I was talking over things with a friend during a game, we were lamenting the performance of a unit of Khorne Berzerkers and generally comparing their value versus other units. In our discussion we thought we might play a house rule where chain axes rended. After a bit of talk we thought for thematic reasons in all cases and for performance reasons in limited cases that perhaps all chain weapons ought to rend?
A few units could use the boost, like Khorne Berzerkers, because of their relative expense when compared to Grey Hunters but also for other units, like Striking Scorpions, Chaos Champions, and even Imperial Guard.
We didn't really think regular assault marines needed a boost though, but figured the game would survive and it would probably help with general balance for everyone else probably. (Chainfists wouldn't get anything else...)
Would it be cool, and or would it be fair if 'chain<whatever>' weapons were all granted rending?
Yea I forgot Ork boyz could have them as well, that'd be pretty cool, I imagine if some of the models, actually had rending attacks with those giant chainsaws they carry!
cgmckenzie wrote:I would like chainswords to do SOMETHING more than a knife, or shovel, or fist. Just seems more logical.
-cgmckenzie
It's really not. Chainweapons, much like their chainsaw counterparts, don't really work to well as melee weapons. The chain, ultimately, does very little. You're essentially hitting people with a stick. Granted, it's a stick that will hurt a hell of a lot if you hold it against someone, but in realistic combat, that won't happen. If you were to hit me with a chainsaw, I would move AWAY from the blade, instead of pushing back into it (as standing still forces you to do... law of reactions and all that) and so the chain wouldn't bite much. Also, the moment that armor is a factor, it is even less effective. Go ahead and buy a steel plate, doesn't have to be very thick. Then hit it with a chainsaw (by the way, don't actually do this, you can very easily kill yourself when the chainsaw breaks).
Now, don't get me wrong, I love me some chainweapons. But, they shouldn't be any more powerful than a regular CCW (if anything they would be less effective). What I could see, would be a -1 LD on any moral checks against units with chainweapons, as they do have the Shock and Awe factor.
Against armor it would still be more helpful than a straight blade. Most blades cut by dragging along the surface to be cut(read: greenskin). Chainsaws do the dragging for you very quickly.
Having been in a couple of fights(both civilian bar brawls and Army close combat), I can see a chainsword being much more useful. Wielding it as a sword, with one hand and swinging, would provide enough force for the teeth to get a bite, even if you are backing away.
I am not expecting to be cleaving off arms or faces like in gears of war, but to instead be dealing out some very punishing wounds, like deep gouges(not merely cuts) and fractured/splintered bones from the teeth.
But, more on topic, I completely forgot about things like chainfists and other bizarre stuff. Not sure how useful it would be in a melee, just because it it welded to the outside of your glove and not being palmed.
cgmckenzie wrote:I would like chainswords to do SOMETHING more than a knife, or shovel, or fist. Just seems more logical.
-cgmckenzie
Thats what we thought.
I'd rather get hit with a club than a chainsaw, really. I have used a real chainsaw, they really bite, trust me. Haven't you guys ever seen a zombie movie, or evil dead, or Gears of War?
cgmckenzie wrote:I would like chainswords to do SOMETHING more than a knife, or shovel, or fist. Just seems more logical.
-cgmckenzie
Thats what we thought.
I'd rather get hit with a club than a chainsaw, really. I have used a real chainsaw, they really bite, trust me. Haven't you guys ever seen a zombie movie, or evil dead, or Gears of War?
...and the common denominator is that all three of your examples aren't RL.
cgmckenzie wrote:I would like chainswords to do SOMETHING more than a knife, or shovel, or fist. Just seems more logical.
-cgmckenzie
Thats what we thought.
I'd rather get hit with a club than a chainsaw, really. I have used a real chainsaw, they really bite, trust me. Haven't you guys ever seen a zombie movie, or evil dead, or Gears of War?
...and the common denominator is that all three of your examples aren't RL.
Neither is 40k... It's pretty much at the opposite end of realistic.
Not so sure about rending, but I would like them to do something slightly more than just be a vanilla CCW.
I would price an upgrade to a rending weapon at 5pts. I like the idea of chain weapons being different like they used to be, but it would give a lot of models a huge boost.
Also, yeah, saying 'it's not like that IRL, so it shouldn't be in 40K' is an argument on shakey ground.
its true. in the current rules chainsaws really bite(pun intended).
they should be a bit better than knives.
i like the 5pt upgrade for the rending. ill try it out to night.
Striking Scorpions with S4 Rending does make them tasty compared to Banshees but I agree that there should be testing to see whether or not making chain weapons wouldnt break the game (to an extent), especially for armies without any chain weapons
I like this idea quite a bit. Being a player from the days of yore, the dissolution of Chain Weapons into the ranks of the generic Close Combat Weapon category has bugged me for a while.
I think in the next chaos friendly game I play versus my buddy I'm going to suggest he make all his chain weapons rend. Since we play space wolves vs chaos a lot and only some of my grey hunters actually have chainswords I bet it will be balance out ok.
Academically of course I realize they cant rewrite the BRB and every codex with chain<whatevers> but I still think this idea would be pretty fun, and possibly not game breaking.
I think the 5 point cost is reasonable. I really see it working well with just a few models in larger squads, like the od ork boy with a chainsaw or a scattering of assault marines in a unit largely armed with bolt pistols and Knives.
I'd like to hear how your games go if any of you try this!
Also, yeah, saying 'it's not like that IRL, so it shouldn't be in 40K' is an argument on shakey ground.
But arguing that they do something IRL that they don't, so they should do so in-game too, is perfectly OK and sacrosanct? Who DARES refute arguments by pointing out that they're wrong?
Come on Walrus get on board, whatever chain fake thingeez do who cares...
Could you think of it only in abstract game terms?
Do you think if they rended in the game it could work? Do you not think it would be an interesting idea for a little bit of spice. Or do you really think they ought to just be another flavor of plain old CC weapon?
Also, yeah, saying 'it's not like that IRL, so it shouldn't be in 40K' is an argument on shakey ground.
But arguing that they do something IRL that they don't, so they should do so in-game too, is perfectly OK and sacrosanct? Who DARES refute arguments by pointing out that they're wrong?
It took me a while to work out what you were saying there, I think I was coming at it from the wrong angle. OK, so it's fair that 'it works IRL' when it doesn't is a worthless argument, you are quite correct. However, 40K is a fiction, and pointing out that it works that way in fiction is, I feel, perfectly valid. If we were going for pure realism, we'd not be fighting with Space Marines and Orks, after all. Also, why shouldn't 40K chain weapons function very differently from present day chainsaws? They have power weapons and such, that have no modern day equivalent.
It's really unnecessary, and the added capability against vehicles would be extremely so, in addition to not making much sense.
In all honesty, Chain weapons are rather silly to begin with, as if they're anything like a chainsaw, they're easily jammed and have to deal with chains snapping (that'd be lovely to have your swords chain snap and fly into your face...) and don't cut through metal well at all, you'll more likely than not destroy the weapon in the process by smacking it against something heavy and metallic.
That, and a chainsaw-slash isn't going to be any more devastating than a solid axe blow or a sword thrust. Messier perhaps in some ways, but that's about it.
