N18 Time to fix blasts! (houserule)

JawRippa

Gang Hero
Mar 31, 2017
1,749
2,637
138
Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Edited! Updated #1 and #4 for clarity. Added #5,#6 and #7 suggestions. #2 and #3 are removed into spoiler since they proved to be less popular.

1.1). Targetting ground with blast is prohibitted. Instead you target fighters as normal, following rules for target priority (switching to closer and/or easier target to hit if target priority test is failed). After determining target you may either center the blast on top of the selected target, or you may place blast in any way you want, as long as the shooter can see its center and blast is touching a part of the selected target's base. Blast counts as being a 1.5" or 2.5" cylinder positioned on the same level as target (1.5" for small blast and 2.5" for large blast). Proceed to resolve the ranged attack, getting all penalties or bonuses for targetting that fighter such as cover or equipment/skill effects. The range of a shot is determined by measuring distance to your selected target (which means that if you shot an enemy at 7" with a grenade launcher and repositioned the center of a blast to be within 6", you would not suffer a -1 for short range.)

fzsh5t3ntvk-jpg-jpg.jpg


On the example picture, shooting at any of the two goliaths will incur a -1 to hit penalty (for partial cover from terrain located outside this picture). Top ganger is selected as a target (without target priority test since he is the closest to shooter) and blast is repositioned is such way to partially touch second ganger on the bottom, which would result in two hits if the blast does not scatter. The shot is taken with -1 to hit penalty for partial cover, same would happen if top ganger was targetted with a conventional non-blast gun.

Reasoning: Targetting ground is mainly used to skip shooting restrictions or negative modifiers. It should not be any different than shooting a normal gun, but still allow to position blast templates so you can punish bunched up people more easily. You still will get affected by various rules that trigger when fighter is selected as a target such as Cameleoline cloak or Corpse Grinder's masks.

4.1). Blast weapons that alter terrain rules or create los-blockers can target points on the table, provided that you can put a small token/coin on that point and it is both visible to a shooter and does not fall off (Smoke and Pulse). If that weapon is capable of damaging or directly harming fighters (Graviton Pulse), it may target a point on the table only if the blast marker does not directly touch enemy fighters, otherwise it has to target an enemy fighter directly using rules from above. If such blast marker would touch an enemy, reposition blast template so it does not touch an enemy fighter or select other target.

Reasoning: Targetting a point on the field is essential for the Smoke; Also graviton pulse can be used as a deterrent by cunning player - would love it leave it as an option (without an option to abuse it)

5). Hand grenades ignore up to -1 negative modifier for to hit roll when used for a ranged attack. They are particularly great at being lobbed over cover!

Reasoning: Hand grenades need some serious love. Not only you need 2 stats to use them well unlike conventional blast weapons, they also run out incredibly fast.

6). Obstructing terrain is ignored when working out where the template scatters to (eg, it may scatter through walls), but will dissipate harmlessly if the center ends its scatter inside of a solid structure.

Reasoning: NCE way of scattering blasts. Same reasoning as #2 suggestion: reduce chance of scatter successfully hitting a target, this suggestion does not require a dice roll.

7). If the blast misses due to an improbable shot, roll 2D6 instead of D6 when determining scatter (this means that there is bigger chance for a misfire).

Reasoning: Makes improbable shots more punishing for blasts, as well as allowing more design space for pitch black or smoke redesign.
2). If the center of a scattered blast hits an impassable terrain or terrain piece taller than 2", it immediately stops scattering. Roll a D6: On 1-3 the blast is absorbed by terrain, and fighters nearby are not hit (either the projectile pierced the wall and most of lethal force was supressed by following collapse, or it ricocheted at high angle).

Reasoning: Missing a blast can easily result in you hitting intended target anyway due to scattered blast exploding upon contact with nearby terrain. Fighters in door frame or corners are almost guaranteed to be hit by blast, you may as well skip rolling to hit at this point.

