<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title><![CDATA[Latest posts for the thread "Rule Idea For Next Edition "]]></title>
		<link>http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/16.page</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Latest messages posted in the thread "Rule Idea For Next Edition "]]></description>
		<generator>JForum - http://www.jforum.net</generator>
			<item>
				<title>Rule Idea For Next Edition </title>
				<description><![CDATA[ Does anyone think it would be cool to have a backfire rule on some guns?<br /> <br /> <br /> It could be kind of like 'Get's Hot' but instead of instanly taking a wound if you roll a 1, roll the dice again and on a 4+ or something the gun backfires, the model takes a wound, and you can't use the weapon again (sinse it probably got wreacked after backfiring) or something like that. The gun only wouldn't work if you rolled the 4+ after rolling the 1. If you roll a 1, 2, 3 it would be like the gun jamming or something so the model wouldn't be able to shoot next turn (representing the model having to unjam his gun).<br /> <br /> Any Comments?]]></description>
				<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/231258/582340.page</guid>
				<link>http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/231258/582340.page</link>
				<pubDate><![CDATA[Tue, 24 Feb 2009 01:38:19]]> GMT</pubDate>
				<author><![CDATA[ Waaagh_Aun'va]]></author>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>Rule Idea For Next Edition </title>
				<description><![CDATA[ I think guns don't jam often enough to warrent that kind of rule. Now if that was a <span class="glossaryitem" onmouseover='gp(341);'>d20</span> it might make sense but its only a <span class="glossaryitem" onmouseover='gp(24);'>d6</span> so there's not enough numbers to accurately depict jamming. You sound like me when im bored, think up random rules that sound great but can never get to quite work.]]></description>
				<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/231258/582379.page</guid>
				<link>http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/231258/582379.page</link>
				<pubDate><![CDATA[Tue, 24 Feb 2009 02:08:46]]> GMT</pubDate>
				<author><![CDATA[ SauerKRAUT220]]></author>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>Rule Idea For Next Edition </title>
				<description><![CDATA[ Well, why not make it "On a Roll of 1 to hit, the gun may have jammed. Roll <span class="glossaryitem" onmouseover='gp(1);'>2d6</span>. If a Double 1 is rolled, the gun Jams, backfires or some other suitably horrific event"<br /> <br /> Of course, the problem is its a finicky rule that has no real need to be there. And again yeah its more suited to a <span class="glossaryitem" onmouseover='gp(341);'>d20</span> game]]></description>
				<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/231258/582402.page</guid>
				<link>http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/231258/582402.page</link>
				<pubDate><![CDATA[Tue, 24 Feb 2009 02:27:24]]> GMT</pubDate>
				<author><![CDATA[ Waaaaaaagh!]]></author>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>Rule Idea For Next Edition </title>
				<description><![CDATA[ That is just a slightly different way of doing 'Get's Hot!'<br /> <br /> It is quicker and easier for gameplay to give the 'Get's Hot! rule to a new type of gun that you want to make hazardous.]]></description>
				<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/231258/582893.page</guid>
				<link>http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/231258/582893.page</link>
				<pubDate><![CDATA[Tue, 24 Feb 2009 11:14:45]]> GMT</pubDate>
				<author><![CDATA[ Kilkrazy]]></author>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>Rule Idea For Next Edition </title>
				<description><![CDATA[ Complicated, fluff-less, annoying, pointless. I can't think of a single weapon this could be applied to, and although weapons do jam in real life, rolling a bunch of misses probably represents jamming better than this rule does. As for back firing, any weapon that isn't as devastating as a Plasma weapon (which I wouldn't wield if I were anyone unless it was the only weapon I had and a Terminator was bearing down on me), but has a one in twelve chance of killing the user, I don't think anyone would want to field it.<br /> <br /> On a side note, I think Imperial Plasma weapons should lose "Get's Hot." It's just annoying and really brings the weapon down as an option (at least for units with 5+ armor saves or worse), below its point value at least.]]></description>
				<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/231258/583583.page</guid>
				<link>http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/231258/583583.page</link>
				<pubDate><![CDATA[Tue, 24 Feb 2009 19:03:21]]> GMT</pubDate>
				<author><![CDATA[ Skinnattittar]]></author>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>Rule Idea For Next Edition </title>
				<description><![CDATA[ There is that system in Dark Heresey (percentile system) but i find it makes more sense as its a roll playing game, in <span class="glossaryitem" onmouseover='gp(3);'>40k</span>, i just believe it would be a slow down to the game....]]></description>
				<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/231258/587723.page</guid>
				<link>http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/231258/587723.page</link>
				<pubDate><![CDATA[Thu, 26 Feb 2009 22:31:10]]> GMT</pubDate>
				<author><![CDATA[ Ciaphas-Cain]]></author>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>Re:Rule Idea For Next Edition </title>
				<description><![CDATA[ They had something like that in 2nd edition, related to the rapid fire dice. It slowed the game way down, but was occasionally kinda funny.]]></description>
				<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/231258/587743.page</guid>
				<link>http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/231258/587743.page</link>
				<pubDate><![CDATA[Thu, 26 Feb 2009 22:45:01]]> GMT</pubDate>
				<author><![CDATA[ warpcrafter]]></author>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>Rule Idea For Next Edition </title>
				<description><![CDATA[ Yes, sustained fire weapons could Jam in 2nd edition. It sucked and made sustained fire weapons quite lame. <br /> <br /> Back then weapons did not have a "Heavy X" stat. They had "Sustained Fire X Dice" stat where X= the number of sustained fire dice you would roll. The sustained fire dice were 6 sided and had a "jam" on one face, a "1" on two faces, a "2" on two faces and a "3" on one face.<br /> <br /> So with the assault cannon before rolling to hit you would roll 3 sustained fire dice. For every "jam" you rolled you had to spend one shooting phase clearing the jam instead of shooting. If you rolled 3 jams the cannon blew up and killed the firer instantly. Usually you would get 2 to 4 shots and a jam. Of course, back then they had a 48" range, S8 and -3 armor modifier (AP3 equivalent, roughly.) <br /> <br /> And games only lasted 4 turns so if your Heavy Bolter jammed you effectively lose it for 1/4th of the game. It was way better to just take a missile launcher or lascannon. <br /> <br /> Weapon Jamming is a dumb rule. It's effectively represented by a model's <span class="glossaryitem" onmouseover='gp(14);'>BS</span> in 3rd, 4th, 5th edition. When a model fails a roll to hit it represents any number of things happening such as the round being a dud, the gun jams, a bird gak on his goggles as he was about to fire, etc.  ]]></description>
				<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/231258/589150.page</guid>
				<link>http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/231258/589150.page</link>
				<pubDate><![CDATA[Fri, 27 Feb 2009 19:26:22]]> GMT</pubDate>
				<author><![CDATA[ Brian P]]></author>
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>