. Assigning rules to things because it feels like they should have them is rather thoughtless. What does giving the Long-las Reliable do to the balance of weapons? How does that affect its average damage? How does it affect the balance compared to other sniper-type weapons? Is one obviously better now?

None of those important questions are even considered in Makes Sense game design. Weapon stats should be set using math to back them up, or at least taken into consideration. Setting things based on what "feels right" or "makes sense" is not game design.

Absolutely. Game design must come first when designing a game.

That said, I think it's possible to accommodate both design and fluff, at least in this case. Reliable could be moved to Las weapons, and then balance the other weapons around that. It might not (probably won't) be possible in every case in the game, but whereever possible, the fluff should be observed, so long as it isn't detrimental to the game design.

As I said, if I had to choose, I'd pick good design over fluff (at least when fluff concerns are minor, as here). In a perfect world (one without deadlines), I'd like to have my cake and eat it too.

As I said, if I had to choose, I'd pick good design over fluff (at least when fluff concerns are minor, as here). In a perfect world (one without deadlines), I'd like to have my cake and eat it too.

My biggest problem with these forums is that I've seen people post literally the opposite of this, which is just mind-boggling.

As I said, if I had to choose, I'd pick good design over fluff (at least when fluff concerns are minor, as here). In a perfect world (one without deadlines), I'd like to have my cake and eat it too.

My biggest problem with these forums is that I've seen people post literally the opposite of this, which is just mind-boggling.

On behalf of the fluff first crowd I would like to say that breaking immersion is something that should be avoided, that said I'm talking in the general sense and not about any particular item when I say that. If a long las is as reliable as a hellgun I can live with that.

I reject that position and if your immersion is broken by being unable to imagine a make believe laser gun failing to operate I don't really know what to tell you.

I'm very much in the "let guns be unbalanced if they are in fluff" camp. Las weapons are so common because they are a good choice, auto weapons are common because they are easy to make. This does not mean sp weapons should not have the different ammo types just that this balance for the sake of balance is not to my taste .

This. Balance for the sake of balance is terrible.

And any Lasgun or -pistol in a WH40k that doesn't have Reliable better be Poor-quality or whomever wrote the entry was an idiot. Las-weapons being reliable, sturdy pieces of equipment is one of their most defining aspects in virtually all fluff that mentions them.

In many ways, all Las-weaponry are the kalashnikovs of the Imperium. They're easy to repair, easy to customize, almost never breaks, virtually never jams (...has one ever jammed in fluff? How would it even jam, I mean, technically?), and in a pinch, you can recharge your laspacks with solar energy or, if you're desperate, by throwing them into a campfire.

In the previous system, this explicitly had a chance to remove Reliable, however, simply because you had a chance to break the laspack, if memory serves.

Robbing lasweapons of the Reliable quality is ridiculous and is Matt Ward-level of fluff****.

I'm very much in the "let guns be unbalanced if they are in fluff" camp. Las weapons are so common because they are a good choice, auto weapons are common because they are easy to make. This does not mean sp weapons should not have the different ammo types just that this balance for the sake of balance is not to my taste .

This. Balance for the sake of balance is terrible.

And any Lasgun or -pistol in a WH40k that doesn't have Reliable better be Poor-quality or whomever wrote the entry was an idiot. Las-weapons being reliable, sturdy pieces of equipment is one of their most defining aspects in virtually all fluff that mentions them.

In many ways, all Las-weaponry are the kalashnikovs of the Imperium. They're easy to repair, easy to customize, almost never breaks, virtually never jams (...has one ever jammed in fluff? How would it even jam, I mean, technically?), and in a pinch, you can recharge your laspacks with solar energy or, if you're desperate, by throwing them into a campfire.

In the previous system, this explicitly had a chance to remove Reliable, however, simply because you had a chance to break the laspack, if memory serves.

Robbing lasweapons of the Reliable quality is ridiculous and is Matt Ward-level of fluff****.

Couldnt have said it better ;D

How about let's not use the word "****" to describe anything that happens in a silly made up game. **** is a serious thing and using the word to critique the rules for whether a laser gun can jam in a game is absolutely reprehensible.

How about let's not use the word "****" to describe anything that happens in a silly made up game. **** is a serious thing and using the word to critique the rules for whether a laser gun can jam in a game is absolutely reprehensible.

Now, I agree with the general sentiment that you shouldn't make fun of ****. **** is never funny.

Unless it's a clown.

Nevertheless, contextually, I do not think that there's any better way to put it other than "fluffrape", so fluffrape it is.

How about let's not use the word "****" to describe anything that happens in a silly made up game. **** is a serious thing and using the word to critique the rules for whether a laser gun can jam in a game is absolutely reprehensible.

Seriously - sit down - be cool - relax.

No real fluff was harmed, and all fluff mentioned is alright.

How about let's not use the word "****" to describe anything that happens in a silly made up game. **** is a serious thing and using the word to critique the rules for whether a laser gun can jam in a game is absolutely reprehensible.

It took me a moment to make the connection and realize that you were actually reacting to the word "fluffrape".

Now, I agree with the general sentiment that you shouldn't make fun of ****. **** is never funny.

Unless it's a clown.

Nevertheless, contextually, I do not think that there's any better way to put it other than "fluffrape", so fluffrape it is.

Calling it 'fluffrape' is wrong on so many levels. Using the word **** for anything other than what the word actually means normalizes the term and further entrenches **** culture.

Since you clearly have no idea why what you've said is harmful, here's a primer for you: http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Rape_culture

Do some reading and better yourself.

How about let's not use the word "****" to describe anything that happens in a silly made up game. **** is a serious thing and using the word to critique the rules for whether a laser gun can jam in a game is absolutely reprehensible.

It took me a moment to make the connection and realize that you were actually reacting to the word "fluffrape".

Now, I agree with the general sentiment that you shouldn't make fun of ****. **** is never funny.

Unless it's a clown.

Nevertheless, contextually, I do not think that there's any better way to put it other than "fluffrape", so fluffrape it is.

Calling it 'fluffrape' is wrong on so many levels. Using the word **** for anything other than what the word actually means normalizes the term and further entrenches **** culture.

Since you clearly have no idea why what you've said is harmful, here's a primer for you: http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Rape_culture

Do some reading and better yourself.

Haha, oh wow .

"Geek Feminism" .

"**** Culture" .

No. Just no. I can't take you serious. This has to be some elaborate joke. I'm just being trolled to hell and back. People like you cannot possibly exist for real, you're just boogiemen from funny captions on the internet, in-between the funny cats and the Westboro Baptist Church.

Please take your self-insert political agenda and Iamoffendedness elsewhere while the rest of us here in the real world continue to discuss real subjects such as pen'n'paper roleplaying games, Matt Ward's rampant crimes against humanity, and whether or not Adepta Sororitas are celibate or not (they're not).

I'm all for a good discussion on morals or culture or the degenerate nature of modern society, but this isn't the forum for it.