Plasma Syphon

[Sonikgav]

Has anyone figured out what is covered as a Plasma Weapon or is it another one of those 'we will see in the faq' questions?

I know it mentions the Pistol, Gun and Cannon in the Syphons entry but seeing as this is in the Xenos inquisitors entry its funny if it would only effect Imperial tech. Obviously Chaos would be effected too but how about things like the Tau Plasma Rifle? Can we stretch it as far as to say Tyranid Bio-Plasma is effected? How about any weapon that mentions a Plasma reaction in its fluff entry etc?

[Rev. Tiberius Jackhammer]

It effects the weapons it says it effects, pistols, guns and cannons. This would include the Tau version, since it's called a "Plasma Rifle". If you want to houserule it into effecting to things like bio-plasma, sure, but the rule as written only effects the three named weapons.

[Sonikgav]

It effects the weapons it says it effects, pistols, guns and cannons. This would include the Tau version, since it's called a "Plasma Rifle". If you want to houserule it into effecting to things like bio-plasma, sure, but the rule as written only effects the three named weapons.

You contradict yourself then because it doesnt mention the Tau Plasma Rifle. All it says is 'it effects Plasma Weaponry, including Plasma Cannons, Plasmaguns and Plasma Pistols' so this seems to only pick on Imperial Guard, Space Marines and Chaos. Seems a little odd.

And no, you cant say the Tau one is just a Plasma Gun because apart from the AP the two guns have nothing in common, different Strength, Range, and doesnt get hot.

[gcsmith]

If you were pinikety all of the tau weapons are plasma if you read their descriptions lol

Edit: if you were over pinikety all flame weapons are plasma :)

[Rev. Tiberius Jackhammer]

Oh, whoops, I thought that the Imperial Plasmagun was called a "Plasma Rifle" too, like how the Imperium, Eldar and Tau all have flamers. So yeah, the tau plasma rifle wouldn't be effected. Fluffwise, the Syphon mentions it effects the "frequencies" most plasma weapons operate at, I'd just assume starcannons, Tau Plasma/Pulse tech and bio-plasma all operate at different frequencies. Of course, this doesn't account for the Leman Russ Executioner.

[Paul]

Good question: is the Plasma Destroyer a "Plasma Cannon?"

if you say yes, give a reason. And please don't let that reason be "it has plasma in the name"

[Connjurus]

Good question: is the Plasma Destroyer a "Plasma Cannon?"

if you say yes, give a reason. And please don't let that reason be "it has plasma in the name"

I'd say the Plasma Siphon is a teensy-bit small for that much plasma, and would probably overload and explode.

[DarkLink]

You contradict yourself then because it doesnt mention the Tau Plasma Rifle. All it says is 'it effects Plasma Weaponry, including Plasma Cannons, Plasmaguns and Plasma Pistols' so this seems to only pick on Imperial Guard, Space Marines and Chaos. Seems a little odd.

And no, you cant say the Tau one is just a Plasma Gun because apart from the AP the two guns have nothing in common, different Strength, Range, and doesnt get hot.

If it has Plasma in the title of the weapon, then you cannot argue that it is not affected by the syphon.

Plasma weapon does not mean St 7 AP 2. It means a plasma weapon. Tau Plasma Rifles are Plasma weapons. Star Cannons are Plasma weapons.

[gcsmith]

On wat basis are star cannons plasma weapons?

[isotope99]

I think the simplest way is just to say if it has the word plasma in the title then it's a plasma weapon, rather than just in the fluff.

So yes to Tau plasma rifles, no to Eldar starcannons

Probably should also be an exception for super heavy weapons like the emperor battle titan's plasma annhialator? :p

[Sonikgav]

I'd say the Plasma Siphon is a teensy-bit small for that much plasma, and would probably overload and explode.

The Syphon doesnt absorb the incoming Plasma if your looking for a fluff excuse. It emits a signal that makes Plasma react badly so its harder to aim therefore making Plasma Weapons BS1.

[scadugenga]

On wat basis are star cannons plasma weapons?

Page 22 Eldar codex.

[DarkLink]

The Syphon doesnt absorb the incoming Plasma if your looking for a fluff excuse. It emits a signal that makes Plasma react badly so its harder to aim therefore making Plasma Weapons BS1.

