Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Yeah, that's right, I said it. There was something good about 3rd Edition rules. Rapid Fire being one of them.

Now I may be mixing and matching my Editions here, my old 3rd Edition Rulebook is packed away in a box somewhere, and I'm too afraid of upsetting the Jenga gods to attempt going through that stack. So here is my proposal for Rapid Fire:

Rapid Fire:

Situation One:
Full Range of Weapon, one shot, Heavy.

Situation Two:
Half Range of Weapon (as in, is Range is 30", it would be R15"), two shots, Heavy.

Situation Three:
Half Range of Weapon (as before), one shot, Assault.

Now I also have slight difference. In Situation Two, an alternative (so S2 and S2A) would be that it is not quite Heavy, but also not Assault. You could still move than shoot, but not make an Assault. Yes, this benefits my Guard, but it also doesn't muck up First Rank FIRE! Second Rank Fire!.

Sure, but the combination Rapid Fire/Pistol wargear combination does this and does it better.

I'm pretty sure only Space Marines and Chaos Space Marines also have pistols with their bolters. And without pistols, you don't garner an additional close combat attack with Guard (all Guard models are issued a single close combat weapon).

Well yeah, so why would we give Guard the ability to do what they could otherwise with a Lasgun and a Las Pistol?

Are you suggesting that Guard should have Lasgun, Close Combat Weapon, AND Laspistol, giving them an additional attack in close combat? Instead of just adjusting Rapid Fire fore all, including our Tau friends, to benefit with the ability to move, shoot once, and assault?

Are am I not understanding your, I'm not sure if they are statements or passive aggressive (not saying that in an insulting or, passive aggressive, manner.... it's kind of sad that passive aggressive has been degraded in such a way that it can only be used insultingly... damn Freudians) question.

No, I'm saying that GW very recently had the option of giving them a Lasgun and a Laspistol instead of a Lasgun and a Close Combat Weapon, and went with the former rather than the latter when they have gone for the latter with the Space Marine armies.

Hence there was a reason why they did that, and since you give no reason why it should be otherwise, I'm inclined to doubt that your suggestion is well-considered. Mind you, you give no information indicating your motivation in proposing this, whether you think it would improve the game or simply be an interesting house-rule variant, so I can't really judge.

However, considering that Games Workshop had the option of re-introducing the 3rd edition Rapid Fire rules and instead went with the current set of options suggests to me that you're writing against a feature of the game rather than a bug or shortcoming.

The whole point of modern 5th edition rapid fire is that it makes a choice between shooting and assault, with the Rapid Fire/Pistol combination allowing Space Marines the tactical flexibility of doing both. Why would we allow the Imperial Guard to do this? In other words, what would motivate us to deviate from the off-the-shelf rules, and in what regard?

Touche, good point. My reasons for wanting to change Rapid Fire are an important point I left out. So I will try to explain my motivation:

Because I don't like current Rapid Fire.

Pretty much sums it up.

It's odd, nonsensical to its fluff reason, unreasonably restrictive given its application, and I just don't like it. Rapid Fire weapons are described as being weapons with multiple fire functions and uses, while now it is limited to only two: Stand an shoot far, or move and shoot twice but giving up assault (yes, you can stand and shoot twice too, but that's not the point). There is little reason to allow a player to choose to move, shoot once, then assault like in ye olden days.

You ask why I would want to give this to Guard? Well, I don't really care about giving it to Guard so much as just making it available to everyone. I think it is a poor excuse of bad rules writing to simply say "the writers of the rules didn't want it so, so neither should you!" Well I'm allowed to want whatever I want. Doesn't mean I'll get it, but I can still want it.

As for giving Guard laspistols in exchange for their close combat weapons, well that would be less fluffy. Laspistols are a bit more restricted piece of wargear, not so easily come across as a lasgun, much like modern times, not all troops are issued pistols. Space Marines can easily make an exception because, well, they're Space Marines!

I would rather give everyone more tactical flexibility than restrict it with the excuse "some guy who happen to be on the design team didn't agree with you, so you should be happy with their decision!"

