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.

In the Space Marine codex, one of the relics is that suit of armor which confers a 2+ invuln once per game. In the fluff, it mentions that it was the first suit of power armor ever built, has far better design, and strongly insinuates that the only reason it isn't a 2++ all the time is because nobody understands quite how it works and because they don't know how to keep it charged and running for that long.

Bearing this in mind... Does this mean that the original Space Marines, (Back when there were a handful of them, all with brand new gear,) all were running around with the fluff equivalent of a 2+ invuln, because their gear was so perfect? For that matter, has all the SM gear degraded by that much? (From 2++ to 3+, for instance. Could boltguns have once been, say, S7 AP3 or something like that? Meltaguns at S10 AP1 Melta Lance? Terminator armor a 2++ rerollable? The fluff equivalent of these, at least.)

I realize that fluff and rules aren't always one and the same, but it would be wicked cool if my theory was correct.

I'd say they're OVER 9,000!!!!!

 Icculus wrote:
I'd say they're OVER 9,000!!!!!

41 seconds before this meme was brought up. That's an academy record!

Waaaghpower wrote:

 Icculus wrote:
I'd say they're OVER 9,000!!!!!

41 seconds before this meme was brought up. That's an academy record!

Disqualified, due to being edited one time

 Rippy wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

 Icculus wrote:
I'd say they're OVER 9,000!!!!!

41 seconds before this meme was brought up. That's an academy record!

Disqualified, due to being edited one time

I don't get it. Meme? Over 9,000?

Over 9000 Is a quote from Dragonball Z that went viral a while ago. It was in reference to 'Power Levels', a ranking system in DBZ to measure the strength of your enemies.

Back on topic...

Waaaghpower wrote:
Over 9000 Is a quote from Dragonball Z that went viral a while ago. It was in reference to 'Power Levels', a ranking system in DBZ to measure the strength of your enemies.

Back on topic...

Thank you.

Waaaghpower wrote:


Bearing this in mind... Does this mean that the original Space Marines, (Back when there were a handful of them, all with brand new gear,) all were running around with the fluff equivalent of a 2+ invuln, because their gear was so perfect? For that matter, has all the SM gear degraded by that much? (From 2++ to 3+, for instance. Could boltguns have once been, say, S7 AP3 or something like that? Meltaguns at S10 AP1 Melta Lance? Terminator armor a 2++ rerollable? The fluff equivalent of these, at least.)

I know fluff power doesnt correspond to game power like that, but its funny you should say that, because back in second edition terminators had a 3+ save. Which you took on 2d6...

 somecallmeJack wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:


Bearing this in mind... Does this mean that the original Space Marines, (Back when there were a handful of them, all with brand new gear,) all were running around with the fluff equivalent of a 2+ invuln, because their gear was so perfect? For that matter, has all the SM gear degraded by that much? (From 2++ to 3+, for instance. Could boltguns have once been, say, S7 AP3 or something like that? Meltaguns at S10 AP1 Melta Lance? Terminator armor a 2++ rerollable? The fluff equivalent of these, at least.)

I know fluff power doesnt correspond to game power like that, but its funny you should say that, because back in second edition terminators had a 3+ save. Which you took on 2d6...

That's what, a 1/36 chance of failure? Make sure to bring AP2 weapons...

You didn't have an AP system back then, it was all armour modifiers instead which reduced your armour save. Much like WHFB.

Yep. Shuriken Catapults were OMGBroken because they were Storm Bolters that inflicted a whopping -3 to armour saves (between the natural -1 for being S4 and the -2 weapon modifier).

Space Marines! Saving on a 6+! Against Eldar!

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Yep. Shuriken Catapults were OMGBroken because they were Storm Bolters that inflicted a whopping -3 to armour saves (between the natural -1 for being S4 and the -2 weapon modifier).

Space Marines! Saving on a 6+! Against Eldar!

So a lascannon was, what? A -10 modifier?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also: A 6+ save is better than what we get in 6th ed! I can't remember the last time my armor wasn't rended, penetrated, glaived, and bypassed...

A lascannon had a -6 modifier, plasma cannon had 2 energy modes and could be -2 at low power and -6 at high power. Plasma gun was simply -2.

