But the sniper rifle can pretty much hit as hard as a krak missile so…. Harder if you can get a headshot.

DJSunhammer said:

 

I'm going to doubt that.

Long-Las on a very accurate hit:

3d10+3 Pen 1. (only 1 of those d10 may generate RF).

Krak Missile:

3d10+8 Pen 8. Minimum damage 6, target must test Toughness at -30 or be stunned for a number of rounds.

Fresnel said:

So can a starting OW squad.

Musclewizard said:

 

In the IG all Ratlings are snipers and scouts but not all scouts and snipers are Ratling. Any squad capable of buying a special weapon can make this a sniper rifle and there are specialist weapon squads that can carry 3 in between 6 men. Human snipers have also been portrayed in several novels, such as the Gaunt's Ghosts series, though interestingly enough snipers in the books rarely, if ever, use spotters.

Fresnel said:

From my understanding, this is in fact false. You only need to look at some of the patently ridiculous stuff that has slipped out of BL in some of the lesser-known novels. See, for instance: http://1d4chan.org/wiki/C.S._Goto (Note: I haven't read the novels, but I assume even if this is hyperbolized, some of it is at least true). 

 

 

 

 BL is a division of GW… 

So where do the boundaries lie for FFG? Perhaps they are a little wider than some assume? 

Fenrisnorth said:

Apart from every single soldier with a weapon being able to achieve this effect, isn't this a bit like working around the system rather than with it? Regardless of the end result, you're basically building a character with the intent to have him fail in his job. Apart from this not really being how snipers actually work, this should, given enough time, also seriously affect the roleplaying. So you've got that ace marksman in your squad, just that he's the only one who never hits anything? Personally, I found it rather anti-climatic when my character wasted 4 out of 5 shots/turns due to a dodging enemy, and I do believe that this has contributed to our squad being wiped out. I'd have loved to have just a Spotter comrade back then, it would have made the character feel more complete as a sniper. The other comrade orders just don't feel as fitting for a marksman.

Also, I think a way cooler solution to your idea would be a talent that would allow a character to double as a "PC Spotter comrade" for the Heavy, deliberately choosing when and where to "waste" a shot to steal someone's Dodge rather than being forced into a 100% fail role. Might be a fun addition to the game, actually, as I think it really would increase teamplay.

 

HTMC said:

For quite a number of years, one of them spent on this forum, I too followed the erroneous belief that there would be something like a "canon" and that stuff published under the label has to be consistent. Only a few months ago I finally had that epiphany, after having read a number of comments and statements from various people who actually work on the franchise and as such have to know: There is no such thing as a single consistent setting, just lots and lots of different visions and interpretations, all equally valid. That's the explanation for why so many sources from all origins have conflicts, some smaller, some bigger, with each other. By now, I've come to the conclusion that the whole deal about "canon" is an urban myth that the fans simply propagate because they assume, because they wish this is how it is.

Here's a bunch of quotes w/ sources on the subject:

"With Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000, the notion of canon is a fallacy. […] Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000 exist as tens of thousands of overlapping realities in the imaginations of games developers, writers, readers and gamers. None of those interpretations is wrong."
-- Gav Thorpe, former GW game designer, now freelancing as a Black Library author

"It all stems from the assumption that there's a binding contract between author and reader to adhere to some nonexistent subjective construct or 'true' representation of the setting. There is no such contract, and no such objective truth."
-- Andy Hoare, former GW game designer, now freelancing as a writer for FFG

"There is no canon. There's a variety of sources, many of which conflict, but every single one is a lens through which we can see the 40K setting."
-- Aaron Dembski-Bowden, most famous for his Horus Heresy novels

 Now, my Marine buddies, (Hoorah, not Space) have given me the idea that a sniper's job is first and foremost to get enemies to take cover; not to kill people. Now once you get into Special forces and the CIA and other paramilitary stuff, then you are getting into the territory of the DH Assassin. That aside, you have taken my statement to an absurd level to invalidate it. Did I say the sniper's job would be to miss? Because I'm pretty sure I didn't. Hell, if the sniper is being sneaky, they AREN'T going to be dodged, at which point the Ratling's comrade is nullified, and the WS's Pinning one starts to shine. What would you do to make the ratling stand out? Actually make them be the chef? give them Weapon Training (Spoon)? They are only snipers. it's all they're good at. in fact, they are better at it than humans. Why are people up in arms about Ratlings being better snipers, and not about Ogryn being better meleers? 

