Concept for Random shot weapons

[chapter master 454]

A core problem with these weapons is the inherit meh of their effectiveness. On one end of the scale you have a max rolling volcano lance turning a spartan assault tank into scrap within one turn (Industrial strength "Oof" for that one) to the other end being a low rolling frag grenade against guardsmen (off-Brand past expiry date "off") which stems from a double layering of their random fact: having to roll a good number of shots then having to connect with them.

However I often wonder...these are meant to normally be what was once blast weapons. These weapons were less about the personal touch and more about "to whom it may concern". So why aren't they treat as such? So trying to brainstorm possible ideas and remembering to keep it relatively quick and easy to do without too much to remember. I came up with this concept of "random shot" weapon rules.

 

 

Weapons whose number of shots are random tend to be those of a largely indiscriminate nature, either they unless a massive blast that can tear entire buildings down or fire such volume of ammunition that it really isn't possible to miss completely with these weapons.

Whenever firing a random shot weapons, consult the weapons stats for the number of dice it rolls. Each die rolled represents a salvo or shell from the weapon, for the sake of reference these will be referred to as "Shells".

Roll to hit with each shell the weapon fires, using the firing models ballistic skill and ignoring any modifiers. These weapons aren't about hitting a particular target, more just aiming in roughly the right area. If a hit is successful then proceed to roll the appropriate die for the shell as noted in the weapons datasheet and that is the number of hits the weapon gets. If a hit roll is unsuccessful it doesn't mean the shell missed completely but wasn't were it was meant to be for most effect. For each missed hit, roll the appropriate die as one would as if you were successful but instead half the resulting roll (rounding up). Note that if the target has the Monster, Vehicle  or Titanic keyword then you instead round down, these units are so large that they can often shrug off glancing blows from such weapons, most of the impact lost on the ground or the nearest tree.

​Example: A whirlwind fires its castellan missile launcher at an Ork Boyz squad. The weapon has a type of Heavy 2D6, this means the weapon fires 2 shells as noted by the first number. The player rolls to hit with each shell and manages to hit with one but misses with the other. The player then rolls the two dice, making note of which one represents the hit and which one represents the miss. The dice representing a hit rolls a 5 and so scores fire hits while the dice representing a miss rolls a 4. Due to be a miss this result is halved to figure out how many hits occur and so only 2 hits get through totalling 7 hits.

 

Granted, it would need some serious wording checks and means to short hand it down more effectively but the principle is there and is intended to give blast weapons a better floor to their results while also making their ceiling a little more accessible (how many times do you roll hot 6 on your D6 weapon and suddenly flubbed the hit rolls?). I was also attempting to ensure this doesn't affect flamer weapons as since they have auto-hits, you would just roll to check how many hits you get. I also wanted to build into the weapon a way to negate modifiers and in my opinion it makes no sense why being sneaky helps you when mortars start raining down on your position. Thoughts?

[Brother Casman]

Interesting, interesting. I do like the idea of a "miss" still doing something when using blast weapons.

 

I had vague thoughts along the lines of changing how the "extra" hits are generated for former blast weapons:

- roll to hit. If you hit, then:

- small blast weapons change to d3 hits per 10 models (or fraction thereof) in a unit

- large blast weapons change to d3 hits per 5 models (or fraction thereof) in a unit

 

But I hadn't considered a "miss" still having an effect. Definitely worth thinking about.

[Jings]

I figured the best way to do it in 8th would be to just have a Blast keyword for certain weapons, which works this way: 

 

Roll to hit > If you hit, it inflicts D3/6 automatic hits. 

 

If you roll a 1 to hit, it instead hits the nearest unit within 3"/6". 

 

So, say a Battlecannon shoots. That would change from Heavy D6 to Heavy 1 with the Blast D6. You roll to hit, and if you do, it inflicts D6 hits and if you don't and roll a one, you hit the nearest unit within 6". Just seems such an easy and straightforward way to go with it, and gives them a bit more of a distinctive flavour from regular shooting and auto-hit weapons. It would even encourage you to shoot them into crowded units because of the potential to still inflict damage on a miss. 

 

Might be sucky for low-BS armies, but I think allowing it to hit other units on 1s helps even things out. 

[Revlid]

If a weapon's meant to be a "blast" or "aoe"-type weapon, wouldn't it make more sense to key the weapon off the size of the enemy unit? Either by giving it more attacks, or giving it a bonus to its hit roll? Alternatively/in addition, if the problem's the high variability of the weapon, just reduce the size of the dice being used. 2D6 is 2-12, average 7, but 4D3 is 4-12, average 8. It's a more even curve.

 

So turn a Flamer into:

 

Name: Flamer

Range: 8"

Type: Assault *

S: 4

AP: -

D: 1

Abilities: This weapon automatically hits its target. This weapon fires D3 shots for every 5 models in the target unit (round up), to a maximum of 4D3.

[Berzul]

If a weapon's meant to be a "blast" or "aoe"-type weapon, wouldn't it make more sense to key the weapon off the size of the enemy unit? Either by giving it more attacks, or giving it a bonus to its hit roll? Alternatively/in addition, if the problem's the high variability of the weapon, just reduce the size of the dice being used. 2D6 is 2-12, average 7, but 4D3 is 4-12, average 8. It's a more even curve.

 

So turn a Flamer into:

 

Name: Flamer

Range: 8"

Type: Assault *

S: 4

AP: -

D: 1

Abilities: This weapon automatically hits its target. This weapon fires D3 shots for every 5 models in the target unit (round up), to a maximum of 4D3.