3). Having cover between you and center of a blast does not grant improved save; however you cannot be hit if a straight line cannot be traced from the center of a blast to any part of your model without going through terrain.

Reasoning: Improved armour save was a bandaid by GW which didn't affect much, because RAW you can almost always find a way to center blast on nearby cover piece so there is no obstruction and thus no improved armour save. Templates suffer a lot from this unlike blasts.
 

Attachments

  • FZSH5t3nTVk.jpg
    FZSH5t3nTVk.jpg
    256.4 KB · Views: 317
  • fzsh5t3ntvk-jpg.jpg
    fzsh5t3ntvk-jpg.jpg
    256.4 KB · Views: 176
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: geotech890
It's a nice solution - templates should work the same way (although obviously would ignore any to-hit mods).

I don't see the benefit of point 3, you just removed the benefit from having a barricade or such between yourself and the blast.

Point 4 doesn't really work without premeasuring either.
 
(edited original post, I reread op and understood what is going on)
I`m not sold on those ideas. Having to have only a part of target models base covered would still mean I could place it the same way as in just being able to target ground, although with added - modifiers to hit. And losing the only negative modifier of original rules (the intervening terrain + to save) doesn`t really make sense if we want to nerf blasts.
 
Last edited:
It's a nice solution - templates should work the same way (although obviously would ignore any to-hit mods).

I don't see the benefit of point 3, you just removed the benefit from having a barricade or such between yourself and the blast.

Point 4 doesn't really work without premeasuring either.
I think flame templates could work in a similar fashion, yeah.

#3 was not a thing in the past for previous Munda; and frankly, this crutch by GW was not affecting blasts in the slightest. Blasts are OP because they ignore targetting rules and can score hits by scattering into terrain: by nerfing those we don't need +armour crutch, which is easy to negate anyway.

You dont need to premeasure for #4. Select a point on the table (with added clarity with putting token, to prevent positioning smoke on tips of antenna or something equally silly). If the distance is too long, pull back token until you reach your max distance. I'd add a penalty of autoscatter if you've guessed the distance incorrectly.

(edited original post, I reread op and understood what is going on)
I could place it the same way as in just being able to target ground, although with added - modifiers to hit.
"although with added - modifiers to hit" thats the point? You'll get penalized in the same way as if you were targetting fighter with non-blast gun. So a corpse grinder will spook your grenade launcher and you straight out can't select Falsehood as a legitimate target (although you could hit him if you targetted one of his friends nearby, but thats a failed positioning). I think you've misunderstood the wording completely, getting negative to hit modifiers from cover is still a thing, in fact , thats the whole point! #2 is a big hit to blasts as well.
 
#3 was not a thing in the past for previous Munda; and frankly, this crutch by GW was not affecting blasts in the slightest. Blasts are OP because they ignore targetting rules and can score hits by scattering into terrain: by nerfing those we don't need +armour crutch, which is easy to negate anyway.
"It doesn't do as much as I hope, therefore I'm scrapping it"
Forgive me but I don't understand the logic. It's very useful for templates, and it's better than nothing.

You dont need to premeasure for #4. Select a point on the table (with added clarity with putting token, to prevent positioning smoke on tips of antenna or something equally silly). If the distance is too long, pull back token until you reach your max distance. I'd add a penalty of autoscatter if you've guessed the distance incorrectly.
You do need to premeasure.
"I want to place this grav-gun here, just outside of the blast range of the fighter."
"Oops, I placed it a little too close and the blast clips them."
Do I have to target the fighter? Do I have to amend where I'm targeting?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DamianK
I think be both misunderstood each others posts.

What I mean is, allowing player to place blast in any way he/she wants, as long as it only covers a part of a base of target model leaves a lot of room for further abuse. Say there are two models near each other, one in cover, other in open. So with these proposed changes, I can target one in the open (so no negative modifier) and then place blast covering both of them - now suddenly having the ability to hit both without any negative. Just like targetting ground under regular rules. Granted, that is a very specific situation, but there are probably more than that.

