Ruling on HMG's, rifles, etc in CC

[dmcgee1]

  The FAQ is wrong.  The rule book has the answers and while scattered around a bit, it clearly says the following pieces.  (page reference numbers included)

Section 8.5, page 49 (top of page)

Unless otherwise stated in a model’s profile, models may not make Ranged Combat attacks while engaged in Close Combat. Nor can they use any special equipment that is not related to Close Combat while engaged in Close Combat. Items that require no active effort on the part of the user (such as gas masks and environmental suits) are an exception to this rule.

Section 21, page 127 under heading of Close Combat:

  "This range comes into play when a model is in Base contact with an enemy model and attempting to use an equipped weapon on that enemy model.  While Melee Weapons are best at these ranges, most other weapons suffer problems.  Sidearms are compact enough to allow a model to use it in Close Combat Range to shoot an opponent with greater Penetration and Harm, which is reflected in their bonus to hit.  ALL OTHER WEAPON TYPES, with the exception of SOME SPECIAL) are difficult to use at close combat range, with the butt of a weapon's stock being used to bludgeon an opponent, since the barrel cannot be brought to bear at an enemy that is so close."/

(section 21.3, page 131) Rifles are only adhoc clubs.


Weapon Damage (page 120)

  The Damage of a Weapon is dependant upon the situation.  While in Close Combat, a weapons damage is derived from the Strength (ST) value of the model striking with it (unless its a Sidearm, which relies on the bullets to do the damage). The better or more deadly the Melee weapon is, the greater the bonus to the model's ST value.


Word for word and it clearly... CLEARLY... answers the question of the damage a non-Sidearm firearm does in CC.

So, does this mean that a rifle butt (which is not a natural attack)can damage an impenetrable target, but super-humanlly stong model who's natural attack isn't strong enough cannot?

Help me understand the (lack of) logic.

[Dragon62]

As stated above Thom stated as Archer said. Not that I agree with it. As Dave states here. A light Infantry grunt could damage a Vehicle with Inpenatrbility clubing with rifle but a Karnophage with natural attack 10 cant.  Here's another question for you. The Scythe of Semai which is a HMG has a 3' blade is CC 0 and Dam 13 this equals more than the Stalkers ST 5 plus 6 for the largest bayonet.

[Archer]

Um guys...

#1- its a game.  Everything does not have to make sense.

#2- Riflebutts and all that: I would think using a rifle-butt on an impenitrable target would mean you are trying to use the rifle as a hammer or crowbar on something that might be exposed or a gear of some kind (fluff-wise) whenre as the Karnofage, think of it from the standpoint that while one phage is not going to hurt the EDD because of teeth and claw being natural versus machined, #'s three on will... and by #4, The EDD is falling over due to the Swarm assault.

  And that would suck for MR EDD... making him that much easier to hit.

#3- Damage in CC for the Sythe- I would think the the Sythe has a Dark Legion Bayonet attached based on the model and how fluffy it would be for the Big bastrads.  But thats me- I don't make the rules, I'm just opinionated and knowledgible in them.

[Dragon62]

John your EDD point is not a good one 1st of all no matter how many Karnophages get on the EDD they are all still natural attack 10 so the EDD is immune to them and also swarm attack has no effect on models that have greater than STR-6 and the EDD is STR-11 so they cant pull it down.

[Archer]

John your EDD point is not a good one 1st of all no matter how many Karnophages get on the EDD they are all still natural attack 10 so the EDD is immune to them and also swarm attack has no effect on models that have greater than STR-6 and the EDD is STR-11 so they cant pull it down.

  Good points... and to be honest, I had forgotten its not a limit to damage but to all natural damage.  So a Karnophage Army cannot hurt a force with an EDD.

  But I highly doubt anyone would take just 'phage alone.  Neph with Wind of Insanity can do the job... though the following will work really well too.

  1k force with 32 Phage (4 units of , Neph of Mooj with Winds, Ezoghoul and Muj Defiler Pod.  That 38 swarming models, 1 neph and a big mo-fo with high armor, lots of wounds and stupid fast (Speed 6).

[dmcgee1]

Um guys...

#1- its a game.  Everything does not have to make sense.

Not being able to fire into CC because I can't bring the rifle to bear, yet the bayonet at the end of the rifle will cause damage makes no sense, either, but that is the rule, according to you and Thom.

