Watched a YouTube video yesterday, where An Actual Doctor discusses 40K weapons. And part of the topic was the impact of a regular human attempting to fire an Astartes Bolter.
He pegged it at 75 Cal, and explained the recoil would do horrific damage. But, what he didn’t include in his comments is how a Bolt round actual works. Rather than just being a particularly large shell with enough charge to propel the Bolt round to the target, it’s a two stage system. The initial charge propels it out the barrel, then the rocket motor kicks in to accelerate the round to the target.
Now, him not mentioning it doesn’t mean he didn’t account for it. And that’s where my question comes in.
Based on real world weapon physics, and that two stage system, can we work out the likely recoil? I appreciate I’ve not included an initial muzzle velocity, so those who know such things may have to guesstimate somewhat.
Oh, and here’s the video I watched for your viewing pleasure.
Without an initial velocity it's impossible to make anything but a wild finger-in-the-air guess.
40mm grenade launchers are very common, and substantially larger than .75cal. So clearly, if the velocity is low enough it can be fired by a human without that much difficulty.
But not only is the initial velocity of the bolter unknown, but so is the weight of the boltshell. Especially as it uses futuristic scifi metals it's basically impossible to guesstimate this either.
All we have to go on is 'the lore'. But the lore is so wildly inconsistent you get dramatically different accounts even at different points of the same book, let alone a consistent picture across the entire 'canon' with the different authors and everything.
So TLR I don't think any attempt that logically concluding how a bolter would work is remotely possible. Nothing short of just making gak up.
We are fairly consistently told in lore though that astartes weapons are too big and powerful and awesome for humans to wield. But then there's also multiple instances of humans picking up and using astartes weaponary, so... it depends on the story the author wants to tell.
Any estimation of recoil is going to require a ton of assumptions on things like muzzle velocity, materials science, fictional chemistry etc that even ball parking it is going to be an exercise in educated guesswork
Having said that I'll take a stab at it after work
For me, this is just one of the long running inconsistencies in the background. Its kind of up there with autoguns being described as using caseless ammo, but there usually an awful lot of brass depicted in artwork
RT doesn't particularly go into the mechanics of a bolter, but the 2nd ed Wargear book explicitly says bolts come out of the barrel at "low velocity" implying minimal recoil.
Wargear describes the heavy bolter as having a more powerful propellant and explosive charge, befitting a support weapon version, but increased recoil from that is likely to be at least partly countered by the additional mass of the weapon.
3rd ed notes the existence of low velocity solid slug types for covert work, but doesn't go into the initial recoil bit.
The Munitorum Manual is somewhat self-contradictory as it explicitly describes bolt guns as generating "enormous recoil", but then goes on to use the older description of the bolt coming out of the muzzle under low velocity. Its also funny that in the Manual, bolt pistols are said to fire exactly the same round as a bolt gun (and they are interchangeable), but the issue of recoil just doesn't come up, even though bolt pistols are clearly lighter weapons.
The only other place I have seen any decent description of bi-propellant ammo in fiction is from Iain Banks' Against a Dark Background with the entertainingly named FrintArms 10mm Hand Cannon. It only gets a few mentions, and I don't have the time just now to dig out the specific references and see if it goes into its operation, but I remember the description as "bang, raaaark, pop"
As kirotheavenger says, we have no way of telling.
Calibre alone is not helpful- .75 calibre was a common calibre for muskets for hundreds of years. These certainly kicked, especially if loaded well with an individually cast ball fitted to the gun and a leather wad to minimise windage, but they were obviously manageable. Now, gunpowder burns a lot slower than modern propellants, so a big part of this is the slower acceleration of the bullet, but it gives an example of how calibre is only part of the story.
The other aspect is we have zero idea how much space magic technology goes into a typical boltgun, or really any Imperial firearm. Oversized calibres compared to modern weapons are common, like autoguns with 8.25mm bullets. We do know that the Imperium has access to gravity-manipulating technology and "inertial dampners", which may also manipulate gravity. It would make sense if similar tech featured in firearms. The Imperium probably doesn't understand it, they may not even know that is what a particular doohickey does on a given firearm, but the STC blueprint says this doohickey must be made this way and fitted here on a given gun and they do just that.
Take this cut-away schematic of a Terminator stormbolter: What exactly does a "blast compensator" do? Sounds like some kind of recoil management to me. Now, stormbolters are noticeable for apparently being more mobile than standard bolters despite being significantly more bulky, so this could be the reason why, but I would not be at all surprised if Imperial firearms routinely include blast compensators to make recoil more manageable.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Flinty wrote: For me, this is just one of the long running inconsistencies in the background. Its kind of up there with autoguns being described as using caseless ammo, but there usually an awful lot of brass depicted in artwork
RT doesn't particularly go into the mechanics of a bolter, but the 2nd ed Wargear book explicitly says bolts come out of the barrel at "low velocity" implying minimal recoil.
Wargear describes the heavy bolter as having a more powerful propellant and explosive charge, befitting a support weapon version, but increased recoil from that is likely to be at least partly countered by the additional mass of the weapon.
3rd ed notes the existence of low velocity solid slug types for covert work, but doesn't go into the initial recoil bit.
The Munitorum Manual is somewhat self-contradictory as it explicitly describes bolt guns as generating "enormous recoil", but then goes on to use the older description of the bolt coming out of the muzzle under low velocity. Its also funny that in the Manual, bolt pistols are said to fire exactly the same round as a bolt gun (and they are interchangeable), but the issue of recoil just doesn't come up, even though bolt pistols are clearly lighter weapons.
This latter point does actually make sense. A shorter barrel will have less recoil for the same round as the bullet doesn't accelerate for as long before reaching the end and letting the gas dissipate, at least up to the optimum length of barrel where the gas is still accelerating. A sawn-off shotgun, for example, has much less recoil than the full-length original firing the same cartridge.
Low velocity and heavy recoil aren't incompatible with a heavy projectile. Grenade launchers were mentioned above- these are fairly low velocity, but the weight of the projectile can still give them significant recoil. Rifle grenades were notorious for the recoil and could even crack gunstocks.
On the blast compensator, I’m put in mind of the barrel thingy put on Tommy Gun’s to help with their recoil. So perhaps here, it’s a vent to allow some of the gas pressure to push the Stormbolter down with each shot?
Also clarification on the broader topic. I’m not looking to discuss whether a Marine can handle the recoil. We know their enhanced physiques are further aided in strength and stance by their power armour. I think I even read somewhere that power armour auto compensates for recoil by adjusting your stance. Not enough to remove its impact entirely, but enough to aid your aim significantly.
Is it possible to opine about the purpose of the initial kick charge? If its simply to get the round clear of the barrel and to start a bit of spin, then it could be super weedy. If its supposed to give a decent chance of penetration into a target at short range before the rocket motor can properly kick in, then it would need to be beefier.
While one could rely only on the mass-reactive explosive to provide lethality at short range, as a largely unarmoured human, I would want some kind of minimum safe distance before the thing went boom.
Looks like the Neopup (a close current bolter analogue) has a minimum arming range of between 5 and 15m. Anyone who is up on muzzle momentum for lethality at that kind of range willing to share the likely charge needed?
I presume that the initial charge is to give you a decent bit of zero-range velocity, otherwise it would be pointless.
Gyrojets (a close IRL equivalent to a bolter) were entirely rocket propelled through the barrel and hit their peak velocity at about 10m away. So just pure rocket propulsion is basically fine except for very close ranges.
Also artistic depictions of bolt rounds usually show a fairly beefy casing, pretty much the same size as what you'd expect from a regular bullet.
Could this be because artists are just painting on vibes not on technical accuracy, and are simply depicting casings that you and I are familiar with and understand as such? Pff, don't be ridiculous, we all know shotguns fire out of their magazine tubes and GW artists are gun experts.
So this would suggest the boltround gets a pretty substantial kick at the start.
Personally I've kinda started to assume bolters are *primarily* propelled by the initial kick, and that the rocket propulsion is fairly minimal, doing little more than maintaining velocity over long range. This also maximises the explosive payload (as otherwise even a .75cal bullet would have little space for a usable bang at the target).
Interesting thoughts on the kick then rocket thing. And I’m now thinking perhaps I’ve not thought about each correctly.
It’s entirely possible that the initial charge is, well, standard. Enough to speed the round to usual bullet speeds. Then, the rocket motor kicks in to further accelerate it for armour penetration.
If so? Even at point blank range, a bolter will still make an unarmoured roughly human analogous target go splat. But at range, it gets better at penetrating armour thanks to the rocket boost?
We do have one piece of solid information: their recoil is strong enough to prevent a space marine from effectively wielding it in one hand without special training. That's explicitly stated in the fluff for Grey Hunters. And since we know space marines are strong and bolters aren't all that large (compared to their other weapons) that must be quite a bit. We also know that it's difficult for normal humans to use bolters two-handed unless they've been specially modified to dampen the recoil (but it can still be done).
We also know that bolt pistols are designed to pierce through armor at point-blank range, so that to me implies a fairly high muzzle velocity. Maybe not equal to an autogun or shuriken catapult (or lasgun, ha) but enough to make it fully effective with no time for the rocket to accelerate the bolt. Otherwise assault marines would probably use laspistols or something. And finally, they're just usually depicted as kicking a lot and sending out large brass casings, because that looks cool. Maybe they can fire caseless but usually don't (sniper variants probably still would).
Though I would stress my question isn’t about Bolters in general, but Astartes Bolters in particular.
We know they’re larger and chunkier, and game stats aside? A larger calibre.
Also on Grey Hunters? This is likely shoddy hazy memory, but their training is more than just how to wield a Bolter one handed, but doing so in close quarters, whilst also wielding a melee weapon in your other hand.
The difference between me, arguably, being able to fire a shotgun one handed, and me not braining or causing other mischief to myself, and being able to do when someone is trying to smack me in the face with a frying pan. That gulf of ‘probably maybe could’ and ‘can do so with skill, control and aplomb” skill level.
Hmm I guess all I can say is I don't think a space marine has ever been allowed to wield a bolter in each hand, or shoot their bolter and their bolt pistol in the same phase, even for Grey Hunters. So that makes me think it's more difficult than using them off-hand in melee, though I'm sure it's more game balance than anything.
I mean they're strong enough to technically do it but it would be less effective than shooting one normally. You're probably safer being shot at by a guy with an uzi in each hand than a guy aiming one properly.
This is why I think it boils down to specialised training.
I mean, there are various things I’ve the oomph to pick up one handed, but do little more than carry. Whereas someone with specific combat training (like learning how to counter balance and control the momentum and that) can do so and beat the snot out of someone whilst at it.
EDIT: I have no idea why "r" keeps being changed to "are", it's probably some autocorrect nonsense to prevent L33tsp33k. Whatever it is it's bloody infuriating and I've tried to change it 5 times now!