And as a side note - blast are one of the very few counters to CGC, I don`t think taking that out is a big selling point for a rule change.
 
"It doesn't do as much as I hope, therefore I'm scrapping it"
Forgive me but I don't understand the logic. It's very useful for templates, and it's better than nothing.
I think that combination of removal blast targetting ground shenanigans, blasts poofing into walls and armour buffs from cover would be too much. In my experience templates are very weak unless they have blaze exactly because of them being bad at dealing with targets in hard cover. Target someone with combat shotgun ~5" away from you with scatter, he is now a space marine (saves on 3+ from flak+hard cover).
You do need to premeasure.
"I want to place this grav-gun here, just outside of the blast range of the fighter."
"Oops, I placed it a little too close and the blast clips them."
Do I have to target the fighter? Do I have to amend where I'm targeting?
"Oops, clipped" does not count. adjust blast positioning then. If still not possible, select another point on the ground entirely or fire directly at an enemy.
 
I think be both misunderstood each others posts.

What I mean is, allowing player to place blast in any way he/she wants, as long as it only covers a part of a base of target model leaves a lot of room for further abuse. Say there are two models near each other, one in cover, other in open. So with these proposed changes, I can target one in the open (so no negative modifier) and then place blast covering both of them - now suddenly having the ability to hit both without any negative. Just like targetting ground under regular rules. Granted, that is a very specific situation, but there are probably more than that.

And as a side note - blast are one of the very few counters to CGC, I don`t think taking that out is a big selling point for a rule change.
Oh, I see. Yeah, you can still abuse that sort of thing, but if you are bunching fighters, thats on you as a player. Perhaps I was too hasty with #3 because in your example cover would help out the second fighter in cover... I'll think about it.
 
I mean, if I want to use group activations, bunching up is a bit of a prerequisite. But yes, that is my choice (and thus my fault in some circumistances) as a player.

But then there is another thought that came to my mind - if we nerf blasts, it kinda makes grenades with blast and frags in grenade launcher even less usefull, and just means more justification for throwing kraks with aim all day. And I`m not sure that is in any way making the game better.
 
I think that combination of removal blast targetting ground shenanigans, blasts poofing into walls and armour buffs from cover would be too much. In my experience templates are very weak unless they have blaze exactly because of them being bad at dealing with targets in hard cover. Target someone with combat shotgun ~5" away from you with scatter, he is now a space marine (saves on 3+ from flak+hard cover).
IMO all of those points solves different issues.
Although I'm actually against the 4+ walls thing, it's realistic that it's dangerous to be in a confined space when someone is throwing grenades around.

Also, there are four types of template weapon.
Flamers - which have Blaze which ignores armour.
Web - which ignores armour entirely.
Gas - which ignores armour entirely
And Scatter - which is just a tax on Firestorm rounds. But scatter still isn't bad, it autohits and you get d6 shots. Nor do I see why shotgun blasts should ignore cover when single shotgun blasts don't.
 
Seems very arbitrary to pick out 4 types of templates (blaze, web, gas and scattershot). What about Concussion & Flash? Rad-phage? One even got toxin but I guess it would be grouped with blaze since it also got that.
 
I mean, if I want to use group activations, bunching up is a bit of a prerequisite. But yes, that is my choice (and thus my fault in some circumistances) as a player.

But then there is another thought that came to my mind - if we nerf blasts, it kinda makes grenades with blast and frags in grenade launcher even less usefull, and just means more justification for throwing kraks with aim all day. And I`m not sure that is in any way making the game better.
I wouldn't care about interaction with specific weapons too much, the game is not very balanced anyway. Launching Kraks is always preferable, unless you can make use of knockback or targetting directly has too many penalties. As for quick fix for grenade launcher, kraks should be limited and cost ~15 creds (but grenade launcher should be cheaper).

