PDA

View Full Version : The Revised Inquisitor Armoury



MarcoSkoll
23-07-2009, 22:18
Those of you from the Conclave will probably remember my Armoury project. After a long break, there's an update.

The all important link:
http://www.mediafire.com/?nwmlez4nw4m

This is an Alpha update, a work in progress, as with all the others - and thus liable to change quite heavily in the next update. It's also likely that there's things like notes to myself, missing stats, and sentences which don't end prop
I've tried to proof-read it, but I may have missed something. You'll have to bear with that - but if you find such things, tell me.

This update refreshes a few of the old solid projectile weapons (and adds a handful too, as well as more ammunition types), and adds Bolt, Plasma and Melta weapons.
Lasweapons are still too much of a work in progress to release yet, but I am still working on them.

On the note of the solid projectile weapons section, changes are marked with red text. You may want to just reset all text to black after your first read.

As far as the new stuff, of the changes from the rulebook, the bolters are the big diversion, now done vaguely like I did the shotguns before, with 12 different ammunition types to choose from (on which note, Psycannons are now simply represented by an otherwise normal bolter loaded with Psycannon bolts).
Bolters are still damn nasty weapons, but they've now got some downsides to go with that. Also, there are a few bolt weapons I made up for the sheer hell of it. You may agree with them, you may not - this is after all, an Alpha release, so I've thrown in a few trial things to see what you think.

The Plasma guns now get more conventional reload stats rather than a slow recharge. However, although you can now rapid fire them, the build-up of heat makes the results of any failure worse.
They also now come with two power settings - Evil and More Evil. However, More Evil also makes the consequences of the weapon's failure worse.

Melta weapons aren't a huge change from the rulebook, but they do now get increased effectiveness versus armour, and the rather excessive Multimelta has been replaced with the less horrific Heavy Meltagun.
I've a feeling someone said something about what they thought should happen with melta weapons in this project, but I can't find it in my off-line copy of the old thread (and thus I assume it was said in a different thread to the main one), so if you're out there, could you repeat it?

As always, thoughts welcomed.

Dust King
24-07-2009, 04:33
First of all great job, I'm really looking forward to trying out some of these weapons. After reading through I've got a handful of comments I made while reading through.

Like the resting and crack shot
Ablative armour a good idea, makes it more useful

Would change rare category to include non military weapons, eg. Weapons which are no longer in manufacture or illegal black market weapons.

Like the addition of hunting rifles

Perhaps make it so Kraken penetrator does only 2d10 damage against lightly armoured targets (armour 3 or less) to represent the round passing clean through them without detonating.

Hellfire round possibly counts as setting a location on fire to represent the acid continuing to burn the target, doing only d6 dammage a turn but being harder to put out than fire (15% chance per action to put out?).

Also if I remember correctly a bolt round with a tracking device was mentioned in the necron codex, possibly does reduced damage but allows the target to be tracked via auspex.

Nice idea with the bolt cyclers

Finally I'd just like to say I did really like what you've done with the armoury, it's definitely an improvement over the one in the rulebook. Thanks :)

MarcoSkoll
24-07-2009, 15:42
Rarity is just rough guidelines. Like it says, those with good connections who aren't military could probably find them - for a hefty price of course.
My descriptions are just my way of making it clear what sort of definitions I'm using for each rarity, and stressing that rare does actually mean rare, not something every Tom, Dick and Harry could get their hands on.

It's also meant to stop people looking at it and thinking that it's actually related too strongly to power level, as many people seemed to think about the other system.
Yes, more powerful weapons are likely to be rarer, but that doesn't hold for all cases.

It is still draft wording, but don't expect it to get too specific.

~~~~~

The trial rules are designed to bring a bit more sense to the firearms section.
The Weapon Handling is meant to stop people carrying weapons which are just on the edge of their strength limits; the ablative is meant to make it slightly more meaningful as armour; Crack Shot was pretty necessary, because I've added a quite a few auto modes here and there; and the resting is just common sense that it would help support the weapon.

The resting is designed to work in tandem with some bipod rules I'm drafting, designed to make the very heavy weapons usable under specific circumstances:

Increases Weapon Enc by +10. It takes an action to raise or lower a bipod.
- When raised, the bipod has no special effect.
- When lowered, rested bonuses (for roughly horizontal surfaces only) are doubled, and the weapon may be rested on the ground if the user is prone. Additionally, when rested on a bipod, weapons don't lose the rested bonus if they fire on modes other than Single. Movement rates above a walk are reduced by 1 yard per action when bipods are lowered because of the hindrance to movement.

Thoughts also welcomed on that.