So why not simply propose a house rule enabling Imperial Guard to replace their Close Combat Weapons with Las Pistols and call their Lasguns [insert favourite Forge World here]-Pattern?

Since Pistols are [Close Combat Weapon + Assault 1 Ranged Weapon], you're good to go and people can still move and fire twice up to 12".

Nurglitch wrote:So why not simply propose a house rule enabling Imperial Guard to replace their Close Combat Weapons with Las Pistols and call their Lasguns [insert favourite Forge World here]-Pattern?

Since Pistols are [Close Combat Weapon + Assault 1 Ranged Weapon], you're good to go and people can still move and fire twice up to 12".

Because not even houses play house rules? That's for one. And two, that proposal only effects Guard. I'm not only up to help Guard, but to try and improve the game. Many people seem disenfranchised with current Rapid Fire rules, though from the lack of participation I am seeing here, I am wondering if all that has just been general chatter or lip-service of the Grognard kind.

Skinnattittar wrote:Because not even houses play house rules?

How is your topic not a proposal for a house rule? We're not GW employees here (by and large).

Personally I'm fairly happy with the current rapid fire rules, and if I were to change them it would only be to allow them two shots in both scenarios (stationary to max range, moving to 12'').

Jack

Skinnattittar:

I agree with Jackmojo: I'm pretty happy with the current stat of the Rapid Fire rules.

I think they work well compared to previous incarnations, and that the Pistol/Rapid Fire combination is a very good substitute for the original attempt at making tactical squads tactically flexible.

Jackmojo wrote:...if I were to change them it would only be to allow them two shots in both scenarios (stationary to max range, moving to 12'').

That's.... um... lemme check. Yeah. That's how it currently is. My, preferred, suggestion would be to allow it one assault type shot at range 12".

Nurglitch wrote:Skinnattittar:
I agree with Jackmojo: I'm pretty happy with the current stat of the Rapid Fire rules.
I think they work well compared to previous incarnations, and that the Pistol/Rapid Fire combination is a very good substitute for the original attempt at making tactical squads tactically flexible.

So your suggestion is to issue all units with Rapid Fire weapons a pistol equivalent of their Rapid Fire weapon? That seems a bit excessive, but it does work with the current rules system. As long as the model doesn't also have a close combat weapon.

Skinnattittar wrote:

Jackmojo wrote:...if I were to change them it would only be to allow them two shots in both scenarios (stationary to max range, moving to 12'').

That's.... um... lemme check. Yeah. That's how it currently is. My, preferred, suggestion would be to allow it one assault type shot at range 12".

Huh, since when do bolters get two shots out to 24 inches when stationary?

To whit my suggestion is about increasing the power of the basic soldiers rifles at range, not giving them more opportunities to charge, which I tihnk the game offers enough of in general.

Jack

Skinnattittar wrote:
Situation Two:
Half Range of Weapon (as in, is Range is 30", it would be R15"), two shots, Heavy.

This is a misconception, actually.

Rapid fire in 3rd was 12" as well, regardless of full range amount.

3rd ed. BGB, pg. 57: "If a unit armed with rapid fire weapons remains stationary each model can shoot twice at targets up to 12" away or once at targets over 12" away."

Jackmojo wrote:

Skinnattittar wrote:

Jackmojo wrote:...if I were to change them it would only be to allow them two shots in both scenarios (stationary to max range, moving to 12'').

That's.... um... lemme check. Yeah. That's how it currently is. My, preferred, suggestion would be to allow it one assault type shot at range 12".

Huh, since when do bolters get two shots out to 24 inches when stationary?
To whit my suggestion is about increasing the power of the basic soldiers rifles at range, not giving them more opportunities to charge, which I tihnk the game offers enough of in general.

Ah, I see, I mis-understood what you were trying to say.