Not to mention the huge balance issues of having to recost chain weapons and players having to rip off or add chain weapons to dozens of models.
I was thinking it it might be to much because people could build unit and army structures around it. To many codices as well. There's just to many changes in the general rules and codex balance for a blanket rule like all chain = rend.
How about just for Khorne Berzerhers and Striking Scorpions then, as an option for an extra 5 points a model?
Shrike325 wrote:It's really not. Chainweapons, much like their chainsaw counterparts, don't really work to well as melee weapons.
Yes. yes they do.
Chain weapons occupy a space between normal weapons and power weapons, and are cheap enough to (relatively) mass produce, unlike power weapons. They can cut through light armor and even do some good damage to power armor in the hands of a skilled or lucky user, and cause grievous wounds against its victims.
In fact, Shrike, one can thrust with a chainsword and have it penetrate reliably.
A chainswaw would have an awful time making it through body armor, especially without breaking the chain or jamming up. They are fantasy weapons and little else.
Modern chainsaws would have the problem. The 40k chainswords, not so much. They have bigger teeth, future metal, and(most importantly) are designed for it.
Vaktathi wrote:A chainswaw would have an awful time making it through body armor, especially without breaking the chain or jamming up.
Of course it would.
These are not chainsaws.
These are specially made military-grade weapons designed for the sole purpose of killing their enemies.
These are weapons that are capable of bisecting an Ork in one swift blow, or piercing an Astartes' ribcage to cut into one of their hearts in one thrust. Far above mere modern chainsaws. How they necessarily do this, it is not entirely established. But they do.
Augustus wrote:Come on Walrus get on board, whatever chain fake thingeez do who cares...
Could you think of it only in abstract game terms?
Do you think if they rended in the game it could work? Do you not think it would be an interesting idea for a little bit of spice. Or do you really think they ought to just be another flavor of plain old CC weapon?
I'd be fine with them doing something extra (priced appropriately of course!), I just pointed out that using RL as an argument wasn't very proper and got called out on it. Therefore, I defended myself.
I'd be TOTALLY fine with Khornate chainaxes getting some sort of nice bonus though!
Vaktathi wrote:A chainswaw would have an awful time making it through body armor, especially without breaking the chain or jamming up. They are fantasy weapons and little else.
I didn't think this discussion was about real life chainsaws? or have we moved to the homicidal maniacs ahoy board?
GW fluff regularly has Chainsword wielding soldiers cleaving through armour, ripping up flesh, penetrating vehicle armour etc.
Seems like a good idea to have chainswords as rending weapons.
I'd say it actually makes perfect sense for them to give things Rending. But we'd have to change a few things. Just going on what I know, the Space Marine Assault Squads would have to have a Combat Blade as default, and a Chainsword for a 3 pt upgrade. Vanguard Veterans and could keep their chainswords, though, since most people give them upgrades anyway. Orks would have to differentiate between "Choppas" and "Chain Choppas"
What about Chainfists? Sx2, 2d6 For Armor Penetration, Rending?
While 40k is 1. Fiction and 2. Fantasy Sci Fi, I agree with Melissia
If I went back in time to the age of the first guns, I bet they'll laugh if I described modern day Sniper Rifles to them since to them guns cant reliably shoot at far away targets at a rate x10 faster
I think Chainfists already incorporate the "chain" part of their fist
Your Friend Doctor Robert wrote:I'd say it actually makes perfect sense for them to give things Rending. But we'd have to change a few things. Just going on what I know, the Space Marine Assault Squads would have to have a Combat Blade as default, and a Chainsword for a 3 pt upgrade. Vanguard Veterans and could keep their chainswords, though, since most people give them upgrades anyway. Orks would have to differentiate between "Choppas" and "Chain Choppas"
What about Chainfists? Sx2, 2d6 For Armor Penetration, Rending?
Not really sure what Rending would do for Chainfists, as if either die rolls a 6, even if the other is a 1, it's penetrating any vehicle in the game, and a 6 already wounds and ignores saves on everything anyway (assuming S4 base here, I'm not aware of any chainfists available on anything that's not S4 base)
This is probobly going to cause more grief, but I think the basic premis was to update a unit type/weapon option to increase combat scaryness. Whether a chainweapon is practical or not can be avoided by finding a better equivalent to rend. rend is basically a chance to turn an oponents armour (even vehicle) against them. So how about this. (using noise marines as an example start group, or tau as both use sonic weapons)
"sonic blades" special rule: rending 5pt upgrade
The weapon strikes as a tuning fork, attempting to resonate with the oponants armor, causing it to shake apart, and vibrate, causing massive internal damage. (liquifying organs, blowing out ear drums etc)
To balance a free versiom you could always lower the weapons strength by 1 as it may be more delicate. (str-1, rending, free upgrade)
I apologize for any typos, using a phone on a train
As a blood angels player I personally think this would be insanely overpowered. I always field 3x 10 man assault marine units with sanguinary priests and striking at initiative 5 on the charge with 24-ish (possibly more if I upgrade the priests and sergeants) rending attacks would be nuts. Goodbye termies.
I cant even imagine what basic DC would be like if chainswords had rending or even if it was a 3-5 point upgrade.
1: ALL CURRENT CCWS STAY AS THEY ARE. This will ensure that basic balance is not disrupted.
2: Add Chainsword as an upgrade to all Imperial, non-Daemon Chaos, and Eldar models that have a CCW, for 3 pts apiece for Marines and 2 pts apiece for Humans and Eldar. These replace the basic CCW and grant the Rending USR.
3: Add Chain Axe as an upgrade for Khornate Berserker CCWs, for 6 pts apiece. These replace their CCWs and grant the Rending USR and re-rolls on a to-wound roll of 1.
4: Add Chain-Choppas as an upgrade for Ork Choppas for 4 pts apiece. These replace the Choppas grant the Rending USR and re-rolls the first failed to-wound roll on the charge.
5: Add a Big Chain Choppa for any Ork able to take Big Choppas, for +10 pts apiece. Counts as a Big Choppa which has Rending and re-rolls on to-wound rolls of 1.
6: Add Sparky Choppas for Nobs, Bosses, Meks, and Big Meks for +15 pts apiece. Replaces the Choppa, annd counts as a power weapon.
Hmm 30 points to fully kit out a rhino embarked marine squad with rending sounds a bit cheap imo. Also all guardsmen have CCW so I would be very afraid of +18 bodies in a powerblob with rending. I would tack on a higher cost or only let certain IG model take them (after all it seems that even catachans or death korps basic infantry rely on knifes more than chainswords). Chain Choppas definatly give small ork units like bikers and trukkers an edge but I think the reroll would bump the price up
using GW fluff (the gaunts ghosts series) i would say that having a chain weapon merely count as a CCW is a bit weak, gaunts chain sword carves hime across the first 2.5 books and there is a mention of a world eater cutting a russ open with a chain axe
Yeah khorne bezerkers are really a let down in the current 5th codex. They're amazing against non-dedicated CC units but so is everything else. They can't hold their own against terminators, boyz or anyone that's designed to go CC. Pathetic, I know.