#2- Riflebutts and all that: I would think using a rifle-butt on an impenitrable target would mean you are trying to use the rifle as a hammer or crowbar on something that might be exposed or a gear of some kind (fluff-wise) whenre as the Karnofage, think of it from the standpoint that while one phage is not going to hurt the EDD because of teeth and claw being natural versus machined, #'s three on will... and by #4, The EDD is falling over due to the Swarm assault.

  And that would suck for MR EDD... making him that much easier to hit.

Phil addressed the natural attack and the numbers issue.  However, I would NEVER attampt to use my rifle as a tool to damage somethin that would render my weapon useless to fire.  Not a flame - just an observation of the statement.

#3- Damage in CC for the Sythe- I would think the the Sythe has a Dark Legion Bayonet attached based on the model and how fluffy it would be for the Big bastrads.  But thats me- I don't make the rules, I'm just opinionated and knowledgible in them.

John, again, with all due respect (and envy for being as involved with the game as you have been), fluff ain't rules.  This game is, for the most part, built around common sense.  While the rulings from Thom are official, it is everyone's right to dissent ("I don't make the rules, I'm just opinionated and knowledgeable in them.").  Therefore, when we see a wrong, we want to make it right.  A small minority of players wanting a rule to change because they want to see their models do better is not grounds for reconsidering a ruling.  A majority of a group of players that all agree on how a rule should be made is.

All many of us who agree that firing weapons while engaged in CC should be allowed are saying is that there is a FAQ entry that states that a weapon may be fired while in CC as long as it's CC modifier is used.  It makes sense, and it has not seemed to unbalance anything.

One other tidbit of rhetoric - if you have the option of grappling/punching a target or to butt-stroke said target, which would you choose to do?  Me, I'd butt-stroke - because it would cause more damage.  By that line of thinking, why would a make-shift club cause the same damage as if I'd punched the target?  It wouldn't, and should be reflected by the "make-shift" club being able to do more damage (ST+1 or 2) than a fist or otherwise hurled body part.

[Archer]

(Ye know... this must be the week to beat on dead horses.  *sigh*)

rifles in CC:  Dave- A rifleman has no business in Close Combat and if you look at some of the normal troop models available some corps, many of them come with pistols (Capitol troops and Imp Regular) or CC weapons (Trenchers) for the off chance they will be in CC and will need something other than a club.

It sepcificly states what weapons are allowed to fire during  CC and waht can't.  THe only reason to allow rilfes to do it is to give troops witout CC weapons a stronger weapon than dedicated CC troops in CC.  An unfair advantage I say to some troops out there.

  Those troops that don't have anything CC-specific?  They have the dedicated specialists in the force structure to take the fight to kinfe range.  It's the rifleman's job to cover.  If the PLAYER did not bring anythign to fight battles on even ground up close, that is the PLAYER's fault for thinking he might noe need it.  (All my armies have some sort of CC-capable unit in them because I expect to have to bail out one of the firepower squads at least once a game. ).

FWIW, I happen to consider this subject about as beaten as its goona get...  THe book says what it does and Thom confirmed it in front of witnesses...  Its a gmae mechanic and it happens to work for what it does.  IRL, one's finger is not where near the trigger if forced to use one's rilfe as a club.  Fore-guard and behing the charging handle for a buttstroke or baytonet attack...  and bayonet charge is taught to be last act of defiance.  At least it was when I went through basic.  Now I have no idea...

riflebutt on EDD- One has a better chance at shooting him unless EDD charges you.  And if EDD charges you and you cant breakaway for whatever reason, welll... breaking ones rifle is least of one's worries. If it were real life, I wouldn't smash my rifle on a vehicle anymore than you... unless I knew it was gonna stiop the damn thing (jam a leg actuator, etc)


Sythe-  Dave, I agree more things should be a little closer to matching the design of the weapon or fluff.  But it is what it is...  if it were to be allowed, I'd have no problem with it as I never have any intention on letting him close to use it like that... and if he's using it like that, he's insame; the Sythe is a better bulltet spitter than a can opener.

  I'm not saying I agree or disagree on it being allowed, I am saying I can see whay he would think it should have a bayonet and what I could see being on it and being reasonable...  I did *not* say it should be allowed.  To be honest, it could have teh soopa-penultimate CC weapon on the model...  Just means I am going to ensure it's dead that much more and it becomes a point sink. 

  Now with all respect due you for your calmness in discussing this subject, pleast drop it already- it's been ruled on.

[dmcgee1]

IRL, one's finger is not where near the trigger if forced to use one's rilfe as a club.

