from france

i read on the forum some interesting question about material from sword quality to natural armor and caracteristique of heavy stubber. so i read my books agains those of BI and those of FF and i am seriously questioning the pertinence of the primitive qualities most melee weapons have.

Look page 162 of bi inquisitor handbook and the naval shield nor the material nor it 's fabrication is primitive at all. Moreover its second function is to cover some breach in the hull of a space ships. do you really think a space captain use a wooden shiel whitch is primitive for such thing? i don't.

same question for the arbites shield for me. this question lead me to another one does a weapon earn the primitive trait for it's nature like "sword" or it's fabriquation? i think a great sword forge in the scintilla hive for some wealthy costumer shouldn't have the primitive trait. methode material prevent this i think. it 's same for polearms and so on.... it is not like if the sword have created by a blacksmiths in a primitive word. I know not all sword have the mon , power or lathe quality but always give teh primitives traits to them seem a litlle bit too much for me.

there must be a middle ground between this to extreme. i think that a weapon or a equipement with primitive design but modern material and method of craft should not have the primitive quality

Look page 162 of bi inquisitor handbook and the naval shield nor the material nor it 's fabrication is primitive at all. Moreover its second function is to cover some breach in the hull of a space ships. do you really think a space captain use a wooden shiel whitch is primitive for such thing? i don't.

The primitive quality means that a weapon is not designed to breach state of the art armour and an equivalent armour is inadequate protection against state of the art weapons. The shield is considered a primitive weapon - do you think it's supposed to be able to be armourpiercing when I bash someone with it? Note that the cover/armour provided is not primitive.

same question for the arbites shield for me. this question lead me to another one does a weapon earn the primitive trait for it's nature like "sword" or it's fabriquation? i think a great sword forge in the scintilla hive for some wealthy costumer shouldn't have the primitive trait. methode material prevent this i think. it 's same for polearms and so on.... it is not like if the sword have created by a blacksmiths in a primitive word. I know not all sword have the mon , power or lathe quality but always give teh primitives traits to them seem a litlle bit too much for me.

there must be a middle ground between this to extreme. i think that a weapon or a equipment with primitive design but modern material and method of craft should not have the primitive quality

As mentioned above, the primitive quality is earned by weapons that cannot pierce modern armour. You are completely right in assuming that a sword fabricated on Scintilla for a noble is not primitive, and there's a very simple reason for it: It's mono'ed (unless the noble shells out the big bucks to import one from the Lathes or one of the worlds capable of producing power weapons). Mono is not some mystical quality whose secrets are passed down from one ancient master to another (well... actually it is, but those ancient masters engage in mass production...). A mono sword costs half the price of a standard autogun and is only one category more rare.

As Cifer eloquently explained, Primitive is basically a caterogy used to compare to other weapons/armor. Primitive is not necessarily a reflection of the level of technology the weapon was made of. A sword made on a Feral world might indeed be "primitive" in every sense (perhaps made of bronze, for example), while an Imperial world sword could be made of the latest plasteel. They are both in the Primitive category, because they are countered by armor similarly. The Primitive label's sole use, game-rule-wise, is to determine if an armor protects better against that weapon (and vise versa).

A sword (primitive) works better against leather (primitive) than against carapace (not primitive)

A lasgun (not-primitive) works better against leather (primitive) than against carapace (not primitive)

It's not a question of the item's manufacture, but how it relates in effectiveness to an opposed weapon/armor. That's why a weapon that has been Mono'd loses the primitive trait. It could be made out of Bronze on a Feral world, but it's edge has been honed fine enough to even out its effect against even non-primitive armors.

Cifer said:

So by this reasoning getting hit with natural projectiles - like large falling rocks, building collapsing, perhaps even falling - would count as 'primitive damage' doubling armor points?

Rashid ad Din Sinan said:

Core Rulebook p. 210:

"Armour offers no protection against falls"

And, yes, a rock falling on you does primitive damage, but if it's large enough and falls from a great height, it'll probably do serious damage even after the AP-reduction. Just use a system like Table 7-27: Falling Damage: 1d10+x where x is increased by both size of the rock and distance it fell (taking terminal velocity into account of course). Obviously this is not limited to falling rocks, but could just as well be used for collapsing buildings and other things.

Following the logic, yes it would, but practically speaking no amount of armor can really protect you from the force behind all those sources of hurt: Gravity.

