Welcome to Warhammer 40k - Lexicanum! Log in and join the community.

Difference between revisions of "Talk:Plasma gun"

From Warhammer 40k - Lexicanum
Jump to: navigation, search
(Magnacore pattern/ type)
Line 92: Line 92:
  
 
:::::::Well in the original image in question, the image is colored. While the labeled pattern image is not. It would have allowed a reader to atleast know the color of the weapon. As well as seeing it from a different angle (since the wielder had it slung over her shoulder), thus seeing more of what the weapon looked like. There are also images of weapons that dont have a normal pattern image. Like with images of the Tanith 1st and Only. There no image of a lasgun labeled "MKIII Lascarbine", but it is clearly stated that the MKIII Lascarbine is the standard issue, and the stock is made of the planet's Nal wood. There is an image of Tina Criid, who is carrying a lascarbine with a wooden stock. While not explictly labeled a "MKIII Lascarbine" it can be easily evidenced that is a MK III and thus we can put an image of it to the lore.--[[User:TheNuclearSoldier|TheNuclearSoldier]] ([[User talk:TheNuclearSoldier|talk]]) 15:17, 5 May 2018 (MDT)
 
:::::::Well in the original image in question, the image is colored. While the labeled pattern image is not. It would have allowed a reader to atleast know the color of the weapon. As well as seeing it from a different angle (since the wielder had it slung over her shoulder), thus seeing more of what the weapon looked like. There are also images of weapons that dont have a normal pattern image. Like with images of the Tanith 1st and Only. There no image of a lasgun labeled "MKIII Lascarbine", but it is clearly stated that the MKIII Lascarbine is the standard issue, and the stock is made of the planet's Nal wood. There is an image of Tina Criid, who is carrying a lascarbine with a wooden stock. While not explictly labeled a "MKIII Lascarbine" it can be easily evidenced that is a MK III and thus we can put an image of it to the lore.--[[User:TheNuclearSoldier|TheNuclearSoldier]] ([[User talk:TheNuclearSoldier|talk]]) 15:17, 5 May 2018 (MDT)
 +
 +
:::::::::Aha! So basically you tell the reader that the pattern HAS this colour while actually you don't know that, because the colour is not associated by source to that pattern. And so you have already possibly misinformed the reader, without intending to. Unless there is a statement somewhere that says that all Cadians always carry said pattern and under no circumstances EVER in the history of Cadia has a Cadian touched another pattern, not even if his/ her life depended upon it - then maybe you would be safe with your assumption. Otherwise even if something superficially looks the same we really are in no position to know with certainty that there have been no deviations in the materials used or in the manufacturing process. So why should we - without need - run the risk of telling people potentially wrong things? --[[User:Inquisitor S.|Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum]] ([[User talk:Inquisitor S.|talk]]) 15:24, 5 May 2018 (MDT)

Revision as of 21:24, 5 May 2018

MK V Mars Pattern?

I have been looking through the Siege of Vraks and I see where there is a plasma gun on page 95, but it is just listed as "plasma gun". Is there anywhere in the book where it is named the MK V Mars Pattern?--TheNuclearSoldier (talk) 23:34, 2 May 2018 (MDT)

Phew, paper chase. Actually you missed it because it is not the DKoK plasma gun on p. 95, but the Dark Angels one on p. 150. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 13:47, 3 May 2018 (MDT)

MKVMarsPattern.jpg

Awesome, thank you! So no idea what pattern the DKoK used?--TheNuclearSoldier (talk) 13:59, 3 May 2018 (MDT)
I just flipped thru it, so who knows what is hidden someplace in the text. From the top of my head: no, sorry. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 14:06, 3 May 2018 (MDT)
In "The Fall of Orpheus", p. 170, there is this plasma gun, but it says "special issue", so not the "standard" DKoK version. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 14:14, 3 May 2018 (MDT)

MKIIdAccatranPlasma.jpg

Yeah, I already have that pattern in the database. It was special issued just for that operation. The one issued during the Siege of Vraks looks like a much different pattern. I guess that one will go unnamed for now, but I will upload its image to the unnammed gallery.--TheNuclearSoldier (talk) 14:28, 3 May 2018 (MDT)
I guess most weapon patterns never get actually named. C'est la GW vie. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 14:34, 3 May 2018 (MDT)

