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.

How do unimproved humans, like guard officers, use bolt pistols with any accuracy and for any length of time? The kick on those things must be wrist-shattering, unless you're a Space Marine or have an augmetic hand or something. Is this because the bolts are two-stage rockets, so the initial kick isn't that bad, or is there some other fluffy excuse that I'm missing.

Most likely because of the two stage rocket thing is my guess. Makes the most sense.

theonetruedonut wrote:The kick on those things must be wrist-shattering, unless you're a Space Marine or have an augmetic hand or something. Is this because the bolts are two-stage rockets, so the initial kick isn't that bad, or is there some other fluffy excuse that I'm missing.

Extreme bolt weapon recoil is an invention by some fans and various independent novel authors, probably because it's assumed to be "cool" if the gun kicks like a mule. Remember, there is no canon in 40k. However, if you look at actual GW sources, the most detailed mention about how they work simply tells us that the rounds "leave the muzzle at low speed" before the rocket motor kicks in. There are mechanical ways of compensating for recoil (and the detailed bolter schematic from the 3E rulebook actually does show a "blast compensator" somewhat resembling the principle of a recoilless rifle), which is why modern weapons like the AA-12 can be fired one-handed or even dual wielded on full auto (though your accuracy will suffer, naturally).

Speaking of real life comparisons, we actually have firearms with similar and even larger calibres. The most powerful example of this would be the Russian KS-23 - a shotgun firing a calibre .90 (that is 0.15 inches wider than a bolter round) solid steel slug that is capable of punching through a motor block at a distance of 100 meters. Wowzers!
The aforementioned AA-12 also has a calibre very close to 40k bolt weapons, is capable of firing its slugs on fully automatic mode, and you can get high-explosive ammunition for it, which is why I like to see the AA-12 as the best example of a "real life bolter". I mean, come on, doesn't this looks somewhat like a bolt round?

Also, bolt pistols use the very same ammunition as boltguns, so all of this goes for both weapon types.

Their kick isn't any more then a regular solid slug weapon of similer caliber.

The only difficulty a guardsmen might have would be with the weapons size, not its kick. Bolt weapons are hefty pieces of equipment.

There's also the fact that there are human-sized bolt weapons. An astartes bolt pistol is not the same as a human bolt pistol.

Grey Templar wrote:The only difficulty a guardsmen might have would be with the weapons size, not its kick. Bolt weapons are hefty pieces of equipment.

True, completely forgot to mention this! Although this too is not reflected in most sources, many do mention this as being one of their drawbacks (the others obviously being the requirement for regular maintenance and a steady ammunition supply).

Ironically, weapon weight serves to reduce a gun's recoil, too. More weight = needs more force to be moved. *themoreyouknow*

Also - meet Sergeant Harker: http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?prodId=prod40004a&_requestid=7063672

jareddm wrote:There's also the fact that there are human-sized bolt weapons. An astartes bolt pistol is not the same as a human bolt pistol.

This is not consistent information. In fact, I've only ever read it in FFG's RPGs (where it contradicts information from the SoB Codex), though I also recall someone mentioning some outsourced novel where a similar statement has been made.

In GW's Inquisitor RPG, all characters - normal humans and Space Marines - do use the same bolters.

What Lynata said.

For most of 40k history bolt weapons have been said to have low to no recoil and Space Marines have used the same weaponry as the rest of the Imperium. The initial kicker charge was just to get it out of the barrel, and between the weak kicker charge, weapon weight, and stabilizing systems the recoil was negligible.

This would result in a weapon that was deadly and accurate at range, but wasn't as powerful at point blank, before the rocket had time to get up to speed.

Newer, third party publications (and some older BL novels) have begun to claim that SM use heavier weapons and that they kick like a mule. Many do not like this alteration, and so discard it from their personal canon.

If you are in the "try to justify all fluff possible" and "all fluff is equally canon" camp you could argue that certain chapters have chosen to take advantage of their augmented strength and power armor by using rounds with more powerful kicker charges, and that the extra equipment used to tie the weapons into their suits (and combat recoil) resulted in larger than standard weapons.

This would result in a weapon that was equally deadly at all ranges, but less accurate when fired full auto.

Similar reasoning can be used to justify high kick bolt weapons used by regular humans. They simply chose to use a round that sacrificed rapid fire accuracy for close range killing power.