And no don't even try the 80 attacks on a charge argument. You're limited to 10 bezerkers max due to transportation issues.
I just personally use the old codex when khorne chainaxes were a unique weapon that allowed a maximum of a 4+ armor save for 1pts per model. Yes, it rapes the s*** out of elite/heavy infantry.
Why not just use that then? It's already an "official" upgrade.
Also, you can take amazing things like collar of khorne. 2+ save against psychic spells.
Just last week I had a game against a GK terminator squad. 1500. I ran 2 bezerker squads that cost me like 571 points each or something.
The guy initially had a purifier crowe list (which ironically would've done better) but he was like "Oh I didn't know you were taking bezerkers" so he switched his list right before deployment.
BAM! All his terminators had 4+ armor saves in CC. He only had like 1 halberd in every squad so with furious charge, I pretty much slaughtered them.
Also, in old dex you could give a guy a banner of rage for 20 points which gave everyone +1A for one assault phase during anyone's turn. Amazing on a charge when you can get 5 attacks per berzerker.
So yeah, if you want to have fun with khorne via official rules, last edition dex is the way to go. You can find them on ebay for like $10.
Just putting that out there. Also something to consider if you're thinking about houseruling 3 pts for rending per model when khronate chainaxes were just 1pt. And things were more expensive in the old dex too.
Because it modifies the armor save, and that's something that GW seems to not like.
Besides, with the upgrade I noted, they do wounds than normal AND have a chance to rend.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The suggestion to have it merely be ignoring armor on a six instead of a penetration bonus is probably better, although chain axes and big chain choppas should keep rending.
Bah, screw GW. They were the ones that came out with those rules anyway.
You're looking at a chance to get anti-heavy armor capability and increased anti-vehicle for 3 pts versus just super-anti heavy armor for 1pts. (Since you need to roll 6's to rend versus ALL your attacks just forcing 4+ saves)
Now, rerolling 1's to wound is nice but at 6 points would you really take it? That would push modern bezerkers to 26/model. You have to admit, that's really expensive for a I4 CC unit. There is little bonus against vehicles since you get a buttload of attacks at S5 anyway against rear 10. Could be beneficial against walkers though...
In comparison, old bezerkers were 26/model at
WS4, no furious charge, FnP, frags and khornate chainaxes.
Melissia wrote:
4: Add Chain-Choppas as an upgrade for Ork Choppas for 4 pts apiece. These replace the Choppas grant the Rending USR and re-rolls the first failed to-wound roll on the charge.
Unless you want to force Ork players to roll separately for each model, I'd suggest you change this to something else.
The thing that really grinds my gears on this topic is that Imperial Guard Penal Legion knife fighters - using knives, let alone chainswords - have Rending attacks. What the hell, Cruddace.
kadeton wrote:The thing that really grinds my gears on this topic is that Imperial Guard Penal Legion knife fighters - using knives, let alone chainswords - have Rending attacks. What the hell, Cruddace.
Prison life can change you
But that is a good point, why do random criminals with knifes have a better chance at cracking open mega armor or tyranid shells than space marines with chainswords?
kadeton wrote:The thing that really grinds my gears on this topic is that Imperial Guard Penal Legion knife fighters - using knives, let alone chainswords - have Rending attacks. What the hell, Cruddace.
It just struck e as a way to make 'zerker axes more effective without having re-write ccw rules for everyone.
I think there should be an option to upgrade 'zerkers to power weapons (but then you're looking at Vanguard level unit prices) or at least an enhanced chain axe which would grant +1S or Rending etc.
Rather than let chain edged weapons be rending...
How do you feel about forcing the oponent to re roll sucessful armour save rolls?
Slightly more effective vs infantry, the lighter the armour the more scary an enemy witha chainsword/chainaxe is...
cgmckenzie wrote:Against armor it would still be more helpful than a straight blade.
except no, straight swords have a thin piercing point for a very very good reason, you can probably guess what that piercing point is used for.
if anything a basic straight sword should have rending because of that, while a chainsword should have -1 to hit and wound and give +1 to armour saves for being so utterly pathetic as a weapon of war, it would be more effective to turn it off and use it as a club with lots of teeth
The reason the rapier and similar swords were so great during their time was the quality of armor was poor and had those exposed joints made of leather and cloth that a blade could get through. Future armor and even most current armor doesn't have that problem.
Science time!! Take your kevlar vest(I am assuming everybody has a spare) and place it on your test dummy(might have to buy one). Now stab it with your rapier. You will penetrate, but it will be nowhere near as good a cut or penetration as you would expect against leather/cloth/hopes and dreams.
I am working on the assumption that 40k armor is at least at the quality of basic body armor today. It won't stop the blade but it also won't get rended by it. They make anti-stab vest today that will stop a knife, but do bullocks all for bullets/lasers. A chainsaw with oversized teeth, however, will do a massive amount of damage to the kevlar vest and a fair amount to the anti stab vest if used properly. Key there is the oversized teeth. A standard chainsaw will have large problems tackling plates of any kind, not to mention ceramic ballistic plates.
When the weapon is designed to tear through the lowest common denominator of armor, it will do it. In fact, any weapon designed for a singular purpose(long range shooting, armor piercing, light them on fire) will excel at that if it gets out into the field MOST of the time and will pale in comparison in other aspects(rapid shooting, hunting, snuggling).
Stella Cadente wrote:straight swords have a thin piercing point for a very very good reason, you can probably guess what that piercing point is used for.
Imperial chainswords (not necessarily the double sided ones used by chaos) tend to also have a point.
And don't forget, though the basic CCW of the 41st millenium is pretty much the same as the basic CCW from now, the Chain-weapons don't just use normal blades, but instead, I think, monomolecular blades, whirring about with an engine as strong as a diesel trukk's powering them.
That, and with a single blade, you manage to hit a soft spot, you do one hit of damage. With a chainsaw blade, you manage to hit a soft spot, you're hitting it at 200 hits per minute.
Anvildude wrote:And don't forget, though the basic CCW of the 41st millenium is pretty much the same as the basic CCW from now, the Chain-weapons don't just use normal blades, but instead, I think, monomolecular blades, whirring about with an engine as strong as a diesel trukk's powering them.
That, and with a single blade, you manage to hit a soft spot, you do one hit of damage. With a chainsaw blade, you manage to hit a soft spot, you're hitting it at 200 hits per minute.
It could be better said that it makes a soft spot.
cgmckenzie wrote:Against armor it would still be more helpful than a straight blade.
except no, straight swords have a thin piercing point for a very very good reason, you can probably guess what that piercing point is used for.
if anything a basic straight sword should have rending because of that, while a chainsword should have -1 to hit and wound and give +1 to armour saves for being so utterly pathetic as a weapon of war, it would be more effective to turn it off and use it as a club with lots of teeth
The **** man?
A chainsword is not just a chainsaw. A real world chainsaw is bad as a weapon of war because it's a goddamned gardening tool. A chainsword is not: those teeth are way more than just regular chain; they're designed specifically to rip through armor and flesh, whereas a chainsaw is designed to rip through wood. The chainsword is a weapon. The chainsaw is a tool. Do not confuse the two.