Considering that Plasma weapons don't really actually make any sense, there isn't much of a need to try and find a real world explanation for what a weapon that really doesn't work well in reality anyways doesn't work well when it happens to be used in this case in a game that is most definitely not a simulation of what real combat would be like.

In short, a wizard did it (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AWizardDidIt).

[Tynskel]

I am not sure what you mean that plasma weapons don't make sense.

it is like firing a bullet, a projectile in the solid phase, but instead this 'bullet' is in the plasma phase. In this case, it is directed by magnetic fields, and because it is super heated, not only impacts on things, but also boils stuff away.

[Paul]

I am not sure what you mean that plasma weapons don't make sense.

it is like firing a bullet, a projectile in the solid phase, but instead this 'bullet' is in the plasma phase. In this case, it is directed by magnetic fields, and because it is super heated, not only impacts on things, but also boils stuff away.

The hilarity of plasma is that it really isn't that effective of a weapon. I am more likely to survive being hit by lightning (super-heated ions ... plasma) than I am a bullet.

Also, the magnetic fields required to contain a plasma over any distance would require so much power output that if you used the SAME ******* GENERATORS AND MAGNETS you could get a solid projectile to go a considerable fraction the speed of light - much more powerful than ionized gas.

[wkz]

I am not sure what you mean that plasma weapons don't make sense.

it is like firing a bullet, a projectile in the solid phase, but instead this 'bullet' is in the plasma phase. In this case, it is directed by magnetic fields, and because it is super heated, not only impacts on things, but also boils stuff away.
Plasma weapons sound cool: Superheated cores being fired!! It burns with the force of a THOUSAND SUNS!!

But there's one big problem: Plasma usually dissipates right after the initial point of generation. That is what Paul have as his base of his argument up there (all the rest are about trying to get that plasma to work... ... well, the hilarity of it at least)

(Edit: you read stuff here? No, no stuff here. Its wrong and you're wrong and its a figment of your imagination... shaped charges is what you read... if it exists. Remember, no stuff here...)

[Tynskel]

actually, a lightning bolt is not really plasma. It is just an electron transfer.

However, plasma is made of two parts: ions and unbound electrons. It's the ions moving at high speeds that act like a bullet.

[DarkLink]

Thing is, plasma is just kinda like superheated gas. Gas doesn't have very much mass. There would be a minuscule amount of kinetic energy transfer, and that's about it. The heat dump would cause some burns on unarmored stuff, but it certainly wouldn't cut through heavy armor the way sci-fi authors tend to think it would.

And this is all assuming that you do have some way of directing the plasma. In real life, though, there's no means to do this. It would be like using a super-soaker full of hot steam. You would burn anything you hit pretty badly, but you'd have to be about 3 feet away from the target or else all that steam just dissipates.

[wkz]

Thing is, plasma is just kinda like superheated gas. Gas doesn't have very much mass. There would be a minuscule amount of kinetic energy transfer, and that's about it. The heat dump would cause some burns on unarmored stuff, but it certainly wouldn't cut through heavy armor the way sci-fi authors tend to think it would.

And this is all assuming that you do have some way of directing the plasma. In real life, though, there's no means to do this. It would be like using a super-soaker full of hot steam. You would burn anything you hit pretty badly, but you'd have to be about 3 feet away from the target or else all that steam just dissipates.
But but but, here's the thing: in the fluff Plasma guns can go quite a ways before dissipating. Given what we know about plasma, this means there's a containment field of some kind at work right there.

What if the containment field ALSO shapes how the charge explodes on its target? We'll have the effect that real-world Shaped Charges bring to the table: a conic shape forcing a very thin needle of super-hot metals travelling at superior speeds to pierce right into whatever armor it just impacted against.

(and the accidental collapse of this field is what causes the "get hot" roll...)

And what's more, because it is "forcefield" on "generated super-heated gas", ammunition is more or less simple energy, and can be very tight and compact. You will not need great feats of engineering to pump out crates on crates of missile tubes or autocannon shells, nor will you need great feats of logistics carrying said crates of stuff to the frontline. All you need to carry there are the much smaller (but apparently powerful as all hell) powerpacks, and everything else will solve itself. With lots of plasma burn.
/geekmode

Ah well. Guess we have to wait for the next 30,000 years before we get force fields that can project themselves in container form to disperse plasma death to our enemies... Also, "In real life" doesn't come into this, simply because there is no real life equivalent.