Being crushed by a boulder weighing several tons would probably even buckle power armor, and being beneath a ten story structure when it collapses will probably squeeze out your innards like stepping on a kielbasa with a boot. Likewise, plummeting 100 meters will see you reach terminal velocity, and in this case, terminal's double meaning is quite appropriate, especially seeing how armor would only increase your mass and the speed of descent. It's not so much about the armor protecting it's wearer; the armor may very well be perfectly fine after the event. It's occupant will be serious messed up, however.

And this is why Maglev Grace and Pilot (Jetpack) are quite practical advances...

In general, though, completely encasing and rigid armour (pretty much power armour) should be able to lower falling damage at least a bit though, simply by preventing broken bones and twisted joints.

So by this reasoning getting hit with natural projectiles - like large falling rocks, building collapsing, perhaps even falling - would count as 'primitive damage' doubling armor points?

For the above-mentioned reasons, falling would generally be out, but rocks are pretty much the definition of primitive weaponry, aren't they? Collapsing buildings would depend on the material of the building - something that breaks with a lot of very sharp edges would be a prime candidate for non-primitive damage - but in general, they'd be primitive. Of course, unless you're wearing PA, this will likely be a moot point due to the amount of damage taken and the whole "buried alive" business.

Its not the fall that kills you... its the sudden stop.

For the same reason getting hit in the head with a baseball bat can kill you even if it doesn't break the skull... The jarring of the internal organs can cause rupturing or general organ failure.

You can be standing right next to a 2000 pound bomb when it explodes... even if you don't get hit by shrapnel or flame you are likely to die from the concussion... no armor will stop that.

the 8 spider said:

While I do not have the problem you mention with most of the weapons (especially not with swords and their ilk), I do have a personal problem with the "primitive" quality of the musket.

Therefore, I use a "house rule", making the musket (and other rather primitive black powder weapons) "semi-primitive")

- Against primitive armour, treat them as "not primitive"
- Against non-primitive armour, treat them a "primitive"

With this house rule, they fair much better against primitive armour but are still no challenge for good imperial armaplast.

This rule could be useable for melee weapons as well, but you should charge an extra cost for it. Perhaps 15 or 20 Thrones (about half of the "Mono" upgrade).

But again: I do not see anything wrong with the weapons right now

Is there anyway to make primitive armor not primitive due the metals or material they are made of? I ask because some players want medieval looking armor, but not at the cost that they are always primitive.

Kilcannon said:

am pretty if you ask the gm and a skilled TP nicely you can reforge a fudal plate in plasteel and reinforced with shock absorbing material, and it would basicly become a carapace armour.

but some things cant like hides that are natural in its definition.

Its not the fall that kills you... its the sudden stop.

For the same reason getting hit in the head with a baseball bat can kill you even if it doesn't break the skull... The jarring of the internal organs can cause rupturing or general organ failure.

You can be standing right next to a 2000 pound bomb when it explodes... even if you don't get hit by shrapnel or flame you are likely to die from the concussion... no armor will stop that.

No infantry armour we have today, that is. There obviously is protection against sudden deceleration, 2000 pound bombs and other problems of modern life - hitting the ground with 60 km/h is generally more harmful than sitting in a car, strapped into your seatbelt and having an airbag, when it hits a tree at 60km/h, although the forces involved are basically similar. In the same way, you can survive the 2000 pound bomb less than fourty metres away: Just have the 40 metres between you and the bomb consist of reinforced concrete.

So, as there obviously is a way to protect against these dangers, the real question is whether in the 38000 years between now and Dark Heresy, someone found it useful to down-size this protection until it fits into a suit of armour (and whether you happen to have such a suit).

Is there anyway to make primitive armor not primitive due the metals or material they are made of? I ask because some players want medieval looking armor, but not at the cost that they are always primitive.

Most carapace and at least some power armour has a tendency to the medieval anyway.

but some things cant like hides that are natural in its definition.

You could certainly "sew in" a few layers of mesh armour into your hides, though they'd obviously be more hide-covered mesh armour than actual hide armour at that point...

Kilcannon said:

Easy enough, I would think, to have Xeno-mesh appear like medieval chain and carapace appear like feudal plate. So have the players purchase those with the understanding of their appearance appearing more primitive.