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 I realize that the moderk 40k iteration of Grav Weaponry is fairly new stuff, and therefore not the most well-described pieces of hardware in the 40k universe (like, say, the Bolter), but I can't seem to find anything that describes how a Gravgun looks like when being fired. I know the effects: It creates a localized field of strongly increased gravity, that crushes the enemy in their armour, but what does it actually shoot, and what does that sound like?

I imagine it being a sort of fine, green beam, that pulses stronger and more rapidly as the bearer fires the weapon (explaining the Salvo rule), and sounding sorta like "BiiiiiieeeeeeuuuuUUUUUUuuuUUUUuuuuUUUUuwm", starting out highpitched before going into a deeper pulsating tone.

This is propably close:

As far as I know, it fires no visible beam at all, and the target is simply crunched as if grabbed and crushed by an invisible fist.

This is GW we're talking about, so there will be a whizz-bang of somesort. Given that they like to paint Grav weapons as glowing green out of every possible crack and crevice I'm assuming they fire a green beam.

No one knows how they work. They're like magnets that way.

Well gravity waves are only detectable by how they react with other things, can't be seen, smelled, heard, tasted or touched. But that wouldn't be very fantastical and dramatic now would it? I like this glowing green idea, sounds like it would look nice. Green with white highlights or black highlights? I'm an Ork player though so I don't necessarily need to worry about it but just to say if Orks has grav guns I'd not choose green. I like little bits of contrasting splash colours to show up out of a horde of the same colours if you know what I mean and this is why I posted in this thread; consider the colours of your army before settling on a colour for the effects of their weapons.

Gravitons in sci-fi are usually comparable to 'shootable black holes'. They create a point of intense gravity that can either crush things or force a usually explosive reaction. The two comparisons are 'black hole' and 'big bang', but one way or another it has to do with there being intense pressure focused on a single point. 40k is more leaning towards the black hole type. Why they're Salvo weapons, I have no idea. A graviton is supposed to be an intense singularity and making a bunch of them kinda ruins the 'single' our of singularity.

A very good example would be the device in the beginning of Guardians of the Galaxy. Quill uses it to pull the orb out of the energy tube and then later to screw with all the soldier things. That is likely some sort of graviton device.

Given that the description specifies 'an invisible fist', I suspect there is (unusually) no glowy whomminess. The generator may glow but there isn't necessarily a beam emitted.

Didn't the Mass Effect games have a shootable black hole weapon? I imagine it looks a lot like that.

It's called the Reaper Blackstar.

The gun appears to exploit an element zero core and mass effect fields to fire gravitational singularities - micro black holes - that revert to their natural lethality when they impact a solid object.


I do not imagine a Graviton weapon looks a lot like it, though.

 SharkoutofWata wrote:
Gravitons in sci-fi are usually comparable to 'shootable black holes'. They create a point of intense gravity that can either crush things or force a usually explosive reaction. The two comparisons are 'black hole' and 'big bang', but one way or another it has to do with there being intense pressure focused on a single point. 40k is more leaning towards the black hole type. Why they're Salvo weapons, I have no idea. A graviton is supposed to be an intense singularity and making a bunch of them kinda ruins the 'single' our of singularity.

A very good example would be the device in the beginning of Guardians of the Galaxy. Quill uses it to pull the orb out of the energy tube and then later to screw with all the soldier things. That is likely some sort of graviton device.

The Salvo more than likely has to do with how long the operator can focus the beam in the proper spot to use it properly or something. something requires enough focus to not be able to use properly on the run.

I think there was a thread a while back that asked this sort of thing.

In all honesty the concept doesn't make that much sense. Heavier armor suddenly means it does more damage. Unless this device makes whatever it hits SOOOOO Heavy that it basically doesn't move and the user is "knocked out" in the way that he cannot leave for the rest of the skirmish kinda makes sense.

Otherwise if its a micro black hole then weight and armor really wouldn't make a lick of difference.
if the thing was lifting people up and then dropping them. then armor would still be better to have as most types of armor has various padding and damping things.

It actually reminds me of that one sword from bleach thing. that every time it hits it just makes you heavier.

I think the idea is that the gravity waves cause the heavier armor to crush the occupant of said armor, rather than lighter, more flexible armor just sort of forming around the target, albeit uncomfortably.

 Psienesis wrote:
I think the idea is that the gravity waves cause the heavier armor to crush the occupant of said armor, rather than lighter, more flexible armor just sort of forming around the target, albeit uncomfortably.

While true (lol shrinking pants oh no!)

Wouldn't armor that strong like a 2+ already be structurally strong enough to support all sorts of pressure and stress anyway? i though terminator armor can survive vacuum and deep sea adventures.

 Desubot wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
I think the idea is that the gravity waves cause the heavier armor to crush the occupant of said armor, rather than lighter, more flexible armor just sort of forming around the target, albeit uncomfortably.

While true (lol shrinking pants oh no!)

Wouldn't armor that strong like a 2+ already be structurally strong enough to support all sorts of pressure and stress anyway? i though terminator armor can survive vacuum and deep sea adventures.

It doesn't have to literally crush them in order to make them a casualty. While using it as something as ramshackle as a ork megarmor would probably splat the wearer, increasing the 'gravity' of terminator armor several hundred times may not crush the wearer. It would, however, make them so heavy that they'd just creature their own miniature sink-hole. At the best sinking so deep into the ground that they'd have no hope of escape, and rendered so heavy they'd be unable to move.

Yeah. A casualty in the game does not mean the model is actually dead, just that they won't contribute more to the battle (that takes what, seconds?)

The whole not crushing but making them so immobile due to weight was something i said a while back :/

Wouldn't armor that strong like a 2+ already be structurally strong enough to support all sorts of pressure and stress anyway? i though terminator armor can survive vacuum and deep sea adventures.

Not necessarily. TDA was, from what I understand, developed from suits worn to repair plasma forges, and withstand great heat. It's not a deep-sea diving suit or an EVA suit (pressure in space, incidentally, is nil, hence the fiction of "explosive decompression".)

I am reminded of a scene from Futurerama:

"How many atmospheres can the ship withstand?"
"Since it was designed to operate in space, I'd say between zero and one!"

Hmm i though they where an EVA but i might be wrong.

Just cause the armour can survive external pressure from water and survive in a vacuum it doesn't mean it can survive every aspect of said armour being pulled in around the occupant inside it. We're talking everything from wires, motors, cogs and screws. These are things the wouldn't normally be effected by the sea or a vacuum but under intense gravity they're gonna be flying around messing all kinds of stuff up inside those suits.

I guess that makes a bit more sense but then that would equally feth the gak out of tanks fairly easier than a 1/6 chance.

 Psienesis wrote:

Wouldn't armor that strong like a 2+ already be structurally strong enough to support all sorts of pressure and stress anyway? i though terminator armor can survive vacuum and deep sea adventures.

Not necessarily. TDA was, from what I understand, developed from suits worn to repair plasma forges, and withstand great heat. It's not a deep-sea diving suit or an EVA suit (pressure in space, incidentally, is nil, hence the fiction of "explosive decompression".)

I am reminded of a scene from Futurerama:

"How many atmospheres can the ship withstand?"
"Since it was designed to operate in space, I'd say between zero and one!"

I remember something about Space Wolves being able to fight Tau battlesuits in an oceanic habitat from some old fluff.