PDA

View Full Version : Chainswords and Close combat weapons



Deadmanwade
24-11-2007, 12:52
Here's something my friend remarked on today during a 40k apoc battle.
Why is a chainsword exactly the same as a rifle butt or a knife?
Surely a spinning, buzzing, flesh tearing sword is going to do a lot more damage than a knife. In all the fluff, the chainsword cuts down most things at any rate.

They do look wicked though.

k'ron
24-11-2007, 13:01
A lot of it has to do with the streamlining of the 40K rules set. Back in second edition most weapons had their own unique stats such as the chainsword and even the chainaxe.

The downside for this was it often slowed the game down as things like armour penetration often involved rolling things like D3 + D4 + D20 + X, which took quite a while.

The simplification of the chainsword to a simple close combat weapon was for a rules benefit to speed up the game.

If every weapon was a killing machine like in the fluff a marine army would only need to consist of about ten minatures to kill an apocalypse sized force for example.

Gorbad Ironclaw
24-11-2007, 13:05
Because if you wanted it to be more realistic the chainsword would likely be a terrible close combat weapon. Brutal if you hit right, yeah, but oh so tempremental.

Hellebore
24-11-2007, 13:05
A lot of it has to do with the streamlining of the 40K rules set. Back in second edition most weapons had their own unique stats such as the chainsword and even the chainaxe.

The downside for this was it often slowed the game down as things like armour penetration often involved rolling things like D3 + D4 + D20 + X, which took quite a while.

The simplification of the chainsword to a simple close combat weapon was for a rules benefit to speed up the game.

If every weapon was a killing machine like in the fluff a marine army would only need to consist of about ten minatures to kill an apocalypse sized force for example.


That's just a tad exaggerated - 10 space marines would be obliterated by a single Baneblade shell.

With 5th ed perhaps they will add a little bit more variety to combat weapons.

Chain weapons should probably get to re-roll failed to wound rolls...


Hellebore

jfjnpxmy
24-11-2007, 13:08
Because if you wanted it to be more realistic the chainsword would likely be a terrible close combat weapon. Brutal if you hit right, yeah, but oh so tempremental.

"When attacking with chainswords in close combat, roll 1D6. On a roll of 1, it hits a zipper, belt buckle, shoulderpad or helmet at exactly the wrong angle and goes zipping off in a random direction while making a horrible noise. Your squad takes one wound, no saves, and the model wielding the chainsword has to spend the next round of combat looking for it."

different13
24-11-2007, 14:28
If you want a better idea of what the weapons in 40K are capable of, download the Inquisitor rules from the specialist games site.

A chainsword is nearly twice as good as a regular sword, afaik.

Ignore the rules for the gauss flayer though, lol.

While you're there, look up the power-halberd. That's just sick.

Avenger2040
24-11-2007, 15:05
Well you can make a Chainsword give +1 Str or re-roll to wound so it will not affect greatly the game speed.

Heru Talon
24-11-2007, 15:09
Personally I don't treat ordinary Combat Knives or Rifle Butts as CCWs (I leave that classification for larger more deadly weapons, like swords, chainswords, Catachan Knives etc).

Askari
24-11-2007, 15:42
Combat Knives at al, are not CCWs usually in terms of the rules, in that, say Dark Angels, it says all Space Marines [not as a rule, but some background info to explain why they have any attacks in close combat] are armed with a close weapon of some sort, such as a Combat Knife, but it doesn't confer a bonus for 2 CCWs, else Dark Angels would have the bonus, due to also possessing a Bolt Pistol.

Chaos Space Marines, often armed with Chainswords, do also count as being armed with CCWs, so do Assault Marines :)

Liteswitch
24-11-2007, 16:34
Well you can make a Chainsword give +1 Str or re-roll to wound so it will not affect greatly the game speed.

You introduce one rule for one weapon in CC, and suddenly everyone will be whinging and demanding their weapon gets extra abilities in CC, and then we're back at 2nd ed. Which although I liked, The CC phase had to go.

MrBigMr
24-11-2007, 16:58
If you want special rules for ya chainwords, use them as power weapons. When one thing gets special rules, everyone will want them. "Why are choppas not super?" "Eldar tech is superior to all, our monofilagment blades should all be power weapons." Etc.