What you described sounds suspiciously similar to Meltaguns thou.... although the fluff reasons for how THAT one works is as different from your example as Apples and Oranges

[talos]

You can't use todays tech to reason how weapons work millenia in the future. A cohesion field, a thetta force blah blah could provide fluffy solutions for plasma weaponry.

As for the rule it's vey vague. I assume that plasma weapons affected by this, are all weapons with plasma on their title. Anything else would have you searching each codex if there is a refference in the fluff of any mention for plasma. Until ofcourse there is a faq that defines which weapons are affected.

[elmir]

I believe one of the DE weapons also has the description in the fluff that it's a plasma weapon. I don't have the codex at hand, but I remember reading the fluff in the wargear section and it said something along the lines of:

"unlike the plasma weapons used by other races...". Does that make it count as a plasma based weapon as well, like the eldar starcannon?

I really cannot recall the name of that gun, it's an AP 2 thingy though. :confused:

[eldargal]

That would be the disintegrator cannon.

[Paul]

You can't use todays tech to reason how weapons work millenia in the future. A cohesion field, a thetta force blah blah could provide fluffy solutions for plasma weaponry.

Well, that's not entirely true.

There ARE immutable laws of physics and engineering which apply even 40,000 years in the future:

Conservation of energy
and
Power output

The power output required to contain a plasma of X energy would, by its very nature, be Y where Y > X (or else it would be unable to contain the plasma).

So if Y > X in terms of energy, why isn't Y being used as the weapon instead?

To put it in simpler terms:
If the containment field is strong enough to restrain ionized gas, it is also strong enough to, say, magnetically affect the integrity of the hull of a tank or use the force-field (if it isn't magnets) to crush a man. Without the plasma.

[talos]

If we are talking millenia in the future that means that technology then is as incomprehensible to us, as todays technology is to an amoeba.
Don't get me wrong, I am an engineer my self and I know all about conservation of energy, entropy etc The point is we don't know. Period. A containment field could affect ionized gas and not the hull of a vehicle just as a magnetic field affects only certain kinds of metal. You can have MT of a magnetic field, yet you can't even shift a gram of aluminium. So power output is not a factor.

[Lemt]

Well, that's not entirely true.

There ARE immutable laws of physics and engineering which apply even 40,000 years in the future:

Conservation of energy
and
Power output

The power output required to contain a plasma of X energy would, by its very nature, be Y where Y > X (or else it would be unable to contain the plasma).

So if Y > X in terms of energy, why isn't Y being used as the weapon instead?

To put it in simpler terms:
If the containment field is strong enough to restrain ionized gas, it is also strong enough to, say, magnetically affect the integrity of the hull of a tank or use the force-field (if it isn't magnets) to crush a man. Without the plasma.

Demons are running around pantsless 40k years into the future. That's got to mess with physics somewhat.

[DarkLink]

http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/sidearmenergy.php


But but but, here's the thing: in the fluff Plasma guns can go quite a ways before dissipating. Given what we know about plasma, this means there's a containment field of some kind at work right there.

Of course there's a plasma field in the fluff. My comments aren't about how plasma works in the fluff, they're about how plasma doesn't make much sense in the real world.

Incidentally, there are cases in which plasma is contained within a magnetic field for certain scientific purposes. It is, however, horribly ineffective as a weapon. It's like trying to attack your opponent with a refrigerator, not very practical when compared to actual weapons.



What if the containment field ALSO shapes how the charge explodes on its target? We'll have the effect that real-world Shaped Charges bring to the table: a conic shape forcing a very thin needle of super-hot metals travelling at superior speeds to pierce right into whatever armor it just impacted against.

Plasma doesn't explode. Magnetic fields do not explode.



And what's more, because it is "forcefield" on "generated super-heated gas", ammunition is more or less simple energy, and can be very tight and compact. You will not need great feats of engineering to pump out crates on crates of missile tubes or autocannon shells, nor will you need great feats of logistics carrying said crates of stuff to the frontline. All you need to carry there are the much smaller (but apparently powerful as all hell) powerpacks, and everything else will solve itself. With lots of plasma burn.
/geekmode

Plasma is most definitely not "simple energy". A laser is "simple energy". And a laser would be a much more efficient way of dumping pure energy into a target. Trying to use plasma for those purposes would likely be far less efficient.