Fenrisnorth said:

I take it you've missed the 10 page long (maybe longer now) thread on people complaining about Ogryn stats. :-P

 No, I saw it; but THAT one was that Ogryn sucked, not that they were wtfawesome. 

Fenrisnorth said:

Aside from the "forcing people into cover" job being just as appliable to a Heavy Weapons Gunner and his heavy bolter, this varies greatly depending on the unit and the military/nation as well as the era you're looking at. Since the Imperial Guard supposedly covers everything, I don't see why one major role should be left out of the game, especially considering that this - and not suppression - is the one the existing mechanics for Ratling sharpshooters obviously support.

For reference:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Designated_marksman
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sniper
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_sniper#Doctrine <-- what I tried to be in our game

 

Fenrisnorth said:

Yeah, you did. I quoted the relevant passage in my previous post.

The character intends to hit the target, but you as the player prefer the idea that this attack would negate the target's Dodge so that a player with a heavier weapon would kill him. In essence, the player's intentions are at odds with the character's. Unless you intend to play the character in this suppression role you mentioned - but then we still have the problem that this decision is essentially taken away from the player by firmly associating these roles with two different races, so you can't play a "killer" human sniper or a "suppressor" ratling sniper; the rules only support "suppressor" humans and "killer" ratlings. This could be easily circumvented by simply allowing some leeway when it comes to teaming soldiers with comrades.

The way the system works now, non-ratling snipers are quite simply not supported. The Weapon Specialist is the next best thing and an obvious choice to emulate a marksman, but it shows that this is improvisation on part of the player. I realize that FFG has a tendency to deviate from studio fluff, but at the same time I'm sure that a lot of players would enjoy the option to play human marksmen as well, and not just because of some specific examples in the IG Codex or various BL literature.

 

Fenrisnorth said:

Something that accurately reflects their superior tendency to become excellent marksmen, such as (obviously) appropriate Aptitudes and Characteristics bonuses as well as perhaps early access to a talent other classes/species have to work for, or a unique perk that allows the Ratling improved usage of some other skill or talent.

Because if you carefully consider the argument, you may notice that the Ratling's Spotter Comrade has absolutely nothing to do with race but with role.

What's next, people claiming that the Sergeant's Comrade is the only guy in the squad allowed to operate a voxcaster? :P

 I never said I'd be HAPPIER if my shot missed; I mean, best case scenario, I hit and he flubs his dodge. 

The two have virtually identical affinities, (Both missing Offense, which sucks; because the best stuff is BS+Offense)

The WS is better at landing said shot in the first place (BS Bonus), Since they are hidden, they should not need to worry about dodge in any case. 

The Rat's comrade is helpful once you flub your stealth, which shouldn't happen.

The WS's ability to swap weapons on the fly is very nice, and allows you to not be slavishly attached to your long-las or sniper rifle. (swap between them, or have an anti-tank weapon to snipe with as well)

Also, Heavy Weapons don't Pin. as a rule. You CAN use them to overwatch or supressive fire; but then you're blowing through a whole lot of ammo and sacrificing your turn/chance to hit. The WS gets to do whatever and still pin, should he so choose.

I'm stil not seeing the WS being a bad killy sniper.

I don't think people have had enough time to realize what pinning with even single shot weapons is really going to do eventually. Orks as the first canned campaign doesn't help either, as they tend to have the WP to ignore it anyway with the whole mob rule thing.

Eventually people will realize that non-supressive fire as a source of pinning is quite nice. Note, that this means you can make your flamethrower pinning (I realize this is a non sniper related tangent, yet still an awesome realization); if you pin an enemy, and they're on fire, they can't take the full round action to remove the fire condition.

Since honestly, not everyone in a squad might have a FA weapon (even the heavy gunner), the ability to invoke pinning (especially with a sniper platform, and all the range that brings), is quite nice. Spotter, while useful, is a bit less meaningful next to a WS's base +5 BS that they have on a Ratling.

If a Ratling is using spotter + set-up shot, there is numerically little difference between that and a WS using the comrade to provide a +5 BS bonus and Hail of Fire.

Ratling - 35 BS base, self aim (+20 w/ accurate), self standard attack (+10 base), short range (+10), comrade spotter (+10 second aim), comrade set-up shot = 85 target

WS - 40 BS base, self aim (+20 w/ accurate), self standard attack (+10 base), short range (+10), comrade BS bonus(+5), comrade hail of fire= 85 target

The only time there is a notable difference is when a Ratling uses both the +5 and Spotter comrade actions.