Galaspar
24-11-2007, 18:50
I think the main reason the chainsword has no special rules these days is that when it had it's own profile, it was strength 4. These days, in most cases it'll be in the hands of some kind of Marine, so it'll be strength 4 anyway. They must have not wanted to change it's power level in the transition from 2nd to 3rd ed by giving it a special rule that it didn't have before.

kikkoman
24-11-2007, 19:25
Had an idea before of penalizing units without ccw's in close combat

a guy swinging a rifle is gonna do bad against a guy with a chainsaw.

so anyone without a ccw gets -1 ws.

what if folks with knives vs chainswords got -1 ws to represent the disadvantage. It's a minor thing.

Grazzy
24-11-2007, 19:41
Its just streamlining the rules as somebody else said. I would like to see a re-roll to wounf though, as with an average S4 marine a re-roll to wound will not do much if it does not ignore saves.

mistformsquirrel
24-11-2007, 19:47
I'm perfectly OK with it as it is. Every CCW that isn't a power weapon is equal, and this works fine.

One important thing to remember is that everything is grossly abstracted in 40k.

Examples: An Imperial Guardsmen and an Ork are the same Strength. Now looking at Orks, and then looking at Humans - one would ask why Orks are not S4. Well there's a couple reasons I think. The first is simple game balance. But the second is every bit as relevant, and its that every category covers a BROAD array of things.

S3 goes from fairly weedy humans all the way up to bulging normal Ork Boyz. Space Marines on the other hand are S4, which is equal to a Nob; but no unmodified human can equal it.

A Chainsword is only so much of an advantage - an advantage that, while strong, is not enough to be carried over into the highly abstracted rules of 40k. If it were an RPG - you'd bet the Chainsword would be better than a bayonet; but it isn't, and thus everything is simplified for speed.

Helicon_One
24-11-2007, 22:05
If chainswords were superior close combat weapons to combat knives then modern day soldiers would be fixing hedge trimmers to their rifles rather than bayonets. A chainsword is a heavy complex weapon that is a lot harder to wield effectively than a dagger or short sword, and is taken more for its fear factor than any benefits it may grant to the user in combat.

Tim

Warlord Gnashgrod
24-11-2007, 22:09
well, if you want to make the chainsword different from a regular ccw, paint in special, like metalic blue or green, and have it represent a power weapon. I do.

Greatoliver
24-11-2007, 23:56
I would say that it should be left to smaller scale stuff like Necromunda - it would get complicated and people wouldn't like it... As said above!

LoneSniperSG
25-11-2007, 02:12
If every weapon was a killing machine like in the fluff a marine army would only need to consist of about ten minatures to kill an apocalypse sized force for example.

They can, if you use Movie Marine rulez.

As far as the CCW thing, I ran into this problem before, but it was the reverse. "Does a marine holding a combat knife mean he is armed with a bolter and CCW?"

I agree with the fact chainweapons should be above normal CCW's, but when considering standard swords, axes and knives in my Space Wolves squads, it should be tied in the same. Having chain-weapons count as a power weapon would make them expensive and probably not very popular. Having them count as their own class would make them a pain in the **** like before, especially for players who have a large amount of them, like me.

However, I realize now that some of us, like me and other Space Wolves players, have access to a better form of Chainsword that counts as a power weapon. It is rolled in with our normal power weapons, adds +1 to strength, and is referred to as a "Frost blade" or "Frost Axe". I'm also fairly sure the chainsword might not be in the new SW codex. Why? Just has that feeling, you know..

azrael22
25-11-2007, 02:29
As far as the CCW thing, I ran into this problem before, but it was the reverse. "Does a marine holding a combat knife mean he is armed with a bolter and CCW?"



Even if it did count as that, he would only get one attack still. You only get extra attacks from 2 CCWs or 1 CCW and 1 Pistol.

Therefore, 1 CCW and a 2 handed weapon give no extra attacks.

Also, as stated above, the rules are such that they cover broad ranges and make generalities. A chainsword has the same rules as a regular sword for the same reason an Ork boy is the same Str. as a guardsman. Generalities.

dblaz3r
25-11-2007, 02:42
But doesnt the true grit rule for space wolves mean that bolters are handled like pistols? Meaning 2ccws?