~~~~~

Hunting Rifles were intended to fill a bit of a gap, weapons with some grunt, but not battlefield practicality. Something like a downgraded battle rifle, if you want.

The low-end bolt weapons are on a similar note - built on a budget, because why spend huge money on a weapon when you'll only be able to scrounge up a few rounds of ammunition once in a blue moon?

~~~~~

It's hard to know with the Kraken Penetrator. I want to find a way of making it less appealing, but I'm not sure how. That sounds like a decent solution.

Tracker beacon projectiles are something I'm fiddling around with - I would like to include these things, but they need some thinking about.
The logic of shooting something you want to track is questionable though...

MarcoSkoll
25-07-2009, 21:06
I've been looking at the download counter, and for multiple dozens of downloads, it's a bit disappointing that I've only had feedback from one person.

You may think it's all fine, you might agree with Dust King on some points, and you might think there's no need to post.

Yeah, it's not essential that you do, but I would like you to - points you think are good, points which should be refined, things that need to be expanded or made clearer, stuff you outright dislike, fluff you think I've made a mockery of...

Any feedback you've got.

Dust King
25-07-2009, 23:44
Just a suggestion for the tracking rounds, as far as I can see there are two uses for tracker rounds; to track individuals which you don't want to get too close to (stealer cultists, mutants etc.) and to prevent your enemies escaping from a firefight.

I'd suggest doing 2d6 damage, if it penetrates armour then the target becomes visible on auspex, if it hits and fails to penetrate armour then there is a 75% chance that it becomes stuck in the armour. If the target is being followed closely (GM's discretion) then they can take a Sg test to notice the tracker. to remove it is two actions and D3 to the injury total (unless it was in armour)

Just a suggestion but that's what I think.

Inquisitor Cade
27-07-2009, 17:37
Nice work on the bolt plasma and melta weapons, especially the plasma malfunction rules.

A few thoughts:

AP bullets are less penetrative than mach and HEIAP bullets. Why not have it as halves armour as well, which would simplify it too.

I don't M249's are that heavy, I'd suggest mid-heavy stubbers have Enc 50.

I'd give plasma pistols semi(2) and maybe increase the semi values of the other plasma weapons by one. This would make the most of the malfunction chart, and I see no reason for plasma pistols to be incapable of semi auto fire.

I'd make the Magnum Enc 20. As big as Deagles are they aren't bolt pistols.

I'd make plasma pistol 5 Enc higher than bolt pistols rather than the same.

A few weapons that I think should be represented:

A smaller bolt pistol with a much smaller mag and less enc

An LSW type weapon, a long, heavy barreled assault rifle

I'll look over it in more detail and come back later.

P.s. Dust King. I don't think the tracking rounds are rounds that stick to a target and transmit a signal as you seem to believe, though such a round might be worth adding to the list. Perhaps seeker round is a better label in this case.

Lacerto
27-07-2009, 17:39
Looks very cool. Having read Terry Pratchett I'd probably try and cut back on the number of exclamation marks!!! ;) Minor proof-reading point, p12 line 1 already for all ready. Not sure whether the plasma modifiers rule needs rewording to something like:

o -1 for each other low power shot fired from the plasma weapon this and last turn.
o -2 for each other high power shot fired from the plasma weapon this and last turn.

Also, is a Heavy Meltagun the same as a Multimelta?

Keep up the good work.

Dust King
27-07-2009, 22:07
Dust King. I don't think the tracking rounds are rounds that stick to a target and transmit a signal as you seem to believe, though such a round might be worth adding to the list. Perhaps seeker round is a better label in this case.

Yeah that probably sounds better, I wasn't trying to get the proper name, just a rough description of what they do. Still I like the sound of seeker rounds.

Inquisitor Cade
28-07-2009, 11:05
A few more thoughts.

Some of the Smg's should be Cm, I'd say all but the light and heavy ones. I'd also make the At-Snc Rifle and carbine Uncm as well as the PDW pistol and the high calibre carbine.

I'd make the bullpup auto shotgun Rld 3 and reduce the drilling shotgun's rate of fire to semi (2) (though I don't really know what it is so if it has a mechanism that makes it much faster to fire than a pump action shotgun or a semi auto compact then ignor me, though I'd be interested in how it works)

I'd make the semi auto sniper and possibly the precision sniper rare.

By you definition of rare as military issue and exotic as special military issue I'd concider making bolters exotic.

