Allowing a pen +2 non-primitive bow would be nice, having some modern kind of accelerator or whatever. Explosive arrows would have to be buffed then though (giving tearing and blast maybe ?).

Unless you houserule that thrown mono knives lose their Pen, I don't see why you'd need an accelerator to replicate the +2 Pen on "mono-tipped arrows" - although it sounds like an option, similar to the "pneumatic" thing that was used as a way of adding Mono to hammers.

As for explosive arrows, Tearing sounds good - it'd be a nice tie-in to bolt rounds and actually bring a bit of system into what looks rather arbitrary now. Maybe add a small raw damage boost, too?

Style left aside, a mono-bow as autogun isnt really possible atm

Muskets maybe, but not a bow. Allowing a pen +2 non-primitive bow would be nice, having some modern kind of accelerator or whatever. Explosive arrows would have to be buffed then though (giving tearing and blast maybe ?).

I don't have a problem with mono arrows, quarrels or thrown knives.

Monobullets though

I disagree with explosive arrows in general, but if you must, just strap a krak grenade to the tip of your arrow. Quick and easy.

Style left aside, a mono-bow as autogun isnt really possible atm

Muskets maybe, but not a bow. Allowing a pen +2 non-primitive bow would be nice, having some modern kind of accelerator or whatever. Explosive arrows would have to be buffed then though (giving tearing and blast maybe ?).

I don't have a problem with mono arrows, quarrels or thrown knives.

Monobullets though

I disagree with explosive arrows in general, but if you must, just strap a krak grenade to the tip of your arrow. Quick and easy.

Far too heavy to be effective.

Allowing a pen +2 non-primitive bow would be nice, having some modern kind of accelerator or whatever. Explosive arrows would have to be buffed then though (giving tearing and blast maybe ?).

Unless you houserule that thrown mono knives lose their Pen, I don't see why you'd need an accelerator to replicate the +2 Pen on "mono-tipped arrows" - although it sounds like an option, similar to the "pneumatic" thing that was used as a way of adding Mono to hammers.

As for explosive arrows, Tearing sounds good - it'd be a nice tie-in to bolt rounds and actually bring a bit of system into what looks rather arbitrary now. Maybe add a small raw damage boost, too?

Instead of a damage boost, I'd add Blast (1) to tearing.

If you also allow mono-arrows, you have 1d10, Pen 2, non-primitive with tearing & explosive

In DH1, the Mono upgrade costs 40 Gelt. That's an expensive quiver of arrows you have there.

What am I missing here? Aren't Man-stoppers analogous to Mono?

Thats why I say, the bow should be made mono and not the arrows.

Thats why I say, the bow should be made mono and not the arrows.

So basically the DH special snowflake bow (like Elf Bow in WHFRP1)?

I dunno. It would be nice for the players, but technically it could be the reason why it isn't really done except in edge cases, for people who have too much money to spend.

That being said, and tying into the following quote, one could also make "mono-arrows" cheaper by reasoning that prepping a small dagger-like point isn't as expensive as treating the entire length of a large blade. Maybe you can even slip a bit on quality because the arrow is meant to only be used once, meaning that no-one cares if the arrow would irraviably lose its Mono trait after the 3rd or 4th shot, whereas "true" mono blades are expected to persist.

What am I missing here? Aren't Man-stoppers analogous to Mono?

Quite so - honestly, a lot of needless confusion would be solved just by renaming "Manstoppers", especially given that Dum-dums are the true manstoppers. There's a reason bullets are called that way, and increased armour penetration isn't it.

Here's a thought:

- rename Manstoppers to Mono Shot

- make Mono arrows as expensive as the old Manstopper rounds?

DID SOMEONE SAY "MONO ARROWS"?!?!?!?!"?!?

So back a mission in my campaign, and Lynata can testify to this, Mockingbird (The clever code name for the player's cell) was strolling in a feudal world city without even bothering to wear disguises or alter their appearance. So naturally, the secessionists operating in the city easily saw them and send their trio of bowmen after them. They managed to take a few (head)shots while the acolytes were in a crowded plaza (bows are silent wouldn't ya know) before people panicked with the subsequent gunshots from the PCs, but not before having a few people in the crits.

Anyways, long story short, they learned the value of disguises and being discreet. Second, They fear bows as they fear the Tech-Priest with grenades. Third, those arrows were simply made of 'modern' Imperial material, and while not having any pen value, where still considered non-primitive. So that's might be a way to get 'better' arrows (as your modern hunting arrows are far more sharp than your medieval arrows, not to mention the numerous types of arrow heads they invented to speed up bleeding, slice veins and pierce through tough animal hide.)