Stella Cadente wrote:straight swords have a thin piercing point for a very very good reason, you can probably guess what that piercing point is used for.
Imperial chainswords (not necessarily the double sided ones used by chaos) tend to also have a point.
and that point is moving, fat and covered in a shell, that won't do squat since its got maybe an inch of penetration at the point, at least it would if it wasn't moving, its a slashing weapon, and armour is made to stop slashing better than it is stabbing, heck Vostroyans would technically be almost immune to chainswords, and would probably bugger it up when it hits the chainmail.
Stella Cadente wrote:straight swords have a thin piercing point for a very very good reason, you can probably guess what that piercing point is used for.
Imperial chainswords (not necessarily the double sided ones used by chaos) tend to also have a point.
and that point is moving, fat and covered in a shell
And yet, swordsmen in 40k are using chainswords are able to quickly bisect opponents-- literally cutting tough opponents such as Orks in half-- in one swift blow.
Don't use the models as a basis for judging the width of a chainsword.
Chain edged weapons LOOK like they should be better in assault than CCW.
The RULE of COOL makes them worth an upgrade to thier abilities.IMO.
I think rending is a bit too much...(Concidering the frequency in the game.)
But giving them the ability to allow you to re roll to wound dice, OR force the oponent to re roll thier armour save....Is about where they should be.IMO.
This could simply be a house rule, for those that want chain edged weapons to be a bit better than plain ones.
We just need to agree on the increase in PV for this sort of effect....
If chain swords also rended. I would take units with them in my Eldar army. Since all they do at the moment is give a +1 to STR, plus whatever goes on with those units, I've never bothered to take them.
Scorps have higher strength, and enough attacks to reliably rend pretty often. They have a better save too, and don't need fleet as much, because they have infiltrate and can get stealth, so they are more survuivable too. I'd take scorps over banshees any day if they rended.
I'd been fine with chainswords having or not having rending. Depending on the strength and quality of the chainsword rending and nonrending are possible. However, you'd need to have a pointcost increase for all the guys with chainswords, so its just easier to keep chainswords the way they are.
Chainswords, as has been pointed out before are terrible weapons. The cutting surface is less wide than the sword and you have blocky sides that would actually prevent penetration of the weapon into anything. Secondly, chainsaws and weapons built on the same ideas have issues with the blade binding and sticking in things as soft and unmoving as wood, let alone moving people wearing thick armor.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Melissia wrote:Don't use the models as a basis for judging the width of a chainsword.
Okay, we'll use the art then that shows that same thing. We can also safely assume that the marine is cutting people in half in spite of his weapon not because of it. You can't just ignore basic physics because you don't like them, that's not how analyzing things works.
Norade wrote:Okay, we'll use the art then that shows that same thing. We can also safely assume that the marine is cutting people in half in spite of his weapon not because of it. You can't just ignore basic physics because you don't like them, that's not how analyzing things works.
Who said anything about Marines? Mere humans manage it.
And doing it to creatures far tougher than humans.
Norade wrote:Okay, we'll use the art then that shows that same thing. We can also safely assume that the marine is cutting people in half in spite of his weapon not because of it. You can't just ignore basic physics because you don't like them, that's not how analyzing things works.
Who said anything about Marines? Mere humans manage it.
Which shows that Orks aren't as tough as people think they are. The point is the weapon as shown is frankly slowed beyond all belief and it's for really simple reasons too.
1) If chainsaws made such effective weapons why are they so rarely used in violent crime today with normal knives and guns being favored to such a high degree?
2) Why would you want a weapon where you can potentially snap the chain, bind the blade, blow the motor, or run out of fuel leaving you with a slightly pointy club?
3) Looking at the design of the weapon they have a blocky outer casing which should actually hinder it penetrating anything, this is based on the pictures as well as the models.
4) They can't be stealthy weapons given that they always make more noise than a solid blade.
Orks are toughness 4, same as a Marine, meaning ungodly tough. I'm not sure about their Deathwatch stats(which are usually more accurate) but I bet you it's somewhere in the 40s to 50s.
1: Cost, weight, noise, etc. More importantly, criminals rarely have to cut through anything harder than Kevlar, while a Chainsword is good for cutting through Genestealers,
2: Because it's got much more cutting and ripping power than a real world chainsaw.
3: It'd only hurt penetration with the spine of the blade, which a swordsman can tell you you shouldn't cut with anyway.
4: Which is why stealth troops like SM scouts use regular blades.
Norade wrote:1) If chainsaws made such effective weapons why are they so rarely used in violent crime today with normal knives and guns being favored to such a high degree?
Why are you talking about chainsaws? I thought this was a thread about chainswords.
Norade wrote:2) Why would you want a weapon where you can potentially snap the chain, bind the blade, blow the motor, or run out of fuel leaving you with a slightly pointy club?
Because it's more effective.
Norade wrote:3) Looking at the design of the weapon they have a blocky outer casing
apparently they don't, because they can bisect incredibly tough creatures.
Norade wrote:4) They can't be stealthy weapons given that they always make more noise than a solid blade.
Which is why recon regiments don't use them, duh?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Your Friend Doctor Robert wrote:Orks are toughness 4, same as a Marine, meaning ungodly tough. I'm not sure about their Deathwatch stats(which are usually more accurate) but I bet you it's somewhere in the 40s to 50s.
They have Unnatural Toughness just like Marines, with a toughnesss value ranging between 40 and 50 depending on your source.
Norade wrote:2) Why would you want a weapon where you can potentially snap the chain, bind the blade, blow the motor, or run out of fuel leaving you with a slightly pointy club?
Because it's more effective.
Considering that this is 40,000 years into the future, and the Mechanicum generally likes creating effective cheap things, I'm pretty sure they've found certain kinds of materials (adamintine maybe? Something readily available and powerful.) that would keep this from happening... There are AV 14 Land Raiders afterall, and Power Weapons.
Norade wrote:2) Why would you want a weapon where you can potentially snap the chain, bind the blade, blow the motor, or run out of fuel leaving you with a slightly pointy club?
Because it's more effective.
Considering that this is 40,000 years into the future, and the Mechanicum generally likes creating effective cheap things, I'm pretty sure they've found certain kinds of materials (adamintine maybe? Something readily available and powerful.) that would keep this from happening... There are AV 14 Land Raiders afterall, and Power Weapons.
1: Cost, weight, noise, etc. More importantly, criminals rarely have to cut through anything harder than Kevlar, while a Chainsword is good for cutting through Genestealers,
So all these things are still a factor for a space marine as well. Not to mention that we see normal swords work just fine in the hands of space marines.
2: Because it's got much more cutting and ripping power than a real world chainsaw.
I'm going to call BS on that given that we have 8.5 horsepower commercial chainsaws and even more powerful vehicle mounted chainsaws. The real reason we don't use them is there's no point. A knife kills just as well and you're always better of engaging at range when you can.
3: It'd only hurt penetration with the spine of the blade, which a swordsman can tell you you shouldn't cut with anyway.
No, seeing as the raised edge goes all the way around I'd say that it hurts penetration all over. Also, you want to strike with the last third of the blade for a slashing sword which on all models and pictures still has that wide edge. So try again moron.