I'd increase the reload for heavy stubbers to 8 (I assume the are belt fed from a drum)

I'd give assault cannons the jam prone rule.

I'd give heavy bolters a full auto setting and increase the damage of heavy bolter shells from +1 to +3.

MarcoSkoll
28-07-2009, 21:14
Answering in some kind of order:

@Lacerto: Both already and all ready are considered acceptable spellings. Not all spell-checkers accept already, but it is a valid spelling.

-The intention is that the high power modifier for plasma guns is only applied for the actual shot you're making. All previous shots, regardless of power, are a -1 penalty.
I may change that, depending on feedback.

However I've realised that I do need to put in something that says it takes an action to change between settings.

- The heavy meltagun is a multimelta, if you want it to be, but not specifically so. It's deliberately reined in from the original multimelta though.

@Inquisitor Cade: AP bullets are designed to not be too violent, a bit of a compromise between each. While I could make them 1/2, rather than 1/3 armour reducing, that takes some of the balance out of them. Something to be restricted, rather than more freely available.
And the HEIAP bullets - they're just designed to be very nasty. That's for GMs who need to make an NPC's weapon beyond insane.

-Although based on the M249, the Mid-Heavy stubber is meant to be fairly Enc heavy to dissuade people from being too eager to take one. I'll look back at it though.

- Plasma pistols... It's a nice idea, but I've got these nagging doubts about if people are using INQ 2's semi-auto system, which unfortunately breaks quite a lot of what I'm doing. I suppose I should write for INQ 1, and stop worrying about if other people are using trial rules.

- Encumbrance notes: Both fair points.

- Smaller bolt pistol: I'm not really keen on the idea of bolt weapons being too accessible. I think I want to stick to "tightly limited but light" and "useful, but heavy".

- Good call on the LSW. I'll look into that.

- Tracking/Beacon rounds do exist in the canon - as do Seeking rounds. I'm considering playing with rules that combine the two. Hit them with a Beacon round, and then you can tune in Seeking rounds to the frequency for easier shots.

- SMGs: Don't want them to be too common. I'm looking at these things being more black-market than legal sales. In the tightly controlled Imperium, I can imagine that small automatic weapons are restricted - as they are in many countries today.
Other things: The rarities are a bit slapdash at the moment. You make some reasonable suggestions, and I'll look into that stuff.

However, rare is not common military issue. It's stuff that you'll almost only ever see as military issue - not quite Special issue stuff, but getting that way.

- I thought the Bullpup Auto was Rld 3. My bad. Fixing it.
The drilling shotgun is a three barrelled shotgun. They're not common to see, but they do exist. As they've got no loader that needs operating, their rate of fire is as fast as the trigger can be pulled.

- Heavy stubbers. I've tried to avoid being specific about the feed mechanism, but the weapons they're based off are belt fed.
The reload probably should come up. Probably to 5 or 6 rather than 8, but you're right.

- Miniguns are actually some of the most reliable weapons out there. Tens, if not hundreds of thousands of rounds between stoppages - more rounds than most weapons will fire in a lifetime.
The thing is, because of their multiple chambers and electrical operation, they can't suffer several kinds of problems that trouble most automatics. They're actually closer to revolvers in operation.

- Heavy bolters aren't +1. They're +1 base damage die, so typically +D10.
I might go with full auto, but I might differentiate between mounted and carried heavy bolters for that.

Anyway, thanks for the feedback guys.

precinctomega
29-07-2009, 08:06
I haven't read the document in question (although I intend to liberally plunder it for INQ2 eventually - due credit to be given, natch). But "all ready" and "already" have completely different meanings. "Already" means "previously". "All ready" means "completely prepared".

I don't know which one you should have there. Just clearing up confusion. See here for a reference:

http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/already

R.

Inquisitor Cade
29-07-2009, 08:18
As the rules stand Ap bullets give no advantage against standard (flak AV3) or reinforced (AV4) armour. How often would the sort of person who wouldn't have access to a more restricted round need a bullet that is only of worth against heavy armour?

I wouldn't have made the smaller bolt pistols any more available, just more weildy (Enc 20) and with a smaller mag. It would mean that a character with access to a bolt pistol could choose a more practicle one which wouldn't dominate the game so much.