Dekkar Pattern in Black Tide

Saw where there is mention of a Dekkar Pattern Plasma Gun in the novel Black Tide. If anyone has that book, I'd much like to have the reference page and information on the pattern to add to the database.--TheNuclearSoldier (talk) 15:53, 3 May 2018 (MDT)

DekkEr with an "e" I think: "Rafen’s eyes widened in surprise as he recognised the shape of a thickset plasma gun. The

weapon’s cowling was enamelled in blood red, and dressed with a skull emblem in beaten gold. “A twin-core design,” Mohl was saying, “Dekker-pattern. The rare Baal-variant model.” Unbidden, Rafen ran a finger over the skull, tracing the etching beneath it. “Aryon.” He spoke the hero’s name with reverence. “This is the sidearm of Brother-Captain Aryon. He perished in battle at the Yennor Reach more than seven centuries ago… His remains were never found.”" It is in Chapter 4. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 04:51, 4 May 2018 (MDT)

Thank you! Pattern added to the database. Any additional information about the weapon in the novel after it's introduction?--TheNuclearSoldier (talk) 05:47, 4 May 2018 (MDT)

6th Edition Plasma Gun Image

Similar to my above post, there is an image of the XII Ragefire Pattern Plasma Gun in the 6th edition, but I do not have a copy of that rule book. If I could have the page number of the image (it should be on the page with multiple other weapon examples) and any lore to go along with it, it would be much appreciated.--TheNuclearSoldier (talk) 15:53, 3 May 2018 (MDT)

The double page 54/55 shows different weapons (among them a plasma pistol and a plasma gun), but none are specified by pattern. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 05:03, 4 May 2018 (MDT)
Ah yeah thats the red one, right? Sorry I am looking for this one.--TheNuclearSoldier (talk) 05:32, 4 May 2018 (MDT)

XII Ragefire Plasma Gun.jpg

What makes you think it is in the Rulebook 6th ed? --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 11:25, 4 May 2018 (MDT)
I may have been mistaken, it may be in one of the Codicies, but the main page image is similar and the reference link points to the 6th edition rulebook. The reference maybe incorrect for all I know, as I did not add that image, myself. --TheNuclearSoldier (talk) 12:01, 4 May 2018 (MDT)
It might be very well. At least I have not found it so far. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 12:48, 4 May 2018 (MDT)
Let's keep looking, but if we can't find at least the main page image soon, we will have to remove it. But that's not too bad as we can just replace it with one of the unnamed pattern images.--TheNuclearSoldier (talk) 13:07, 4 May 2018 (MDT)
If a source can not be found, it should at least be quarantined,yes. From the image itself I tend to point in the direction of one of the Imperial Armour books or possibly a later Space Marine codex. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 13:55, 4 May 2018 (MDT)
Gotcha. Codex Space Marines 6th edition, p.123. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 14:20, 4 May 2018 (MDT)
Is that for the main page image, the image I uploaded, or both?--TheNuclearSoldier (talk) 14:42, 4 May 2018 (MDT)
For the image in this discussion. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 14:44, 4 May 2018 (MDT)
As for the main page image, looks like it resides in the Munitorum: Plasma Guns (Background Book). I am trying to find a copy online to check the page number.--TheNuclearSoldier (talk) 19:40, 4 May 2018 (MDT)
If by "main page image" you mean the one labelled "Imperial Diagram of a Plasma Gun[11]" I think that is the one from the rulebook. But I will have to verify again. I am just very sure I have seen it already recently. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 01:41, 5 May 2018 (MDT)
Please do confirm that that is the picture you are looking for. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 02:00, 5 May 2018 (MDT)
Yes that is it. It in the Munitorum: Plasma Guns (Background Book).--TheNuclearSoldier (talk) 07:57, 5 May 2018 (MDT)