Seems very arbitrary to pick out 4 types of templates (blaze, web, gas and scattershot). What about Concussion & Flash? Rad-phage? One even got toxin but I guess it would be grouped with blaze since it also got that.
To be honest, those 4 templates are most common and likely to be encountered. Rad gun one is so awful I forgot it existed. I don't remember concussion / flash templates being a thing.

In general I'd like seing flamers being good at flushing targets out of cover, right now you provide targets armour which goes against any common sense. Blaze does ignore cover, yeah, but you also want to have a fair chance at injuring targets. We've tried removing +armour for templates and so far it didn't break the game. We do rotate mechanicus with mortalis a lot if you are wondering.

Although I'm actually against the 4+ walls thing, it's realistic that it's dangerous to be in a confined space when someone is throwing grenades around.
If you've missed, so there should be a punish. Walls and cover are always going to be near the fighter, because cover is essential for survival. Making blasts extra good by ricochetting into those is making it a bit too easy to use.
 
Last edited:
Seems very arbitrary to pick out 4 types of templates (blaze, web, gas and scattershot). What about Concussion & Flash? Rad-phage? One even got toxin but I guess it would be grouped with blaze since it also got that.
I mean Templates as in the teardrop shape, not blasts.

I'm not aware of any template weapon that doesn't fit into one of the four types I listed.
Everything you listed is blast, correct?
 
Honestly I think the best (and simplest) fix for Blasts is to made blast weapons have an additional -1 to hit modifier if they try to target a specific spot on the table. Might encourage more direct targeting of models.

I'd agree that if you target a model you can place the blast marker how you like as long as target is touched by it.

Also subject them to the standard target priority rules.

I'm happy with walls etc stopping scatter and making confined spaces dangerous to be when blasts are being chucked around.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cronevald
Honestly I think the best (and simplest) fix for Blasts is to made blast weapons have an additional -1 to hit modifier if they try to target a specific spot on the table. Might encourage more direct targeting of models.
Over half of a year we've tried every houserule that was suggested on this forum:
  • -1 to hit for targetting a point was the first one and proved to be completely ineffective, especially for high ballistic fighters who still easily hit on 2+.
  • You can only select point on the table which is fully visible and place token on it. You have to fully see the token, and it has to stay still without falling over, otherwise you can't select that point as a target.
  • You have to pass target priority test to target a point, otherwise you shoot the closest visible target (proved to be a bit "glitchy")
I came to a conclusion that 95% of the time blasts are targetting points on the table instead of fighters, this is used to bypass some shooting restrictions or doing "unfluffy" shots such as sniping fighters in smoke, fighters in melee, attacking fighters who are hidden from the shooter (out of LOS or pinned behind cover), sniping enemies in Pitch black (FAQ from 2019 by GW allows doing that) or bypass any penalty such as ignoring CGC masks. Honestly, rather than having a ton of erratas for how blast should interract with these, I'd make it so you can only target enemies directly. At least this way this is more inline with regular shooting with additional benefit of occasionally hitting enemies even on miss due to scatter.

After a few years of playing Neomunda I do realise why old necromunda forced you to target enemies directly, because otherwise there are too many things that you break in the rules. So #1 is basically expanding upon that idea. You target a fighter directly with all possible downsides, but you may fiddle with blast positioning to clip someone within 3"/ 5" of that fighter. So does what targetting ground was designed for - making precise multishots to punish bunching up, without allowing cheesy interactions.

I'm happy with walls etc stopping scatter and making confined spaces dangerous to be when blasts are being chucked around.
My experience on Mortalis with blasts is that they are as powerful as templates. This article on Goonhammer confirms my suspicions. Note that these numbers are without accounting for scattering into nearby terrain, which makes it even easier to hit. This is why I think there should be a downside for scattering into terrain. I'm not married to an idea though, but I feel that it could use some testing.