The machine pistols and micro smg are more or less auto pistols, so I remain convinced that they at least should be common.

Regarding the heavy stubber reload time I was also concidering the plasma gun rld. Most plasma weapons have two 'cells' that need replacing in a reload. I think that this could be done faster than changing a belt feed and box.

The old 40k rules and fluff indicated that assault cannons were prone to jamming, hence why I suggested it. I suppose it's one of those times where real life and the fluff don't see eye to eye. I see what you mean about the reliability of miniguns though.

"Heavy bolters aren't +1. They're +1 base damage die, so typically +D10."
Oh right. Ouch.
Heavy bolters are the most prevalent automatic weapon in the imperium, so It seems wrong to not give them an automatic mode. Incidentaly what does semi(5) represent? can a heavy bolter trigger be pumped more rapidly than most?

Inquisitor Cade
29-07-2009, 08:50
Another thought, If you'll excuse the double post, is that the ripper gun is clearly defined in the new guard codex as an almost unbreakable auto combat shotgun. I think you should add this to your list. I'd have thought

basic . J . Single/semi(2/4). -10% . D6+3 (hits D3 locations) . 20 . 8(belt fed). 55 . rare

I'd imagine that they would use a larger size scatter shot round, with maybe range J and D6+3 damage per hit. It wouldn't be suitable in smalller shotguns and conversly wouldn't be able to use other types of ammo.

MarcoSkoll
29-07-2009, 10:01
As the rules stand Ap bullets give no advantage against standard (flak AV3) or reinforced (AV4) armour.Equally, they're at no great disadvantage either, but you're right.

Thing is, I don't want to make them able to cut through power armour like butter. Perhaps what I'll do is make them ignore the first two or three points of armour instead of a certain fraction.

I wouldn't have made the smaller bolt pistols any more available, just more wieldy (Enc 20) and with a smaller mag.
I'll look into it, but it is still starting to go between my thoughts of simple, light, but not very practical bolt weapons - those made singly on a bit of a budget with civilian tools.
...And complex, heavy, but battle efficient bolters - made to standard patterns by the AdMech or those associated with them.

The machine pistols and micro smg are more or less auto pistols, so I remain convinced that they at least should be common.They're one of those marginal things. I'm not sure I want them to be as available as basic revolvers and stubbers, but then again, I suppose they're the sort of thing that wouldn't be uncommon to see on the black market - if at cost.

Most plasma weapons have two 'cells' that need replacing in a reload. I think that this could be done faster than changing a belt feed and box.To quote from the 3rd Ed 40k rulebook (p. 60):
"Reloading a plasma gun is time consuming as both flasks have to be unscrewed and new ones carefully screwed into position."

At 2 to 3 seconds an action, that puts Rld 8 at about 20 seconds, which doesn't sound that unreasonable a time to unscrew and re-screw two flasks. In fact, it's probably a little generous to the user.
On the other hand, although I'm not frequently reloading belt-fed machine guns, I don't think 10-15 seconds (Rld 4 to 6) is an unreasonable estimate.

The old 40k rules and fluff indicated that assault cannons were prone to jamming, hence why I suggested it.Yeah, but they've since done a bit of a retcon on that.
Anyway, if modern technology can make these things practically faultless, then Imperial technology shouldn't struggle in the slightest.

Heavy bolters are the most prevalent automatic weapon in the Imperium, so it seems wrong to not give them an automatic mode.
Incidentally what does semi(5) represent? Can a heavy bolter trigger be pumped more rapidly than most?
In some cases, semi is being used to represent burst fire, or automatic ROF that doesn't really qualify for Full mode.

As a rough rule, I've given weapons a rate of fire about as high as the number of shots a real world equivalent could put out in a second if being used sensibly. Not always quite that high, but of that kind of order (obvious exception: Miniguns).
That puts the heavy bolter at about 5 rounds a second, of the same order as the Mk 19 Grenade launcher of today. That's probably a hair low, but still a damn nasty weapon. There's got to be some balance between realism and playability in there somewhere.

I probably will give it some form of very low full mode, but bear in mind that just because I've not given something full mode specifically doesn't mean it's not a fully automatic weapon. Just that it's rate of fire wasn't high enough to qualify for the different system.