This makes amazing amounts of sense. I love it.

[Phubar]

The idea of Revlid is very good, you could make those ammount of shots coded in 3 (or more) types of areas

- flame: 1d3 every 5 models, max 3d3

- small: 1d6 every 5 models, max 2d6

- large: 1d6 every 5 models, max 3d6

- huge: 2d6 every 10 models, max 4d6

 

And the profile will be

 

Name: Flamer

Range: 8"

Type: Assault flame*

S: 4

AP: -

D: 1

* this weapon hits automatically

 

Name: FragMissile

Range: 48"

Type: Heavy small

S: 4

AP: -

D: 1

[Berzul]

And you can name that rule as Blast.

Flamer Blast

Small Blast

Large Blast

Apocaliptic Blast

 

I think it is a great rule

[Revlid]

An alternative for flame weapons would be to have them inflict one automatic hit for every model in the enemy unit within range of the weapon, minimum D3. More fiddly and prone to arguments, though.

 

The idea of Revlid is very good, you could make those ammount of shots coded in 3 (or more) types of areas

 

In general, for better or worse, 8e has largely forgone coding in mechanics as proper nouns like this. The downside is constant repetition and minor variations in wording that may or may not be significant; the upside is not having to look up or remember what a Flame/Small/Large/Huge weapon does mid-game, and not having to write "this is an Assault Flame weapon, except it caps at 5d3 shots".

 

There are places that could definitely benefit from a proper noun or two (e.g. "deep strike" replacing "set up anywhere on the battlefield that is more than 9" from any enemy models" would be fine), but there's enough variation in how different weapons work and are balanced that I don't think extra weapon keywords are a good idea.

[Phubar]

Yes 8th is an edition of few keywords.

The official system for old template/blast weapons btw it is not fair and i dont know why they didnt kept the old areas (i mean i know, for having less arguments possible on which model is under the template or not).

 

Imho i will bring back old areas but with new rules. The weapon is still Heavy/Assult etc but instead of the 1d6/2d6 etc it will have a code like a3, a5, a7 (each is an old area template). When firing you place that template over an enemy unit. The number of the shots is the number of model under it. If multiple units are targeted you roll separately for each of them.

To keeping the efficiency against single models you can give up the template and choose a fixed number of shots (ie 3) that is the same for all areas.

[Revlid]

Yes 8th is an edition of few keywords.

The official system for old template/blast weapons btw it is not fair and i dont know why they didnt kept the old areas (i mean i know, for having less arguments possible on which model is under the template or not).

 

Imho i will bring back old areas but with new rules. The weapon is still Heavy/Assult etc but instead of the 1d6/2d6 etc it will have a code like a3, a5, a7 (each is an old area template). When firing you place that template over an enemy unit. The number of the shots is the number of model under it. If multiple units are targeted you roll separately for each of them.

To keeping the efficiency against single models you can give up the template and choose a fixed number of shots (ie 3) that is the same for all areas.

I fundamentally don't agree; the removal of templates was an excellent choice for a number of reasons.

• It reduced the amount of paraphernalia a given player had to bring to each battle. In 8e you just need dice and a tape measure. No need to bring a flamer template, a small blast template, a large blast template, a huge blast template, a scatter die and an artillery die.
• It sped the game up by removing the arguments over which model was under what template, the time spent arranging a template for maximum coverage, the time spent squatting down and standing on tiptoes to get a "proper" vantage point.
• It limited the need to fuss around so much with precise model placement within a unit to avoid being a tasty target for a battle cannon; it might have been realistic, but ensuring that every model was at the absolute edge of unit coherency to ward off a missile launcher certainly wasn't fun.

I definitely think the replacement (primarily just a large number of random shots) could have been handled better, probably by keying it more to the size of the target unit. But I absolutely wouldn't want to return to templates.

[Revlid]

However I often wonder...these are meant to normally be what was once blast weapons. These weapons were less about the personal touch and more about "to whom it may concern". So why aren't they treat as such? So trying to brainstorm possible ideas and remembering to keep it relatively quick and easy to do without too much to remember. I came up with this concept of "random shot" weapon rules.

 

Now, to actually address the OP's idea, I'd suggest borrowing wording from combi-weapons, or from units that get multiple hit rolls per attack like Soulgrinders, Gorkanauts, etc. For an example of the first:

Weapon: Earthshaker cannon

When you attack with this weapon, make a single hit roll. On a hit, use the Direct Hit profile. On a miss, use the Glancing Hit profile.

 

- Direct Hit    Range: 240"   Type: Heavy D6   Strength: 9   AP: -3   Damage: D3

Abilities:This weapon automatically hits its target, and can target units that are not visible to the bearer.

 

- Glancing Hit    Range: 240"   Type: Heavy D6   Strength: 5   AP: 0   Damage: 1

Abilities:This weapon automatically hits its target, and can target units that are not visible to the bearer.

 

 

Alternatively, keep the S/AP/D the same, but lower the hits to D3.

 

Note that this model makes losing BS or moving-and-shooting less serious for the Basilisk; you get fewer auto-hits or weaker auto-hits, but you still get auto-hits. A normal Basilisk hitting on 6+ will average 0.8 hits; this version will still do 3.5 hits, they'll just almost certainly be S5, AP0, D1.

[Lord Raven 19]

Why not use the deathstrike missile area of effect ability for all of them.

[Slasher956]

I like this idea... it then means that weapons like the exorcist become unique again with their random shots!  Instead of just being a worse 'not quite template' weapon.....