Blast weapons like grenade launchers are very, very good in Necromunda. They allow players to ignore the targeting priority rules and instead place a blast marker anywhere within line of sight, and instead of missing entirely if the hit roll is failed the weapon scatters. So long as the model’s base is underneath the blast marker after scattering the weapon hits the target. As a result there are three results that can cause the target to take a hit:

  1. The hit roll succeeds.
  2. The d6 result on the Scatter test is low enough that the blast marker still covers the base.
  3. The blast marker scatters into a wall and the position is close enough to cover the base.
It’s impossible to calculate every scenario regarding walls, but it can have a pivotal effect particularly in Zone Mortalis games. For scattering in the open, models in Necromunda generally have 25mm (0.984”) or 32mm (1.260”) bases, and the radius of the blast markers (half the diameter) is either 1.5” or 2.5”. If you place a blast marker on the center of a model’s base, it will need to scatter a distance equal to the radius of the blast marker plus the radius of the base. The radius of a 25mm base is less than half an inch, while everything else is greater than half an inch, so size matters.

BlastProbHit2.png


To go through the math, we consider the two possible outcomes. For the BS 6+ shooter targeting a 25mm model the chances of hitting are 16.7%. The chance of the blast scattering only one inch is the chance of the miss (5/6) multiplied by the chance of a 1 on the d6 (1/6), which is also 13.9%. Add the values together and after rounding you get a 31% hit chance.

The benefit is significant, with even the worst possible shooter still hitting a Goliath nearly half the time. Of course the low BS guys who benefit the most (Goliaths) also end up being the most vulnerable so at least there’s some balance. This also explains why combining the Overwatch skill with a grenade launcher is so devastating; a high BS champion like a Genestealer Acolyte Hybrid is going to pin and cancel your action three times out of four. The only way things get any easier is with template weapons, which are amazing in and of themselves.

Never considered this broken myself. Id only approve of these changes in my group provided we agreed to other houserules too.

1) CGC masks don't affect shooting, only melee charges.
Blasts can ignore way too many shooting restrictions as of now (see reply to Al_Weeks above). We were thinking about giving CGC a -1 to hit to melee or ranged attacks if you fail a WP test. I think they need some sort of protection against shooting, just not the same level of protection as completely cancelling shooting whatsoever.

I mean Templates as in the teardrop shape, not blasts.

I'm not aware of any template weapon that doesn't fit into one of the four types I listed.
Everything you listed is blast, correct?
Radgun of Van Saar is a radiation template which has Radphage. It sucks a lot.
 
Last edited:
Over half of a year we've tried every houserule that was suggested on this forum:
  • -1 to hit for targetting a point was the first one and proved to be completely ineffective, especially for high ballistic fighters who still easily hit on 2+.
  • You can only select point on the table which is fully visible and place token on it. You have to fully see the token, and it has to stay still without falling over, otherwise you can't select that point as a target.
  • You have to pass target priority test to target a point, otherwise you shoot the closest visible target (proved to be a bit "glitchy")
I came to a conclusion that 95% of the time blasts are targetting points on the table instead of fighters, this is used to bypass some shooting restrictions or doing "unfluffy" shots such as sniping fighters in smoke, fighters in melee, attacking fighters who are hidden from the shooter (out of LOS or pinned behind cover), sniping enemies in Pitch black (FAQ from 2019 by GW allows doing that) or bypass any penalty such as ignoring CGC masks. Honestly, rather than having a ton of erratas for how blast should interract with these, I'd make it so you can only target enemies directly. At least this way this is more inline with regular shooting with additional benefit of occasionally hitting enemies even on miss due to scatter.

Blasts can ignore way too many shooting restrictions as of now (see reply to Al_Weeks above). We were thinking about giving CGC a -1 to hit to melee or ranged attacks if you fail a WP test. I think they need some sort of protection against shooting, just not the same level of protection as completely cancelling shooting whatsoever.

Radgun of Van Saar is a radiation template which has Radphage. It sucks a lot.