~~~~~

Ripper guns... Hmm, an idea that hadn't occurred before. Good call.

lagoon83
08-09-2009, 11:43
if modern technology can make these things practically faultless, then Imperial technology shouldn't struggle in the slightest.

I'm gonna play devil's advocate here and raise the point that Imperial Technology's inferior to its modern equivalent in a lot of places...

precinctomega
08-09-2009, 13:25
Name one.

The application of Imperial technology at the level of the individual citizen is inferior to that of modern technology, but the actual level of sophistication of that technology is vastly superior to what we have today.

R.

MarcoSkoll
08-09-2009, 23:53
Imperial Technology's inferior to its modern equivalent in a lot of places...
Yes, and I understand that.

That's why we have hover vehicles, mass space travel, artificial gravity, laser weapons, force fields, power armour, teleportation, bionics that are superior to the natural limb, the technology to create nearly invincible super-soldiers, the ability to extend people's lifetimes to several times their natural length and weapons that can strip a planet of all life.

Comparatively, they're still largely bound to wheeled or winged vehicles, one planet or the orbit of it to live on, and all kinds of relatively very primitive technologies.
The only thing they really match up on is they have weapons with the ability to rid a planet of all life, but they're only able to do that to the one planet they rely on, so it's pretty daft actually.

Oh wait, I may have got those the wrong way around... :p

Disclaimer: This post may contain sarcasm.

lagoon83
09-09-2009, 02:11
Ouch. Burn. Maybe I should clarify! And not post without re-reading to make sure I've said what I was aiming for.

The technology's superior, but the application of it's a lot more slapdash. So the idea of a jamming / exploding assault cannon, which is revered as a sacred artefact with a spirit of its own and treated as such, could make sense - even when the lower-tech modern-day counterpart, which is understood to be a machine with mechanical parts and treated as such, might not.

Did I make myself any clearer? Got a feeling I didn't. Oh well!

precinctomega
09-09-2009, 07:14
It's always nice to have an excuse for poking fun.

I'm yet to read Marco's armour rules - busy, busy busy! - but as I've already said, I expect to plunder them liberally for INQ2 in due course (you don't turn down the considered opinion of a professional ballistics/materials technology expert). So I don't know whether he has rules for stoppages.

In INQ2, any roll to hit that misses the target and is a double is considered to be a stoppage (I have an aversion to the word "jam", as that describes only one possible variation of stoppage).

Some weapons are considered to be Reliable and don't suffer stoppages (las weapons, revolvers and shotguns are the first off the top of my head), but others are Unreliable and will suffer a stoppage on any roll of a double, even if it's a hit.

It is possible to Reliable weapons to cease to be Reliable, and for normal weapons to become Unreliable.

R.

MarcoSkoll
10-09-2009, 02:30
You don't turn down the considered opinion of a professional ballistics/materials technology expert.
Semi-professional, at very most - my attempts to further my education still come before work.
The work I'm employed for is on less-lethal pneumatic cannons (and sometimes paintball guns). I don't spend a whole lot of time using powder burning firearms, although I study the mechanisms and lethality of them quite extensively.

Much of my interest is simply a hobby - or perhaps an obsession...


So I don't know whether he has rules for stoppages.
Some. There's several versions of stoppages and faults, but it's only usually applied if the weapon is expressly damaged, you've got some bum ammunition, the GM's being evil, or you've fitted some unreliable modification (like a drum magazine).

There's the "Jam prone" rule, which jams on high results (98-00 is common), and requires a test against BS test to clear (BS is taken to cover firearms handling skill as well as accuracy).

Then there's this whole scheme about "hit rolls ending in a 5", which can result in all kinds of fun (or distinct lack of it), depending on what exactly you're using... faulty explosive ammunition, damaged magazines, unreliable ammunition - as well as Plasma weapons.