Mono arrows? Personally, that's a bit stretching it, but it can always be done yes; perhaps a single mono upgrade for a full quiver?

EDIT: also, check out the compound bow; 40m range, 1d10+2, Pen 1 AND accurate to booth; who needs another bow after you get that one (Basic bow being 30m, 1d10, reliable; both are primitive as well)

Didn't you use Horde rules for those guys, actually? I remember dying in a single round of combat.

I also still blame faulty intelligence for not alerting us to the actual threat level. We didn't don any disguise because we simply didn't expect that randomly arriving travellers in assorted Imperial clothes would be fired at on sight, simply because it was an Imperial world where people in these clothes could be expected on the streets. It's not like we were brandishing Inquisitorial insignia or anything.

Still have fond memories of all the grenade-fumbles, though. Had quite a few laughs there.

Ammo in Dark Heresy was X Thrones per clip, right? In that case, the upgrade applying to an entire quiver would make sense!

Nope; I used surprise, with aiming, accurate weapons, deadeye shot for a -10 to called shot instead of -20 and shooting at the unprotected head- oh and a bonus for being on the third floor of a building while you were in the streets. hence why they had something around a 75% chance to hit.

Well, you were informed that a rogue element was disguised and active on the planet where the Inquisitor suddenly disappeared without any warning; perhaps I wasn't too direct with the "be discreet" credo, but I figured you would at least try something; and do recall the team back then; Sororitas with a jetpack and power armour, Tech-Priest, Psyker with force scythe, and assassin in a bodysuit..sorta stands out on a world where everyone is a dirty peasant covered in ****..

sorta stands out on a world where everyone is a dirty peasant covered in ****..

10 meters from the local spaceport?

No worries, though; unfortunately I did not enjoy the class mechanics of the BoM SoB a lot (part of my dislike for that book), compared to my experience with the older IH version, so I was not overly attached to that character. My only regret is that I never got to try out that fancy jump pack, for that one's rules actually looked fairly interesting!

Actually, the spaceport was out at sea, about an hour or two boat ride to reach the city you were in.

Yeah the SoB on BoM was a bit off. While it was a nice addition, it was a little too..secular an archetype to be part of a flexible acolyte cell, especially one with a vain assassin, a TP and a gentle old-man Psyker..who ended up gaining 38 000 Thrones while gambling around town gathering info.

I don't recall that boat ride (or rather, I recall it from a different campaign) - but then again, I don't have absolute trust in my own memory.

My criticism on the BoM SoB had nothing to do with the character per se, though, it just felt less like a warrior than the IH version, presumably because the poor advancement scheme was supposed to balance the ridiculously high-tiered starter gear. I really think Black Industries had the right idea with a Novice that started out low, but had better opportunities to grow. Both mechanically, as well as in terms of character development.

For our Cell specifically, I suppose it was a poorly chosen character (not in the least because of the Psyker); a decision born out of my intense interest at giving this new book and this new class a try. It didn't pay off, but of course that's only in hindsight now. I have a feeling my Assassin would've fared better, especially given the many disguises and aliases collected over time - then again, the mindwipe we considered after the "contamination" would've probably caused the character to be a bit creepy as opposed to the old cheerful self.

Ah, good old times...

Yeah, the boat ride was a one-liner thing, as it went calmly; thought I think someone got sick along the way as well..but I'm not too sure at this time...

Well, with what, 200-300 xp per sessions, and the lowest skill bieng around that for the SoB, advancement was going to be way slower than your "normal" acolyte where the average skill/talent is 100-200XP, I saw it more that people would have fallen bakc on the top notch gear instead of skills/talents to get that character working. Thougth even when you were diguised as a flapper girl, the char proved to be competent..but yet again, that was thanks to characteristics rather than skills..

At least you (unfortunately) managed to dodge the whole "Tracking the Gloom Haunt" thing they're doing right now, getting into fire fights and threatning journalists..that jetpack would have been good for those roof top chases.

I dunno why you want Mono-bullets, it sound rather stupid, besides, you already got manstoppers and other kinds.

But you, of course, can have mono on primitive weapons and ammo. Like arrows and bolts. Maybe more advanced ammo in muskets, but this will actually cost you. And if you really need some special ammo, you can have a look in the other books, there's plenty to choose from.