Lisiecki
25-11-2007, 05:29
If chainswords were superior close combat weapons to combat knives then modern day soldiers would be fixing hedge trimmers to their rifles rather than bayonets. A chainsword is a heavy complex weapon that is a lot harder to wield effectively than a dagger or short sword, and is taken more for its fear factor than any benefits it may grant to the user in combat.

Tim

Really?

And here i thought that the imperial fists and that many guards men, such as Gaunt were able to deftly manover with chain swords in duels?
I guess thats just the source material lying to me again


But doesnt the true grit rule for space wolves mean that bolters are handled like pistols? Meaning 2ccws?

Yes, but you also never get the bonus on the charge

zendral
25-11-2007, 05:39
It always seemed like chainswords should get a little something extra because of what it is. Obviously more advanced than a normal CC weapond. Nothing game breaking, nothing uber. I think it should do this: any results of a 1 when wounding allow a re-roll. Of course this is just a wish, so...barring the nightmare of streamlining.

AmKhaibitu
25-11-2007, 08:18
Really?

I guess thats just the source material lying to me again


Or it could be that the author of that source material doesn't have a grasp on the actual technicalities of what they're writing.

WLBjork
25-11-2007, 08:38
May want to take another look at the Gaunt books (and the Cain books for that matter).

Gaunt is good with a chainsword, but it never says it's easy for him to wield the chainsword.

Burning Star IV
25-11-2007, 08:38
I think they should grant at least +3 strength, as I once made a working miniature chainsword to use as a butter knife and letter opener. It had noticeably more damaging effects on envelopes, toast, and other things of that nature.

GMillar
25-11-2007, 08:51
But doesnt the true grit rule for space wolves mean that bolters are handled like pistols? Meaning 2ccws?

If you read the true grit rule (at least in the latest SM codex) I believe it says that any Marine with true grit is assumed to also have a close combat weapon.

I think it's safe to assume that pretty much every infantry model in the game counts as having a close combat weapon, since they all get to attack in close combat. How many units have a pistol but no CCW anyway?

mongoosedog300
25-11-2007, 10:23
most imperial armies use chainswords in their dedicated close combat squads, and even outside of it. I say make chainswords the basis for close combat, and make everything else weaker :p

Askari
25-11-2007, 10:41
May want to take another look at the Gaunt books (and the Cain books for that matter).

Gaunt is good with a chainsword, but it never says it's easy for him to wield the chainsword.

Or perhaps, just maybe, in 38,000 years time they've developed a Chainsword which is easier to wield and more damaging than your average chainsaw these days.

Supremearchmarshal
25-11-2007, 14:43
Chainswords ARE better than most close combat weapons - you don't get +1 A for a knife, rifle butt or bayonet.

Askari
25-11-2007, 14:45
Chainswords ARE better than most close combat weapons - you don't get +1 A for a knife, rifle butt or bayonet.

Someone else noticed! Woo!

elvinltl
25-11-2007, 15:54
Well, it's probably for balanced. Eldar Scrop ChainSword gets +1S though.

Rotten
25-11-2007, 16:20
Anyone who wants chainswords to be "fluffy" and different from other CCWs should play Inquisitor or Necromunda and stop whining.

Calistarius
25-11-2007, 18:01
Has anybody here actually used a chainsaw? Hitting people with them is a terrible idea. I'd rather be armed with a spoon than a chainsword.

MrBigMr
25-11-2007, 18:24
Has anybody here actually used a chainsaw? Hitting people with them is a terrible idea. I'd rather be armed with a spoon than a chainsword.
http://pictures.deadlycomputer.com/d/9956-3/250px-Bruce_Campbell_Army_of_Darkness.jpg

Lisiecki
25-11-2007, 18:27
Chainswords ARE better than most close combat weapons - you don't get +1 A for a knife, rifle butt or bayonet.

Ya, you do, look at, the rules.

you get 1 close combat attact for existing
you get another for having a close combat weapon in the hand you dont have a weapon in
you can get others, for various things

Lisiecki
25-11-2007, 18:28
I think they should grant at least +3 strength, as I once made a working miniature chainsword to use as a butter knife and letter opener. It had noticeably more damaging effects on envelopes, toast, and other things of that nature.

Really, a chain sword should be almost as good as a chain fist
really?