Seriously?  John, without getting into a seriously off-topic discussion about the mechanics of the butt-stroke, obviously, you and I were trained differently.

bayonet charge is taught to be last act of defiance.  At least it was when I went through basic.  Now I have no idea...

In-game, there is no need to charge to use the bayonet.  Bayonet may be used in CC regardless of the situation.

riflebutt on EDD- One has a better chance at shooting him unless EDD charges you.  And if EDD charges you and you cant breakaway for whatever reason, welll... breaking ones rifle is least of one's worries. If it were real life, I wouldn't smash my rifle on a vehicle anymore than you... unless I knew it was gonna stiop the damn thing (jam a leg actuator, etc)

Seems silly, but, in-game, it could work.  Further, so could jamming a knife, stick, or blown-off-squad-mate's leg.  Apparently, a rule that is okay, but firing a rifle while in CC makes no sense.

Now with all respect due you for your calmness in discussing this subject, pleast drop it already- it's been ruled on.

John, I understand that you have your position, and that it has been ruled upon.  However, to tell me to drop it is to say that I have no case, and, therefore, no right to talk about it.

I am fine with playing the rule as it stands, now.  However, I am within my ideals and within my rights as a player of the game to dissent with a ruling.  I am not alone in this, and I feel that it is worthy of discussion.  You are free to stand upon the grounds that it has, already, been ruled upon, and that your stance is correct - it is.

Please, allow us who believe that the rule is wrong to be able to affect the change that we feel is needed.

[Archer]

IRL, one's finger is not where near the trigger if forced to use one's rilfe as a club.

Seriously?  John, without getting into a seriously off-topic discussion about the mechanics of the butt-stroke, obviously, you and I were trained differently.

I look forward to htat discussion Dave...  should prove enlightneing and entertaining discussing the diffences between Army and Airforce Close Quarter Drills...

bayonet charge is taught to be last act of defiance.  At least it was when I went through basic.  Now I have no idea...

In-game, there is no need to charge to use the bayonet.  Bayonet may be used in CC regardless of the situation.

  Very true- and its something *I* don't agree with, by the way.  I was a propnent of the unarmed CC attack back when this edition was in Beta stage and I asked about it then.  I forget the reason for the No but I remember the no- so I let it ride.  And I have not had many situations where it's cropped up.  But then, all my units have CC weapons or have no biz getting stuck in unless its to slow down somethign like a Behemoth.

  I also fought for Shotgun use in CC for buttstoke and lost that arguement too...  But I've dealt with it- I just shoot my men stuck in CC if they can't break away.  *shrug*

Now with all respect due you for your calmness in discussing this subject, pleast drop it already- it's been ruled on.

John, I understand that you have your position, and that it has been ruled upon.  However, to tell me to drop it is to say that I have no case, and, therefore, no right to talk about it.

I am fine with playing the rule as it stands, now.  However, I am within my ideals and within my rights as a player of the game to dissent with a ruling.  I am not alone in this, and I feel that it is worthy of discussion.  You are free to stand upon the grounds that it has, already, been ruled upon, and that your stance is correct - it is.

Please, allow us who believe that the rule is wrong to be able to affect the change that we feel is needed.

 I did not say you had no right to talk about it...  However, this been discussed and discussed and discussed...  with some folks saying there is no rules or anything in the book that says the damage the rifles do or that rifles/hmgs/cannon can't shoot in close combat.  I provided all the relevant sections which states the rules as to what they are supposed to do... and folks still have issue with it or feel things "never shoudl have changed from 2nd as it was perfect."   (btw- thats an actual actual quote at a convention said to Thom's face)

  It is a subject that is getting so old... well, old enough to the point it has been dragged up enough times to have a crapload of pages to link to for it; and its because folks either missed the rule in their reading or don't want to read.  This issue is decidedly one caused by bad editing...  Nothing to be done about it until someone does a "UWZ edition 3.5 Revised"...

  And yes, if I had the money to do it, I'd draft five of you guys (including you dave- always gotta have a stubbornly obstinate irishman in the mix to keep everyone honest) to hash things out, edit and re-edit before publishing (check twice , printt once)

  Dave, you are entitled to your opinion and I am happy you are willing to play the game with the rules as written.  But brother, please understand that I really think you are wrong with playing with a 2nd Ed mechanic in the 3rd Ed game.... just really really wrong.

  And if I can help it, I will never willingly play 2nd edition ever again.  Just how it is.