Unfortunately, I would have to disagree on your latter comment. The only two (main) units with that ability are Space Marines and Chaos Space Marines, which also have pistol. Guard, Tau, and others are left unable to shoot and assault. The appreciable effect would be minimal, but the strategic effect would be greater. Rather than being more stationary units, the ability to move, shoot, then assault could be taken more advantage of, allowing more creative commanders of dreaded dreary gunline armies the ability to be more dynamic in assault.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@ Plantuan : Yes, I do remember this, but I remember all the groups I played in (including Dakka Dakka, which was still around then) allowed Tau rifles 15" for double tap. Now my memory is hazy, that was something like seven years ago.

Skinnattittar:

No, my suggestion is that the current system works fine, but if you really want to institute a house-rule to play with your syndics, then I suggest either adding an appropriate Pistol weapon to a model or exchanging that model's Close Combat Weapon with such a Pistol.

Nurglitch wrote:No, my suggestion is that the current system works fine, but if you really want to institute a house-rule to play with your syndics, then I suggest either adding an appropriate Pistol weapon to a model or exchanging that model's Close Combat Weapon with such a Pistol.

While I understand your suggestion, I find it unsatisfying, as that is not my qualm, nor would its application be any more applicable than my original suggestion, and would require a more abstract solution of changing wargear, instead of simply changing a rule. That is to say, stop repeating yourself with less and less content. Giving all lasgun/bolter/kroot-gun/kroot-rifle/pulse-rifle/plasma-gun/plasma-rifle/splinter-rifle/hellgun/gauss-flayer carrying models a R(1/2) Pistol/Assault 1 attribute equivalent (which I don't think all those weapons have) seems a bit more complicated, and may even require the creation of weapons that currently don't exist. And yes, I did pull out the ol' hellguns, which I think still exist in some of the older, but still valid Imperial codices, and the splinter-rifle as well, which was written with the older rules in mind even.

Except that people know what Pistols do and simply adding a Pistol is more elegant than adding a new rule.

The new pistols, the ones that aren't Las Pistols, Bolt Pistols, Plasma Pistols, Splinter Pistols, or Pulse Pisols, would simply be an iteration of the main armament with the "Rapid Fire" type swapped out for the "Pistol" type. So we'd have Kroot Pistols, Hell Pistols, and Gauss Pistols.

This elaboration of the original system is more parsimonius than your suggestion, which changes a rule, and achieves the same result by extending the Pistol rule rather than changing the Rapid Fire rule.

While these would be functional equivalents, people know how Pistols work, have seen how they work on Space Marines, and so there will be less confusion in how the modification is supposed to work, and thus make it easier to implement.

When in doubt, use off-the-shelf parts. Don't reinvent the wheel.

Nurglitch wrote:Except that people know what Pistols do and simply adding a Pistol is more elegant than adding a new rule.

The new pistols, the ones that aren't Las Pistols, Bolt Pistols, Plasma Pistols, Splinter Pistols, or Pulse Pisols, would simply be an iteration of the main armament with the "Rapid Fire" type swapped out for the "Pistol" type. So we'd have Kroot Pistols, Hell Pistols, and Gauss Pistols.

This elaboration of the original system is more parsimonius than your suggestion, which changes a rule, and achieves the same result by extending the Pistol rule rather than changing the Rapid Fire rule.

While these would be functional equivalents, people know how Pistols work, have seen how they work on Space Marines, and so there will be less confusion in how the modification is supposed to work, and thus make it easier to implement.

When in doubt, use off-the-shelf parts. Don't reinvent the wheel.

You have pretty much just said the same thing you have said at least once or twice already.... and you have miss-used "parsimoniou," so I am taking it away from you.

So, really, you're just time wasting. I regret posting in this thread.

Nurglitch wrote:So, really, you're just time wasting. I regret posting in this thread.

It seems we are in agreement of something; I also regret that you posted in this thread.

In a world without assault weapons I could see the logic of this rule. But as it is, giving rapid fire weapons this rule would just have them intruding on the place held by assault weapons. Shootas, Tau pulse carbines, shuriken catapults, and etc give the ability for their bearers to charge into combat guns blazing; they don’t need to have that taken from them by rapid fire weapons. Rapid fire weapons fill their own niche in a manner that is gaming appropriate and realistic.

