Hi there,

in preperation for my up an coming campaign I try to look through the books to anticipate the questions my players will have. During that I stumbled upon two things:

1. Can you modify arrows with the mono upgrade? Since the arrowhead is in essence a blade (at least the broad arrowhead commonly used for warfare) I think it should be possible and for the cost of the mono upgrade (40 Throne) you should be able to upgrade one full quiver of arrows (20 arrows cost 1 Throne).

2. In melee combat some weapons have a greater reach than others. Trying to fight someone who wields an eviscerator while using a knife means you have quite a disadvantage. Or if some beast is bigger than you it should be able to hit you before you can hit it. However nowhere in the rules is there even a hint about this. Did any of you ever stumble across this problem? If so what are your solutions for it? Or do you ignore it and play it as is?

My idea would be to grant a bonus to WS.

Hopefully you have some ideas for me!

I would say, yes, you can apply the mono upgrade to an arrow, but not all arrows commonly used in warfare are have an edge. But even if they don't it would still work; the errata makes a special mention that the mono upgrade can be used on weapons like hammers as well, but the method and technology are not the same as for an edged weapon. The thing is, I don't think cultures that still use arrows have the technology to create mono weapons. If however you are on a more advanced world and still want the arrows, I think that a full quiver with mono arrows would cost more than 41 thrones. I would be willing to go as high as 5 arrows for 40 thrones if any of my players asked, any more would be too cheap.

Of all non-throwable melee weapons I only know of one that specify a range "beyond" normal melee and that's the Neural Whip (IH p.163). Upon engaging in melee the distance between two opponents is not fixed, the one with a knife would be likely utilize his arm reach more and to step in when attacking, and the one wielding a great weapon would be likely to keep his arms closer to his body in order to stabilize his grip on his heavy weapon and to step out when attacking because of his weapons reach. But even though this little dance back and forth never stops in such a fight, both are still engaged in melee. At least that's how I see it.

Inquisitor use to have 3 melee ranges, giving bonuses for each, so a spear could keep a swordsman at bay from far away, but would be at a distadvantage if he got in close. I think it it a bit complicated though. But I think maybe more knives should have the fast quality, where 2 handed weapons should give you bonus damage on your strength.

2. In melee combat some weapons have a greater reach than others. Trying to fight someone who wields an eviscerator while using a knife means you have quite a disadvantage. Or if some beast is bigger than you it should be able to hit you before you can hit it. However nowhere in the rules is there even a hint about this. Did any of you ever stumble across this problem? If so what are your solutions for it? Or do you ignore it and play it as is?

Just ignore it - knives already are at a substantial disadvantage due to often dealing less damage than the enemy has armour and toughness.

The thing is, I don't think cultures that still use arrows have the technology to create mono weapons.

Tell that to the Moritat...

If however you are on a more advanced world and still want the arrows, I think that a full quiver with mono arrows would cost more than 41 thrones. I would be willing to go as high as 5 arrows for 40 thrones if any of my players asked, any more would be too cheap.

Why? 20 arrows come up to perhaps 40 shots, assuming you recover half of them every time you shoot them (not exactly a granted assumption, considering how often many acolytes don't have time for peeling the projectiles out of their enemies or go looking for them several hive levels below).

A mono'd sword probably has more surface area and can strike a few blows more than just 40.

Cifer said:

I did say culture, not cult, but yes, the Moritat would be the exception. But a feudal world is otherwise most likely to still use arrows, and they sure don't have advanced enough technology.

Remember that the mono upgrade costs 40 regardless of the size of the weapon; a single-edged knife is just as expensive to upgrade as a dual-edged great sword.

Or just use the cost of Man-Stopper rounds for Mono Arrows, double or triple that if you deem them reusable...

Btw a Moritat Assassin with a composite bow is down right insane:

How about this package:

Moritat Assassin
Basic Weapon Training (Primitive)
Rapid Reload
Mighty Shot

This package is 1200xp minimum and yield the following:

An Assassin which can make an aimed shot every round (see eratta for extra damage) which has the following stats:

BS +10%, 1d10+4 R, Pen 3, Accurate, Tearing...



How about that for Silent Death

How about that for Silent Death

I prefer my silent death a little more long-ranged, but it's nice.