Lynata wrote:In GW's Inquisitor RPG, all characters - normal humans and Space Marines - do use the same bolters.

They do the same damage for game balance. That doesn't mean they're identical guns.

But I've seen this argument being brought up far too many times to want to say more than that on the subject.

riplikash wrote:This would result in a weapon that was deadly and accurate at range, but wasn't as powerful at point blank, before the rocket had time to get up to speed.

As a sidenote to this: Of course it should be pointed out that bolt weapons are no true "gyro-jets" and that their initial velocity may well be high enough to kill even armoured foes.

Even more interestingly, the Stalker rounds which were used by the Deathwatch to make improvised silenced "sniper bolters" were said to be subsonic - which means they had to fly at a speed of no greater than 340 meters per second - and still be no weaker than standard bolt shells.

Coincidentally, the aforementioned AA-12 has a muzzle velocity of 350 meters per second.

jareddm wrote:They do the same damage for game balance. That doesn't mean they're identical guns.

*shrugs* They do have the same name in the list tho.

Also, the Space Marines in Inquisitor aren't exactly balanced to normal humans in other aspects of the game, so why should it be different there?

The identical nature of bolt weapons has been around since forever. The SoB Codex specifically mentions "armour and weapons the equal to any Space Marine Chapter".

This really has been a non-issue until certain authors of licensed products went ahead to deviate from the norm by using their artistic license and the lack of canon.

Lynata wrote:As a sidenote to this: Of course it should be pointed out that bolt weapons are no true "gyro-jets" and that their initial velocity may well be high enough to kill even armoured foes.

Certainly the standard exit velocity is probably plenty lethal. I said it would be less powerful, not that it wouldn't still be dangerous.

Even more interestingly, the Stalker rounds which were used by the Deathwatch to make improvised silenced "sniper bolters" were said to be subsonic - which means they had to fly at a speed of no greater than 340 meters per second - and still be no weaker than standard bolt shells.

This implies either that they had different (presumably more expensive) construction to make up the deficit,
or that for simplicities sake the game system simply chose not to represent the difference in power. When using identical rounds the one going faster is going to have more power.

In the real world ammo manufacturers make a big deal out of a bullets slightly different construction having a 1% increase in effectiveness, because that may be the 1% that saves someones life. In game terms things like that are rarely worth representing. Just because a round may sacrifice recoil for power does not mean that the change is significant enough to be represented in game.

Anyways, I'm not arguing that your wrong, as I'm sure you know, as we've had this discussion before. Throwing out conflicting fluff is a perfectly valid strategy for building you "personal canon." I was just proving an alternate interpretation to justify the apparent conflict.

The identical nature of bolt weapons has been around since forever.

It's true, but fluff changes. FFG and other third parties are responsible for a significant portion of 40k fluff and 40k exposure these days. It's pointless to dismiss it when having a group discussion at this point, even if you don't accept it personally.

The SoB Codex specifically mentions "armour and weapons the equal to any Space Marine Chapter".

While I get what this quote is saying on a poetic level, I am skeptical about taking it as truth on a literal level. SoB armor is clearly inferior to SM armor. They lack the black carapace, advanced tactile feedback, and numerous other enhancements. While it provides a similar level of protection, it isn't 'equal'.

Likewise they lack anything to match battle barges, terminator armor, and drop pods.

Just as the C:SM claim that the Ultramarines are "THE BESTEST CHAPTRE EV4R!!1!" and that all astartes that aren't Ultramarines wish they were should be taken with a grain of salt, the claim that the sororities equipment is "equal to any Space Marine" should probably not be taken as gospel, when the descriptions of their equipment demonstrate otherwise.

This really has been a non-issue until certain authors of licensed products went ahead to deviate from the norm by using their artistic license and the lack of canon.

That's 40k for you. Things change. Otherwise the Space Marines would still be drugged up criminals, and the SoB would still be their parole officers. Like I said, a large portion of the player base these days was introduced to the hobby via 3rd party publications like DH and DoW. While it is ok to dismiss them for personal fluff, in group conversations it isn't really feasible. If we are going to discuss the whys and hows of the universe, we need to all be on the same page.

There is also the possibility of a lower powder load.

I mean. When I used to hunt, I would handload my cartridges to save money. The cartridges I used for target practice would have a much lighter powder load to make for more comfortable shooting, whereas my hunting round would have a much more energetic load for improved lethality.