So first off: Assumptions: - We are talking about a standard Astartes bolt per the diagram on Page 60 of the 3rd edition rulebook - Images are approximately to scale Materials assumptions: - Diamantine is effectively diamond and has all the physical properties of it - "Depleted Deuterium" is Depleted Uranium - Deuterium is a gas, and depleted deuterium is equally stupid. It's sci-fi nonsense meant to sound cool. DU makes sense in the context, if you disagree you can do your own calculations
We know the Bolt is 0.75 calibre, but calibre is a measure of diameter in inches, we still need the length, and a more sensible unit of measurement 0.75 inches is 19.05mm In the reference image the diameter of the bolt is 62 pixels, and the length is 147 pixels 19.05 / 62 = 0.30725806451, which is how much each pixel is in mm, so a length of 147 pixels gives us a length of 45.1669354839mm
So our bolt is approximately 19mm x 45mm
The volume of a cylinder is π(r squared)h (and this is how I discover BBCode doesn't have superscript!) We know d = 19.05 and d=2r, so are = 9.525mm are squared is 90.725625 90.725625 x 45.1669354839 = 4097.79845111 π x 4097.79845111 = 12873.6135099
So IF a bolter shell was a perfect cylinder then it would have a volume of 12873.61 mm cubed But it isn't, it tapers at the end, so we need to account for the tip
As luck would have it, the distance between the base and where the tip begins is exactly 100 pixels, so we know the tip is a cone with a base diameter of 19.05 and a height of (47 x 0.30725806451 =) 14.441129032mm
Volume of a cone is π(r squared)(h/3) but we have all the necessary values now: are squared = 90.725625 h/3 = 4.81370967733 So pi x are squared x h/3 gives us 1372.0177663352514116180995121611, or approximately 1372mm cubed
And if we recalculate the rest of the bolt with a new height of just 100 pixels we get 8757.56021mm cubed Add this to our cone and we have a total volume of 10129.5779763 mm cubed for the entire bolt shell (The bolt tip is obviously not a perfect cone and nor is its body a perfect, featureless cylinder, but it's a good number to go off of for now)
So we have a total approximate volume of 10,129.58mm cubed. How does that help us? Because we need MASS
mass is density x volume. Now if we're taking Deuterium to be an analogue for depleted uranium, DU has a density of 19.1g per cm cubed, so if the entire bolt was a solid block of DU it'd weight 193.47 grams. Bullets are typically weighed in grains rather than grams but a gram is 15.43236 grains, usually rounded to just 15 So a solid DU bolt shell, if it existed, would be 2986 grains Compared to a .50 BMG bullet topping out at around at 800 grains
But of course, it isn't a solid lump of radioactive material, it's hollowed out and filled with all kinds of fun additions.
But now I'm tired. Tomorrow I will divide our volume of bolt shell into approximate percentages of different components and calculate mass based on those. Then we can move on to estimating muzzle velocity, which will give us the force required to propel the bolt at that speed Which will then give us the recoil (of the bullet, not of the weapon, for the weapon recoil we need to subtract the mass of the bolter from the equation and I'm not going through all of that.
TLDR: BOLTS ARE HUGE AND HEAVY AND PACK A LOT OF FORCE
*can’t really remember his GCSE maths because who does outside of careers that need it, but recognises the equations even if he can’t personally verify*
Surprised no one's referenced this yet. Of course it's not lore accurate but it's another weapon in the ballpark. Notably, it has some mechanism/s to reduce kickback as well.
Insectum7 wrote: Surprised no one's referenced this yet. Of course it's not lore accurate but it's another weapon in the ballpark. Notably, it has some mechanism/s to reduce kickback as well.
Even comes with auto senses and both metal storm and kraken ammunition!
Inconsistencies in the lore can potentially be explained by different makes and models having different recoil profiles. I can also see an inexperienced soldiers occasionally getting a boltgun or bolt pistol, perhaps looted from a fallen more worthy soldier, and breaking his wrist as he uses an unfamiliar weapon. Or the "fact" that using it can potentially hurt you is used to keep the rank and file from screwing around with weaponry meant for elite troops.
Plenty of videos of inexperienced shooters getting handed a magnum revolver or shotgun and it kicks their booty out there. I can imagine the same happening with bolters and a whole in-universe equivalent to "Fudd lore" happening.
Though I would stress my question isn’t about Bolters in general, but Astartes Bolters in particular.
We know they’re larger and chunkier, and game stats aside? A larger calibre.
No we don't. That's just some third party fan fiction. They're the same and normal humans can fire them just fine.
That's the exact same Godwyn pattern bolter marines used to have, before the actually bigger marine bolters, the bolt rifles, were introduced with the primaris.
Those might be difficult for normal humans to fire, but certainly not impossible as there are human-portable heavy bolters and other heavy weapons too.
Crimson wrote: That's just some third party fan fiction.
Interesting. I assume by this you mean the various BL books and RPG books like Dark Heresy?
Dark Heresy in particular seems a popular source for the devastating effect of Astartes boltguns on human wielders. Considering its writers and designers featured such names as Alan Bligh and Andy Hall, though, it doesn't exactly strike me as something as outlandish and badly deprived of oversight as some BL contractor's first 40k book. Alan Bligh in particular is my favourite Warhammer background designer (RIP...) and I tend to place his work above just about everything else.
Crimson wrote: That's just some third party fan fiction.
Interesting. I assume by this you mean the various BL books and RPG books like Dark Heresy?
Dark Heresy in particular seems a popular source for the devastating effect of Astartes boltguns on human wielders. Considering its writers and designers featured such names as Alan Bligh and Andy Hall, though, it doesn't exactly strike me as something as outlandish and badly deprived of oversight as some BL contractor's first 40k book. Alan Bligh in particular is my favourite Warhammer background designer (RIP...) and I tend to place his work above just about everything else.
Dark Heresy in particular. It is a licenced work. But sure, a lot of BL stuff, especially about marines, is very "fan fictionish." In any case, the models of weapons are either identical or very similar, and they have always had identical rules on the tabletop, nor do codices imply that these would be drastically different weapons. And bigger and more powerful bolter variants do exist, and these look different, have different rules and are identified as such. I think the idea that a weapon called the same, represented by the same weapon model and having the same rules in the game would somehow be a radically different weapon in the lore is just laughable.
Fan Fictiony, or background you don’t agree with? Not having a go at you, but there is a difference.
On the Catachan lad? Looking the same and being the same isn’t the same.
Example? Found on the 40K Wiki.
Godwyn-De'az Pattern - The Godwyn-De'az Pattern Bolter is the standard pattern of bolter used by all of the Orders Militant of the Adepta Sororitas since their formation in the 36th Millennium. This pattern has been in use by the Sisters of Battle since that time because it remains more reliable and more potent than any other pattern of bolter developed for use by the Sororitas. The Godwyn-De'az Pattern is designed to be used by a normal Human and thus is much smaller than an Astartes bolter. This pattern of bolter is designed to make use of the Sarissa as an attachment. The Sarissa is a vicious, curved, bayonet-like blade that can transform the Godwyn-De'az Bolter into an effective close combat weapon even as it retains all of its ranged functionality.
Emphasis mine.
Now, I’ll grant you smaller size doesn’t automatically mean smaller calibre. But, it can be an indicator. After all, if you’re making it embiggened, why not chamber it for a larger, presumably more potent round?
Because logistics. Keeping marine and Guard calibres/round dimensions consistent helps with this. If marines can only be resupplied from their own stocks, then a big benefit of the DM is lost.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Fan Fictiony, or background you don’t agree with? Not having a go at you, but there is a difference.
My initial comment about "fan fiction" was regarding licenced stuff like the RPGs. That's like getting your Star Trek lore form the Star Trek online game. Not canon. Not that 40K has consistent canon to begin with.BL stuff is all over the place depending on the author. Codex lore is the most consistent source of lore.
On the Catachan lad? Looking the same and being the same isn’t the same.
So be honest. Do you honestly think that the designers would use the exact same look, size and rules to represent the weapon they actually thought was not the same weapon? No they would not.
Example? Found on the 40K Wiki.
And what it the source of the information beyond the Wiki? Was this in the codex?. Not in the current one, at least, I don't think. Or was it from the licenced RPG or some such? That's not official.
Now, I’ll grant you smaller size doesn’t automatically mean smaller calibre. But, it can be an indicator. After all, if you’re making it embiggened, why not chamber it for a larger, presumably more potent round?
But there is zero indication of smaller calibre. Bolters use the standard 0.75 calibre bolts.That's in all the lore. Like sure, there can be some small variations between different types of bolters. Like marine ones probably have larger grips for example. But the idea that they would be some drastically different weapon with different capabilities is just wild. Like I said, bigger bolters (bolt rifle, heavy bolt rifle, heavy bolter) do exist and they are modelled differently and have different rules. And we literally have normal humans firing heavy bolters. Do you think that normal marine bolters are somehow bigger and more powerful than human-portable heavy bolters? I guess you then also think that marine heavy bolters fire battle cannon shells?
And we know the calibre of the Storm Bolter illustrated above. Specifically an Astartes Model of the same.
Heavy Bolters exist and are a larger calibre. Therefore, Bolt Shells are available in different calibres. So by no means are all infantry scaled Bolters going to be the same calibre.
GODWYN-DE’AZ
PATTERN BOLTER
The standard issue weapon for all
Battle Sisters since the Orders
Militant were formed, the Godwyn-
De’az pattern bolter has remained
unchanged for millennia, largely
due to its superior performance in
comparison to other weapons of its
class. But the Godwyn-De’az is
much more than a weapon to the
Sisters of Battle; it is a symbol of the
Emperor’s divine judgement, the
first and foremost of the ‘holy
trinity’ of bolter, flamer and melta
with which the Adepta Sororitas
bring justice to the manifold enemies
of Mankind
No mention of it being smaller.
And we know the calibre of the Storm Bolter illustrated above. Specifically an Astartes Model of the same.
Yes, 0.75 like all bolters have ever been.
Heavy Bolters exist and are a larger calibre. Therefore, Bolt Shells are available in different calibres. So by no means are all infantry scaled Bolters going to be the same calibre.
Heavy bolter shells are not bolter shells. Again, heavy bolters are something that are specifically called to be different in the codices, modelled differently and have different rules.
Christ are we going to have to point to the "everything is canon" sign in every single thread?
GW licensed the RPGs, they had oversight on the contents, they explicitly stated licensed things are canon but noooooo, thet's not good enough because we need to draw made up arbitrary lines over what does and does not count as "real" in made up toy soldier world even after we've been explicitly told what counts. For decades.
To be honest the wiki does have some real groaners:
The Space Marines are not the only warriors of the Imperium to carry boltguns into battle, but the version carried by the Firstborn Adeptus Astartes, the Mark Vb Godwyn Pattern Boltgun, is by far the largest and most devastating. By comparison, the smaller patterns of boltgun carried by the Adeptus Sororitas or the champions of the Astra Militarum are pale reflections. So large is the Godwyn Pattern that no normal man could heft one, let alone survive its unforgiving recoil.
Yes, if a human tries to shoot a regular space marine bolter he will instantly die from the recoil. And the mechanically identical versions used by other armies are only "pale reflections" for some reason.
Other features include a biometric sensor integrated into the weapon's grip that allows the bolter to identify its user's genetic signature so that only Astartes can make use of the bolter.
Why would you want to prevent your enemy from shooting your bolter if the recoil will instantly kill them? The only enemies who could do so are other Astartes (who already have their own bolters).
The bolter is a large .75 calibre semiautomatic assault weapon... ...and can fire in bursts of up to four with a single trigger pull.
That's not semiautomatic...
It is illegal within the Imperium for a non-Astartes to wield an Astartes pattern bolter
You just told me this was physically impossible! But spess mehrines are so uber epic that people would steal their bolters just to die shooting them if it wasn't also illegal. Calling this stuff bad fanfiction is entirely fair, it's the same desperate-to-be-special style that genre is notorious for.
All of that aside, I think it's easy to say that SoBs use .75 bolters that have a smaller frame because they're less ruggedly built. A space marine is expected to bash an ork in the head with his bolter and have it continue to function afterwards, whereas an SoB can't hit with equal force and they apparently favor bayonets instead. That would be consistent with the wargame rules (both shooot at S4 but space marines make melee attacks at S4 even when only armed with their bolter, SoBs are limited to S3). That wouldn't, however, imply more recoil for the space marine, just a heavier gun. (Unless marine bolters have a higher muzzle velocity, which is possible but isn't reflected in the stats of SoB bolt pistols.)