So against a lascannon, a Terminator had to roll a 9+ on 2D6 to save.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Yep. Shuriken Catapults were OMGBroken because they were Storm Bolters that inflicted a whopping -3 to armour saves (between the natural -1 for being S4 and the -2 weapon modifier).

Space Marines! Saving on a 6+! Against Eldar!

There was no additional -1 for being S4. Shuriken Catapult was simply -2 save modifier, so a Marine would get a 5+ save.

The -1 save for being S4 was only in close combat, and they didn't stack, you used whichever was higher. So if you were S4 and had a -2 modifier weapon, you'd get -2. If you were S6 and had a -2 modifier weapon, you'd instead use -3 as that's higher than the weapon's own modifier. But that was only in CC, shooting you just used whatever the weapon had.

^^; It has been a while since I played.

Me too, but it was my favourite ruleset, lol. The codices were horribly unbalanced, but I thought the rules themselves were solid.

ABADDON

WHAT DOES THE SCOUTER SAY ABOUT HIS POWER LEVEL

Never try to relate Fluff to game rules, they only overlap on the most superficial of levels. The FFG RPGs tend to have stats and rules much closer to the fluff.

 vodo40k wrote:
Never try to relate Fluff to game rules, they only overlap on the most superficial of levels. The FFG RPGs tend to have stats and rules much closer to the fluff.

Yeah, for instance...Grav inflicts damage on a Terminator easier than a Wraithknight or a Carnifex in game...for a gravity based weapon...what?

That makes a little sense actually. Gravity does not give a gak about armor.

In Schlock Mercenary, "gravy guns" are the biggest weapons in their arsenal, literally capable of smearing entire spaceship crews against the walls. Sometimes, without even hurting the ship, if the AI has fine enough control over it.

 Melissia wrote:
That makes a little sense actually. Gravity does not give a gak about armor.

So wouldn't it wound things with more mass more easily?

 ductvader wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
That makes a little sense actually. Gravity does not give a gak about armor.

So wouldn't it wound things with more mass more easily?

Depends on how it wounds to begin with. If it involves accelerating them in to something, no, more mass would resist acceleration due to inertia; though it possibly would cause more damage once the higher mass actually impacted, they'd stand a good chance of resisting being moved to begin with. If it involves simply liquefying them due to absurdly high gravity, mass probably doesn't matter at all. Absurdly high gravity can condense a spaceship in to a little cube, after all.

Mind you, I think you should keep in mind that GW's writers are not good at science.

 Melissia wrote:

 ductvader wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
That makes a little sense actually. Gravity does not give a gak about armor.

So wouldn't it wound things with more mass more easily?

Depends on how it wounds to begin with. If it involves accelerating them in to something, no, more mass would resist acceleration due to inertia. If it involves simply liquefying them due to absurdly high gravity, mass probably doesn't matter.

Mind you, I think you should keep in mind that GW's writers are not good at science.

Indeed, because if that was the case, rippers would just go splat.

Grav guns appear to work against weight....and should therefore wound against the number of wounds a model has...I would think...no matter how I look at it, it doesnt make sense in one way or another.

More wounds doesn't indicate more weight, unless you're saying an inquisitor outside of power armor weighs more than an Astartes in power armor. Maybe it's the massive balls of the former?

Grav would work against density, not weight.
So, thicker hulls would be affected more than bigger hulls.
Terminator armour is pretty thick, but also tough.

BrotherHaraldus wrote:ABADDON

WHAT DOES THE SCOUTER SAY ABOUT HIS POWER LEVEL

Vegeta: "It's not picking him up."

I'm aware of the difference between weight and mass, yes.

 Skinnereal wrote:
Grav would work against density, not weight.
So, thicker hulls would be affected more than bigger hulls.
Terminator armour is pretty thick, but also tough.

So Wraithbone...or heck...most necrons.

Yep. Mass is something used for measuring objects. Wait is something used for measuring queues.

 vodo40k wrote:
Never try to relate Fluff to game rules, they only overlap on the most superficial of levels. The FFG RPGs tend to have stats and rules much closer to the fluff.

In the grimdark future, there is only lethal fall damage from a small tumble down 3 stairs or off a small, raised plinth.