4: Which is why stealth troops like SM scouts use regular blades.
At least somebody is willing to use the logical option.
Melissia wrote:Orks are as tough as Marines, if not tougher.
Norade wrote:1) If chainsaws made such effective weapons why are they so rarely used in violent crime today with normal knives and guns being favored to such a high degree?
Why are you talking about chainsaws? I thought this was a thread about chainswords.
A weaponized chainsaw is still a chainsaw. They operate under the same principles and you can't just wave your hands and yell 'the chainswoord is not a chainsawz'. You try pitching the idea of a chainsword to any real life fighting force military or mercenary and see how far you get.
Melissia wrote:
Norade wrote:2) Why would you want a weapon where you can potentially snap the chain, bind the blade, blow the motor, or run out of fuel leaving you with a slightly pointy club?
Because it's more effective.
Care to explain exactly how it's more effective or do you not have an answer because you haven't given this a lick of rational thought?
Melissia wrote:
Norade wrote:3) Looking at the design of the weapon they have a blocky outer casing
apparently they don't, because they can bisect incredibly tough creatures.
You're going to deny the art and models that depict chainswords then?
Melissia wrote:
Norade wrote:4) They can't be stealthy weapons given that they always make more noise than a solid blade.
Which is why recon regiments don't use them, duh?
Ah, so the purpose of the melee weapon, utility and stealth is lost for any unit carrying chainswords over regular knives and seeing as a marine with a normal sword kills just as well in most sources they actually have no advantages.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
grayspark wrote:
Norade wrote:2) Why would you want a weapon where you can potentially snap the chain, bind the blade, blow the motor, or run out of fuel leaving you with a slightly pointy club?
Because it's more effective.
Considering that this is 40,000 years into the future, and the Mechanicum generally likes creating effective cheap things, I'm pretty sure they've found certain kinds of materials (adamintine maybe? Something readily available and powerful.) that would keep this from happening... There are AV 14 Land Raiders afterall, and Power Weapons.
That's wonderful, now take a chainsaw and try to cut through a bar made of the same metal as the teeth. Didn't work? Then try cutting through a softer metal like aluminium. Still didn't work? Try against something like thin sheet metal. Once you're done with that try a saw made for the job along with things like an axe and a heavy mace.
You'll soon find that there are reasons we don't normally use chainsaws versus metal and that knights prefered axes, maces, and hammers against armored foes. If SM used things like cutting saws against their enemies that would make a ton more sense, but sadly GW are morons who struggle to do anything even part way constantly as evidenced in the many ways bolters are depicted in canon.
You really seem to be forgetting that chainswords are not modern chainsaws. Not even close, so trying to use the fact that we don't use chainsaws in the military today as reasoning for chainswords being bad is wrong. And here's why!
1) Chainsaws are designed for cutting through wood. That means small teeth made of a lightweight material moving quickly is good enough. Chainswords are designed to cut through armor and people. Much bigger teeth made of a much stronger material moving slower with more torque.
2)The chain for the chainsword will also be beefed up to prevent jamming/breaking.
3)The soldiers of today can think of a multitude of things that they can carry for the 15-20 lbs that is a chainsaw. Stuff like more water, more ammo, more rations, or clean socks/scivvies. SM really don't have that problem.
4)Melee is by no means there for the stealthy kills. For a tabletop example, think back to an assault that happened in the middle of the table. For a real world example, I have personally gotten into a number of hand to hand situations with insurgents, not because I wanted to keep it quite but because I couldn't level my rifle on them before they closed on me from around a corner.
Comparing the two and using today's chainsaws as the point of measurement is like using the very first man-portable firearms as justification as to why my M4 is ineffective compared to a bow. Or even why the classic spear point knife is better than my more modern Bowie style point knife. Technology changes, and in 40,000 years chainswords could very well be a viable weapon.
cgmckenzie wrote:1) Chainsaws are designed for cutting through wood. That means small teeth made of a lightweight material moving quickly is good enough. Chainswords are designed to cut through armor and people. Much bigger teeth made of a much stronger material moving slower with more torque.
All the torque in the world won't keep you chain from binding against hard materials. There is a reason that nobody in real life would ever develop a chain driven melee weapon. You can also say that the materials they use are stringer, well so is the armor of their enemies not to mention things like a spindly Necron arm made of living metal that is sure to bind your blade.
2)The chain for the chainsword will also be beefed up to prevent jamming/breaking.
A chainsword will still jam 100% more than a static blade.
3)The soldiers of today can think of a multitude of things that they can carry for the 15-20 lbs that is a chainsaw. Stuff like more water, more ammo, more rations, or clean socks/scivvies. SM really don't have that problem.
If the brass thought that a chainsaw would help they would stuff it on them. We've seen how the brass love to stuff extra weight on soldiers.
4)Melee is by no means there for the stealthy kills. For a tabletop example, think back to an assault that happened in the middle of the table. For a real world example, I have personally gotten into a number of hand to hand situations with insurgents, not because I wanted to keep it quite but because I couldn't level my rifle on them before they closed on me from around a corner.
Yes, troops need a melee weapon, no they don't need a slowed chainsword when we've seen that regular weapons work just as well. Not to mention that the melee weapons most soldiers carry are more likely to be used for things other than combat that a chainsword would be useless for. As for melee in the current theater, yes it does happen, but more often people switch to pistols or in rare cases fix bayonets).
Comparing the two and using today's chainsaws as the point of measurement is like using the very first man-portable firearms as justification as to why my M4 is ineffective compared to a bow. Or even why the classic spear point knife is better than my more modern Bowie style point knife. Technology changes, and in 40,000 years chainswords could very well be a viable weapon.
-cgmckenzie
Sorry, but that's just plain BS. Ask anybody today if they think developing a chainsaw weapon for the cases we use melee weapons today would be a smart idea. Then ask them if going back to the days of grenadiers being armed with melee weapons and short range firearms makes any sense. I think I know what your answer will be.
Also, yes, I know that the armor in 40k is supposed to somehow make melee effective again, but you'll always be safer firing back at the enemy from cover rather than rushing in at him where you run the risk of them getting a clear shot off. In the cases where ammo runs out, a las weapon with bayonet would be a more effective use of the weight than a melee weapon.
Augustus wrote:wow a page arguing about a fictitious weapons, ok sure. I didn't intend this thread to be in the fluff section, but now, I think it qualifies.
Thread was worthless anyway, just do a search and see how often the idea gets shot down by everybody...
I think we went over the pointlessness of chain weapons a few pages ago. There are so many other things that are utterly stupid in 40k. Like Titans and any sort of big walking robot thing. The concept is ridiculous. But it still exists, doesn't it? That's because this is 40million years in the future, with space orks and robot skeletons. It's not supposed to be realistic at all! The chainsword is a purely "rule of cool" scenario, and this is a thread discussing introducing rending to chainswords, due to the "rule of cool."