Incidentally, you should take a class on thermodynamics.



Ah well. Guess we have to wait for the next 30,000 years before we get force fields that can project themselves in container form to disperse plasma death to our enemies... Also, "In real life" doesn't come into this, simply because there is no real life equivalent.

Or just wait until they invent bolters, because solid projectile weapons will probably always work better than plasma ever will. In fact, if the technology avails itself, lasers will likely be much more effective. The only problem with lasers is that it's very difficult to accumulate enough pure energy to do anything of note, requiring enough batteries to fill up a 747.



What you described sounds suspiciously similar to Meltaguns thou.... although the fluff reasons for how THAT one works is as different from your example as Apples and Oranges


Melta weapons aren't just impractical, they're non-sensical. The description for how meltaguns work is just a bunch of fancy sounding sci-fi mumbo-jumpo.


You can't use todays tech to reason how weapons work millenia in the future. A cohesion field, a thetta force blah blah could provide fluffy solutions for plasma weaponry.


Oh, plasma weapons could work. All the technology exists, theoretically at least. Thing is, compared to pretty much any actual weapon, plasma just doesn't make any sense. Fancy new technologies aren't likely to change that for a very, very long time, if ever.

[Tynskel]

I do not understand how you can say plasma is ineffective as a weapon. It is just a different state of matter. It is like saying liquid or gas or solid is an ineffective weapon. It matters how it is used.

How do you know that plasma doesn't explode? Depending on the properties of the ions and electrons, they could recombine and release energy. If they do so at a sufficient rate, the local release of energy will look like an 'explosion'. There will be a shockwave.

What are you talking about with meltaguns? They are a giant Hair Dryer. It fires a pulse of Sensible Heat. That thermal pulse reaches you by conduction, convection, and radiation. It cooks you.

[talos]

Oh, plasma weapons could work. All the technology exists, theoretically at least. Thing is, compared to pretty much any actual weapon, plasma just doesn't make any sense. Fancy new technologies aren't likely to change that for a very, very long time, if ever.

I guess the 1st musket ever made, compared to a bow at the time, it would be cumbersome, impractical, ineffective and wouldn't make sense. Now compare any bow to a minigun. And that's a few hundred years of evolution...

[Paul]

I do not understand how you can say plasma is ineffective as a weapon. It is just a different state of matter. It is like saying liquid or gas or solid is an ineffective weapon. It matters how it is used.

How do you know that plasma doesn't explode? Depending on the properties of the ions and electrons, they could recombine and release energy. If they do so at a sufficient rate, the local release of energy will look like an 'explosion'. There will be a shockwave.

What are you talking about with meltaguns? They are a giant Hair Dryer. It fires a pulse of Sensible Heat. That thermal pulse reaches you by conduction, convection, and radiation. It cooks you.

I'm not saying it's an ineffective weapon so much as saying that whatever technology they are using to utilize the plasma would be better served as a weapon in its own right.

Like if guns fired blades of grass at low velocity, sure you could use them for that but they'd still be more effective as a club.

[Tynskel]

I am not sure you can justify your answer. You do not know what technology they used to make the plasma gun work.

Right now, it is beyond our means to use plasma as a weapon effectively. But, we do not know that it would never be practical.

In the 40k Universe plasma is an effective weapon of destroying just about anything. Make sense, to me. It has the combination of mass and high thermal energy. It has both large thermal and kinetic energy. So, not only does it impact, it burns!

[plawolf]

You guys are really having a heated argument over how feasible a fictional gun used by plastic guys in a game is? Really?

I dare say I am not alone in not being all that bothered about how feasible plasma weapons are, and would actually like to know what weapons are affected by the plasma syphon.

[DarkLink]

I do not understand how you can say plasma is ineffective as a weapon. It is just a different state of matter. It is like saying liquid or gas or solid is an ineffective weapon. It matters how it is used.

In a nutshell, plasma is basically very inefficient. It takes so much energy and effort to make it into a weapon, and there are so many other far, far, far more effective weapons out there, that plasma just doesn't make much sense.