There is a less intrusive way to achieve what you are attempting, and that is creating a simple upgrade for rapid fire units. Some armies could benefit from having their units customized their rapid fire weapons into range 12 assault 2 weapons. Just move the unit from troop to fast or elite and give the adjustment a cool name like the “Trench Stormer” upgrade.

I really like Jackmojo’s rule about being able to shoot up to the max. range twice if the unit remains stationary. The one downside besides completely changing the game and having to readjust point values, is that it might discourage motility as rapid fire units would no longer have to advance towards the enemy to double tap them with their weapons. How about making it scenario specific and calling it something like “Clear Blue Day” mission rule or something else to represent very clear visual arcs that the armies are exploiting. That way imperial guard and tau could play out these rules without having to rewrite the game. It could even be played so that the stationary rapid fire guys are out numbered. I could easily envision a game where 2000 points of ork mobs had to cross a killing field to get to a 1000 points of tau.

Well, wouldn't Rapid Fire also be stepping on the toes of Heavy weapons just as much as Assault weapons? I don't have my Ork abridged rules with me, so I can't speak for Shootas, but the Carbines would still have a slightly longer range AND pinning, Shuriken Catapults are always Assault 2 R24", so would always get two shots at full range AND assault. So no, I can't really agree with that argument much at all. Besides, Rapid Fire isn't an option for most units, it's what they have, so it is extremely difficult to say it would be robbing anything from weapons that are Assault, as they are usually different enough from their Rapid Fire counter-parts in other ways.

As for "Rapid fire weapons fill their own niche in a manner that is gaming appropriate and realistic." I'm just curious what that "niche" is, as they are just sort of 'there' in my opinion. They are just a weapon that, if used, prevents you from assaulting, there is no option to fire the weapon then assault, even if you don't move, you can't fire them, then assault. And "Realistic?" Really? Are you going to use that word? Because it's not very realistic NOT to run and gun with a lasgun/bolter/kroot-gun/kroot-rifle/pulse-rifle/plasma-gun/plasma-rifle/splinter-rifle/hellgun/gauss-flayer, if you can, and since you can already run and gun, why can't you continue to run and gun? You might be a bit less accurate, as you're moving faster, which is represented by the diminished number of shots, but you could do it before, why not some more?

All of these weapons both have history and fluff supporting them being able to do this. For half the history of WH40k you could do that, but all of a sudden you couldn't anymore. I am not calling this a "great tragedy," but I would like to be more flexible and less static, and I don't think it would make any particular army all that more powerful, it would hopefully just loosen up the game to more tactics.

Skinnattittar wrote:Well, wouldn't Rapid Fire also be stepping on the toes of Heavy weapons just as much as Assault weapons? I don't have my Ork abridged rules with me, so I can't speak for Shootas, but the Carbines would still have a slightly longer range AND pinning, Shuriken Catapults are always Assault 2 R24", so would always get two shots at full range AND assault. So no, I can't really agree with that argument much at all. Besides, Rapid Fire isn't an option for most units, it's what they have, so it is extremely difficult to say it would be robbing anything from weapons that are Assault, as they are usually different enough from their Rapid Fire counter-parts in other ways.

In the game there are units armed exclusively with heavy weapons, or rapid fire, or assault weapons. My Dark Reapers behaved differently in their capabilities when compared to units armed with rapid fire or assault weapons – in this common case mobility is exchanged for increased ranged and power when compared to other units with rapid fire weapons. Nercon warriors, battle sisters, and other rapid firers are not muscling in on their territory.

Carbines and shootas have a range of 18”, Shurikan catapults are 12” with dire avenger catapults having an increased range of 18”. There are plenty of short range one or two shot assault weapons in the game – grot guns, flesh borers, and all pistols. Some units can fire and assault like tyranid termagants and necron immortals others can’t like imperial guard and tau. I don’t think 40K needs to be streamlined anymore then it already has been. Complaining that imperial guardsman can’t fire then assault with their lasguns is just the mirror land version of eldar guardians complaining that they can’t shoot their shuriken catapults 24 inches if they stand still.