+5, while nice, is largely trivial.

As far as pinning vs. undodgeable, different things for different people I guess.

Fenrisnorth said:

Ah, perhaps a matter of miscommunication, then? When the attack "hits" and the target dodges, it still ends up being a miss. The character doesn't hit, because a bullet hitting its target would wound it. This is what I was referring to. Whether your attack misses or the target dodges, your character ends up "failing" in his/her job. The more this occurs, the less fun the game gets. At least when the character is supposed to be good at this, for at this point the game begins to involuntarily sabotage your portrayal.

Fenrisnorth said:

You're assuming that the sniper player operates detached from the squad, which I do not think is how the game is supposed to be played. They are part of a team, and whilst the sniper may separate from the group a bit, it's not the same as a "true sniper" that is not in a squad at all but in a team of two people, doing their own stuff and essentially playing their own game.

Snipers within a squad are Designated Marksmen, and they don't hide like "true snipers" do. They act like any other soldier in the squad, with possible exception on how they prioritise targets and that they are the go-to guys for covering fire (a role shared with the machine gunner, if the squad has one) and for spotting. At least that's how I've learned it; perhaps someone with more real life experience in the infantry could clarify.

Fenrisnorth said:

If one were to actually value such an option, sure. I don't. Maybe a Ratling sniper would like this, though. Why not allow Ratlings and Weapon Specialists to trade their Comrades?

You're basically trying to tell me that the Weapon Specialist is as good a sniper as the Ratling is, yet then you say that the Ratling needs to retain the Spotter as a unique aid because it makes him … better? I do realise that this is very circumstancial, and some people might even prefer the pinning ability. I just hope that it should be clear why other players regard the Spotter as a very powerful ability that would benefit their own gameplay style much more than the Comrade they get as per current RAW, and that the difference cannot be realistically justified by the background: Ratlings get to have a Comrade whose shot essentially makes the enemy dodge, whereas Weapon Specialists get a Comrade whose shot makes the enemy pinned. Narrative-wise, it's exactly the same thing (comrade's attack doesn't hit but is close enough to have an effect on the enemy), just with a different mechanical result. Again: this has nothing to do with race, but everything with role.

Fenrisnorth said:

I think this is another misunderstanding. I wasn't referring to the game at all, but to the statement that a sniper's main job is supposed to pin down enemies. If you were to go by that, the same role would apply to heavy bolter gunners. I don't care at all how the mechanics support this, but yes, I was thinking of the Suppressive Fire action.

Fenrisnorth said:

Well, yes, you haven't seen me waste 5 out of an overall 6 turns due to my targets dodging. ;)

Call it bad dice luck, but if there's a perfectly viable option for a sniper of a different race, and if said option should have obviously nothing to do with the character's race whatsoever, then I think the game would be more fun if said option were be expanded to apply to snipers in general, not just Ratlings.

Ratlings who might not even be snipers, mind you.

 /hug

 

I feel your pain sister. I've had times like that.

 

From what I have read of the IG; I'd guess the Munitorum doesn't hire Ratlings for other jobs because they'd be crummy at them; except chef.

He doesn't NEED to retain his spotter, in fact, it's a little overkill for him because he has the agility bonus to be great at stealth. On the steal subject; I figured that the squad designated marksman or whatever would be sneakingalong covering the squad; jumping from rooftop to rooftop in an urban environment, sneaking through the bush in a jungle, etc. Or even just rolling along with the squad and waiting until the scout tells them the enemy is ahead. (Or heck, they may BE the scout)

 

As to pinning, the difference between a sniper's pinning and a machine gunner's pinning is twofold. First, you are aware of the machine gunner's position for the most part; second, the sniper makes the squadstay deeper in cover because the shots are precise, rather than a sporadic burst you could run throught with luck. At least to my line of thinking.

Having looked closer at what a designated Marksman is; the Ratling stinks at it, while the WS does a better job. Long range accuracy without stealth is not a job for a midget in a camo cloak with a single fire rifle. The DM is about quick accurate fire; not doing one shot one kill stuff. The equivalent is someone with an M36 Lasgun in a squad of people with Lascarbines. 

I'd rather take ratling out of the game than try and work them into the game as a sort of alternate "Race Choice" that puts them in specialties they have never been in fluff-wise.