The wiki does contain a list of bolters that don't use .75 and the De'az isn't mentioned, so I'm pretty sure they're still in .75:
The .75 calibre is now the standard for bolts in the 41st Millennium. However, during the early days of the Great Crusade in the late 30th Millennium, there were bolters that made use of variable calibre ammunition. This included the ancient Tigris Pattern Bolter, which fired .60 calibre bolts, and the Phobos Pattern Bolter, which made use of .70 calibre bolts. The Space Marine Legions' archaic Ikanos Pattern Bolt Pistol made use of a .50 calibre bolt.
For those who aren't aware, a heavier gun actually dampens recoil if you're shooting the same type of ammo, since more energy is spent moving the gun. That would give a SM bolter less recoil than a SoB bolter if they're shooting the same type of bolt.
So one conclusion I can make from this discussion is that it's really the bolt pistol that's crazy. You're saying this is a .75 gun shot one-handed designed to pierce armor at 1 yard? It also looks like it weighs 20 lbs and they hand those out to the guard like candy.
I'd rather have a plasma pistol, at least I can take a few shots before it might explode. A bolt pistol looks like it would break my wrist on the first shot.
Orkeosaurus wrote:To be honest the wiki does have some real groaners:
The Space Marines are not the only warriors of the Imperium to carry boltguns into battle, but the version carried by the Firstborn Adeptus Astartes, the Mark Vb Godwyn Pattern Boltgun, is by far the largest and most devastating. By comparison, the smaller patterns of boltgun carried by the Adeptus Sororitas or the champions of the Astra Militarum are pale reflections. So large is the Godwyn Pattern that no normal man could heft one, let alone survive its unforgiving recoil.
Yes, if a human tries to shoot a regular space marine bolter he will instantly die from the recoil. And the mechanically identical versions used by other armies are only "pale reflections" for some reason.
Right, but that line doesn't actually say the recoil would instantly kill a non-augmented human does it? It's saying this bolter is built for superhuman bioengineered warriors. A normal human couldn't just pick it up off the floor and wield it themselves. So mighty are the Space Marines a normal human would likely have their entire arm dislocated from the force of the recoil or even ripped off. Or smash their skull if they try and aim down the iron sights. But that isn't exactly snappy written down, so you're supposed to fill in the blanks yourself.
And that isn't that crazy. Poor weapon control can easily lead to an accident even with a fairly low calibre weapon. The point of that text is to let you know as the reader that a bolter is a fething big gun and regular human dweebs can't carry it or use it without causing themselves serious mischief.
Ashiraya wrote:I think they do that to play up how powerful the bolter seems to be.
It's a gyrojet -and- it has bonecracking recoil! Wow it must be so powerful!
Genuinely, I'd give pretty decent odds this was the thought process, if they even thought about gyrojet recoil at all in the first place.
The trouble is we use the gyrojet because its the only modern-ish analogue for how a bolter works based on what the in-universe workings of a bolter are. But the gyrojet was a heap of crap and didn't work. The gyrojet worked with a very heavy barrel to off-set the recoil of the initial charge. Presumably to make it function like a bolter properly should you reach a point where the heaviness of the barrel becomes too much for the mass reactive rounds you're wanting to fire at the velocity you are firing it at. Thus you get recoil. At which point, you then bioengineer the users to compensate for that recoil.
Orkeosaurus wrote:To be honest the wiki does have some real groaners:
The Space Marines are not the only warriors of the Imperium to carry boltguns into battle, but the version carried by the Firstborn Adeptus Astartes, the Mark Vb Godwyn Pattern Boltgun, is by far the largest and most devastating. By comparison, the smaller patterns of boltgun carried by the Adeptus Sororitas or the champions of the Astra Militarum are pale reflections. So large is the Godwyn Pattern that no normal man could heft one, let alone survive its unforgiving recoil.
Yes, if a human tries to shoot a regular space marine bolter he will instantly die from the recoil. And the mechanically identical versions used by other armies are only "pale reflections" for some reason.
Right, but that line doesn't actually say the recoil would instantly kill a non-augmented human does it?
Well if you fail to survive something you're dead. Of course it's meant to be hyperbole, but the hyperbole sounds dumb. Especially because space marine bolters aren't even all that big for a gun in 40k, a Guard plasma gun looks heavier than a SM bolter. And Harker is a human who carries a heavy bolter and shoots it from the hip, you can say he's "abnormally strong" but he's otherwise just a guy in a t-shirt.
It's like saying "no man can survive the extra-spicy buffalo wings" when you really just mean they're too spicy for most people. It's cheesy.
Crimson wrote: In any case, one of the main benefits of gyrojet ammo is the elimination of the recoil, so bolters of any type would have very little recoil.
Bolters aren't gyrojets though. Gyrojets were 100% rocket propelled small arms.
But bolters are two stage propulsion - initial kicking charge and rocket propulsion in flight. They're rocket assisted (similar to some specialised long range artillery shells).
Which means they will have an initial recoil proportional to how much that initial charge is.
And it’s how much that initial charge that’s the main question here.
Does it need to be significant, if it’s mostly to give the bolt round enough rifle spin for accuracy, with the rocket then providing the real velocity?
Is it what we’d consider a standard charge for a round of that calibre, with the rocket motor then kicking it up to ludicrous speed?
Is it somewhere in between? Where in the middle might it sit? Is their a minimum, however dinky, range before the fired bolt round can do its whole detonate inside you thing? If so, if I shoot you within that range, can the bolt round go straight through you then blow up your luckless mate just over there?
On the minimum range thing? Given Bolt Pistols seem to use the same rounds as a Boltgun, seemingly not. Otherwise they’d be kind of ineffective at very short ranges. So I think we can reasonably extrapolate that if there is a minimum range? It might only be mere centimetres.
I think the initial charge is fairly equivalent to a round of the calibre, only a little bit less.
Bolters are regularly shown piercing heavy armour at even point blank range (I'm reminded of the 5th edition SM codex illustration where a bolter blows through a CSM at point blank range).
Although how accurate is that illustration as I don't think any lore holds that a bolter can blow clean through a suit of power armour and out the other side.
But the idea of zero-range armour penetration consists nicely with the usual depiction of bolter casings being fairly large and not dissimilar to what we would expect from a normal round.
There also wouldn't be any point in the charge unless it had at least a medium amount of oomph. You can start the rocket motor inside the barrel so you don't actually need anything for initial spin
The art definitely needs to be viewed through a rule of cool filter. Not necessarily complete fantasy, but certainly exaggerated somewhat.
Though side thought? As I think we broadly accept a Bolt Round is unlikely to blow the back out of an Astartes? Surely that makes the injury worse, as the blast has less places to go, concentrating it more?
I mean, I’m using “worse” here for a certain value of that word. Power Armour or Pants, when a Bolt Round detonates in your chest, you’re not gonna walk it off. But unless I really, really* don’t understand physics? With the blast contained, the contents are going to get minced even finer?
Which seems like a nice counter to the general resilience of an Astartes when it comes to using small arms against them. A contained bolt blast is going to be more focussed, and more likely to kill outright than simply horribly maim?
*As opposed to “don’t understand them but have a rudimentary grasp”.
The bottom line is the entirety of 40k is just rule of cool. There's no logic or consistency beyond what's cool. So trying to work out logic just doesn't make sense.
Like take the models for example. The Leman Russ ostensibly has a 120mm main gun. But based on the model you'd think it had 10x that. Yet all the artistic depictions of the Leman Russ (including those technical schematics which state 120mm) follow the proportions of the tabletop model.
How do you square that circle? What's the "actual canon"?
Ashiraya wrote:Don't use the 40k wiki. It's extremely unreliable and fanfiction gets unnoticed there for years.
Lexicanum is what you want to use. It has actual in-line citations, so information from there can be used in discussions.
This.
The 40k Wiki is useless as a source for anything beyond vibes and seeing what the meme version of 40k is. Lexicanum is far, far more accurate. Not perfect, but decent.
kirotheavenger wrote:The bottom line is the entirety of 40k is just rule of cool. There's no logic or consistency beyond what's cool. So trying to work out logic just doesn't make sense.
Like take the models for example. The Leman Russ ostensibly has a 120mm main gun. But based on the model you'd think it had 10x that. Yet all the artistic depictions of the Leman Russ (including those technical schematics which state 120mm) follow the proportions of the tabletop model.
How do you square that circle? What's the "actual canon"?
It is supposed to have a liquid-cooling shroud, so more like a maxim gun. This seems unnecessary for a relatively-slow firing weapon, but we know that Russes can be environmentally sealed and at least the HH version can operate in a vacuum. Cooling is far more important in those circumstances. It probably isn't needed on most worlds, but then no one is going to modify the sacred STC design- that would be heresy!
Automatically Appended Next Post: Re. calibre- I've seen heavy bolters described as 1.0 calibre (an inch), but I've not personally seen a source. The only source with a number I do know is the Sol-pattern heavy bolter (the classic style that is carried on the shoulder). This has a calibre of 0.7, apparently the same as Phobos-pattern boltguns and actually smaller than a standard Godwyn-pattern boltgun round!
Having a longer barrel might account for that, or perhaps using hotter versions of the ammunition used in boltguns, or merely having the same calibre but actually being very different bolts with the heavy bolter ammunition essentially being necked down.
It is supposed to have a liquid-cooling shroud, so more like a maxim gun. This seems unnecessary for a relatively-slow firing weapon, but we know that Russes can be environmentally sealed and at least the HH version can operate in a vacuum. Cooling is far more important in those circumstances. It probably isn't needed on most worlds, but then no one is going to modify the sacred STC design- that would be heresy!
What's the source for the watercooling?
I've never seen that mentioned before and it's clearly not what's depicted on the model or the schematics (which have ammunition sized to fit the barrel we see).
It is supposed to have a liquid-cooling shroud, so more like a maxim gun. This seems unnecessary for a relatively-slow firing weapon, but we know that Russes can be environmentally sealed and at least the HH version can operate in a vacuum. Cooling is far more important in those circumstances. It probably isn't needed on most worlds, but then no one is going to modify the sacred STC design- that would be heresy!
What's the source for the watercooling?
I've never seen that mentioned before and it's clearly not what's depicted on the model or the schematics (which have ammunition sized to fit the barrel we see).
Epic: Armageddon rulebook, pg. 95. It is in the description for the Leman Russ. Technically, that is for the Mars pattern, but it makes sense that it holds for other Leman Russ.
If you have a copy of the PDFs that GW published on their website awhile back, then it is in the Background and Forces document in the Imperial Guard section, and is pg. 38 of the PDF.
Huh, so it does. Case in point that 40k lore has no consistency right I don't think it really detracts from my point though, a waterjacket shouldn't affect the observed calibre of the barrel which is immense and carried through to the internally carried shells in crosssection views as well.
Well yes but if we start to assume that then literally all of the lore starts to become meaningless.
Then again it probably *is* a safe assumption given how wildly off a lot of 40k's numbers are.
I believe Leman Russ canonically have about as much armour as you'd expect on a second world war era tank, despite being one of the most heavily armoured vehicles in the 41st millenium.
Also wars like Vraks, allegedly the most brutal and bloody war in the entirety of 40k, had fewer casualties than WW2.
kirotheavenger wrote:Huh, so it does. Case in point that 40k lore has no consistency right I don't think it really detracts from my point though, a waterjacket shouldn't affect the observed calibre of the barrel which is immense and carried through to the internally carried shells in crosssection views as well.
You do have to come down somewhere when it comes to depictions and lore. My impression is that the lore in Epic: Armageddon is an attempt to rationalise the oversized, heroic-scale barrels on the 2nd edition Leman Russ kit, which were iconic but a bit silly in scale. That has then been undermined by the cut-away art you mention (which I think coincided with FW selling loose shells for tank models, so was probably intended to support sales of heroic-scaled parts).
