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.

Simple Question, if i am supercharging a plasma and the enemy applies a -1 to hit, does that mean 1's and 2's now inflict damage to myself? Logically it would still only be 1's as things like dodging and being stealthy wouldn't make the weapon more likely to cause trouble. However i saw a battle report online where people played a -3 to hit as 1,2,3,4 all dealt damage to the firer (sounds ridiculous but thought i'd ask)

It is ridiculous, but accurate. If an enemy has a negative modifier to hit them, that increases the probability that a unit shooting at them can damage themselves.

No, it doesn't make sense that an enemy's difficulty to hit would make a plasma weapon more unstable, but it's the rules.

A more sensible way to word overcharged plasma is to say 'unmodified rolls of 1 cause damage to the firer'. Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut, that's not what it says.

https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/warhammer_40000_designers_commentary_en-1.pdf

Q: When making a hit roll with a supercharged plasma weapon, do you determine whether a ‘1’ was rolled before or after applying re-rolls and modifiers?
A: You apply all re-rolls and modifiers first.
For example, if, after re-rolls and modifiers, the final result is then a 1 (or counts as a 1, as explained above), then the supercharged plasma weapon injures or kills the firer.

So the only way I heard it make sense from a fluff standpoint is the negative to hit and exploding is your dude firing the plasma gun so much to try and hit it over heat.

Some roumers said it was done as they made plasma rules then handed out the re-roll 1's like candy and didn't realise that it ment overcharged plasma has insignificant downside.
But as it stands apply all modifiers and if you score 1 or less you suffer for plasma but you can only reroll the unmodified failures.

I think you could justify it fluff wise especially if you consider it in reference to Halo. When you are super focused on an enemy who maybe is partly hidden trying to get that headshot or they are further away that you don't pay attention to your weapon overheating and it ends up doing so. The extra distraction increases the likelihood.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
So the only way I heard it make sense from a fluff standpoint is the negative to hit and exploding is your dude firing the plasma gun so much to try and hit it over heat.

This. I explained it myself before seeing your post.

All good points. It can be explained in fluff (basically holding the trigger longer to hit the target) and it has in-game reasoning to tone down Plasma when re-rolls are involved
It makes overcharging a real choice over just always doing it when near a re-roll 1s buff.
Plasma is already the best weapon choice most of the time. GW likely knew this and FAQ'd accordingly.

Just another example of GW making a rule that seems to make no sense at first, but when you analyze it further, it appears much more elegant and/or appropriate.

-

Would have been nice if they just hadn't made overcharged plasma OP in the first place