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.

So, a major project I'm working on of late involves the use of a lot of mud effects. And that project also involves a fair amount of power weapons.

So one question I have to ask is whether or not the power field of a power weapon would disintigrate mud particles on contact or not. Essentially, should I paint the power weapons first, and put the mud on top, or do the mud effects and then lay on the power weapon effects to ensure no mud shows on the weapons?

Uhh... I'd do the latter. I'm under the impression that the mud would stick to the disruption field, and the power weapon user could just flick it off, or turn the power off, let the mud fall off, and then turn the field on again.

The mud would burn and carbonize, leaving scorch marks not mud stains.

the energy would cause the water in the mud to begin to boil.

once the water was gone the dirt would either fall off or just stick to the blade.


this would allow for some cool steam to come off a mud covered power weapon.

Got to admit, that would be pretty cool to see animated.

The mud would disintegrate. Anything made of matter disintegrates. Mud is made of matter last time I checked.

KamikazeCanuck wrote:The mud would disintegrate. Anything made of matter disintegrates.

No, actually.

Power weapons are not light sabres. If disruptor fields disintegrated whatever they touched, power weapons would be able to carve through a land raider like a knife through a ham.

So is the weapon, it's scabbard and so forth.... :0) The field generator is inset into the blade, so the field presumably touches the blade..

The weapon is not antimatter. If it was anything hit would explode/disintegrate, no save, not just have it's armour ignored.. SO it comes down to Treknobabble, but the 40k version

I think it was once explained as having an osscilating 2-dimensional forcefield (finest edge possible- it would be able to pass between molecules due to having no width) in really ancient (rogue trader? ) fluff, but how that would apply to blunt weapons like T-hammers beats me, and my memory could be faulty. No idea what the current blag is.

My orks just electrocute a hydraulic klaw by the sheer power of awesome orkiness...

I would say that the mud just slides off the forcefield around the weapon, mainly for cool factor, but that's just my opinion

Ailaros wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:The mud would disintegrate. Anything made of matter disintegrates.

No, actually.

Power weapons are not light sabres. If disruptor fields disintegrated whatever they touched, power weapons would be able to carve through a land raider like a knife through a ham.

They can but as even star wars shows its pretty hard to carve through a wall.

Power fields disrupt Molecular Bonds.

this allows the weapon to cause more damage then normal as the target area is far easier to cut.

Power armor is reduced to the consistancy of cold butter because the Atomic bonds are non-existant for the small amount of time the field is present.


when the field leaves the area the bonds return to normal, but the process has resulted in a large energy transferr. the area is heated up.

the result can be warped armor plates and burned flesh.


the Power field itself isn't whats doing the damage, but rather the Blade itself which has it's job made alot easier by the Power Field.



for the inevitable "Eisenhorn Power weapon" argument: Eisenhorns blade operates on the same principal with some additions. instead of a physical blade, a energy beam is projected outwards. this field is much more powerful then a standard blade and, rather then physically causing damage with a steel blade, uses a direct energy transferr to cause harm. armor plates are bypassed and Energy is pumped directly into the targets flesh causing massive internal burns. the massive energisation of matter caught in the "blade" can cause rapid charring. allowing it to sever limbs. if stabbed into the main torso it will just be a massive 3rd degree burn deep enough to damage the internal organs.

Ascalam wrote:So is the weapon, it's scabbard and so forth.... :0) The field generator is inset into the blade, so the field presumably touches the blade..

The weapon is not antimatter. If it was anything hit would explode/disintegrate, no save, not just have it's armour ignored.. SO it comes down to Treknobabble, but the 40k version

I think it was once explained as having an osscilating 2-dimensional forcefield (finest edge possible- it would be able to pass between molecules due to having no width) in really ancient (rogue trader? ) fluff, but how that would apply to blunt weapons like T-hammers beats me, and my memory could be faulty. No idea what the current blag is.

My orks just electrocute a hydraulic klaw by the sheer power of awesome orkiness...

I would say that the mud just slides off the forcefield around the weapon, mainly for cool factor, but that's just my opinion

A power weapon has to be turned on which you generally don't do when its sheathed. And the weapon provides the shape for the field. They're described as disembling matter molecule by molecule. So anything that has molecules can be cut through. Hence the lack of armour saves.

If your going to be paiting your minis in drab tones with lots of mud then it may be an idea to paint your power weapons in cool hues eminating a bit of light for some contrast and draw attention to your characters, even if this doesn't fit in with everyone's view of power weapons. =P

KamikazeCanuck wrote:

Ascalam wrote:So is the weapon, it's scabbard and so forth.... :0) The field generator is inset into the blade, so the field presumably touches the blade..

The weapon is not antimatter. If it was anything hit would explode/disintegrate, no save, not just have it's armour ignored.. SO it comes down to Treknobabble, but the 40k version

I think it was once explained as having an osscilating 2-dimensional forcefield (finest edge possible- it would be able to pass between molecules due to having no width) in really ancient (rogue trader? ) fluff, but how that would apply to blunt weapons like T-hammers beats me, and my memory could be faulty. No idea what the current blag is.

My orks just electrocute a hydraulic klaw by the sheer power of awesome orkiness...

I would say that the mud just slides off the forcefield around the weapon, mainly for cool factor, but that's just my opinion

A power weapon has to be turned on which you generally don't do when its sheathed. And the weapon provides the shape for the field. They're described as disembling matter molecule by molecule. So anything that has molecules can be cut through. Hence the lack of armour saves.

Power fields don't disintergrate matter. they destabilize Molecular bonds making the matter easier to cut through. there is a big difference.

Grey Templar wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:

Ascalam wrote:So is the weapon, it's scabbard and so forth.... :0) The field generator is inset into the blade, so the field presumably touches the blade..

The weapon is not antimatter. If it was anything hit would explode/disintegrate, no save, not just have it's armour ignored.. SO it comes down to Treknobabble, but the 40k version

I think it was once explained as having an osscilating 2-dimensional forcefield (finest edge possible- it would be able to pass between molecules due to having no width) in really ancient (rogue trader? ) fluff, but how that would apply to blunt weapons like T-hammers beats me, and my memory could be faulty. No idea what the current blag is.

My orks just electrocute a hydraulic klaw by the sheer power of awesome orkiness...

I would say that the mud just slides off the forcefield around the weapon, mainly for cool factor, but that's just my opinion

A power weapon has to be turned on which you generally don't do when its sheathed. And the weapon provides the shape for the field. They're described as disembling matter molecule by molecule. So anything that has molecules can be cut through. Hence the lack of armour saves.

Power fields don't disintergrate matter. they destabilize Molecular bonds making the matter easier to cut through. there is a big difference.

That's what I just said.

from what you said, it kinda appeared like you claimed that the atoms actually broke apart.

I just want to be 100% clear

KamikazeCanuck wrote:

Ailaros wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:The mud would disintegrate. Anything made of matter disintegrates.

No, actually.

Power weapons are not light sabres. If disruptor fields disintegrated whatever they touched, power weapons would be able to carve through a land raider like a knife through a ham.

They can

Except they can't.

A person hitting a naked person with a power sword will do exactly as much damage as hitting them with a regular sword. Power weapons do nothing to the user's strength, and, thus, nothing to the strength of the blow. If you can't chop through tank armor with a regular weapon, then you can't chop through tank armor with a power weapon. End of.

Disruptor fields give you a "free" distance of armor penetration, which is why it's good against infantry-borne armor, but not against vehicles. After that free little bit of space, any damage done is based purely on the strength of the wielder, not the strength of the disruption field.