Do you seriously think that in 38,000 years, we won't develop a better chainsaw? Because if you do, you embody every little thing that is horrible about science fiction fans.
loota boy wrote:I think we went over the pointlessness of chain weapons a few pages ago. There are so many other things that are utterly stupid in 40k. Like Titans and any sort of big walking robot thing. The concept is ridiculous. But it still exists, doesn't it? That's because this is 40million years in the future, with space orks and robot skeletons. It's not supposed to be realistic at all! The chainsword is a purely "rule of cool" scenario, and this is a thread discussing introducing rending to chainswords, due to the "rule of cool."
40k =/= to 40 million, protip, the k means thousand moron. Seriously, it's on the cover of the damned rulebook.
As for the thread, yes breaking game balance is cool... Wait... No it isn't.
Do you seriously think that in 38,000 years, we won't develop a better chainsaw? Because if you do, you embody every little thing that is horrible about science fiction fans.
Umm, that pair of sentences doesn't make very much sense. Could you rephrase that using the part of your brain that can produce viable typing?
loota boy wrote:I think we went over the pointlessness of chain weapons a few pages ago. There are so many other things that are utterly stupid in 40k. Like Titans and any sort of big walking robot thing. The concept is ridiculous. But it still exists, doesn't it? That's because this is 40million years in the future, with space orks and robot skeletons. It's not supposed to be realistic at all! The chainsword is a purely "rule of cool" scenario, and this is a thread discussing introducing rending to chainswords, due to the "rule of cool."
40k =/= to 40 million, protip, the k means thousand moron. Seriously, it's on the cover of the damned rulebook.
As for the thread, yes breaking game balance is cool... Wait... No it isn't.
Do you seriously think that in 38,000 years, we won't develop a better chainsaw? Because if you do, you embody every little thing that is horrible about science fiction fans.
Umm, that pair of sentences doesn't make very much sense. Could you rephrase that using the part of your brain that can produce viable typing?
If you think that 38,000 years of progress won't improve a chainsaw one bit, you're stupid. That's as simple as it's going to get. Did you understand that?
I don't mean to come off as rude, but there's really no nice way to say it.
loota boy wrote:I think we went over the pointlessness of chain weapons a few pages ago. There are so many other things that are utterly stupid in 40k. Like Titans and any sort of big walking robot thing. The concept is ridiculous. But it still exists, doesn't it? That's because this is 40million years in the future, with space orks and robot skeletons. It's not supposed to be realistic at all! The chainsword is a purely "rule of cool" scenario, and this is a thread discussing introducing rending to chainswords, due to the "rule of cool."
40k =/= to 40 million, protip, the k means thousand moron. Seriously, it's on the cover of the damned rulebook.
As for the thread, yes breaking game balance is cool... Wait... No it isn't.
Do you seriously think that in 38,000 years, we won't develop a better chainsaw? Because if you do, you embody every little thing that is horrible about science fiction fans.
Umm, that pair of sentences doesn't make very much sense. Could you rephrase that using the part of your brain that can produce viable typing?
Yeah your cool. You can be rude to people anomyously on the internet. You know, a guy can make a few mistakes. And anyway, his post made plenty of sence. And I wasn't at all rude in my post either. You really don't have a reason to be acting like you are. We understand that you don't like the idea. That's fine. I personally don't care for it either, it requires a large amount of overhaul and a bunch of price increases on almost every codex. But you don't see me calling people names over the internet.
loota boy wrote:I think we went over the pointlessness of chain weapons a few pages ago. There are so many other things that are utterly stupid in 40k. Like Titans and any sort of big walking robot thing. The concept is ridiculous. But it still exists, doesn't it? That's because this is 40million years in the future, with space orks and robot skeletons. It's not supposed to be realistic at all! The chainsword is a purely "rule of cool" scenario, and this is a thread discussing introducing rending to chainswords, due to the "rule of cool."
40k =/= to 40 million, protip, the k means thousand moron. Seriously, it's on the cover of the damned rulebook.
As for the thread, yes breaking game balance is cool... Wait... No it isn't.
Do you seriously think that in 38,000 years, we won't develop a better chainsaw? Because if you do, you embody every little thing that is horrible about science fiction fans.
Umm, that pair of sentences doesn't make very much sense. Could you rephrase that using the part of your brain that can produce viable typing?
If you think that 38,000 years of progress won't improve a chainsaw one bit, you're stupid. That's as simple as it's going to get. Did you understand that?
I don't mean to come off as rude, but there's really no nice way to say it.
They can improve chainsaws as much as they damned well please, it won't change the fact that they don't make good weapons. There is a reason that they're used as terror weapons in real life/film and that's because aside from being loud and scary they suck as weapons. They don't do anything that a normal blade doesn't, and frankly a chainsaw with teeth and a chain is going to bind against any armor made of even roughly equal materials. Like is said, try cutting even soft thin metal from the middle with a chainsaw, you'll see the rotating blades push it away making cutting harder. Try putting some metal sheets on a punching bag and cutting that, and I bet you don't get too far and that's a soft punching bag and thin metal to go along with your not military grade chainsaw.
Yeah your cool. You can be rude to people anomyously on the internet. You know, a guy can make a few mistakes. And anyway, his post made plenty of sence. And I wasn't at all rude in my post either. You really don't have a reason to be acting like you are. We understand that you don't like the idea. That's fine. I personally don't care for it either, it requires a large amount of overhaul and a bunch of price increases on almost every codex. But you don't see me calling people names over the internet.
Oh look a thin skinned bitch who doesn't like getting called names in text. As for his post it makes about as much 'sence' as your typing given the awkward double negative. However I don't have to think that the chainsaw will improve as a military weapon in 38,000 years anyway seeing as it hasn't improved as a military weapon in the years since it was developed for its real job of cutting wood quickly. Not to mention that other weapons would get that R&D money so that they had guns effective enough that melee wasn't seen as the go to option when you're outnumbered.
Augustus wrote:wow a page arguing about a fictitious weapons, ok sure. I didn't intend this thread to be in the fluff section, but now, I think it qualifies.
Thread was worthless anyway, just do a search and see how often the idea gets shot down by everybody...
The worthless parts of this thread are your opinions and hostility. Also, you are arguing about made up chainsaws and acting as an authority on weapons, that's actually pretty funny.
Augustus wrote:wow a page arguing about a fictitious weapons, ok sure. I didn't intend this thread to be in the fluff section, but now, I think it qualifies.
Thread was worthless anyway, just do a search and see how often the idea gets shot down by everybody...
The worthless parts of this thread are your opinions and hostility. Also, you are arguing about made up chainsaws and acting as an authority on weapons, that's actually pretty funny.
Meh, it's no less worthless than making yet another chainswords should have rending thread. Besides, nobody has a counter to my arguments besides 'itz the futurez and chinsaz werk differntz'.
Your Friend Doctor Robert wrote:Which is a perfectly valid argument, equally as valid as CHAINSAWZZ ARE STOOPIIIDD!!!!
Can you prove that in any reasonable future that chainsaws would be a decent weapon? I thought not, I can prove that a modern chainsaw makes a terrible weapon.
Norade wrote:
Can you prove that in any reasonable future that chainsaws would be a decent weapon? I thought not, I can prove that a modern chainsaw makes a terrible weapon.