Ammo in Dark Heresy was X Thrones per clip, right? In that case, the upgrade applying to an entire quiver would make sense!

Nope, it was X thrones per round, though really common types of ammo likes arrows, bullets, and shotgun shells were 1 throne for 20 rounds. Compared to, say, a bolt shell, which was 16 thrones for 1 round.

I also don't see why people still want mono bullets. Manstoppers are armor-piercing rounds and fill that niche quite nicely. Unless you're trying to make a shotgun shell that fires razor wire or something, but I think that would wreck the barrel of whatever it's fired from.

Eldar Shuriken Weaponry is basically firing mono bullets. There

I also don't see why people still want mono bullets. Manstoppers are armor-piercing rounds and fill that niche quite nicely.

Exactly, but I suppose a lot of people (like me) got confused by the term. Manstoppers in real life have nothing whatsoever to do with armour penetration but stopping power , hence the name, and Dum dums are just a type of manstoppers - however, in DH (and Inquisitor, which started the error) they are two different types of ammo. Given the mechanical effect, one could easily say that Manstoppers = Mono bullets.

Oh, and thanks for the reminder about ammo cost; I'm on vacation and do not have any of the books with me.

Unless you're trying to make a shotgun shell that fires razor wire or something, but I think that would wreck the barrel of whatever it's fired from.

Don't give people ideas, else some smart guy ends up attempting to re-create the two-stage mechanic of bolt rounds with a shotgun shell of comparable calibre, just swapping the rocket motor for an explosive payload that catapults a set of wire forward, triggering after the projectile has cleared the barrel.

You know how some of those Tech-Priests and weaponmongers are.

I also don't see why people still want mono bullets. Manstoppers are armor-piercing rounds and fill that niche quite nicely.

Exactly, but I suppose a lot of people (like me) got confused by the term. Manstoppers in real life have nothing whatsoever to do with armour penetration but stopping power , hence the name, and Dum dums are just a type of manstoppers - however, in DH (and Inquisitor, which started the error) they are two different types of ammo. Given the mechanical effect, one could easily say that Manstoppers = Mono bullets.

Oh, and thanks for the reminder about ammo cost; I'm on vacation and do not have any of the books with me.

Then call them Armor-Piercing rounds or Penetrators (hurr hurr) instead. Clips in real life are not detachable box magazines, despite what the (often inaccurate) game terminology tells you.

Also, fun fact: Dum-dums are named after an arms factory in India.

Unless you're trying to make a shotgun shell that fires razor wire or something, but I think that would wreck the barrel of whatever it's fired from.

Don't give people ideas, else some smart guy ends up attempting to re-create the two-stage mechanic of bolt rounds with a shotgun shell of comparable calibre, just swapping the rocket motor for an explosive payload that catapults a set of wire forward, triggering after the projectile has cleared the barrel.

You know how some of those Tech-Priests and weaponmongers are.

Again, I point to the Bloodshard shells used by the Blood Angels. And since some quasi-hereteks managed to make bolt shells that can be fired from a shotgun...

Then call them Armor-Piercing rounds or Penetrators (hurr hurr) instead.

We could, but we could also call them Mono bullets and avoid people posting questions like the one that led to this topic.

It's kind of a two birds with one stone deal, the way I see it.

Either way, of course it's something that each group needs to decide for themselves.

I disagree with explosive arrows in general, but if you must, just strap a krak grenade to the tip of your arrow. Quick and easy.

Far too heavy to be effective.

Absolutely. Most explosive arrow designs are.

What am I missing here? Aren't Man-stoppers analogous to Mono?

I believe that was suggested on the first page. Second post IIRC. Why is this silly topic still around?

Thats why I say, the bow should be made mono and not the arrows.

So basically the DH special snowflake bow (like Elf Bow in WHFRP1)?

Clearly - because that's just silly.

That being said, and tying into the following quote, one could also make "mono-arrows" cheaper by reasoning that prepping a small dagger-like point isn't as expensive as treating the entire length of a large blade. Maybe you can even slip a bit on quality because the arrow is meant to only be used once, meaning that no-one cares if the arrow would irraviably lose its Mono trait after the 3rd or 4th shot, whereas "true" mono blades are expected to persist.

... and now you made me miss Shadowrun and Dikote ^TM

What am I missing here? Aren't Man-stoppers analogous to Mono?

I believe that was suggested on the first page. Second post IIRC. Why is this silly topic still around?

Because people don't read the previous pages?