Skinnattittar wrote:
As for "Rapid fire weapons fill their own niche in a manner that is gaming appropriate and realistic." I'm just curious what that "niche" is, as they are just sort of 'there' in my opinion. They are just a weapon that, if used, prevents you from assaulting, there is no option to fire the weapon then assault, even if you don't move, you can't fire them, then assault. And "Realistic?" Really? Are you going to use that word? Because it's not very realistic NOT to run and gun with a lasgun/bolter/kroot-gun/kroot-rifle/pulse-rifle/plasma-gun/plasma-rifle/splinter-rifle/hellgun/gauss-flayer, if you can, and since you can already run and gun, why can't you continue to run and gun? You might be a bit less accurate, as you're moving faster, which is represented by the diminished number of shots, but you could do it before, why not some more?

“Niche” means place and “their” means “their” – rapid fire weapons have their own place in the game as do assault weapons and heavy weapons. And despite being a fantasy game we can have a reasonably expectation that certain conditions are portrayed in the game so that it conveys a level of “realism”. We don’t have kung-fu master imperial guard commanders punching their bare fist through land raiders or catching bullets out of the air for example. Not all guns function the same way or can be sensibly utilized in the same manner. “Realistic” means fighting in a manner that reflects the weapon you carry. A gun that allows you to advance towards the enemy and quickly drop to your knees to pop off a few shots with accuracy is rapid fire. A gun that allows you to charge the enemy sending bursts of ammo at them while in full sprint with accuracy is an assault weapon.

You seem obsessed with incorrectly correcting others. I was going to let it go as the issue seemed moot with Nurglitch divorcing himself from the thread, but you were in also in error when you attempted to criticize his word usage and then “took it from him”. Nurglitch was correct in his usage of “parsimonious”. While parsimony means stingy, it also has another meaning referring to the desired degree of alteration on a subject. It is the principal that a small degree of modification on an object to achieve a desire result is preferably too more complex modifications to achieve the same result. It’s rooted heavily in the evolutionary sciences, but applies just as well to Nurglitch’s point of limiting rule alterations is preferable to creating more rules. I am guessing Nurglitch is a student in biological sciences.

There are guns that require a stabile stance for proper use and there are others that can be fired while on the move. It could be possible to move and fire any hand held weapon in 40K be it assault, rapid fire or heavy. If the question is simply can you run around while holding down the trigger to the gun, the answer will likely be yes. But for some weapons the accuracy will be so off that it wouldn’t even be worth the additional game modifications that would be required to permit such behavior. Give someone with firearm experience a pistol and an AK47 and ask them to run around a track and shoot at targets without slowing with each gun, and you will see why there is a distinction between assault and rapid fire weapons. Some guns are made to be fired on the move others are not, this exists in both reality and the 40K setting.

Skinnattittar wrote:
All of these weapons both have history and fluff supporting them being able to do this. For half the history of WH40k you could do that, but all of a sudden you couldn't anymore. I am not calling this a "great tragedy," but I would like to be more flexible and less static, and I don't think it would make any particular army all that more powerful, it would hopefully just loosen up the game to more tactics.

It just creates a half measure to rob the game of tactical forethought. Instead of making a choice between firing or assaulting we will just see a bunch of people taking the half and half approach. Look in the inquisitor rule book and you will see an assortment of different lasguns with different rolls in the game – some are rifle like and others are customized for stationary use and others for assaulting. Just because there is a story about imperial guardsman characters charging at the enemy with guns blazing does not justify altering the way the game is played – for all we know they could be using nonstandard lasguns or their accuracy was shot to hell by their actions. The game is just improving itself over the editions, in second edition no one could fire then assault regardless of the type of gun unless it was specialized to shoot in hand to hand. Different units should behavior differently from each other, imperial guardsman shouldn't behavior like termagants just my opinion.