Most effects work on that basis, rather than Risky actions, which I personally find quite clunky. They don't allow for a failure in the middle of a character's turn (the failure will automatically be the first shot) and if you do the maths, actually vary in percentage likelihood with character speed. (A Spd 3 character has a 29.6% chance of a risky action - a Spd 5 has a 34.5% chance)

~~~~~

@lagoon83: Yes, the AdMech are somewhat... odd - but that doesn't mean that they're incapable of creating a weapon that works reliably.

Anyway, for the most part, my rules set out to actually add in some more accuracy (and variety) into GW's rules, working from real world firearms.
After all, as I've said elsewhere, GW are game designers, not gun designers. They do the former very well, but the latter leaves something to be desired.

Nasha
10-09-2009, 16:20
In my own non-exstensive experiance (as in my mates dads a game keeper and i used to do airsoft for like 5 years) i found that the recoil from weapons such as shotguns, was actually no higher than that of say a single shot from an armalite. it stands to reason that surely a shot from said shotgun would have a modifier much similiar to that of said armalite. just wondering, but would it not be possible to change the modifiers so that was much more of an effect? i read (or scanned) the rules marko wrote and i must say very impressed, the level of firearms and munitions is amazing and certainly a large improvement on GWs (unsatisfactory) standards. However, i believe that, as SMGs and machine pistols are very common on the black market nowadays, surely they would be everyday occurences in the 41st millenium?
Marko youve written some amazing rules there mate, if, as you say you will, you add small bits here and there then im sure these will be nigh unbeatable in the terms of rules for the INQ game

kerby

MarcoSkoll
10-09-2009, 23:31
What is it that means people put a K in Marco? :eyebrows:

You've got me somewhat confused, which modifiers are we talking about here? Shotguns don't currently have any specific rules for recoil modifiers.
While I'll be adjusting the recoil rules in the next update ("High Recoil" gets a tweak, and the lesser "Considerable Recoil" is being added), none of the basic shotguns are affected by them (but the large bore "upgrade" does however add considerable recoil), nor have they been...

The SMGs and machine pistols are being adjusted to Uncommon in the next update. I don't want to make them simply Common though, because they do still have Full firing mode (I know a few things escaped that filter before...)

And thanks. It's good to know what I'm doing is being appreciated. As I've said elsewhere, sorry about the slow updates, but I think I'm getting close.

Ranger S2H
15-09-2009, 08:40
I have an idea for tracker rounds: you could make them special, rare needler rounds used by bounty hunters and arbites to track gang/cult members to their hideout.
needlers are as stealthy as you can get, and its possible the victim wouldnt even feel they're bugged.

MapLock
18-11-2009, 00:05
Just a quick question,

Are you ever thinking of making a list for close combat weapons?

You have your average sword, short sword, axe, etc.

But it's be pretty damn cool to have different kinds of weapons like a Machete, Katana, Falchion, etc. etc.

So you got one in the works? Or do you think your willing to make one?

kaled
18-11-2009, 05:59
Charax and Helst made a set of custom close combat rules which you can use to create all sorts of non-standard weapons;

http://www.freewebs.com/closecombatweapons/index.htm

MapLock
19-11-2009, 03:36
Charax and Helst made a set of custom close combat rules which you can use to create all sorts of non-standard weapons;

http://www.freewebs.com/closecombatweapons/index.htm

This was exactly the kind of thing me n' my friends were looking for, thanks!

MarcoSkoll
19-11-2009, 15:15
To just get some kind of note in myself, I'm not planning on doing close combat weapons.

My area of interest/expertise is firearms, so while I'm a reasonable candidate for writing a firearms armoury, I'll leave close combat weapons to someone who knows that subject well.

And Charax and Helst's rules work well enough anyway - I see no need to try and revise them.

Ranger S2H
18-01-2011, 15:36
sorry for necro-ing this ancient thread, but I lost my file with the revised armoury when I switched laptops.
I wondered if anyone could tell me where I can download it again, because the link in the OP says it has been made private . . .

DapperAnarchist
18-01-2011, 16:48
http://www.the-conclave.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=33.0 check in here, that's where the ongoing work has been done.

MarcoSkoll
18-01-2011, 16:49
The old versions get archived when there's a new version out. The current V0.5.1 is here: http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?016z1s94rntn1pt

There will be a v0.6 sometime soon.

Ranger S2H
18-01-2011, 18:43
thanks!

@marco:
I really like what you've done with the lasweapons

for the final version, it might be a fun addition to include a glossary at the end, with all the abbreviations, acronyms and other terms.