I prefer to go with the 120mm lore (or thereabouts, some patterns probably have different calibres), with a large water-cooled jacket, and the apparent bore diameter is actually just the bore of the flash suppressor and not the whole barrel. But that is a rationalisation made by cherry-picking favourable parts of the lore.
kirotheavenger wrote:Well yes but if we start to assume that then literally all of the lore starts to become meaningless.
Then again it probably *is* a safe assumption given how wildly off a lot of 40k's numbers are.
I believe Leman Russ canonically have about as much armour as you'd expect on a second world war era tank, despite being one of the most heavily armoured vehicles in the 41st millenium.
Also wars like Vraks, allegedly the most brutal and bloody war in the entirety of 40k, had fewer casualties than WW2.
Those numbers are from the original Imperial Armour and Imperial Armour II (not to be confused with Imperial Armour volume 1 and 2). The thicknesses by themselves are fine- we have no idea about what materials they are made from, and some space magic tech super material could be very protective for a thin plate. In our reality, a plate of Dorchester block is far more protective than the same thickness of rolled homogenous steel, for example.
However, I think they made the mistake somewhere of saying the thickness was equivalent to a value in rolled homogenous steel, which is always silly for science fantasy writers to nail their colours to the mast like that, and when doing that the values were late-WW2/early-Cold war thicknesses. I can't remember where that extra detail is from, but the lore on thicknesses is fine if you discount that particular nugget of info.
Vraks was never presented as the most bloody, merely a particularly long siege war. Bear in mind that Vraks only had a population of 8 million prior to the war, that is smaller than London alone. A war that essentially killed in the ballpark of 22 million is pretty massive for a world with a population that small. I'm pretty sure the HH was the bloodiest war, and in 40k it would be the 3rd war for Armageddon or the 13th Black Crusade that have the most combat deaths (as opposed to simply wiping out entire hive world populations via exterminatus or Tyranids or what not, which will routinely run into the billions).
Tbf yeah the Vraks bit is a bit outdated now 40k includes the 42nd millenium with more armaggeddons and black crusades.
That's not really the point though, the point is a massive planetary war famous for the attritional meat grinder so profound there's accusations of using cloning to maintain the numbers.
And it's not even that big by 1940s Earth standards.
It's very common in 40k. IIRC on Taros they deployed 8 regiments. 8 regiments to conquer a planet, that's nothing.
I’d love a proper recalling of numbers in 40K. Just broadly.
I know the Law Of Large Numbers is a bugger, because it’s increasingly difficult for our sad little monkey brains to comprehend what they actually entail.
For instance? Let’s say Vraks cost 1,000,000,000 Guardsmen’s lives. That sounds like a lot. But right now there’s 8,000,000,000 or so of us regular humans. So a billion lives spent defending an entire world still really isn’t that many. But much beyond that just feels….a bit silly.
I've just clocked out of the numbers thing at this point tbh.
All the way back in Dan Abnett's early 2000s Eisenhorn novels you see them recall a legendary campaign waged by a warmaster 500 years ago, where a whole 4 million (!!!!) guardsmen were deployed to wage war on a single world. The characters reminisce about how that sort of scale just doesn't happen any more in the present day of the setting.
I always considered Vraks to be a rather unimportant battle in the grand scheme of 40k, so it's low numbers compared to IRL world-wide conflict don't bother me that much.
Bobthehero wrote: I always considered Vraks to be a rather unimportant battle in the grand scheme of 40k, so it's low numbers compared to IRL world-wide conflict don't bother me that much.
Here's a guy firing a .700 caliber rifle, just .05 small than a regular Bolt round, he seems to handle the kick rather well.
Come to think of it, maybe the real difference between Guard and Marine bolters is that Guard bolters are single shot and Marine bolters fire a 4-round burst.
I imagine if the .700 above fired a 4-round burst the outcome might be a teensy bit different...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
kirotheavenger wrote: Tbf yeah the Vraks bit is a bit outdated now 40k includes the 42nd millenium with more armaggeddons and black crusades.
That's not really the point though, the point is a massive planetary war famous for the attritional meat grinder so profound there's accusations of using cloning to maintain the numbers.
And it's not even that big by 1940s Earth standards.
It's very common in 40k. IIRC on Taros they deployed 8 regiments. 8 regiments to conquer a planet, that's nothing.
Vraks was published _after_ the Armageddon and 13th Black Crusade global campaigns had concluded. Those are very much in the lore prior to Vraks.
To be honest, I think you are overstating the importance and scale of Vraks in the setting, and conflating some of the lore. It was the focus of three IA books because it was interesting for the story they wanted to tell and the models they wanted to sell. The war is objectively smaller than, say, the Badab War in IA 9 and 10 though.
Vraks was a small world only important because it was essentially an Imperial Guard storehouse for the region. It had a low population but warehouses upon warehouses of munitions. The Imperium then does what the Imperium does and engages in a bloody meatgrinder to slowly recapture it in a pyrrhic victory.
_Krieg_ engages in something like cloning. Not because of Vraks specifically, but because it is a world dedicated to producing soldiers for the meatgrinder above all else. It is their primary export. There are Krieg regiments fighting and dying across the galaxy. 5 were deployed to Armageddon in the early phases of the 3rd war!
I think the scale of most 40k campaigns works when viewing the Imperium as a colonial empire. The comparison isn't WW2, it is the 16th-19th century European empires. How many British soldiers were needed to take and hold India? Not that many compared to the huge population in the region at the time. Most Imperial planets are sparsely populated, and those that aren't are occupied more than integrated.
There are actually some lore examples that go into this "paradox".
Would that perhaps file under “you probably could, but due to the sheer size and weight of the gun and its kickback, not with anything approximating accuracy”?
I mean, if you’re struggling to life the gun in the first place, it seems unlikely you’d be able to adopt a proper firing stance with it. And yes you almost certainly could prop it up on something (say a handy flat topped low wall) which would allow initial aiming, but does nothing to help properly control the recoil.
I’m put in mind of the bit in Seagal’s only passable movie Under Siege, where Erika Eleniak tries to shoot what I think is a Mac10, only for it to buck right out her grip?
I like the idea that Guardsmen can only reasonably use a bolter in single shot mode, whereas only an Astartes has the main character energy to utilise it in rapid fire.
But presumably even they can get a useful rate of single-shots downrange as they retain the "rapid fire" in game and bolters are at least presumably *lower* recoil than a traditional gun of the same power would imply.
I think the fact that the Guard (and indeed, 30k era human auxiliary troops) use bolters at all suggests they get at least a useful degree of accuracy out of the weapons
I’m struggling to find a source outside the 40K Wiki thing to confirm, but I’m sure I’ve read in-universe stuff about human sized Bolters being smaller than the Astartes ones.
May even have been something said in WD, in which case I doubt I’ll ever find it. Will check my 1st and 2nd Ed sources though. Got complete sets, so a few things to flick through in search of an answer either way.
It wouldn't surprise me if there was some reference to it now.
40k lore has been around so long, none of it is now written by the original authors from the same vision. It's all separate authors with only very limited oversight and collaboration writing their own stories from how they perceive the lore and what they want the lore to be.
We've seen several examples of what used to clearly incorrect 'meme lore' now canonised in novels, stories, and rules.
So what even is lore? If Rick Priestly wrote one thing in Rogue Trader and Joe Bloggs writes another - who's correct?
Gonna have a quick bunk off work to skip through the relevant books. Back in a jiffy!
Automatically Appended Next Post: Well, it’s not from the Battle Manual or Wargear book (flavour text is identical across both). But that’s when it was only Marines and Orks that carried Bolters.
Codex Sisters of Battle? Quick flick through found nothing.
Codex Imperial Guard? Quick flick through found nothing.
Inquisitor Rulebook is no help either. It offers different flavours of Boltgun, but no real detail.
I prefer the idea that the bolters are either the same model or, if not, at least cross compatible with ammunition. It would be very convenient if Marines who are leading/fighting with local Guardsmen or PDF could source ammunition from their stockpiles
I also don't think the Marine version has to be bigger, it's already been used better rules-wise with Marines getting fancy rules to denote their mastery of the weapon. I like that it's not a better version of bolter, it's just that Marines are better with it.
There is one primary reason that Marine bolters and human bolters are probably different. Hand size. Human hands and astartes hands are wildly different sizes so at the very least the grips and triggers on an Astartes bolter would need to be bigger. Likewise all of the manipulation points on the gun would need to be enlarged to allow their huge superhuman fingers to use the bolter.
The ammo is certainly the same, maybe even the magazines, but the size difference in hands alone would mandate that a human and astartes bolter would need to be different at least superficially. Even if it was only different pistol grips and enlarged bolt handles and magazine catches. But you'd probably also want to beef up the housing a bit, the marine might smack and xeno over the head with it. Maybe give it a heavier barrel for longevity. Perhaps even larger capacity magazines as standard.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bobthehero wrote: I always considered Vraks to be a rather unimportant battle in the grand scheme of 40k, so it's low numbers compared to IRL world-wide conflict don't bother me that much.
Here's a guy firing a .700 caliber rifle, just .05 small than a regular Bolt round, he seems to handle the kick rather well.
The seige of Vraks also did take place in a relatively small area of the planet. It wasn't the whole planet, just the immediate vicinity of the only notable location on the world itself. IIRC from the scale the entire war took place in an area the size of France or something.
Agreed with both of the above. Marines being able to casually wield as assault rifles what is more akin to a plasma, melta, or other bulky/heavy special weapon when carried by a Guardsman is plenty superhuman. The idea that they have to be extra powerful, so strong they'll kill a normal guy instantly, etc just sounds like spank.
I mean there's a lot of that sort of Marine spank in the BL novels, but it's still spank, and has never squared with the tabletop depictions. Having different controls to suit Marine armor but otherwise being the same underlying gun makes sense for a lot of reasons.
Anyways- apologies if I've missed it, but I don't think anyone mentioned the Inkunzi PAW 20mm grenade launcher. The caliber is within a couple millimeters of 0.75cal, and the velocity is significantly higher than conventional shoulder-fired grenade launchers, giving a ballistic profile closer to that of a rifle. Add a rocket assist and there's your bolter.
Bobthehero wrote: I always considered Vraks to be a rather unimportant battle in the grand scheme of 40k, so it's low numbers compared to IRL world-wide conflict don't bother me that much.
Here's a guy firing a .700 caliber rifle, just .05 small than a regular Bolt round, he seems to handle the kick rather well.
The seige of Vraks also did take place in a relatively small area of the planet. It wasn't the whole planet, just the immediate vicinity of the only notable location on the world itself. IIRC from the scale the entire war took place in an area the size of France or something.
It did- most of the world was uninhabited, all of the pre-war population of 8 million lived in the area around the citadel and spaceport. The world was a fortified warehouse and had no significant industry beyond storing supplies for the Departmento Munitorum.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Would that perhaps file under “you probably could, but due to the sheer size and weight of the gun and its kickback, not with anything approximating accuracy”?
I mean, if you’re struggling to life the gun in the first place, it seems unlikely you’d be able to adopt a proper firing stance with it. And yes you almost certainly could prop it up on something (say a handy flat topped low wall) which would allow initial aiming, but does nothing to help properly control the recoil.
I’m put in mind of the bit in Seagal’s only passable movie Under Siege, where Erika Eleniak tries to shoot what I think is a Mac10, only for it to buck right out her grip?