Templarx88
25-11-2007, 18:57
I think it's safe to assume that pretty much every infantry model in the game counts as having a close combat weapon, since they all get to attack in close combat.

This makes me giggle, because it makes it seem like unless you have some sort of -designated- close combat weapon, you cant engage people in melee.

Heru Talon
25-11-2007, 19:58
This makes me giggle, because it makes it seem like unless you have some sort of -designated- close combat weapon, you cant engage people in melee.

Some people seem to believe that in the future people (and aliens) don't punch, kick or bite anymore.

Pandir
25-11-2007, 20:14
Some people seem to believe that in the future people (and aliens) don't punch, kick or bite anymore.

You would probably break something if you tried to bite or punch Space Marine armor,Tyranid chitin ect.

Slaaneshi Slave
25-11-2007, 20:18
You would probably break something if you tried to bite or punch Space Marine armor,Tyranid chitin ect.

I refer you back to Platoon.

"Holy ****, did you see that *********** head come apart man"

don_mondo
25-11-2007, 20:20
Even if it did count as that, he would only get one attack still. You only get extra attacks from 2 CCWs or 1 CCW and 1 Pistol.

Therefore, 1 CCW and a 2 handed weapon give no extra attacks.

Also, as stated above, the rules are such that they cover broad ranges and make generalities. A chainsword has the same rules as a regular sword for the same reason an Ork boy is the same Str. as a guardsman. Generalities.


Not quite correct. Pistol/CCW, etc have nothing to do with it. All that matters is that they be one-handed weapons. So a model armed with two one-handed weapons, regardless of type, gets the +1 attack. Granted, the combinations will generally be pistol/CCW or two CCW but other combinations of two one-handed weapons are theoretically possible.

Heru Talon
25-11-2007, 20:24
You would probably break something if you tried to bite or punch Space Marine armor,Tyranid chitin ect.
You'd also break your rifle (if you swing it like a bat), or knife vs Space Marine armour.

Slaaneshi Slave
25-11-2007, 20:27
You'd also break your rifle (if you swing it like a bat), or knife vs Space Marine armour.

They don't have armoured necks, arm pits, inner elbows, inner thighs or the back of their knees. Plenty of places to wedge a bayonette.

Burning Star IV
25-11-2007, 20:38
Really, a chain sword should be almost as good as a chain fist
really?

Oh my yes! Because, y'know, I once made a miniature working chainfist also, to get into my car in the event that I locked my keys inside. And alas, when I locked my keys in the car and attempted to use the chainfist to force an entry, all it did was ruin the paint on an otherwise perfectly good ford taurus.

Slaaneshi Slave
25-11-2007, 20:41
I'd love Chain Swords to be +3 Str. My Evisorators add +3 to my Str and I pay 25 points for that. :p

Heru Talon
25-11-2007, 22:55
They don't have armoured necks, arm pits, inner elbows, inner thighs or the back of their knees. Plenty of places to wedge a bayonet.

Actually that is armoured, it's a flexible armour type not as efficient as actual power armour plate but enough to stop a knife in the hand of anything less that an Ork. Anyways it wouldn't matter if you did get your knife through it, as Space Marines have an advanced biology capable of ignoring such wounds (not to mention extremely tough muscle tissue that would prevent the blade going far into the flesh if at all).

Why is a knife not a CCW - Answer = too small and not strong enough to do serious damage to anything tougher than a human.

Why is a bayonet not a CCW - Answer = too unwieldy to use in conjunction with a pistol or proper CCW.


Why is a Chainsword a CCW - Answer = Reach + Penetrating power (consider the fact that a Chainsword is not as unwieldy as a Chainsaw, and doesn't require chain pulling to get it into action).

Why is a Catachan Knife a CCW - Answer = Longer than a standard knife + Made from a rare Steel alloy that maintains it's strength and sharpness + Commonly coated in poisons that make even scratches dangerous.

elvinltl
27-11-2007, 03:50
Actually that is armoured, it's a flexible armour type not as efficient as actual power armour plate but enough to stop a knife in the hand of anything less that an Ork. Anyways it wouldn't matter if you did get your knife through it, as Space Marines have an advanced biology capable of ignoring such wounds (not to mention extremely tough muscle tissue that would prevent the blade going far into the flesh if at all).

