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.

No it's not. Sisters use a modified Godwyn pattern, the Godwy-Deaz, not the same pattern that is used by Guardsmen.

So there are 3 types of bolter's.

One for ordinary Humans, one for Sisters and one for Marines.

There's thousands of types of bolters. Not even all Space Marines use the godwyn pattern.

Heck, there's even pseudobolters.

A Bolt round is a scalled down version of the M982 Excalibur.

Found this over at B&C, and I thought it was relevant. It's a quote in a post by Aaron Dembski-Bowden, Black Library author:

And it goes the other way, too - in a subjective, loose license like 40K, where boltguns really can canonically work in 700 different ways and the IP overlords like it that way - you have people decrying quite well-written novels as terrible, purely because it didn't match their view of canon, or a previous canon source they liked.

Emphasis mine.

Melissia wrote:There's thousands of types of bolters. Not even all Space Marines use the godwyn pattern.

Heck, there's even pseudobolters.

What is a pseudobolter?

Pseudo = false.

IE, a fake bolter, a cheap weapon which imitates boltguns but isn't as good.

Seaward wrote:Found this over at B&C, and I thought it was relevant. It's a quote in a post by Aaron Dembski-Bowden, Black Library author:

And it goes the other way, too - in a subjective, loose license like 40K, where boltguns really can canonically work in 700 different ways and the IP overlords like it that way - you have people decrying quite well-written novels as terrible, purely because it didn't match their view of canon, or a previous canon source they liked.

Emphasis mine.

Nonsense. A lot of those "well-written novels" aren't.

Melissia wrote:Pseudo = false.

IE, a fake bolter, a cheap weapon which imitates boltguns but isn't as good.

Seaward wrote:Found this over at B&C, and I thought it was relevant. It's a quote in a post by Aaron Dembski-Bowden, Black Library author:

And it goes the other way, too - in a subjective, loose license like 40K, where boltguns really can canonically work in 700 different ways and the IP overlords like it that way - you have people decrying quite well-written novels as terrible, purely because it didn't match their view of canon, or a previous canon source they liked.

Emphasis mine.

Nonsense. A lot of those "well-written novels" aren't.

Which has what to do with the point he was making about GW preferring 40K to be a world where boltguns really can canonically work in 700 different ways?

No, he was saying that was his own view, not GW's.

Canonically and flippantly saying "we don't care" doesn't work for me. So screw his opinion.

Physics, Common sense, practicality are all words that have no place in 40k

the rule of cool applies across the board. Marines use bolters because they couldnt fire chainswords effectively, so they went for the next coolest

Rule of cool means something completely different for me than you.

"I don't care because I'm lazy and I don't want to decide on something" is not cool. Don't care if they violate the laws of physics or not, but laziness that leads to inconsistency is just bad writing.

Melissia wrote:Rule of cool means something completely different for me than you.

"I don't care because I'm lazy and I don't want to decide on something" is not cool. Don't care if they violate the laws of physics or not, but laziness that leads to inconsistency is just bad writing.

Whats lazy? I dont understand what your getting at

ugh just wasted my 200th post on that

Melissia wrote:No, he was saying that was his own view, not GW's.

Canonically and flippantly saying "we don't care" doesn't work for me. So screw his opinion.

Who, uh...I mean, who do you think the IP overlords he was referring to are? That'd be GW.

Dude writes Horus Heresy books. His opinion's considerably more informed than yours.

Melissia wrote:The sad thing is that ultra-dense deuterium is theoretically possible... but it's something you get from fusion, a very complex process. Deuterium is just hydrogen with a neutron (most hydrogen atoms not having a neutron). Hydrogen, including Deuterium, is the least dense element in the periodic table in its natural form.

IronChaos wrote:Bolters are big weapons for human standars, but the bolt neutralises part of the recoil AFAIK.
Moreover, there are bolters in imperial guardsmen's squad, fired like any other gun. May it be that the extract you red was refered toa HEAVY bolter? If it was, I would agree.

No. It was for ASTARTES Boltguns.

As I noted several times in this thread, human boltguns have recoil compensators built into them, whereas Astartes boltguns don't.

Keep in mind, modern rifles also have a lot of recoil compensators built into them too, to the point where pretty much all video games are incredibly inaccurate about the recoil they have (I could fire those weapons with less recoil than the characters in those games suffer, and I'm not a trained soldier).

So maybe they use the nuclear ultra-dense deuterium?

OK, I wasn't really saying that only 2 types of bolters were canon, but that Marines use their own kind of bolter is canon.

KamikazeCanuck wrote:So maybe they use the nuclear ultra-dense deuterium?

The ultradense deuterium is a biproduct of fusion, not itself actually a nuclear weapon, that I know of.

Well, I'm confused - since when did the bolter stop being a low-recoil weapon using 2-stage ammunition? That's how it's been since way back when (the original Space Marine novel for instance), and is still described as such in the Lexicanum.

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Bolt_weapon

Is this not considered canon any more?

The bolter has always been a low recoil weapon firing rocket-propelled large calibre projectiles. The arguement in my mind has always been whether caseless ammunition is used, as is the way it used to be described but not necessarily depicted in artwork.