One of my favourite pieces of Guard art shows exactly this- a Guardsman firing a boltgun braced on a window sill. It is from Codex: Cityfight in 3rd edition (image spoilered):
Spoiler:
Bracing guns does help with accuracy and recoil management. Incidentally, this chap is clearly blazing away on full auto given the number of casings flying out. His boltgun also has a stock, and he has one hand on the top of the weapon.
catbarf wrote: Agreed with both of the above. Marines being able to casually wield as assault rifles what is more akin to a plasma, melta, or other bulky/heavy special weapon when carried by a Guardsman is plenty superhuman. The idea that they have to be extra powerful, so strong they'll kill a normal guy instantly, etc just sounds like spank.
Which circles neatly around to those hyperbolic takes being akin to in-universe Fuddlore. Retold tales of the occasional dumb dumb or lightweight who fired a bolter wrong and got hurt being retold to him dying. Or the Munitorum officer telling a particularly stupid batch of recruits that "No they cannot have a bolter! And if they do somehow come across one they are to immediately surrender it to the depot because it will absolutely kill them if they try to use it!!!"
catbarf wrote: Agreed with both of the above. Marines being able to casually wield as assault rifles what is more akin to a plasma, melta, or other bulky/heavy special weapon when carried by a Guardsman is plenty superhuman. The idea that they have to be extra powerful, so strong they'll kill a normal guy instantly, etc just sounds like spank.
Which circles neatly around to those hyperbolic takes being akin to in-universe Fuddlore. Retold tales of the occasional dumb dumb or lightweight who fired a bolter wrong and got hurt being retold to him dying. Or the Munitorum officer telling a particularly stupid batch of recruits that "No they cannot have a bolter! And if they do somehow come across one they are to immediately surrender it to the depot because it will absolutely kill them if they try to use it!!!"
Or just being executed by a particularly rabid commissar for not using their issued lasgun
Which circles neatly around to those hyperbolic takes being akin to in-universe Fuddlore. Retold tales of the occasional dumb dumb or lightweight who fired a bolter wrong and got hurt being retold to him dying. Or the Munitorum officer telling a particularly stupid batch of recruits that "No they cannot have a bolter! And if they do somehow come across one they are to immediately surrender it to the depot because it will absolutely kill them if they try to use it!!!"
Probably a prudent caution since, apparently, owning an Astartes bolt shell incurs a death penalty for citizens (as it's assumed you looted or stole it).
Even if the bolt shell is the same size as what the Guard use, Astartes-issue shells likely have their own manufacturing marks and other little differences to identify them (it would probably be smarter to have them be identical so they could share supply lines, but the Imperium isn't exactly famous for valuing logistical efficiency over pomp, prestige and superstition).
Marines would also likely have much greater access to specialized ammunition types.
The Guard puts a much greater priority on logistical simplification and field reliability, so ammunition that requires individual maintenance (exotic propellants, seeker heads, etc) is right out. It also isn't going to issue extremely rare and expensive rounds to grunts, and your average Guardsman who has to carry it probably doesn't want niche stuff cutting into his allotment of multipurpose mass-reactive.
Whereas Marines have access to whatever they need for the mission, or to have the right response to each potential threat, and are better capable of both carrying it and receiving rapid resupply in the field.
Probably a prudent caution since, apparently, owning an Astartes bolt shell incurs a death penalty for citizens (as it's assumed you looted or stole it).
Even if the bolt shell is the same size as what the Guard use, Astartes-issue shells likely have their own manufacturing marks and other little differences to identify them (it would probably be smarter to have them be identical so they could share supply lines, but the Imperium isn't exactly famous for valuing logistical efficiency over pomp, prestige and superstition).
What is the actual source of this death sentence nonsense?
Dark Heresy, which I already know you decided you don't like as a source (that's okay), but I was not replying to you.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Edit: In the interest of the source argument not appearing repeatedly in future threads, I am just going to post this quote snapped from an interview with ADB (the interview was mostly about Black Library and is much longer, cut for brevity).
As it stands, the official line is that there are three factions empowered to “create IP” (an exact quote), and that’s GW, BL and FW. Given that the 40KRPG is mostly made by folks working in or around the main three companies, I think it’s fair to say that its lore counts as canon, too. I got it wrong myself, right up until I was in a meeting with the company’s Intellectual Property Manager – a situation I find myself in several times a year, as part of the Horus Heresy novel series team. When I was specifically asking about canon, he replied with something I’ve tried to take to heart: “It’s all real, and [n]one of it’s real.”
I don't know how one'd rank all these sources' canonicity, if one was so inclined, but I trust this interview more than I do the opinions of anonymous forum posters, that's for sure. (No offence) So, while I might side with the main studio if they publish material contradicting Dark Heresy, I am not going to write off Dark Heresy as fanfiction. That seems very overkill.
Ashiraya wrote: Dark Heresy, which I already know you decided you don't like as a source (that's okay), but I was not replying to you.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Edit: In the interest of the source argument not appearing repeatedly in future threads, I am just going to post this quote snapped from an interview with ADB (the interview was mostly about Black Library and is much longer, cut for brevity).
As it stands, the official line is that there are three factions empowered to “create IP” (an exact quote), and that’s GW, BL and FW. Given that the 40KRPG is mostly made by folks working in or around the main three companies, I think it’s fair to say that its lore counts as canon, too.
I got it wrong myself, right up until I was in a meeting with the company’s Intellectual Property Manager – a situation I find myself in several times a year, as part of the Horus Heresy novel series team. When I was specifically asking about canon, he replied with something I’ve tried to take to heart: “It’s all real, and [n]one of it’s real.”
I don't know how one'd rank all these sources' canonicity, if one was so inclined, but I trust this interview more than I do the opinions of anonymous forum posters, that's for sure. (No offence) So, while I might side with the main studio if they publish material contradicting Dark Heresy, I am not going to write off Dark Heresy as fanfiction. That seems very overkill.
Note how none of those official three factions empowered to create lore is FFG. It somehow counting is just ADBs personal opinion. And of course that licence has expired years ago, so I seriously doubt anyone at the GW now would consider it any sort of official or even close.
And I think effectively their lore does contradict GW lore. Like in this bolter example these special astartes bolters cannot be founf in any GW source, and there are plenty of places they could have been and logically would have been mentioned if they existed. The codexes do often tell about the weapons, and there indeed are several different kinds of bolt weapons and marks of bolter mentioned but this distinction is not.
GW lore is already a mess, but talking about it becomes even more difficult, if people keep dragging all sort of unofficial stuff into it.
Crimson wrote: And I think effectively their lore does contradict GW lore. Like in this bolter example these special astartes bolters cannot be founf in any GW source
This is not a contradiction and you know that perfectly well.
GW lore is already a mess, but talking about it becomes even more difficult, if people keep dragging all sort of unofficial stuff into it.
As ADB says, the people working on said FFG stuff tends to include employees from the big three.
Like, let's take the authors list for the Dark Heresy core book:
Dan Abnett Gary Astleford Owen Barnes Alan Bligh Ben Counter Kate Flack John French Guy Haley Andy Hall Tim Huckelberry Andrew Kenrick Mark Latham TS Luikart Mike Mason Chris Pramas Rick Priestley
Who should I trust more to be a source and authority on Warhammer lore, these guys, or a forum poster who does not like Dark Heresy?
Again, no offence, but come on. If Rick Priestley isn't good enough then what's left of Warhammer at that point? And that's just one name on the list!
Not liking Dark Heresy and other FFG stuff? No problemo.
But to extend that to “therefore nobody should treat it as a source” is going too far.
Dark Heresy was able to go into finer detail than any other GW product other than Inquisitor. And it ran with that. But not without centralised oversight.
Crimson wrote: And I think effectively their lore does contradict GW lore. Like in this bolter example these special astartes bolters cannot be founf in any GW source
This is not a contraction and you know that perfectly well.
It is. "Well they didn't say they don't exist" is a copout. It is like if some fan fiction depicted all marines with little bunny tails, you could argue it is canon because the official lore doesn't say that they don't.
The GW lore does go into detail about bolter types and marks. If significant difference between astartes and non astartes bolters existed, it would have been mentioned. The Inquisitor, GW's semi-RPG with very detailed equipment does not mention this difference either.
As ADB says, the people working on said FFG stuff tends to include employees from the big three.
Who should I trust more to be a source and authority on Warhammer lore, these guys, or a forum poster who does not like Dark Heresy?
Again, no offence, but come on. If Rick Priestley isn't good enough then what's left of Warhammer at that point? And that's just one name on the list!
It is not about me liking it or not. I like a lot of stuff from the FFGRPGs. I just am not confused about what is official. And the exact quote from ABD you use to justify your position actually lists what is actually official, and the licenced stuff is not. Yes, Funko Pop space marine is not actually a canonical depiction of space marine proportions either. Shocking, I know.
And hell, Wrath & Glory, the later licenced 40KRPG does not have special astartes bolters either! (Apart the primaris weapons that also exist in the main 40K.) It is an anomaly created by FFG for their Deathwatch RPG, possibly due some game design quirk in their system that required giving marines better weapons. If the primaris fluff had existed back then, they would have just been bolt rifles.
Crimson wrote: It is. "Well they didn't say they don't exist" is a copout. It is like if some fan fiction depicted all marines with little bunny tails, you could argue it is canon because the official lore doesn't say that they don't. The GW lore does go into detail about bolter types and marks. If significant difference between astartes and non astartes bolters existed, it would have been mentioned. The Inquisitor, GW's semi-RPG with very detailed equipment does not mention this difference either.
Or it has just not been relevant, because of the extreme rarity of a human having the opportunity to obtain a shell intended for the Astartes in the first place?
It is not about me liking it or not. I like a lot of stuff from the FFGRPGs. I just am not confused about what is official.
It is literally about you liking it or not, because this isn't a stance anyone but you is taking.
And the exact quote from ABD you use to justify your position actually lists what is actually official, and the licenced stuff is not. Yes, Funko Pop space marine is not actually a canonical depiction of space marine proportions either. Shocking, I know.
Setting aside that you ignore most of the quote by saying that, since the question of what is canon or not is very important for their wiki's function, perhaps it's prudent I link lexicanum's article on the matter (where I found the interview):
Beyond that though I think this side track has run its course, because if I say "I think Rick Priestley (in collaboration with the other people on that list, but his presence is especially telling) is someone with a good finger on the pulse of what 40k is and isn't and his written lore is a useful source" and you say "nuh uh, because I, Crimson, Forum Poster of Dakkadakka™, am the arbitrator of this and he has less authority than me" then I really think we've reached an impasse and nothing anyone could say could convince you. Like, it doesn't even have to be Dark Heresy. If a British newspaper interviewed a GW narrative designer, the journalist asked "by the way, was the Emperor personally present in WW1?" and the designer says "Oh yes, absolutely! But don't expect that to appear onscreen!" then I'd consider that a source. I am trusting the one who says it.
So, ultimately, I'll wish you a good day and remark that it's a shame this probably means we're not going to have many productive lore discussions in the future, since my understanding of the lore is based on the writings of GW staff rather than the selection of CrimsonCanon.
Again, not about who likes what. It is about official GW studio stuff and licenced stuff by third parties(regardless of who is writing it) being different. And I think a lot of official fluff is stupid too; these days significantly more so than any FFG stuff.
But it is like Star Wars. Most of Disney SW might be crap. (Or not, that's a matter of taste.) And George Lucas might muse about what other direction the story could have taken. Doesn't change the fact, that he not in charge any more and what Disney produces is the canon now.
And why do you think the Inquisitor does not mention this? It is same way detailed than the FFGRPGs. Or if as you think licenced products count, why Wrath and Glory does not mention it and why does that not count?
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Though the discussion of Dark Heresy et all has highlighted a gap in my collection.