We are talking about chainswords in 40K FLUFF, so if the chainsword is capable of bisecting an ork boy in the fluff, and if the game will not be imbalanced after the interpretation of this, then why not make the game reflect the fluff?
Norade wrote:
Can you prove that in any reasonable future that chainsaws would be a decent weapon? I thought not, I can prove that a modern chainsaw makes a terrible weapon.
We are talking about chainswords in 40K FLUFF, so if the chainsword is capable of bisecting an ork boy in the fluff, and if the game will not be imbalanced after the interpretation of this, then why not make the game reflect the fluff?
Because it would unbalance the game especially for armies that have loads of chainswords versus those that don't. Or are you too dim to notice that?
Oh come on! Your basing your arguments on MODERN DAY chainsaws.
Were talking about Something 38,000 years into the future.
Otherwise known as Sci-fi.
And to stop armies being overpowered, read the beginning of the thread, where you got a basic CCW and upgraded it to a chainsword.
Its supposed to be designed as a CCW. Therefore it works as a CCW. THEY WOULDN'T USE IT IF IT DIDN'T WORK!! A specialised edge, material, engine, shape, size etc., all designed to cause PAIN. Thats all.
I really hope a Moderator shows up and stops people like you, who post about how a chainsword wouldn't actually work, from posting in this thread (if that is even possible). This was a thread asking if giving chainswords/axes etc. a boost, such as rending or re-rolls, and how that would benefit the game, fit the fluff more or help balance certain units.
Oh, and why penal legionaries have rending, look to Lelith Hesperax. That's what insanity/prison/training does to you.
Honestly you've just ignored my post completely.
Modern military forces don't use them because they suck. Current day chainsaws ARE useless in combat (unless you want to scare the gak out of someone). BUT THESE AREN"T CURRENT DAY CHAINSAWS!!!! They don't use them because of weight and their uselessness against anything but bare flesh. But chainswords have been designed to avoid all the problems of using a chainsaw in combat. They are DESIGNED to rip through armour, flesh etc.
"Oh, also, you're too much of a bitch to debate properly so you hope the mods might do something. They can, and possibly will, ban me for calling you a pussy ass bitch, but they won't make me leave the thread because you don't like what I have to say. " What? How do you know that I don't debate "properly"? I'm only hoping that the Mods could help because you are contributing nothing to the thread, nor answering the question asked by the OP.
I must agree with you on the last point however. And no, in fact I do not like chainswords. Nor am i crying to the Mods. I personally think they are a stupid idea, as I would personally much prefer a silent blade. But they look cool, and little kids like them. So therefore GW uses them. More kids = more sales (unfortunately).
If you want to continue arguing this then stop using modern day chainsaws as an example. The only similarity is that they work on the same principle.
Sabet wrote:Honestly you've just ignored my post completely.
Modern military forces don't use them because they suck. Current day chainsaws ARE useless in combat (unless you want to scare the gak out of someone). BUT THESE AREN"T CURRENT DAY CHAINSAWS!!!! They don't use them because of weight and their uselessness against anything but bare flesh. But chainswords have been designed to avoid all the problems of using a chainsaw in combat. They are DESIGNED to rip through armour, flesh etc.
Exactly what design changes can you point out for a chaisword over a normal chainsaw? The blades and chains are stronger, but so is the armor they will often face so that's a wash. They might have stronger engines with lower revs, but we don't have any proof of that and all the scenes of them in cut scenes show them spinning pretty fast so that doesn't seem to be it either. They're a terror weapon, but not much of one.
Things they lack over modern chainsaws are that they have a wide blade that has a case around it that should actually keep them limited to shallow wounds with anything like real physics. They're noisy, heavy, and can run out of power and thus become a fancy club which is fine in the woods against trees, but not on the battlefield.
I cut the rest, because frankly I don't care.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lanrak wrote:Comparing modernday chainsaws to 40ks chain swords .
Is like comparing a modernday laser pointer to 40k lascannon.
Modern day tools work on similar priciples to 40k weapons, but the effects have no bearing on the in game effcts of 40k weapons...
No, it would be like comparing military lasers to lasguns. They both work, but one is still in its infancy as a weapon, though likely to see deployment in the coming decades, and the other is a tried and true weapon which has been refined down to a personal weapons scale.
Chainsaws will never become a real military weapon. Full stop.
No, they don't have a wide blade. They have a mono-molecular blade. And we do have proof of a better engine. I know somewhere it says they are powered by a nuclear reactor. So they won't run out of power anytime soon. They've already lasted a few dozen millennia.
If you don't care, then why are you even posting on this thread?
Sabet wrote:No, they don't have a wide blade. They have a mono-molecular blade. And we do have proof of a better engine. I know somewhere it says they are powered by a nuclear reactor. So they won't run out of power anytime soon. They've already lasted a few dozen millennia.
If you don't care, then why are you even posting on this thread?
Looking at the art and models the blades aren't anything close. Not to mention the fact that these blades would chip and dull swiftly against the armor and other weapons which they would strike by virtue of those materials being of equal hardness and toughness to the blade itself. Not to mention that we see a fairly wide outer casing around the blade itself which would hamper cutting. While they doubtless have a high amount of running time, they can still break down for any number of reasons.
I didn't care about the rest of the post, not the topic in general.
Augustus wrote:wow a page arguing about a fictitious weapons, ok sure. I didn't intend this thread to be in the fluff section, but now, I think it qualifies.
Thread was worthless anyway, just do a search and see how often the idea gets shot down by everybody...
People liked my suggestion
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Norade wrote:Looking at the art and models the blades aren't anything close.
But they aren't necessarily so in the lore given that they can bisect Orks.
They're fat in the art because they're fat in the models. They don't want people buying their stuff for the great art on the cover, then rage-quitting 40K (or rather, being so dissapoint that they don't even start), they want them to get what they see. (Or at least they used to. Now they just use the models themselves on the covers) The models are like that because they're Heroic Scale, and a paper-thin blade on a metal or plastic miniature won't last long. Do you think actual knives and swords are also 3/4 as thick as they are wide? Fluff-wise (what the models represent, not what they are) they're probably about a quarter to an eight of an inch thick, with monomolecular blades and unbreakable chains, and the equivalent of a modern Diesel truck engine powering them.
And the blades aren't like modern-day chainsaw blades. They aren't little chisels, like modern chainsaws, because chisels are designed to be good at cutting wood and moving the scrap out of the way. The teeth on a chainsword are shaped like Canine teeth or predatory claws, or T-rex fangs, they've been designed to be the best shape for cutting through flesh and bone. So instead of a single 'tooth' (a knife or sword) biting into the armour or fleshy bits (that is, either being absorbed by the armour save, or doing a wound) you have 200 'teeth' biting into the flesh whenever they hit. They're not cutting through the armour when you deal an unsaved wound, you're cutting into the exposed head of the sergeant or the bare gut of an Ork Boy. Rending would just be those lucky hits where, if you only had a straight blade, you may have nicked skin, but with a pulling, slicing, shredding chain-blade, you're actually severing an artery.
If the goal is to fix Berzerkers, then allow them to purchase "Chain Axes" (rending close combat weapons).
