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.

I was wondering if im the only person who thinks chainswords should have the shred special rule. It just kind of sits funny that a chainsword has the same stats as a combat blade. How do you guys feel?

Sounds good

They should have something. They look so hardcore yet are no more harmful than a piddly little knife.

I always thought that they should give the bearer fear. Can you imagine you and your unit getting in a CC skirmish and as soon as you get to each other you immediately hear the sounds of chainsaws starting to roar. I am pretty sure that would inspire fear, or at the very least the loud noise out of the blue would cause enough of a distraction that they get the first blow.

I always thought just giving maybe just AP6 or something.

Fear is kinda pointless and it gives the entire unit the buff for just one unit holding the chainsword. That and I really don't think the sound of a chainsaw reving up is really going to scare people charging giant armor clad genetically altered ancient superhumans that fire rocket propelled exploding bullets.

That and shred is actually a huge bonus. Going from 50% chance to wound to 75% is a huge boost and shouldn't be taken lightly.

Maybe just take a note from what they did to Chainaxes. They made chainaxes AP4 to show how they tear through standard armor. Maybe have chainswords cost a point or two extra and give them AP5.

But I feel that Chainswords are just fine as a regular CCW. In a D6 system it's hard to find the balance between a simple buff that is hardly noticable and making something off the wall good.

Well when you consider this is the future, a chainsword is probably pretty generic when it comes to CCW's by most means.

Also, seeing as pretty much everyone that doesn't have a power weapon is usually modeled with a Chainsword, we might as well be adding the rules to normal CCW's.

I think AP5 will do.

I actuly think a chainsword should have something cool as all a chain fist is is a power fist with a chainsword

stats
s ap type
user 6 mele shred

firedrake13 wrote:I was wondering if im the only person who thinks chainswords should have the shred special rule. It just kind of sits funny that a chainsword has the same stats as a combat blade. How do you guys feel?

scorpio2069 wrote:I always thought that they should give the bearer fear. Can you imagine you and your unit getting in a CC skirmish and as soon as you get to each other you immediately hear the sounds of chainsaws starting to roar. I am pretty sure that would inspire fear, or at the very least the loud noise out of the blue would cause enough of a distraction that they get the first blow.

OH NOES ITS NOT UBER LIKE I WANT IT TO BE.

They should have no special rules. They give an extra attack and that's it.

Chainswords aren't these awesome weapons for a reason. There needs to be some kind of basic weapon and that's it. Chainswords are distinctive from combat knives because it's too easy to confuse a power sword with a combat knife.


Chainswords are fine. They don't need bonuses.

if it isn't broke, don't fix it. I don't see any reason to give SM haters another reason to say GW hates xenos.

 SnaleKing wrote:
if it isn't broke, don't fix it. I don't see any reason to give SM haters another reason to say GW hates xenos.

Except that Necrons are one of the best codexes at the moment, eldar, daemons and 'nids are all becoming more playable.

I'd rather take it with the AP4-5 on it and NOT get rid of my bonus attack for having a pistol for the same price as my lame Big Choppa. AP in close combat is pretty much limited to special weapons that are rarely accessible to more than the leader of an infantry group, or a wicked expensive elite group, or an HQ. That being said, Str 5 on the charge with AP4-5 and 5 attacks on the charge? i'll take that over Str7 and 4 attacks on the charge with AP-zilch (speakin Nob stats here) any day.

Shred is a good rule for chainswords. What points would you say models with these should increase by? I'll throw a number out there to the wolves. 5 for single wound models with at most 3 attacks and 10 for multi-wound models or models that generate 4 or more attacks.
AP does not suit chain-weapons very well, unless they are of alien origin (and thus function differently) since all armour would do to a moving-small-parts weapon is make it snag and stop functioning. YES, it's the future and YES it's more advanced - but so is the armour material! All that can be expected to be changed is that the blighted things won't snag on tendons and bone. A chainsaw of today would probably be Shred and At Most One Attack Per Round and Gets Hot! (i.e. dubiously better than improvised weapons)

 Scipio Africanus wrote:

 SnaleKing wrote:
if it isn't broke, don't fix it. I don't see any reason to give SM haters another reason to say GW hates xenos.

Except that Necrons are one of the best codexes at the moment, eldar, daemons and 'nids are all becoming more playable.

Gesundheit? Less playable you mean. Well, not the Daemons, they're grossly overpowered as long as you're not too drunk when building your army list although it does require you to use a certain WD.

 Mahtamori wrote:

Gesundheit? Less playable you mean. Well, not the Daemons, they're grossly overpowered as long as you're not too drunk when building your army list although it does require you to use a certain WD.

WD?

And, I was tabled by a 'nids blob list. No joke. I barely scratched it.

Eldar jetbike lists can't really hurt people, but they can get 2+ cover saves like nobodies business and stay out of assault/close-range shooting very easily.

I just find it interesting that you claim that some of the armies that are lowest ranked among players on this forum (with the exception of daemons whom with the WD update are ranked really high) as being codexes that are improving. Last couple of censuses made on General showed that Eldar have slipped from being mid-tier to now be "only Sisters and BT are worse".

Jetbikes are among the models in the Eldar codex with least problems, they're just a bit too expensive. Problem is the codex just doesn't mesh with itself and that there are virtually no models without problems, but that is for a different thread.

Eldar have Chainswords with a special attribute, by the way. Hint hint nudge nudge.

I really like chainswords, and I always felt they should be something more powerful than regular CCWs; we already have combat knives for that.

I'd give them rending. Yes, rending! Then it would be something you might actually want to occasionally equip a character with, and it would give assault marines that much needed extra punch.

Grey hunters could settle for knives though, they're already way too good. Just give them an option to buy chainswords for few points.

I'd be ok with Chainswords becoming AP5. Of course a point cost would have to be given them. 1 pt would be sufficient.

So any model that comes with a chainsword base would have its cost increased by 1 pt.

So then that means that my necron flayed ones have to get something too because they really cool looking claws that rip things apart like maybe rending or shred or fear because a robot with the skin of its prey isnt scary at all especially when there are a bunch of dead bodies everywhere on the battlefield maybe toss in some prefered enemy flesh in there

The point is that there are a bunch of things that should be more then a ccw that are ccws but that is needed to keep things balanced and not have a bunch of MY THING ISNT UBER ENOUGH NEEDS MORE MATT WARD

to be fair Flayed Ones do need Shred, but thats for a new thread...

Its true that they need a buff but shred is not the buff they need anyone who still uses them in 6th will just want them to be playable again like back in 3rd when they actually had a few cool niches about them that made people want to field them for the fancy tactics that ine could use like taking them with the deciever and pariahs vs a psyker and/or a high LD army like the spahes mariens with their metal bawksez

Well, with Infiltrate and a decent charge range, I think 20 of them could wreck that Guard Blob over there with Shred.

What about giving them AP4?

Well 20 of then already wrecks a guard blob most things do but they need something like i4 again like they were in 3rd or have that fear special rule again that at least gives them the feel if what they really are and I think we shoukd get back onto the topic of chainswords instead of flayed ones we can save that for a different thread

true enough.

Chainswords should be AP5 Logically, as Power Swords are one AP point wors than Power Axes, Chain Weapons should be too.

While I do agree that chainswords should be more than just the simple ccw but if it was anything more it would make certain armies ahem BA far too powerful vs some armies