Cursory eBay search shows entirely reasonable prices. So that’s a new technically, because it’s OOP, Oldhammer project for me.
Ooh! Enjoy. I and my friends used to do a ton of tabletop RPGs before covid, I adored it. Rogue Trader (alongside the obvious Dungeons and Dragons) were our favourites, but we also dabbled in various others.
The writing and lore detail in those books is remarkable. It brings out a sort of nerdy joy I rarely experience. The Eisenhorn omnibus was another source of it - and Abnett was a co-author of Dark Heresy, no surprise! Eisenhorn practically defined what the Inquisition even is like.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Crimson wrote: But it is like Star Wars. Most of Disney SW might be crap. (Or not, that's a matter of taste.) And George Lucas might muse about what other direction the story could have taken. Doesn't change the fact, that he not in charge any more and what Disney produces is the canon now.
I don't know if you are doing this on purpose, but it is very specifically and explicitly not like Star Wars and the interviews in the link I gave you explain that in great detail.
The FFGrpgs are absolutely fantastic. I still run campaigns in them to this day. And the books are great for just reading lore as well. And if you can't get physical books you can get PDFs easily as well.
I am of the opinion that any licensed 40k material is valid for canon purposes, at least as far as any canon claims can be had since GW doesn't have anything like official canon rulings. All material should be weighed against the rest when contradictions are found, so some obviously outdated and overridden stuff is non-canon(like Eldar/human hybrids).
And if someone says that Marine and Human bolters are different, that could still be true even if the ammo used is the same. The AUG and M4 are different guns, but use the same ammunition. Human vs Astartes bolters could easily be different in the same way. And if we only use logic and deduction that would make the most sense. Humans and Space Marines are very different in terms of how big their hands are, that alone would make manipulating the gun extremely difficult for one of them if human and astartes bolters were identical.
Unless the argument is that marines have hands the same size as normal humans...
I don't know if you are doing this on purpose, but it is very specifically and explicitly not like Star Wars and the interviews in the link I gave you explain that in great detail.
I know. It is more of a mess and GW does not really care about canon. That does not mean that stuff actually produced by the company and stuff produced by someone else would be on equal footing.
But again, I ask you this: why no other source mentions these different bolters, even though they go into detail about bolt weapons? Why the Inquisitor does not? Why Wrath and Glory does not? Like c'mon, you must see that it is an anomaly. RPGs before and after Deathwatch do not mention it. FFG books have a ton of interesting setting stuff, but this is just something that was made up for one game, Deathwatch, for game mechanical reasons.
I don't know if you are doing this on purpose, but it is very specifically and explicitly not like Star Wars and the interviews in the link I gave you explain that in great detail.
I know. It is more of a mess and GW does not really care about canon. That does not mean that stuff actually produced by the company and stuff produced by someone else would be on equal footing.
But again, I ask you this: why no other source mentions these different bolters, even though they go into detail about bolt weapons? Why the Inquisitor does not? Why Wrath and Glory does not? Like c'mon, you must see that it is an anomaly. RPGs before and after Deathwatch do not mention it. FFG books have a ton of interesting setting stuff, but this is just something that was made up for one game, Deathwatch, for game mechanical reasons.
An anomaly that can be explained by it not being relevant and the author not thinking about it.
The lack of other sources mentioning it when they theoretically could have is not automatically a contradiction. And we can use logic and deduction to think about it, and Logic dictates that there being different bolters meant for humans vs astartes just makes sense.
Grey Templar wrote: The FFGrpgs are absolutely fantastic. I still run campaigns in them to this day. And the books are great for just reading lore as well. And if you can't get physical books you can get PDFs easily as well.
I actually agree that they're great reading for the lore. (I find the system too fiddly and crunchy for my tasters though. I prefer my RPGs to be somewhat more rules light.)
I am of the opinion that any licensed 40k material is valid for canon purposes, at least as far as any canon claims can be had since GW doesn't have anything like official canon rulings. All material should be weighed against the rest when contradictions are found, so some obviously outdated and overridden stuff is non-canon(like Eldar/human hybrids).
But it doesn't say anywhere that eldar and humans cannot hybridise! But yeah, I agree with your stance, I just think that the astartes super bolters are a clear instance of such anomalous fluff that does not fit with the rest of the lore and this point quite outdated too. Though of course, the funny thing is that these days, it sorta is canon, it is just that these super astartes bolters are called bolt rifles! So basically we are arguing about the fictional history and designation of the astartes super bolters! What a bunch of nerds we are!
Aye, but Eldar and Humans would never even attempt to reproduce with each other so hybrids definitely don't exist. Plus there was that White Dwarf(which post-dates Mr Obi-wan Sherlock whats his name) which had Eldar reproduction details in it which basically makes any chance of breeding with humans impossible. TLDR Eldar require multiple sperm deposits at different pregnancy stages, have quad-helix DNA (as opposed to human double helix), and a bunch of other things so it is not happening even if someone contrived to attempt it.
Crimson wrote: I know. It is more of a mess and GW does not really care about canon. That does not mean that stuff actually produced by the company and stuff produced by someone else would be on equal footing.
I am going to be real with you, this idea that the RPGs are not canon is just not something most people are going to be interested in. GW has licenced it. GW has creative oversight. Hell, you get stories nowadays of how video game developers are asked to do XYZ by their fanbases but they admit they can't do it because GW wouldn't approve. This isn't some rogue element. This is people who are hands-on, people who are core to establishing vast swathes of the game's lore throughout the decades and often being core studio employees. There's just no point trying to create a fight here where there's none.
I sat here for like fifteen minutes writing a big long post to respond to the rest, but I don't think there's much of a point. As Yakface said at one point, you don't need to just reiterate the same thing over and over, eventually a debate can stand on its own.
Is anyone aware of any depiction of such a weapon with a stock, outside of the plastic ones from 1st and 2nd Ed? Which was, due to modelling constraints, near universally clipped off before gluing it? The one that I think first debuted in the metal MkVII box, and continued right up to, maybe slightly beyond 2nd Ed, but definitely wasn’t included in the multipart Tactical Squad of 3rd Ed.
If memory serves the only other stock seen on a Bolter is a manky mangy maggoty wooden one on a Plague Marine?
Meltaguns and Plasmaguns have been depicted with stocks on Marine models (again the 2nd/3rd Ed one piece if you don’t count the back pack metal ones). But Bolters only rarely.
Which is weird, regardless of how easy it is for a Marine to shoot with in-helmet systems, a stock helps massively with stability and having a good firing position. Our LMGs have folding stocks and I remember how miserable it was to fire one with the stock folded up while standing up.
Having a stock for Guardsmen bolters just makes a ton of sense.
BTW, RPGs and wargames have different design priorities for weapons. In wargame you want of course have weapons with different battlefield roles, but it also is perfectly fine if some weapons are significantly better than others. It will just be reflected in the point cost.
In RPG you might have some small amount of "better weapons" so that the characters can be rewarded with better gear, but especially in a game about well equipped elites like Deathwatch, there is not that much need for that. Instead you want the different weapons to have different strengths and weaknesses, so that everyone doesn't just end up wit the same "best weapon." So that's why for example in 40K the plasma gun is just pretty much flat out better than a bolter, and not by small margin, whereas in Deathwatch RPG the choice is not so obvious as you want to have reason for the marines to keep using their iconic bolters.
And then the writers of each game will probably write some fluff that at least somewhat reflects how the weapons are used in the game. And the usage is different and as a result the fluff might be as well.
Is anyone aware of any depiction of such a weapon with a stock, outside of the plastic ones from 1st and 2nd Ed? Which was, due to modelling constraints, near universally clipped off before gluing it? The one that I think first debuted in the metal MkVII box, and continued right up to, maybe slightly beyond 2nd Ed, but definitely wasn’t included in the multipart Tactical Squad of 3rd Ed.
If memory serves the only other stock seen on a Bolter is a manky mangy maggoty wooden one on a Plague Marine?
Meltaguns and Plasmaguns have been depicted with stocks on Marine models (again the 2nd/3rd Ed one piece if you don’t count the back pack metal ones). But Bolters only rarely.
I posted one upthread:
Haighus wrote:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Would that perhaps file under “you probably could, but due to the sheer size and weight of the gun and its kickback, not with anything approximating accuracy”?
I mean, if you’re struggling to life the gun in the first place, it seems unlikely you’d be able to adopt a proper firing stance with it. And yes you almost certainly could prop it up on something (say a handy flat topped low wall) which would allow initial aiming, but does nothing to help properly control the recoil.
I’m put in mind of the bit in Seagal’s only passable movie Under Siege, where Erika Eleniak tries to shoot what I think is a Mac10, only for it to buck right out her grip?
One of my favourite pieces of Guard art shows exactly this- a Guardsman firing a boltgun braced on a window sill. It is from Codex: Cityfight in 3rd edition (image spoilered):
Spoiler:
Bracing guns does help with accuracy and recoil management. Incidentally, this chap is clearly blazing away on full auto given the number of casings flying out. His boltgun also has a stock, and he has one hand on the top of the weapon.
There are not a lot of Guard depictions of boltguns in general though.
Automatically Appended Next Post: In terms of Guard models with boltguns, I don't think any have a stock.
The Cadian Castellan, plastic Krieg Sergeant, limited edition Catachan Sergeant, 5th edition plastic Catachan officer, 3rd edition Stormtrooper sergeant, 2nd edition Commissar and it's 3rd edition remake with a gas mask, and 2nd edition Catachan officer have boltguns without stocks. I can't think of any other Guard models with boltguns off the top of my head, although there might be another 2nd edition officer I am missing.
Crimson wrote: BTW, RPGs and wargames have different design priorities for weapons. In wargame you want of course have weapons with different battlefield roles, but it also is perfectly fine if some weapons are significantly better than others. It will just be reflected in the point cost.
In RPG you might have some small amount of "better weapons" so that the characters can be rewarded with better gear, but especially in a game about well equipped elites like Deathwatch, there is not that much need for that. Instead you want the different weapons to have different strengths and weaknesses, so that everyone doesn't just end up wit the same "best weapon." So that's why for example in 40K the plasma gun is just pretty much flat out better than a bolter, and not by small margin, whereas in Deathwatch RPG the choice is not so obvious as you want to have reason for the marines to keep using their iconic bolters.
And then the writers of each game will probably write some fluff that at least somewhat reflects how the weapons are used in the game. And the usage is different and as a result the fluff might be as well.
The core difference is that most RPG systems are collaborative storytelling games that use a rules set run through a living DM to process and moderate the game. Whilst players and DM can engage in (or get stuck in) Player VS DM mindsets; the fundamental core is that the RPG rules system is there as a foundation which can be tweaked; but which is ultimately not as worried about balance.
Wargames are inherently a PVP situation in almost the vast majority of cases; even narrative is still built around a PVP experience. So the rules and stats and points and all are, in theory, running without moderation and exist to provide a level playing field of mechanics for the two players to engage with as a measure of their own skill.
Under an RPG system you can have balance all over the place and a good DM can mitigate it somewhat. They can even go "actually Dave that combo you found that lets your lasgun kill a greater demon with one shot - I'm not allowing it cause it breaks the game immersion"
With a wargame such tricks are part of the mechanics and might form extensive debates online. They can be highly dividing, confusing or require updates to patch the stats for the game from the developers.
Overread wrote: Under an RPG system you can have balance all over the place and a good DM can mitigate it somewhat. They can even go "actually Dave that combo you found that lets your lasgun kill a greater demon with one shot - I'm not allowing it cause it breaks the game immersion" With a wargame such tricks are part of the mechanics and might form extensive debates online. They can be highly dividing, confusing or require updates to patch the stats for the game from the developers.
This sort of thing happens in wargames too.