I`m honestly puzzled what you are actually trying to fix or what is your problem with blasts, because the more I read your posts, the less clear that is.
At first I thought this was about the usual grenade launcher spam, but then you replied that it`s the kraks should be fired most of the time anyway (which target directly).
-1 to hit for targetting the ground is somehow not usefull because 2+ shooters, but target getting the same -1 for cover is somehow relevant? If we are at a point in a campaign where -1 to shoot is meaningless, we areprobably also dealing with trick shot/infra-sight, so smoke, pitch black and cover is already meaningless (at least for champions)
You also discredit almost every single teardrop-template weapon in the game (with which I agree to some degree - most of them are overpriced to be usefull), so you then propose a bunch of rules which make them better, one of which (+ to armour for intervening terrain) would also make the blast better... Which, I`m not sure, is even than good, reading your previous posts?

Don`t want to sound rude, but honestly, those proposed changes are very arbitrary and seem to be aimed at some obscure, specific purpose, which is covered by generic "templates suck".
 
I`m honestly puzzled what you are actually trying to fix or what is your problem with blasts, because the more I read your posts, the less clear that is.
At first I thought this was about the usual grenade launcher spam, but then you replied that it`s the kraks should be fired most of the time anyway (which target directly).
-1 to hit for targetting the ground is somehow not usefull because 2+ shooters, but target getting the same -1 for cover is somehow relevant? If we are at a point in a campaign where -1 to shoot is meaningless, we areprobably also dealing with trick shot/infra-sight, so smoke, pitch black and cover is already meaningless (at least for champions)
Infra-sight cannot be fitted on blast weapons (pg. 137 Gangs of the Underhive). Trickshot at least eats a skill slot and is not available to everyone. So someone in heavy cover will be at -2 to hit, compared to -1 to hit when you fire at a point on the ground next to them (if you are talking about comparing #1 suggestion to the houserule of -1 to hit when targetting ground).

Grenade launcher spam is mean as hell, but mostly because of built-in krak. Frag grenade just adds versatility, but is not the main appeal of the weapon, because STR3 AP- is not very killy. Plasma cannons and Multi-meltas on the other hand can vaporise your fighters from 36"/24" away, and do all blast-related tricks I've described above.

Don`t want to sound rude, but honestly, those proposed changes are very arbitrary and seem to be aimed at some obscure, specific purpose, which is covered by generic "templates suck".
The changes is not to make templates better, it is to remove ability for blast to ignore on hit penalties for heavy cover and make blasts work properly in Pitch black. I've brought up templates suffering from +armour when target is behind cover not because I think that templates are universally weak, I just wanted to point out how easy it is to bypass that limitation with blast. Just target ground in such a way that there is no terrain between center of the blast and the target. You can even put that center on top of target's barricade - you'll hit the target without any penalties to hit and give it no +armour due to no intervining terrain.
 
Last edited:
Over half of a year we've tried every houserule that was suggested on this forum:
  • -1 to hit for targetting a point was the first one and proved to be completely ineffective, especially for high ballistic fighters who still easily hit on 2+.
  • You can only select point on the table which is fully visible and place token on it. You have to fully see the token, and it has to stay still without falling over, otherwise you can't select that point as a target.
  • You have to pass target priority test to target a point, otherwise you shoot the closest visible target (proved to be a bit "glitchy")
I came to a conclusion that 95% of the time blasts are targetting points on the table instead of fighters, this is used to bypass some shooting restrictions or doing "unfluffy" shots such as sniping fighters in smoke, fighters in melee, attacking fighters who are hidden from the shooter (out of LOS or pinned behind cover), sniping enemies in Pitch black (FAQ from 2019 by GW allows doing that) or bypass any penalty such as ignoring CGC masks. Honestly, rather than having a ton of erratas for how blast should interract with these, I'd make it so you can only target enemies directly. At least this way this is more inline with regular shooting with additional benefit of occasionally hitting enemies even on miss due to scatter.