It's entirely possible that SM and guardsmen simply use different loads for their kicker-charge. The majority of the killing power from a bolt comes from its gyrojet style rocket-acceleration. The stopping power would be less at shorter ranges with a weaker kicker charge, but at average engagement ranges, it'd be about the same because the rocket itself wouldn't be weakened in the least. Combine this with the already mentioned recoil-dampening mechanisms and you have a recipe for a weapon that, while heavy and bulky (making it harder to wield) has a relatively low recoil.

Thanks for all the replies! Now, another question: how the hell does harker WALK AROUND with that monster? Also, where does he keep its bullets? I do believe I smell handwavium in the air.

Maybe you just haven't considered the fact that Harker is a total beast

Of course when its said that a bolter doesn't have much kick it is in comparison to a weapon of similer caliber. It is still quite deadly at close range.

The lesser killing power is only going to be noticable against something heavily armored, like a SM or a Tau Battlesuit. For a squishy human or an ork its just less dead then at long range.

Hey Lynata, thanks for the real-life-to-science-fiction gun lesson. Most gun bunny lectures tend to come off with a distinct whiff of a-hole. Nice to see one that is informative without being patronizing or slavering-fanboyish.

Imperial Guard-issue bolt weapons are smaller than Astartes-issue and Sororitas-issue bolt weapons.

theonetruedonut wrote:How do unimproved humans, like guard officers, use bolt pistols with any accuracy and for any length of time?

Because they're not using bolt pistols made for Astartes, they're using bolt pistols made for humans.

Human hands would have a hard time holding bolt pistols made for astartes due to the size difference.

Melissia wrote:

theonetruedonut wrote:How do unimproved humans, like guard officers, use bolt pistols with any accuracy and for any length of time?

Because they're not using bolt pistols made for Astartes, they're using bolt pistols made for humans.

Human hands would have a hard time holding bolt pistols made for astartes due to the size difference.

This.

Astartes are HUGE. Human-sized weapons would barely fit (if at all) in their hands. At best it'd be clumsy, and at worst unusable. Same with normal Humans. If normal Humans had to use similar weapons, then it's only logical that they would have to use smaller-scale versions of said weaponry.

It should be noted that the difference between human and Astartes bolt weapons is the grips. The ammunition and gun itself is identical.

Grey Templar wrote:It should be noted that the difference between human and Astartes bolt weapons is the grips. The ammunition and gun itself is identical.

I stand corrected...thanks for fixing.

Grey Templar wrote:It should be noted that the difference between human and Astartes bolt weapons is the grips. The ammunition and gun itself is identical.

According to FFG they're different, though.

But even FFG has the difference be very, very minor (in the FAQed version at any rate, the original version for Deathwatch was basically movie marines, not lore marines).

riplikash wrote:Certainly the standard exit velocity is probably plenty lethal. I said it would be less powerful, not that it wouldn't still be dangerous.

Aye - sorry if that bit sounded somewhat condescending, it was really meant as an addendum, less than a counter; directed more against other readers instead of addressing you.

riplikash wrote:This implies either that they had different (presumably more expensive) construction to make up the deficit,
or that for simplicities sake the game system simply chose not to represent the difference in power. When using identical rounds the one going faster is going to have more power.

The interesting thing is that the "identical in power" bit is in the fluff description, not just a mechanical numbers thing. So I would presume your initial thought regarding some special construction secret, probably using ultra-rare materials or an extra difficult production process where it takes 80 manhours to craft a single round or something. In other words: Space Magic!

riplikash wrote:It's true, but fluff changes. FFG and other third parties are responsible for a significant portion of 40k fluff and 40k exposure these days. It's pointless to dismiss it when having a group discussion at this point, even if you don't accept it personally.

But nothing actually did change. Licensed publications have delivered deviating visions of such details since Black Library was founded, with little effect on Games Workshop's own books. FFG's recent re-interpretations are merely the newest set of things that (unnecessarily) cause a ruckus in the community, because at some point a part of the playerbase suddenly started to propagate the idea of a "canon" out of nowhere, and all the new people like me simply adopted it. Yet it's all nothing but an urban myth.