Skinnattittar wrote:Well, wouldn't Rapid Fire also be stepping on the toes of Heavy weapons just as much as Assault weapons?

My suggestion follows the following logic:

1. Game is already assault heavy.
2. Rapid Fire Weapons are currently feel like they have the right effectiveness only from within assault range.
3. Adding additional shot at long range gives them a more interesting stationary option.
4. ???
5. Profit

Jack

Jackmojo wrote:
My suggestion follows the following logic:

1. Game is already assault heavy.
2. Rapid Fire Weapons are currently feel like they have the right effectiveness only from within assault range.
3. Adding additional shot at long range gives them a more interesting stationary option.
4. ???
5. Profit

Jack

It’s a sensible change and would likely add to the game. But it would require a lot of point values to be redone. I could imagine all the ork and tyranid players screaming this down with a passion. Perhaps playtesting it with a 15-20% markup in cost for units with rapid fire weapons. Tau fire warriors would be 12 points marines 19 and so on.

Heh, it might makes orks feel less undercosted, but in regards to others you might be right

Jack

Something i would like to try out is the ability to be able to shoot and assault with rapid fire weapons but a decreased BS value... like -1 or something indicating that they just throw bullets/bolts in that direction hoping to hit something. You would still be able to shoot at the normal BS and still move but then not allowed to assault as they take aim.

This might be flawed or stupid, but it's something thats been gnawing in my so very tired head.

fabbes wrote:Something i would like to try out is the ability to be able to shoot and assault with rapid fire weapons but a decreased BS value... like -1 or something indicating that they just throw bullets/bolts in that direction hoping to hit something. You would still be able to shoot at the normal BS and still move but then not allowed to assault as they take aim.

This might be flawed or stupid, but it's something thats been gnawing in my so very tired head.

How about making an option for customized rapid fire weapons by taking off the stock and reducing the barrel length.

Short barrel modification: Range is reduce to 18”, gun can either be fired as a normal rapid fire weapon or as if it were a pistol.

By sacrificing some range you gain the ability of charge after firing one shot at your target. Which seems balanced to me, plus it is a localized change that doesn’t affect all the rapid fire units in the game, just the ones who take the modification. I could easily see as being a doctrine back in the 4th edition guard codex. This is kind of a same as the suggestion I made previously in this thread just tone down a bit, I think it is a fair exchange of abilities for rapid fire weapons that could be done for free.

Grunt13 wrote:

fabbes wrote:Something i would like to try out is the ability to be able to shoot and assault with rapid fire weapons but a decreased BS value... like -1 or something indicating that they just throw bullets/bolts in that direction hoping to hit something. You would still be able to shoot at the normal BS and still move but then not allowed to assault as they take aim.

This might be flawed or stupid, but it's something thats been gnawing in my so very tired head.

How about making an option for customized rapid fire weapons by taking off the stock and reducing the barrel length.

Short barrel modification: Range is reduce to 18”, gun can either be fired as a normal rapid fire weapon or as if it were a pistol.

By sacrificing some range you gain the ability of charge after firing one shot at your target. Which seems balanced to me, plus it is a localized change that doesn’t affect all the rapid fire units in the game, just the ones who take the modification. I could easily see as being a doctrine back in the 4th edition guard codex. This is kind of a same as the suggestion I made previously in this thread just tone down a bit, I think it is a fair exchange of abilities for rapid fire weapons that could be done for free.

I think what you are speaking of is a carbine; a sub-pattern of a weapon with a shortened barrel and stock, typically used by mounted units, in more modern times favored for urban combat.

It's not a BAD idea, but unfortunately, my objective isn't just to be for a single army, such as Guard. I don't know of any armies that this would give a superlative tactical advantage. The only one being (one that has relevancy, as Dark Eldar have become so foreign even I can no longer back proper inferences) Space Marines, which already have the pistol version of their weapon, so the change for them is moot.

I would be more interested in an alternative suggestion if someone could make an example where this would be a bad idea? Other than that it is different from what is currently done.