After a few years of playing Neomunda I do realise why old necromunda forced you to target enemies directly, because otherwise there are too many things that you break in the rules. So #1 is basically expanding upon that idea. You target a fighter directly with all possible downsides, but you may fiddle with blast positioning to clip someone within 3"/ 5" of that fighter. So does what targetting ground was designed for - making precise multishots to punish bunching up, without allowing cheesy interactions.


My experience on Mortalis with blasts is that they are as powerful as templates. This article on Goonhammer confirms my suspicions. Note that these numbers are without accounting for scattering into nearby terrain, which makes it even easier to hit. This is why I think there should be a downside for scattering into terrain. I'm not married to an idea though, but I feel that it could use some testing.

Blast weapons like grenade launchers are very, very good in Necromunda. They allow players to ignore the targeting priority rules and instead place a blast marker anywhere within line of sight, and instead of missing entirely if the hit roll is failed the weapon scatters. So long as the model’s base is underneath the blast marker after scattering the weapon hits the target. As a result there are three results that can cause the target to take a hit:

  1. The hit roll succeeds.
  2. The d6 result on the Scatter test is low enough that the blast marker still covers the base.
  3. The blast marker scatters into a wall and the position is close enough to cover the base.
It’s impossible to calculate every scenario regarding walls, but it can have a pivotal effect particularly in Zone Mortalis games. For scattering in the open, models in Necromunda generally have 25mm (0.984”) or 32mm (1.260”) bases, and the radius of the blast markers (half the diameter) is either 1.5” or 2.5”. If you place a blast marker on the center of a model’s base, it will need to scatter a distance equal to the radius of the blast marker plus the radius of the base. The radius of a 25mm base is less than half an inch, while everything else is greater than half an inch, so size matters.

View attachment 123500

To go through the math, we consider the two possible outcomes. For the BS 6+ shooter targeting a 25mm model the chances of hitting are 16.7%. The chance of the blast scattering only one inch is the chance of the miss (5/6) multiplied by the chance of a 1 on the d6 (1/6), which is also 13.9%. Add the values together and after rounding you get a 31% hit chance.

The benefit is significant, with even the worst possible shooter still hitting a Goliath nearly half the time. Of course the low BS guys who benefit the most (Goliaths) also end up being the most vulnerable so at least there’s some balance. This also explains why combining the Overwatch skill with a grenade launcher is so devastating; a high BS champion like a Genestealer Acolyte Hybrid is going to pin and cancel your action three times out of four. The only way things get any easier is with template weapons, which are amazing in and of themselves.

I thank you for trying the various permutations. From what you've said it is the pinpoint sniping of blast weapons that an issue. Would making them always scatter (even on a hit) but maybe only D3 or even D3*1/2". My idea being that it should represent the inherent inaccurate nature. Even D3*1/2" means that when centred on a target it will hit said target but many shenanigans by allowing critical placement of a template can be avoided. Basically hitting additional fighters should be a bonus, not an easily calculable result. Going with D3" straight up increases the chance of missing by a 1/3.

A relatively short scatter still ensures high chance of hitting a grouped bunch of fighters, which is blasts raision detre. The further from centred on a fighter the bigger the impact of this rule.
You could even make it d3x1/2" but doubled to D3x1" if targeting in smoke/darkness/ pitch black..
 
So you're right, the Radgun is template. Radphage also ignores armour though, so similar to a flamer, it partially ignores armour.

I agree that I'm skeptical of the simple -1 to hit if targeting the floor.
Firstly, it does nothing to address blasts ignoring most shooting rules (such as Pitched Black), and it doesn't do much to address them ignoring cover. If a fighter is in cover they get at least a -1, so there's nothing lost from firing besides them anyway.

@JawRippa's core idea is a simple way to solve both of those issues.
Although some of the extra stuff, as mentioned by @DamianK, seems confusing in it's purpose and value.

Obviously CGC are an issue, but I would prefer Terrifying to be nerfed directly instead of making the rest of the game suffer around it.
I don't think blasts should be *required* to effectively fight a single gang.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JawRippa