Think of it as a squirtgun filled with steam. You have to spend a ton of energy to boil the water, have some sort of container to carry it, which is likely fairly heavy. It has to be highly pressurized in order to maintain a high energy density, making it dangerous to carry around. Then, when you finally do shoot someone, the steam immediately dissipates so the weapon's range is only a few feet. Now, steam can give you some nasty burns, but it can't cut through armor and because the human body is mostly water those burns aren't likely to be much more than painful. It might kill the target a few days later, and it might distract them long enough for you to club them on the head, but either way it's more of a torture device than a weapon. Plus, since your container is pretty limited in how much mass it can contain, and how much sheer energy it takes to do any significant amount of damage, you only get a couple shots before you have to reload.

Or you can just carry a good old fashioned gun. Guess which one works better?



How do you know that plasma doesn't explode? Depending on the properties of the ions and electrons, they could recombine and release energy. If they do so at a sufficient rate, the local release of energy will look like an 'explosion'. There will be a shockwave.

Plasma is a state of matter. It doesn't inherently explode. Would a bottle of water explode if you opened it? Not unless you had a bomb wired to blow hidden inside. If there is something to cause an explosion, then sure, there will be an explosion. But plasma doesn't just magically explode when exposed to air or something. You could probably play around with the physics and make something happen, but why bother when there are dozens of far, far, far more effective weapons to be used.



What are you talking about with meltaguns? They are a giant Hair Dryer. It fires a pulse of Sensible Heat. That thermal pulse reaches you by conduction, convection, and radiation. It cooks you.

And it's horribly inefficient. Trying to melt something by that method is idiotic. It's kinda like using a barbeque grill to melt a tank from 30ft away. It just doesn't make sense.

Incidentally, melta weapons would effectively be the same as a plasma weapon, except inferior in pretty much every conceivable way. They both work by dumping energy into a target via heated particles, except the plasma in question is typically much hotter than air and you could at least theoretically direct the plasma with magnetic fields. Meltas that conduct heat by conduction, convection and radiation would dissipate energy extremely quickly, and would almost certainly fry the person wielding it as easily as it would the target.

So if plasma is the red-headed stepchild of weapons, melta would be the stepchild's two-legged pug. No apologies for anyone who likes pugs.


I guess the 1st musket ever made, compared to a bow at the time, it would be cumbersome, impractical, ineffective and wouldn't make sense. Now compare any bow to a minigun. And that's a few hundred years of evolution...

Except this isn't a musket we're talking about. That comparison is kinda like saying that because you can use a magnifying glass to kill ants, technology should be able to improve that to the point where our soldiers and Marines will be running around with telescopes as their standard sidearm. It just doesn't make sense.

And please don't say "but that's how lasers work". Please.




After writing this, it occurs to me that I might be reading Friday Internet Fight Night (http://bloodofkittens.com/dickmove/)a little too often:rolleyes:

[Xas]

as a graduated scientist I have to say: keep logic away from 40k.

what is affected by the syphon?
the only sane answear (without conjuring the fluff vs rules vs real life science debate) you can have is:

Everything that has the word "plasma" in it's name.
the guns listed, bioplasma, tau s6 ap2 thingies that somewhere have the "plasma" tag inside their name as well as superheavy stuff.


you can houserule what you want with the superheavies but as a titan princeps myself I have one question for you: when in a real game are you gona stand next to one of those thingies when you can just step out of its area of effect? the 2nd question would be: does your BS really matter with the weapons in question? most if not all titan siced plasma weapons are template weapons that melt a hughe area so your not really gonna miss much because of bs1!


what I actually hope is that it is an indicator of fun things to come with E6 (a "plasma" special rule that is both dangerous to the user and the target? in the fluff plasma weaponry is the most dangerous thing in use and even used to demolish vehicles with the plasma blastgun beeing the primary titan vs titan killing-blow gun but the rules are crappy atm!

[Tynskel]

As a graduate student,

it is our responsibility to be nerds and attempt to justify sci fi.

A melta is in no way a plasma weapon. I don't think you understand how a melta works. Heat weapons are NOT efficient: hence Heat Weapon. Heat is one of the worst forms of energy-- pretty much unusable. However--- 40k engineers are smart-- they managed to take wasted energy and turn it into a weapon.

Have you worked retail? If you shrink wrap things, you use a meltagun.


I think you misunderstand what I said about explode. The 'latent' heat of fusion from the electrons re entering their orbitals on an ion will produce a lot of heat. If all of the atoms gain their electrons back in a SHORT time period, there will be a sudden release of a lot of energy. That energy must go somewhere, and due to the second law of thermodynamics, it will be naturally distributed throughout the surrounding area. Quickly. Like an explosion.