For example, in the current edition of Horus Heresy, the way the rules are written, vehicles, such as the tiny Tarantula (a model which is just above 2cm tall), are treated as being of infinite height for line of sight, meaning even aircraft and Warlord Titans cannot see past it.
"I'm not allowing it cause it breaks the game immersion" seems to have been the community response to that.
(This is in addition to other issues, like the Saturnine thermal diffraction fields doing absolutely nothing RAW, which has gone unFAQed - but again, no one plays it that way).
Just to throw a little extra gasoline on the fire, I don't have my Dark Heresy book close to hand to check against it, but the Only War supplement Hammer of the Emperor from the same RPG line has Astartes bolt casings as a 'very rare' item you can acquire/include in your regiment's standard kit if you feel like paying a bunch of points for it. It mentions Guardsmen 'often' collecting them in the wake of battle to keep as talismans and sacred relics, but doesn't say anything about them risking execution for doing so.
I think it really is just a case of a bunch of writers with slightly different ideas about the universe, stuff shifting with each new release, and a fairly loose hand on the creative tiller, which feels about right for GW. Kind of a 'pick what you like, it's a big universe' situation.
Crimson wrote: I know. It is more of a mess and GW does not really care about canon. That does not mean that stuff actually produced by the company and stuff produced by someone else would be on equal footing.
I am going to be real with you, this idea that the RPGs are not canon is just not something most people are going to be interested in. GW has licenced it. GW has creative oversight.
Maybe true, buuuuut . . .
Some canon is more "real" than other canon, you've made this exact argument in the other thread:
Ashiraya wrote: According to Rogue Trader, the Ultramarines Chief Librarian Astropath is a half-Eldar. RT has -some- interesting and useful stuff and I respect it for its place in history, but at this point Warhammer's changed so much I would not use 1e as a load-bearing argument.
This is why we look for consistency. If one RPG says something different than every other source we have, it's stands on weaker ground. On authors, Rick Priestly wrote Rogur Trader, and you were quick to toss it when it didn't suit your argument.
Because here it is a clear case of retcon. Ilyan Nastase does not hold the position because we know Tigurius does. Ilyan Nastase does not feature on subsequent detailings of the Ultramarines high command, even ones that are comprehensive.
If we had subsequently been told in other sources that imperial citizens -may- in fact possess Astartes bolter rounds without fear of death penalty, then I would have seen no need to debate, but it has not been addressed since to my knowledge. (Only War claims it is practiced, but not whether it is punishable if found out).
With that said, absolutely it is a case of authors not caring too much about keeping consistency, from either side of the coin. It's talked about in the interview. GW themselves mostly care about vibes, what we're doing here waving citations around isn't what anyone was ever intended to do or approach the setting with.
I’d agree that’s a retcon, and a rare example of one that should stick.
Remember, in Rogue Trader Marines weren’t the post-humans we know them as today. Not entirely baseline human, true. And the Imperium wasn’t presented as the same kind of Xenophobic.
He’s also barely mentioned, and no other human/Eldar hybrids are ever mentioned.
But even if there are the odd ones here and there (looks askance at Haemonculi, who may be capable of that)? The chances of such an abomination in the eyes of the Imperium being made an Astartes are an equally rare in the setting Absolutely Zero.
Of course, there are many real world examples of people claiming cultures that they aren’t (Steven Seagal for instance, who seems to be whichever culture suits him in any given interview), so I don’t want to rule out he just claimed to be Half Eldar. Possibly following a semi-successful Mind War with a Farseer perhaps, that lead to genuine mental confusion from psychic probing/feedback etc.
Automatically Appended Next Post: But I come back to my earlier point.
Someone not liking a given part of the background? No problemo. In a nice way, I don’t especially care.
Oh I’ll engage for the sake of conversation, highlighting the bits I find cool about it. But never really with the expectation of changing their mind. It does happen from time to time, and I’m included in that having my mind changed.
But, to extend it to “I don’t like it, therefore nobody can ever claim it’s canon or official” is going too far. Then you’re imposing your opinion on others, and potentially derailing a thread.
There’s also more background stuff than mere citations on Lexicanum. Because it’s not a complete repository.
For instance? In I think it was 3rd Ed, might’ve been edging into 4th, a White Dwarf article offered some alternative, experimental rules for Chaos Daemons. And of course it included background explanations. The bit that stuck in my mind is Daemons being able to see in varying light levels. Not because their eyes are really good. But because they perceive souls, rather than physical objects.
The same article also explained that Lesser Daemons are so single minded, that kind of like Orks they just can’t fathom anyone not enjoying their passion.
All genuine memories of a genuine WD article. But I’ve no idea which issue, so I can’t offer a citation. And Lexicanum makes no mention of it whatsoever.
Now, until such time as I, I dunno, collect an entire, complete back catalogue of WD? I’m of course comfortable my claims here are only marginally better than “Trust Me Bro”.
But interestingly? Those claims don’t actually clash with any well known lore, or the general feel of the universe.
On the bolt round charm point, a distinction could be made between a live round, that could be used to smite the enemy, and a discarded casing that is now a holy relic after such smiting has been undertaken could be made. And also it depends on local custom and the particular mental state of the local unilateral authorities (Officer corps, Arbites, local law enforcement, commissariat, etc)
Flinty wrote: On the bolt round charm point, a distinction could be made between a live round, that could be used to smite the enemy, and a discarded casing that is now a holy relic after such smiting has been undertaken could be made. And also it depends on local custom and the particular mental state of the local unilateral authorities (Officer corps, Arbites, local law enforcement, commissariat, etc)
A distinction could also be made between soldiers of the Guard, noble warriors sacrificing their lives in His name, and cowardly civilians who haven't volunteered for glorious duty.
Guardsmen collecting spent casings is not the same as civilians holding live rounds.
I'm sure I've read lore somewhere about civilians collecting discarded bolt casings after a SM has arrived as holy relics
Granted that doesn't make it *legal*, but also it just doesn't make any sense to outlaw discarded casings? In fact having such a reverence of the Astartes is something the Imperial higher echelons absolutely encourages.
Is anyone aware of any depiction of such a weapon with a stock, outside of the plastic ones from 1st and 2nd Ed? Which was, due to modelling constraints, near universally clipped off before gluing it? The one that I think first debuted in the metal MkVII box, and continued right up to, maybe slightly beyond 2nd Ed, but definitely wasn’t included in the multipart Tactical Squad of 3rd Ed.
If memory serves the only other stock seen on a Bolter is a manky mangy maggoty wooden one on a Plague Marine?
Meltaguns and Plasmaguns have been depicted with stocks on Marine models (again the 2nd/3rd Ed one piece if you don’t count the back pack metal ones). But Bolters only rarely.
The metal late 2nd ed scout sarge had one of those wire stock that folds over the top of the gun. I don’t think it’s supposed to be a full bolter though, but a very heavily accessorized bolt pistol.
The 3rd ed standard bearer doesn’t have a full stock, but there is a brace on the back of the bolter that stabilizes on his forearm. Which is a little nod to the fact he needs to one hand it.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Do we have a direct quote about its illegality? I’m interested in the context of it.
Illegal on World A doesn’t mean Illegal in the Imperium. Illegal within Regiments from World A doesn’t mean Illegal anywhere else.
So the context definitely has me intrigued.
I don't know, I've now skimmed every likely section in both the Dark Heresy 2nd edition core rulebook and the Deathwatch rulebook and can't find any reference to any death penalty.
There is a passage titled "Man's Reach Exceeds his Grasp" in Deathwatch about how extremely difficult astartes weaponary should be to obtain and how DMs should impose extra difficulties on players beyond the normal requistion system for any player that wants one. This seems like an obvious passage to include the hazards if caught with a weapon they have obtained with such difficulty, yet it is not mentioned.
catbarf wrote: Agreed with both of the above. Marines being able to casually wield as assault rifles what is more akin to a plasma, melta, or other bulky/heavy special weapon when carried by a Guardsman is plenty superhuman. The idea that they have to be extra powerful, so strong they'll kill a normal guy instantly, etc just sounds like spank.
Which circles neatly around to those hyperbolic takes being akin to in-universe Fuddlore. Retold tales of the occasional dumb dumb or lightweight who fired a bolter wrong and got hurt being retold to him dying. Or the Munitorum officer telling a particularly stupid batch of recruits that "No they cannot have a bolter! And if they do somehow come across one they are to immediately surrender it to the depot because it will absolutely kill them if they try to use it!!!"
Realised I forgot to throw in behind the "fuddlore" explanation. This makes a lot of sense to me, especially when factoring in that Marine bolters having at least some components oversized to fit meaty Marine fists in power armour would make the guns heavier and therefore reduce felt recoil for the same round.
Give Marine ammunition is typically artisan-produced by Chapter serfs in the Chapter forge, I think it is likely they have a bit more oomph than a standard, mass-produced bolt round, even if both fit in the same gun. Think of the difference between hand-loaded competition-grade 5.56 vs a crate of general issue military 5.56 that was produced to "good enough" and sat in the corner of an arsenal for 50 years. Both will run though an AR-15, but you'll get better results from one.
Marine bolt rounds could easily be loaded "hot". That said, there can't be any dramatic differences because they still all fit within the same weapons profile, so the capabilities have to be broadly comparable... not "rip your arm off or kill you" levels of difference.
Equally, all that artisanal work could just be extra adherence to worshipping the machine spirits of the bolt round that is thought to make a difference by the zealots in 40k, but actually has zero impact on the function. There is almost certainly at least some of this.
Coming back to the OP? I don’t think we ever truly settled on what the kickback might actually be?
If the initial charge is just to get the round moving (a burst of sudden but potentially limited acceleration) before the rocket motor kicks in? It may be lesser than you expect.
Perhaps it is, and is predominantly to wake the shell up, and preserve the rocket part’s fuel, as it’s not having to take it from 0-whatever on its own? Akin to how Motorway driving is more fuel efficient than town driving, as there’s less stop/start going on, so less sudden acceleration for the engine to provide. So in terms of car speeds and Bolt Shells? Maybe the initial bang is for 0-2 in a fraction of a second, allowing the rocket motor to take over and then propel it to 60 in a fraction of a second, and maintaining that velocity? Apologies gun fans, I know that’s a wonky analogy.
But I’d still worry about its sheer bulk and weight. Whilst probably not for sustained periods, the background has plenty examples of a Marine using his Bolter to stove someone in. So it’s not going to have a light build. And by the time you’ve made room for not just Astartes Sosig Fingers, but also the gauntlet of their Power Armour? I’d imagine it’s going to be someone awkward for a regular human to wield.
Sure, a fully grown combat solider can probably pick one up and carry it (especially if you’ve a strap to assist, and we know those exist for Marine Bolters). But to bring it to an amiable firing position, and keep it steady enough? That I think is going to be an issue for most.
And I do mean most, as I find definitives terribly dull in 40K. Especially when we’ve Goliaths and Catachans and Bragg running about who have ridiculous levels of strength.
Firing it? So let’s continue. You can probably lift it. And if you can lift it? You can almost certainly prop it up on a wall. And we saw that in art earlier, though it does seem to be a Guard Issue Bolter. But regardless? If you can lift it, you can prop it on a wall. That of course helps with the aiming and stability. Though without a bipod I’d suspect it’s fairly common for it to tip if you’re not careful.
From there, you’re finally in position to pull the trigger and see what happens. Genelocks exist, but appear to be vanishingly rare. Or at least wildly inconsistently apply. As such I’m happy to assume it’s either busted or entirely not present. So bang goes the bolter, and await its round goes.
But being propped on a wall whilst you try to keep it aimed and balanced? Surely any sort of recoil is going to be an issue?