"With Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000, the notion of canon is a fallacy. [...] Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000 exist as tens of thousands of overlapping realities in the imaginations of games developers, writers, readers and gamers. None of those interpretations is wrong."
- Gav Thorpe

"It all stems from the assumption that there's a binding contract between author and reader to adhere to some nonexistent subjective construct or 'true' representation of the setting. There is no such contract, and no such objective truth."
- Andy Hoare

In essence, there IS no same page, and this community needs to accept that there is no uniform representation of the setting. It all depends on what source exactly you are looking at, for the closer you look, the more contradictions between the various products you'll uncover.

riplikash wrote:While I get what this quote is saying on a poetic level, I am skeptical about taking it as truth on a literal level. SoB armor is clearly inferior to SM armor. They lack the black carapace, advanced tactile feedback, and numerous other enhancements. While it provides a similar level of protection, it isn't 'equal'. Likewise they lack anything to match battle barges, terminator armor, and drop pods.

The equal level of protection is the important bit here, because for the operations conducted by the Sisters this is all that matters. All the other benefits that the Marine variant has are of no consequence for the Sisters (and as such the comparison), because the Sisters employ a different fighting doctrine with fights of shorter duration and less emphasis on close combat.

Also, according to Andy Hoare's Strike Force article in GW's Citadel Journal, the six major Orders of the Sisters Militant actually do have access to "Ophelia-pattern drop pods" - it's a variant of the Deathwind, commonly only pulled out of the armouries when they are about to attack a Marine Chapter.

Sorry for the short OT here, I just can't resist SoB topics.

Jimsolo wrote:Hey Lynata, thanks for the real-life-to-science-fiction gun lesson. Most gun bunny lectures tend to come off with a distinct whiff of a-hole. Nice to see one that is informative without being patronizing or slavering-fanboyish.

Thanks, I'm doing my best.

Now, usually there's no point in looking at 40k tech too deep - but where there is room for realism, I do like to look for possible explanations. This can be a rather fun pastime, actually!

theonetruedonut wrote:Thanks for all the replies! Now, another question: how the hell does harker WALK AROUND with that monster? Also, where does he keep its bullets? I do believe I smell handwavium in the air.

Harker is a monster all by himself! Walking around with this beast is probably a small problem - if you're looking at the Imperial Guard, each heavy weapon team consists of two guys. One of them has to carry the heavy bolter, too, whilst the other carries the ammo! What makes Harker special is that he is apparently able to handle his heavy bolter like other men are handling their rifle. That being said, I've seen some very strong men lift some very big gak in real life, so ... beasts like him do exist!

You raise a valid point about the ammunition, though. Here, I believe the only possible explanation is the handwavium you mentioned. He could probably carry a chain of slugs around his chest (Rambo-style), but ultimately he'd still have less rounds than the average HW team. His fighting style may be reflecting this, however, with Harker not doing much support fire (which wastes ammo like hell) but rather going in and dispatching his foes with short bursts from his gun, backed up by his comrades. Whenever he can, he would grab a refill from the boys.
Not a particularly valid fighting style, but ... good enough that it'd work in an action movie. And that's the most important thing, considering all the other crazy stuff you see in 40k.

I suggest those interested do a google search for the gyrojet, the ideological father to the bolter and some other sci-fi guns. It was almost recoilless.

theonetruedonut wrote:Thanks for all the replies! Now, another question: how the hell does harker WALK AROUND with that monster? Also, where does he keep its bullets? I do believe I smell handwavium in the air.

He's a Catachan, that's how.

Jefffar wrote:
I suggest those interested do a google search for the gyrojet, the ideological father to the bolter and some other sci-fi guns. It was almost recoilless.

Gyrojets (as they exist now) can also be stopped by placing a piece of cardboard over the barrel.

If such was the case in 40k, bolt pistols would be more useful as clubs in close combat than as firearms. The reason there is so much talk about recoil is because the bolt pistol/bolter design deviates from the gyrojet design by adding an unseating charge that is lower in power than a traditional propellant load but is enough to make the weapon lethal at close ranges, and more lethal at longer ranges due to the rocket acceleration. That kicker charge, while less potent than a traditional propellant, is still going to generate much more recoil than the gyrojet design.

Trying to look up gyrojets when talking about bolters is misleading. Bolters, while based on the concept, deviate from the idea.

I thought the primary kill mechanism of the Bolter was it's explosive payload, not velocity.

Both are equally deadly.

It penetrates like a normal bullet but it also explodes inside the target, which allows you to make sure its dead.