[DarkLink]

A melta is in no way a plasma weapon. I don't think you understand how a melta works. Heat weapons are NOT efficient: hence Heat Weapon.

My point wasn't that melta is a form of plasma weapon, since it isn't. My point was that heat weapons are not efficient, which it seems you agree with:).



I think you misunderstand what I said about explode. The 'latent' heat of fusion from the electrons re entering their orbitals on an ion will produce a lot of heat. If all of the atoms gain their electrons back in a SHORT time period, there will be a sudden release of a lot of energy. That energy must go somewhere, and due to the second law of thermodynamics, it will be naturally distributed throughout the surrounding area. Quickly. Like an explosion.

Ok, I see what you're talking about. You could do that, sure. Or you could just use a rocket launcher;).

[wkz]

Lets put it this way: in 40k, people can TELEPORT. They can control massive amounts of energy to force a pathway, tearing a hole in reality to connect two points together, and transport actual matter between those two points. And loads of matter too, if we're considering Terminator armor.

There is NOTHING in real-world science that even comes close to explaining how the above works.

Why then can't we suspend belief for a bit and say "Plasma works, and it is awesome", even when real-world science's descriptions will keep reminding us that real-world plasma sucks? Mayhaps they have some awesome dohiky in the next 30,000 years telling us how to properly pack in the plasma, or how it can be made to explode, or the whole "Plasma" field of research would have a breakthrough of some... well, its 30,000 years worth of developement. Someone may think up of something.

After all, ENTIRE MILE LONG strike cruisers (oh my gods, the material fatigue!! However will the whole darn thing even stay in one piece even for a simple acceleration burn?? And it isn't even the biggest of ships yet??) are loaded with Hamster technology (wow, hoisting big multi-story cannonshells... with only chains? Is that even possible, especially when the ship is shaking during a battle?), can tear dimensions (how in the world do we even perceive a separate dimension, let alone ENTER it?), and have, amongst its crew, people who can throw messages with their minds (21st Century Science: "Ok, now you're being stupid. Please stop")...

[Connjurus]

People arguing on both sides of this are looking pretty stubborn right now.

On one side, you've got people arguing that plasma weaponry makes sense, while blowing over the inherent difficulties of the tech'.

On the other side, you've got people arguing that it'll never happen because it's too inefficient, or it doesn't make sense. Okay, maybe not in the way that 40k describes it, but 40k is NOT hard sci-fi. It's about as soft as you can get.

That being said, who are we to say that there aren't discoveries to be made that will make plasma weaponry cheap and efficient - relatively - and that the Imperium uses tech' based on those discoveries? We cannot, in all certainty, say that. It's a willfully ignorant statement, and just makes the ones claiming it look stupid.

[Demonus]

sorry id have to go with the raw here. plasma guns, plasma pistols, and plasma cannons only. vulkan doesnt allow me to reroll my wounds on flamestorm cannons, and they are obviously giant flamers.

once the FAQ comes out, im sure they will specify.

[elmir]

Slightly odd though that an ordo Xenos inquisitor would only defend a unit again imperial weaponry... :rolleyes:

[Tynskel]

interesting you bring up mile long ships, that's just the frigates--- think bigger for the battleships!

however, think about asteroids/comets. Those stay together quite fine, even with strong differential stresses. And they go through high velocity impacts, and are quite porous.

comets have densities of 500g/cm^3 and less (think fluffy snow).

opps error

500kg/m^3

[DarkLink]

sorry id have to go with the raw here. plasma guns, plasma pistols, and plasma cannons only. vulkan doesnt allow me to reroll my wounds on flamestorm cannons, and they are obviously giant flamers.

That's not RAW. The rules do not say "plasma guns, plasma pistols, and plasma cannons are BS1". It just says "all plasma weapons are BS1". There is no rule that defines what a plasma weapon is or isn't. If you eliminate Tau plasma rifles and star cannons and the like because they do not have a rule that says they are plasma weapons, then you must also eliminate plasma guns, pistols and cannons using exactly the same logic.

The only possible logical conclusion, barring further clarification from GW, is to look at each weapon's description. If it says something about plasma, then it's BS1.


And Vulkan's rule is a poor comparison. His rule explicitly lists weapons that get bonuses, and anything on that list is unaffected. Syphons have no such explicit list.