Certainly without the stance assist of Power Armour and the strength of a Marine in Power Armour, it’s going to be a nastier kick for a baseline human whether they’re firing it normally or what have you.
Would it kill you? Well I’m going to argue it’s not an instant death sentence. But if you’ve got really poor control over it for whatever reason? If it bucks up and hits you in the head, that could range from a fatal contusion to seeing stars with a nasty bruise, and everything in between.
Oooh. I know a source we’ve not checked! Confrontation, the original shot at Necromunda. I don’t have a complete set of the WDs, but I think I’ve the one with the weapon rules.
I mean, we have literal videos of real humans firing weapons of same calibre in this thread. And those are not gyrojet weapons. Bolter is a hybrid, but if it differs from a non-gyrojet gun of same calibre, then it would have less recoil, not more. And as noted, even normal humans rarely use a stock with bolter, again indicating that the recoil probably is quite manageable.
kirotheavenger wrote: eresy 2nd edition core rulebook and the Deathwatch rulebook and can't find any reference to any death penalty.
It's from the 1e The Inquisitor's Handbook, apparently. A book I unfortunately do not own, so cannot give you the direct quote.
Anyway, to get on the topic, all this discussion reminds me that I think the Bolt Rifle was a very good thing to introduce.
Boltguns are iconic, but also a bit undergunned for Marines. A bit like having a HMG as your tank's main gun. It can do better! Space Marines are strong enough to take guns that the Imperial Guard use as stationary, crew-served gun emplacements, and run around with that gun handheld, which is just a terrifying prospect. In city fighting for example you'd normally never expect to deal with that kind of firepower turning a corner and appearing on you so quickly, not without the noise and bulk of a tank telegraphing its presence.
A bolt rifle much better makes use of their strength and size. Marines are still strong enough to readily handle it (it's far from a true "heavy weapon"), so there's not much drawback, and its performance advantages are clear.
I do see the Boltgun as a holdover of the Heresy Supply Chain.
It was by no means the biggest toughest gun a Marine could wield. But it fit the right mix of bloody nasty and comparatively well understood enough to churn out in the numbers needed.
Volkite, the original choice, may often struggle with range compared to Bolt Weapons, is a nastier infantry weapon. You get all the shock and awe of the Bolter (though it’s watching your mates explode into superheated ash rather than them going messily splat), with the added bonus that sometimes said explosion of superheated ash and gas can cripple or kill anyone stood next to you. But, they were hard to manufacture in the numbers necessary for the ever and by no means steadily expanding Legions.
Post Heresy? The Boltgun took on a venerated status. What was once merely A Weapon Good Enough For The Job That We Can Supply In The Numbers Necessary, to an almost holy symbol of the Marines. Perhaps we could even describe it as a Good Luck Charm, and something clung to as an echo of better days past. And so until Cawl? Nobody had really given much thought to replacing it. Not even with Storm Bolters which are far from exotic, being a fairly commonplace Pintel mounted weapon for the staggering numbers of Imperial Guard tanks.
kirotheavenger wrote: eresy 2nd edition core rulebook and the Deathwatch rulebook and can't find any reference to any death penalty.
It's from the 1e The Inquisitor's Handbook, apparently. A book I unfortunately do not own, so cannot give you the direct quote.
Ah, fortunately I have a searchable digital copy!
The handbook mentioned blessed bolt casing charms. Apparently the greater the warrior who wielded the bolter, and the greater the foe the round slew, the holier it is. Doesn't specify these are astartes bolt shells or not though.
(The book does repeat the idea that astartes bolters are bigger, more powerful, and with recoil dangerous to a mortal).
This is probably the badger?
From the weapon description of the "Angelus Bolt Carbine"
Angelus Bolt Carbine wrote:
The fanes of Gunmetal, among their most important duties, hold an oath-bond to manufacture the casing and primary propulsion charges for the Astartes calibre bolt shells. Production of the Astartes bolts is carefully controlled and monitored, and once made, each case is stamped with the aquila and its marker's mark before being passed on to the Adepts of the Machine God. Despite the security and precautions inherent in this sacred duty, it is said a few of these shells never see the aquila stamp. These so called "blind shells" are both utterly illegal and highly desirable, but on their own, blind shells are useless without a weapon to fire them. Consequently, the Fane of Fykos makes in secret a weapon known as the "Angelus". Bluntly elegant in shape and crafted from the finest materials, the Angelus' lacquered stock houses its magazine and unlocks to take three Astartes calibre bolt shells snugly nose to tail. Provided only to their richest and most trustworthy of clients, the exclusivity and terrible killing power of the Angelus is favoured by the wealthiest of bounty hunters and the most accomplished of beast-slayers in the Calixis Sector. Carrying one of these powerful, but highly illegal weapons entails certain risks all of its own.
TLDR: It mentions that Astartes bolt rounds are highly controlled and illegal to carry. but it only mentions a non-descript punishment and that's technically for being caught with the gun rather than the ammo.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I think it's notable that the Boltgun used to be much more lethal than it was.
Back when even a marine was just T4/3+/1W a boltgun could do a reasonable amount of damage. It would do quite a number against a T3 Guardsman that wouldn't even get a save.
These days S4 AP0 just doesn't cut the mustard in remotely the same way it used to.
Is anyone aware of any depiction of such a weapon with a stock, outside of the plastic ones from 1st and 2nd Ed? Which was, due to modelling constraints, near universally clipped off before gluing it? The one that I think first debuted in the metal MkVII box, and continued right up to, maybe slightly beyond 2nd Ed, but definitely wasn’t included in the multipart Tactical Squad of 3rd Ed.
If memory serves the only other stock seen on a Bolter is a manky mangy maggoty wooden one on a Plague Marine?
Meltaguns and Plasmaguns have been depicted with stocks on Marine models (again the 2nd/3rd Ed one piece if you don’t count the back pack metal ones). But Bolters only rarely.
The metal late 2nd ed scout sarge had one of those wire stock that folds over the top of the gun. I don’t think it’s supposed to be a full bolter though, but a very heavily accessorized bolt pistol.
The 3rd ed standard bearer doesn’t have a full stock, but there is a brace on the back of the bolter that stabilizes on his forearm. Which is a little nod to the fact he needs to one hand it.
I had a look through Guard ones, and the ones I missed (not including 1st edition) were the Krieg command squad (no stock), and the singular Guard bolter with a stock- the 2nd edition Tallarn officer with a stocked boltgun:
kirotheavenger wrote: eresy 2nd edition core rulebook and the Deathwatch rulebook and can't find any reference to any death penalty.
It's from the 1e The Inquisitor's Handbook, apparently. A book I unfortunately do not own, so cannot give you the direct quote.
Ah, fortunately I have a searchable digital copy! The handbook mentioned blessed bolt casing charms. Apparently the greater the warrior who wielded the bolter, and the greater the foe the round slew, the holier it is. Doesn't specify these are astartes bolt shells or not though. (The book does repeat the idea that astartes bolters are bigger, more powerful, and with recoil dangerous to a mortal).
This is probably the badger? From the weapon description of the "Angelus Bolt Carbine"
Angelus Bolt Carbine wrote: The fanes of Gunmetal, among their most important duties, hold an oath-bond to manufacture the casing and primary propulsion charges for the Astartes calibre bolt shells. Production of the Astartes bolts is carefully controlled and monitored, and once made, each case is stamped with the aquila and its marker's mark before being passed on to the Adepts of the Machine God. Despite the security and precautions inherent in this sacred duty, it is said a few of these shells never see the aquila stamp. These so called "blind shells" are both utterly illegal and highly desirable, but on their own, blind shells are useless without a weapon to fire them. Consequently, the Fane of Fykos makes in secret a weapon known as the "Angelus". Bluntly elegant in shape and crafted from the finest materials, the Angelus' lacquered stock houses its magazine and unlocks to take three Astartes calibre bolt shells snugly nose to tail. Provided only to their richest and most trustworthy of clients, the exclusivity and terrible killing power of the Angelus is favoured by the wealthiest of bounty hunters and the most accomplished of beast-slayers in the Calixis Sector. Carrying one of these powerful, but highly illegal weapons entails certain risks all of its own.
TLDR: It mentions that Astartes bolt rounds are highly controlled and illegal to carry. but it only mentions a non-descript punishment and that's technically for being caught with the gun rather than the ammo.
That sounds more like it is illegal to commit fraud and corruptly pinch munitions off the military supplies contracted by the Marine Chapter, as much as it is a prohibition on Marine shells.
Whilst it doesn't typically carry the death penalty, secreting away military supplies off the production line is highly illegal in most modern nations too...
I think it's notable that the Boltgun used to be much more lethal than it was. Back when even a marine was just T4/3+/1W a boltgun could do a reasonable amount of damage. It would do quite a number against a T3 Guardsman that wouldn't even get a save.
These days S4 AP0 just doesn't cut the mustard in remotely the same way it used to.
This is true, there has been a general power creep to 40k.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Crimson wrote: I mean, we have literal videos of real humans firing weapons of same calibre in this thread. And those are not gyrojet weapons. Bolter is a hybrid, but if it differs from a non-gyrojet gun of same calibre, then it would have less recoil, not more. And as noted, even normal humans rarely use a stock with bolter, again indicating that the recoil probably is quite manageable.
I agree with this. Boltguns can have a stock. Yet most even used by ordinary humans without power armour do not use them. The logical implication is that they actually have fairly manageable recoil in general.
Going back to the "fudd lore" explanation, even a manageable level of recoil is probably going to feel significant to a Guard trooper who has only ever used a stocked lasgun, a weapon easy to aim with zero recoil. Moving from that to a gun with any kick is likely to feel tough, and if someone picked up a bolter for the first time on full auto or burst and expected it to fire like a lasgun with the stock folded... they are going to be in for quite the surprise.
Bolters, and most other Imperial weapons, probably have some universal attachment points to which modifications can be attached, including the buttplate of the bolter itself. Perhaps even the standard lasgun buttstock can be detached and attached to a bolter. So a guardsman who was lucky enough to be issued a bolter could probably ask for a buttstock if he wanted one.
Perhaps that bumpout on the rear of a bolter is simply a coverplate for some attachment point.
Grey Templar wrote: Bolters, and most other Imperial weapons, probably have some universal attachment points to which modifications can be attached, including the buttplate of the bolter itself. Perhaps even the standard lasgun buttstock can be detached and attached to a bolter. So a guardsman who was lucky enough to be issued a bolter could probably ask for a buttstock if he wanted one.
Perhaps that bumpout on the rear of a bolter is simply a coverplate for some attachment point.
Part of me thinks “It’s all STC based, cross compatible accessories make a lot of sense”
The other part says “you would profane the holy bolter with a part produced at a workshop not sanctified to exclusively make parts for it?!”
And this being 40k, both sides are probably right.
Grey Templar wrote: Bolters, and most other Imperial weapons, probably have some universal attachment points to which modifications can be attached, including the buttplate of the bolter itself. Perhaps even the standard lasgun buttstock can be detached and attached to a bolter. So a guardsman who was lucky enough to be issued a bolter could probably ask for a buttstock if he wanted one.
Perhaps that bumpout on the rear of a bolter is simply a coverplate for some attachment point.
Part of me thinks “It’s all STC based, cross compatible accessories make a lot of sense”
The other part says “you would profane the holy bolter with a part produced at a workshop not sanctified to exclusively make parts for it?!”
And this being 40k, both sides are probably right.
Indeed.
Any old lasgun buttstock would work. However, protocol dictates that you should request a special bolter stock to placate its machine spirit(it has a matching boltgun metallic paint job instead of Lasgun OD green)
R I don't think any attempt that logically concluding how a bolter would work is remotely possible. Nothing short of just making gak up.