Style

"Based on the secrets of the sacred STC, it is a design that has never been developed or improved on. Indeed, the very thought of trying to mitigate the flaws of the plasma gun would be repellent to the followers of the Machine God. By the grace of the Omnissiah, the weapon fulfils a role within the God-Emperor’s armies, and to change this role in any way would be to invite mayhem and disorder. So the plasma gun is crafted just as it has been for untold centuries, each one finding its way into the hands of a resolute Space Marine or an ungrateful Guardsman."
--> Is that a word-for-word-copy? If yes, it has to be paraphrased. And even if not this passage (and any like it) must be much less bloomy. What we need is matter-of-fact language. I will give an example of what I mean how it should sound like:
"Based on a STC, it is a design that has never been developed or improved on and the Adeptus Mechanicus considers that any such attempt would invite mayhem and disorder. For this reason the production of the plasma gun has remained unchanged for untold centuries."
See what I mean? --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 02:00, 5 May 2018 (MDT)

Yep. I just wanted to get that info down before I passed out last night. I'll be revising it throughout the day.--TheNuclearSoldier (talk) 08:02, 5 May 2018 (MDT)
Very good. I think there is a template {{WIP}} that comes in handy for such occasions. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 09:25, 5 May 2018 (MDT)
I put that up when I started changing the play layout.--TheNuclearSoldier (talk) 10:12, 5 May 2018 (MDT)

Temporary project files

To be found here: Category: Images (Temporary files for projects) --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 11:09, 5 May 2018 (MDT)

Magnacore pattern/ type

If the pictured troopers do not have the specific info that this is the Magnacore pattern, they will have to go. We simply cannot know what pattern they carry unless specified in a source. Damn guns looks almost the same anyway, so it would be speculation from our side and that is a big no-no. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 11:09, 5 May 2018 (MDT)

I put that they are the magnacore pattern, since that is the standard issue of the cadian regiments, these are cadian troops, and there is nothing saying they are a different pattern. Same as it is safe to say that if a cadian trooper is holding a lasgun that looks exactly like a Kantrael Pattern M36 Lasgun, then it is safe to say that is a Kantrael Pattern M36 Lasgun, since that is the standard lasgun of cadian regiments.--TheNuclearSoldier (talk) 14:30, 5 May 2018 (MDT)
No, sorry. You are interpolating there. And there is really no need for it. We have to stick to the letter of the word. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 14:44, 5 May 2018 (MDT)
Okay. I'll remove them. Going to have to remove alot of images from many pages.--TheNuclearSoldier (talk) 14:45, 5 May 2018 (MDT)
I meant "extra-", not "inter-", sorry. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 14:51, 5 May 2018 (MDT)
I guess so. If the lore said that a group carried a certain pattern of weapon, I saw a member of said group carrying a weapon that looked exactly like said weapon, and there was nothing stating that weapon was anything else but what it was stated that group carried, then I'd say it was that pattern of weapon. I thought I was sticking with the lore.--TheNuclearSoldier (talk) 15:05, 5 May 2018 (MDT)
Given that it seems that the whole pattern crap comes basically down to stuff we don't see your assumption is dangerous. And honestly I do not really see the benefit of using images that are not specified to describe a specified pattern. What would be the advantage? --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 15:13, 5 May 2018 (MDT)
Well in the original image in question, the image is colored. While the labeled pattern image is not. It would have allowed a reader to atleast know the color of the weapon. As well as seeing it from a different angle (since the wielder had it slung over her shoulder), thus seeing more of what the weapon looked like. There are also images of weapons that dont have a normal pattern image. Like with images of the Tanith 1st and Only. There no image of a lasgun labeled "MKIII Lascarbine", but it is clearly stated that the MKIII Lascarbine is the standard issue, and the stock is made of the planet's Nal wood. There is an image of Tina Criid, who is carrying a lascarbine with a wooden stock. While not explictly labeled a "MKIII Lascarbine" it can be easily evidenced that is a MK III and thus we can put an image of it to the lore.--TheNuclearSoldier (talk) 15:17, 5 May 2018 (MDT)
Aha! So basically you tell the reader that the pattern HAS this colour while actually you don't know that, because the colour is not associated by source to that pattern. And so you have already possibly misinformed the reader, without intending to. Unless there is a statement somewhere that says that all Cadians always carry said pattern and under no circumstances EVER in the history of Cadia has a Cadian touched another pattern, not even if his/ her life depended upon it - then maybe you would be safe with your assumption. Otherwise even if something superficially looks the same we really are in no position to know with certainty that there have been no deviations in the materials used or in the manufacturing process. So why should we - without need - run the risk of telling people potentially wrong things? --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 15:24, 5 May 2018 (MDT)