W00KY said:

The thing is, this depends as much on speed as reach. An eviscerator or other two-handed blade is actually rather slow, giving wielders of shorter weapons a chance to rush in and stab them up while they're on the back-swing. This is why in real life you wouldn't get whole units armed with two-handed weapons, in general - a quick thrusting weapon like a spear would be more effective.

So if I were to do it, I'd try to work up some kind of combination of speed and reach, which you might dub superiority or something. But personally I wouldn't bother. Part of the point of WH40K/DH is that it isn't terribly realistic, and as someone else said, the fact that your enormous chainsword can carve straight through armour and toughness while a dagger tends to just bounce off, should probably be enough of an advantage.

2. In melee combat some weapons have a greater reach than others. Trying to fight someone who wields an eviscerator while using a knife means you have quite a disadvantage. Or if some beast is bigger than you it should be able to hit you before you can hit it. However nowhere in the rules is there even a hint about this. Did any of you ever stumble across this problem? If so what are your solutions for it? Or do you ignore it and play it as is?

This is covered by the unwieldy trait. They cant parry you, you can.

This is why in real life you wouldn't get whole units armed with two-handed weapons, in general - a quick thrusting weapon like a spear would be more effective.

Thats actually not the reason at all. WIth a 2 handed sword, to make sure you dont hit the guy next to you, you have to stand 5 feet apart. With a spear/gladius, you can group up, making it so you and the guys next to you can protect each other with a shield, and the guys with the 2 handed swords are essentially fighting 3 people at one time. Also, long spears were developed to counter cavalry charges, because you could plant them in the ground, and the people on the horse would be forced to stop the charge or run straight into them. They usually didnt last past the first kill or two, if you were really lucky.

In a one on one fight, a guy with a knife/short sword will have a VERY hard time beating a guy with a great sword, if both know what they are doing.

On the matter of melee weapon reach, it can most definitely be included in your game and it dose not need to be complected by any stretch of the imagination. As you had suggested, it would simply modify the characters WS. The operative word in that sentence is modify -that is, if you chose to take weapon reach into account, all it will be is another combat modifier (and you should always have a nice heaping of these in any combat your PC's get involved in).

A sword fight on a clear day in a wide open flat field? Boring as hell. A sword fight on top of a moving train in the driving rain? Now that's exciting and memorable! Weapon reach can be treated as just another modifier like driving rain and being on the roof of a moving train. Just remember, the best method I've found for quickly and easily dealing with modifiers is this: for each thing that helps the character, they get a +10 and for each thing that hinders them, they get a -10.

For instance, we find Psam the Psycho Scum with his trusty butcher knife facing off against the mighty Harry Tick and his massive Great Sword. Psam gets initiative. Now the modifiers: he's on top of a moving train -10, it's poring rain (making it hard to see as well as slippery when wet) -10, and Harry's Great Sword has a much greater reach (not to mention looks so much more impressive then Psam's little kitchen knife) -10. Unfortunately, nothing is really in Psam's favor at the moment and he has a -30 if he choses to attack Harry with his knife. Psam asks the GM if he could rush inside Harry's reach to get an advantage and the GM sees nothing wrong with such a request. So, he has Psam's player make an opposed Agl vs Harry's WS test at a -20 (driving rain, on top of a train... the GM decides the weapons won't play enough into this manuver to add any modifiers). Psam manages to pull the maneuver off and gets inside Harry's reach to deliver a few quick stabs. His modifiers are now: on top of a moving train -10, in the poring rain -10, inside Harry's reach +10 for a total of -10 to stab Harry for his attack action. Once it's Harry's turn, he will have a -30 to try and hit Psam (driving rain -10, on top of train -10, crazy knife fighter inside the reach of Great Sword -10).

Most any complex situation can be molded simply by the GM and the modifiers he places on an action. They are your friend and should be used in just about any and all situations. Not only will it make things a bit more interesting, but it should also get your players to thinking of ways they can use their surroundings to their benefit as opposed to standing in one place and hacking roboticaly away at things.

Graver said:

Thanks, that is exactly what I was looking for. Of course I should have been able to come up with it myself as it is quite simple....well, I guess I need more GM experience. Also thanks to all the others who posted in this thread. I will take the advice and make the mono arrows a bit more .