It does not fire caseless ammunition. Spent bolter casings are used as good luck charms by Imperial citizenry, especially if the casing came from the weapon carried by a Space Marine, the Emperor's own Angels of Death.

The 2-stage propellant process is what gives it its incredible recoil. A single-stage rocket propulsion system would make it nearly recoil-less, but this is not the case.

The boltround "explodes", in the manner of a standard, real-world bullet, its stage 1 powder charge, forcing the round down the barrel and out of the muzzle at lethal velocity.

When it reaches a certain distance/time-since-stage-1-ignition, its secondary stage ignites, which is its rocket-booster, thus propelling the round even further along a flat trajectory, improving long-range accuracy and penetration.

This allows the bolter to maintain lethality in both short- and long-range battles, as a standard gyrojet round has non-lethal velocity at point-blank and short ranges, until the round has had enough time and travel distance to achieve lethality.

farmersboy wrote:Well, I'm confused - since when did the bolter stop being a low-recoil weapon using 2-stage ammunition? That's how it's been since way back when (the original Space Marine novel for instance), and is still described as such in the Lexicanum.

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Bolt_weapon

Is this not considered canon any more?

The bolter has always been a low recoil weapon firing rocket-propelled large calibre projectiles. The arguement in my mind has always been whether caseless ammunition is used, as is the way it used to be described but not necessarily depicted in artwork.

Nah, that's what they are.

Melissia wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:So maybe they use the nuclear ultra-dense deuterium?

The ultradense deuterium is a biproduct of fusion, not itself actually a nuclear weapon, that I know of.

That's what I mean. Maybe 40K's infamous deuterium bolts are the ultra-dense deuterium.

farmersboy wrote:Well, I'm confused - since when did the bolter stop being a low-recoil weapon using 2-stage ammunition?

Quite a damned long time ago...

Seaward wrote:Nah, that's what they are.

No recent fluff supports your suggestion.

Melissia wrote:

Seaward wrote:Nah, that's what they are.

No recent fluff supports your suggestion.

Yeah, but statements from GW authors do. As I said before, I'll take their assertions over your personal interpretation of fluff.

Seaward wrote:

Melissia wrote:

Seaward wrote:Nah, that's what they are.

No recent fluff supports your suggestion.

Yeah, but statements from GW authors do. As I said before, I'll take their assertions over your personal interpretation of fluff.

And others don't... Abnett's Eisenhorn carries a bolt-pistol, and describes its recoil as "horrendous".

Seaward wrote:

Melissia wrote:

Seaward wrote:Nah, that's what they are.

No recent fluff supports your suggestion.

Yeah, but statements from GW authors do. As I said before, I'll take their assertions over your personal interpretation of fluff.

Interpretation?

How exactly do you interpret this:

"Indeed a human trying to fire such a weapon would likely suffer recoil of such strength that it would rip their arm out of their sockets."

To mean that it has very low recoil? That was rhetorical, don't bother to answer.

Boltguns are not caseless, nor do they have no recoil. Deal with it.

Melissia wrote:

Seaward wrote:

Melissia wrote:

Seaward wrote:Nah, that's what they are.

No recent fluff supports your suggestion.

Yeah, but statements from GW authors do. As I said before, I'll take their assertions over your personal interpretation of fluff.

Interpretation?

How exactly do you interpret this:

"Indeed a human trying to fire such a weapon would likely suffer recoil of such strength that it would rip their arm out of their sockets."

To mean that it has very low recoil?

I take it to mean that's how that particular one works. Fortunately, as has been made clear, GW doesn't really give a gak and wants to keep as many canon methods of technology function as open as possible.

Which is good, because the vast majority of their technology makes no sense.

Seaward wrote:I take it to mean that's how that particular one works.

Yes, if "that particular one" means "all Astartes bolt weapons". It is a blanket statement for the entire range of Astartes bolt weapons, not just one pattern.

GW has said this rather consistently in recent years, and this is not the only source that supports it. Deathwatch also supports it with a similar statement.

Seaward wrote:Which is good, because the vast majority of their technology makes no sense.

THe vast majority of Imperial technology makes perfect sense.

Melissia wrote:Boltguns are not caseless, nor do they have no recoil. Deal with it.

No thanks. As I've said a couple times now, I'll take the word of someone who's paid to write for the company over the word of a scarily-committed fan.

Seaward wrote:

Melissia wrote:Boltguns are not caseless, nor do they have no recoil. Deal with it.

No thanks. As I've said a couple times now, I'll take the word of someone who's paid to write for the company over the word of a scarily-committed fan.

Your complete and utter lack of ability to argue your point is amusing, but this is not my words, it's GW's.

Laws of physics say they have recoil.

Belexar wrote:Laws of physics say they have recoil.

Ah, yes, "physics." The natural science that involves the study of matter and its motion through spacetime, as well as all related concepts, including energy and force. We have dismissed this field of study as having anything to do with giant walking robots, interstellar travel and communication, and things like nova cannons.

GW makes gak up as they go along, and often change their minds later. Fluff is fluid and contradictory.