Why is a knife not a CCW - Answer = too small and not strong enough to do serious damage to anything tougher than a human.

Why is a bayonet not a CCW - Answer = too unwieldy to use in conjunction with a pistol or proper CCW.


Why is a Chainsword a CCW - Answer = Reach + Penetrating power (consider the fact that a Chainsword is not as unwieldy as a Chainsaw, and doesn't require chain pulling to get it into action).

Why is a Catachan Knife a CCW - Answer = Longer than a standard knife + Made from a rare Steel alloy that maintains it's strength and sharpness + Commonly coated in poisons that make even scratches dangerous.

With guns why not just shoot them from afar with guns?

And no mattaer what CC weapon you use. An unarmed Martial Art expert can disarm a Chainsaw user with some difficulty of course. Alternatively he could carry a simply pole which will gaurentee victory over a chainsaw user.

So CC skills also comes into play.

Catachant
27-11-2007, 05:12
I think if they decided to give Chainswords special rules, then where would they stop?
Keep them as cool looking CCW, otherwise giving marines another special rule won't go down that well.

Dr.Clock
27-11-2007, 05:19
Yes, elvinltl... that's what we call weapon skill... it is one reason why five marines can make a mess of ten guardsmen in cc. Even without chainswords.

Cheers,

The Good Doctor.

azimaith
27-11-2007, 06:03
With guns why not just shoot them from afar with guns?

Because the scenario is in close combat. Anyhow, close combat doesn't necessitate you stabbin someone, you could be shooting point blank in the armpit/whatever. Marines do bleed, and as Arnie said, if it bleeds, we can kill it.



And no mattaer what CC weapon you use. An unarmed Martial Art expert can disarm a Chainsaw user with some difficulty of course. Alternatively he could carry a simply pole which will gaurentee victory over a chainsaw user.

This is not accurate. After a certain point mass and weapon make them impossible disarm or even fight effectively. I remember talking to a cop who was teaching at a university after he retired, talking about body builders. It came to a point with some they couldn't cuff him, move him, much less disarm him if he had anything because he simply could stop them from moving him by pure brute muscular strength. Strength counts in hand to hand combat, it counts for alot, despite what movies and video games lead you to believe.

Chupacabraplus
27-11-2007, 06:18
Unless you play black templar or space wolves or something, you can always just buy your sergeants chain sword as a power sword. I've seen some people make "power-chain swords" by just adding some wiring going down and along it.

Catachant
27-11-2007, 08:43
Kharn's axe is a chainaxe with myca dragon teeth and that counts as a power weapon doesn't it?

Lisiecki
30-11-2007, 00:30
Or it could be that the author of that source material doesn't have a grasp on the actual technicalities of what they're writing.

yes, your right, if there is one thing that is true in this world
its that Dan Abnett has no idea what the 40k setting is like

MuttMan
30-11-2007, 04:42
Its not the weapon thats effective, its the weilder. A guardsmen with a bayonet that knows how to grab the shoulder rest and extend as far as a spear would in the right spot can catch a chaos marine in his soft armor between his shoulder pad and chest plate.

A chainsword heavy, unweildy, easy to dodge if not used by a strong opponent and the sound of it as they pull back to swing it, makes it on par with any other single edge blade out there.

Vineas
30-11-2007, 05:40
Oh my yes! Because, y'know, I once made a miniature working chainfist also, to get into my car in the event that I locked my keys inside. And alas, when I locked my keys in the car and attempted to use the chainfist to force an entry, all it did was ruin the paint on an otherwise perfectly good ford taurus.

Burning Star wins the thread. Pure comedy gold right here.

Sigged as well!!!!!!!!

Lisiecki
15-01-2008, 01:49
Or it could be that the author of that source material doesn't have a grasp on the actual technicalities of what they're writing.

yes
because over the next 38,000 years, a chain sword couldnt become ALOT diffrent than one would be, with current technology

Triggerdog
15-01-2008, 01:55
"
"When attacking with chainswords in close combat, roll 1D6. On a roll of 1, it hits a zipper, belt buckle, shoulderpad or helmet at exactly the wrong angle and goes zipping off in a random direction while making a horrible noise. Your squad takes one wound, no saves, and the model wielding the chainsword has to spend the next round of combat looking for it.""

-sigged.