You run into the same issue here that people are having in the Heiavy Bolter thread: you want to fix one unit (Astartes-carried Heavy Bolters for Tac and Dev squads), but the proposed changes would throw the game balance completely out of whack (especially for IG, an army that can take Heavy Bolters in slowed numbers).
From a realism standpoint, "Chain" weapons are completely idiotic. There are a few hurdles you need to cross: 1) the rarity of hand to hand combat in modern conflicts that would even necessitate carrying a dedicated close combat weapon, 2) a giant electric turkey knife would be a far better use of electricity if your goal was to break things and kill people, as at least you can stab with it, and 3) chains in general are not conducive to hacking things to death. You have to rev it up and then apply pressure, that's how it works. Watch what happens when someone slips with a chainsaw into something designed to STOP chainsaws. Anything that works in this fashion is highly susceptible to binding.
These little weenies can put a hammer through a car door, so it's safe to say that a space marine could do a number on somebody with something like that.
Anyway, I'd say that a few things in the Space Marine Codex would need changing in this case.
Captain and Chapter Master: Unchanged
Tactical and Devastator Squads: Unchanged
Assault Squad: Start with Combat Blades. Add "Each Model may be given a chainsword for +3 Points"
Vanguard Vets: Unchanged
Sternguard Vets: Unchanged
Terminators: Chainfists are Rending
Zip Napalm wrote:We could all go back to 2nd edition where a chainsword was a chainsword and a rock was a rock?
I know what you mean! I remember then when each CC weapon had a statline just like all the guns. Once upon a time CC weapons had strength and armor mods just like missile weapons.
Thats really cool, but thats also a complete rewrite, unless it was a unique entry for berzerkers only... So
Berzerkers Chaos codex
Any Berzerker can exchange their bolt pistol and or CCW for a chainaxe:
Chainaxe 5 points
S5 Rending
It still seems like having rending would be neat and all, but it just seems like there's not a real way to balance it out, even with additional points costs, as you'd look at basic marines costing as much as grey knights and only having rending and not true power weapons
It is a squad leader item; aside from Assault Marines, only Space Marine Sergeants and up can take Chainswords.(Don't mention a single goddamned non-codex chapter)
Also, Loota Boy: If you don't like it, then get out of our topic. We're having an intellectual and hypothetical conversation. Behave like a gentleman.
I think it might be balanced out by making the opponents armour save 1 better, but give chain weapons rending. It's a little harder to get through to the juicy center, but when you do... you really get to see the color of their insides. And I've always pictured chain weapons having a 'safety release' mechanism or something that senses when there's too much pressure, and that tooth gets released rather than snapping/binding. Still attached, but it folds back to stop from snapping. It would also cut into the armor a little each tooth causing a little more damage untill it bites through. Monomolecular adamantine would cut through a lot like that.
I wish 'rending' had stayed a special rule for Nids.
As soon as some moron put it on the SMAC everyone wanted rending on eveything!
Rending is a crap fix for poor rule developement.
Chainsword look cool and therfore by the ONLY rule that applies in 40k , 'the rule of cool.'
They should be better then standard weapons , but not as good as power weapons.
Therfore they could be allowd a re-roll bonus to wound perhaps?
(Did I mention I hate the bloody stupid use of rending? )
I still say this, or something like it, is the best suggestion thus far:
Melissia wrote:My suggestion:
1: ALL CURRENT CCWS STAY AS THEY ARE. This will ensure that basic balance is not disrupted.
2: Add Chainsword as an upgrade to all Imperial, non-Daemon Chaos, and Eldar models that have a CCW, for 3 pts apiece for Marines and 2 pts apiece for Humans and Eldar. These replace the basic CCW and grant the Rending USR.
3: Add Chain Axe as an upgrade for Khornate Berserker CCWs, for 6 pts apiece. These replace their CCWs and grant the Rending USR and re-rolls on a to-wound roll of 1.
4: Add Chain-Choppas as an upgrade for Ork Choppas for 4 pts apiece. These replace the Choppas grant the Rending USR and re-rolls the first failed to-wound roll on the charge.
5: Add a Big Chain Choppa for any Ork able to take Big Choppas, for +10 pts apiece. Counts as a Big Choppa which has Rending and re-rolls on to-wound rolls of 1.
6: Add Sparky Choppas for Nobs, Bosses, Meks, and Big Meks for +15 pts apiece. Replaces the Choppa, annd counts as a power weapon.
That would be pretty nice. I'm not sure if the Orky Chain Choppa should be a whole 4 points, though. Maybe 3 points, so you can get either 'eavy Armour or a Chain Choppa + Stikkbombs on an Ork Boy for 10 points.
Could just say that Furious Charge grants a single re-roll to-wound with Chain Weapons, which would also benefit some other races as well, and would make some sense (seeing as they'd be flailing around in more abandon with a weapon they'd usually be more careful with)
Could just call the Big Chain Choppa a 'Uge Choppa, and in it's description say that it has a Chainblade.
Melissia wrote:I still say this, or something like it, is the best suggestion thus far:
Melissia wrote:My suggestion:
1: ALL CURRENT CCWS STAY AS THEY ARE. This will ensure that basic balance is not disrupted.
2: Add Chainsword as an upgrade to all Imperial, non-Daemon Chaos, and Eldar models that have a CCW, for 3 pts apiece for Marines and 2 pts apiece for Humans and Eldar. These replace the basic CCW and grant the Rending USR.
3: Add Chain Axe as an upgrade for Khornate Berserker CCWs, for 6 pts apiece. These replace their CCWs and grant the Rending USR and re-rolls on a to-wound roll of 1.
4: Add Chain-Choppas as an upgrade for Ork Choppas for 4 pts apiece. These replace the Choppas grant the Rending USR and re-rolls the first failed to-wound roll on the charge.
5: Add a Big Chain Choppa for any Ork able to take Big Choppas, for +10 pts apiece. Counts as a Big Choppa which has Rending and re-rolls on to-wound rolls of 1.
6: Add Sparky Choppas for Nobs, Bosses, Meks, and Big Meks for +15 pts apiece. Replaces the Choppa, annd counts as a power weapon.
Norade: Ad Hominem attacks don't invalidate what you say, they invalidate you. An Ad Hominem attack is resorting to insults because the user can't debate. It's one of those automatic losses, like Godwin's Law.
Melissa: One thing, I think that Space Marine Assault Squads should have Chainswords for free, because they need the buff, and this way we don't have to replace all their models with Combat Blade holding ones.
Your Friend Doctor Robert wrote:Melissa: One thing, I think that Space Marine Assault Squads should have Chainswords for free, because they need the buff, and this way we don't have to replace all their models with Combat Blade holding ones.
I honestly don't think Assault Marines need any buffs, myself. But then, that's from the perspective of Orks and Sisters, whose equivalents (Stormboyz and Seraphim) are a bit overpriced compared to Assault Marines.
I wasn't aware that my post was OTT at all. I just told him it was a game about toy soldiers and he should calm down, and <personal attack on another user deleted; knock it off. Focus your comments on the discussion, not on the other posters, or you will have problems --Janthkin>. I'm not really sure I understand that one. But whatever. I guess i'll just leave this thread then.