[Lemt]

Slightly odd though that an ordo Xenos inquisitor would only defend a unit again imperial weaponry... :rolleyes:

Tau and Tyranids also have weapons with "Plasma" in their name. Plus the Syphon is of alien origin, so it may have been made to fight the Imperium.

[Rapture]

The only possible logical conclusion, barring further clarification from GW, is to look at each weapon's description. If it says something about plasma, then it's BS1.


The only logical conclusion? Maybe in your opinion. A rule discussion is not about beating other people into the ground with your definite statements. A little open mindedness goes a long way.

Another logical conclusion, barring further clarification from GW, is use this wargear on whatever has plasma in the name. Considering that it will affect a large number of high strength, low ap weapons without requiring anyone to go through their codex with a highlighter (and without reducing the majority of Tau units to BS1, which is silly).

[WereWolf_nr]

I think the simplest way is just to say if it has the word plasma in the title then it's a plasma weapon, rather than just in the fluff.

So yes to Tau plasma rifles, no to Eldar starcannons

Probably should also be an exception for super heavy weapons like the emperor battle titan's plasma annhialator? :p

Agreed, case closed for me.

[Tynskel]

I totally agree that Star Cannons and Plasma Missiles should be on the list effected by the syphon. The description says plasma.

Since there is no official rules description of a plasma weapon, the only thing left is fluff. Remember, there are many many instances in the rulebook where fluff and rules are blended.

[Rapture]

Since there is no official rules description of a plasma weapon, the only thing left is fluff. Remember, there are many many instances in the rulebook where fluff and rules are blended.

And even more where they are not. Using fluff to interpret rules doesn't work.

[DarkLink]

Except when the only available option for interpreting rules is the fluff.

[Gir]

I totally agree that Star Cannons and Plasma Missiles should be on the list effected by the syphon. The description says plasma.

Since there is no official rules description of a plasma weapon, the only thing left is fluff. Remember, there are many many instances in the rulebook where fluff and rules are blended.

I agree. I also think Tyranid Bio-Plasma should be included.

[elmir]

And the dsintegrator cannon from the DE by extension.

"the disintegrator cannon is far more sophisticated then conventional plasma-based weaponry however, for it..." As quoted from the DE entry for the disintagrator cannon.

Although it says it fires from energy collected from a sun, that last line hints at this weapons firing plasma munition as well. It's stats certainly suggest it's plasma based too, when you look at the AP2 value. ;)

[Xas]

when you want to go for the fluff-way you'd have to include all "pulse" weaponry (s5 ap5 thingies) from the tau codex.

at same time however I'd exclude eldar plasma missile as they are firing normal missiles that just incidentally have a plasma payload and the syphon apparently affects the projecting fields.




on the issue of feasability of plasma weapons: a simply solution is to realize that the word "plasma" does not ALLWAYS have to mean the 4th state of matter as in ionized gas. for an examply ask any biologist/doctor. when they hear plasma, they'll think of a part of blood.


for all we know 40ks plasma could simply be a rare element or special alloy/processed material that emits a hughe amounth of energy after beeing activated in a reaction chamber. hell, when reading titan-fluff I'm allways thinking that gw uses the word "plasma" where we'd use the word "nuclear" in modern day technology. To dodge the issue of critical mass (you cannot make the paylord of nuclear bombs as small as you want or they'll simply not explode) I could see 40k plasma beeing a mixture of matter and antimatter that prolly is stored in gaseous form in some kind of containment field so it doesnt react inside the plasma chamber (that would also explain why a titan's plasma reactor is a finite power sorce even though the power reserves are immense compared to anything else imaginable).

to go all super-silly on the matter I could see 40k plasma as a simple mixture of protons, antiprotons and fictional anti-gravitons. the anti-gravitons would hold the matter-antimater reaction inside the vessel at a low enough level so the material can hold it (or in case of titan reactors a level that can be harvested nicely). getting power from matter-antimater reactions would solve any problems with energy.

the reason why the imperials dont simply drive a more conventional weapon with that powersorce is simple given by their dogmatic nature and not knowing **** about the stuff they use. it's prolly that only the plasma ammunition/reactor STC utilizes zero point energy (or any other science-fiction super-energy-sorce) to produce the products.

[DarkLink]

Huh, that's kinda funny. One more reason not to take fire warriors.