Jump to content



Photo

Second Edition Beta- playing a sniper STILL not possible.


  • Please log in to reply
95 replies to this topic

#41 bogi_khaosa

bogi_khaosa

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,155 posts

Posted 07 January 2014 - 02:15 PM

Does it explode in fluff? As far as I know it is a large slug projectile -- which means it can graze, unless it's magic.

 

I think we're confusing something here. "Reliably destroy landspeeders" means "most of the time it will destroy landspeeders," not "it is guaranteed 100% to destroy a landspeeder."

 

Actually destroying a landspeeder is not that hard -- going by memory they have 15 front armour and 15 structural integrity, so an Exitus Rifle should do it with some regularity even from the front.


Edited by bogi_khaosa, 07 January 2014 - 02:15 PM.


#42 Arrakiz

Arrakiz

    Member

  • Members
  • 30 posts

Posted 07 January 2014 - 02:22 PM

Does it explode in fluff? As far as I know it is a large slug projectile -- which means it can graze, unless it's magic.

 

I think we're confusing something here. "Reliably destroy landspeeders" means "most of the time it will destroy landspeeders," not "it is guaranteed 100% to destroy a landspeeder."

 

Actually destroying a landspeeder is not that hard -- going by memory they have 15 front armour and 15 structural integrity, so an Exitus Rifle should do it with some regularity even from the front.

Except, whether it will destroy it or not, is not reliable, it's random.



#43 bogi_khaosa

bogi_khaosa

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,155 posts

Posted 07 January 2014 - 02:27 PM

 

Does it explode in fluff? As far as I know it is a large slug projectile -- which means it can graze, unless it's magic.

 

I think we're confusing something here. "Reliably destroy landspeeders" means "most of the time it will destroy landspeeders," not "it is guaranteed 100% to destroy a landspeeder."

 

Actually destroying a landspeeder is not that hard -- going by memory they have 15 front armour and 15 structural integrity, so an Exitus Rifle should do it with some regularity even from the front.

Except, whether it will destroy it or not, is not reliable, it's random.

 

 

Something that has a high chance of doing something is reliable by definition.

 

As pointed out above, the chance of rolling 4 ones is .01%.


Edited by bogi_khaosa, 07 January 2014 - 02:28 PM.

  • Ghaundan likes this

#44 Kshatriya

Kshatriya

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,686 posts

Posted 07 January 2014 - 02:44 PM

If you raise minimum damage, you are in effect saying that there is no such thing as slight grazing. Slight grazing is literally impossible for the sniper. Not only will he reliably one-hit-kill or seriously wound things, he will ALWAYS do it.

That's a fine effect for the Vindicare, but I think non-Ascension assassin snipers are pretty good as-is and don't need changes.


Edited by Kshatriya, 07 January 2014 - 02:45 PM.


#45 bogi_khaosa

bogi_khaosa

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,155 posts

Posted 07 January 2014 - 03:00 PM

 

If you raise minimum damage, you are in effect saying that there is no such thing as slight grazing. Slight grazing is literally impossible for the sniper. Not only will he reliably one-hit-kill or seriously wound things, he will ALWAYS do it.

That's a fine effect for the Vindicare, but I think non-Ascension assassin snipers are pretty good as-is and don't need changes.

 

 

Well I agree with you; my position is that snipers are very playable (except for the 4000-meter part) and very deadly.

 

When the OP means "sniper" he doesn't mean "sniper" -- he means "guaranteed killing machine who literally cannot fail to make a kill." :)


  • Ghaundan likes this

#46 Green Knight

Green Knight

    Member

  • Members
  • 205 posts

Posted 07 January 2014 - 03:32 PM

Sniper shots to the head - or wherever - are not inherently more dangerous than any other hit with a rifle-type weapon.

 

In the Grim Darkness of the Far Future any hit to the head or vitals with anything from a lasgun and up (bolters anyone? or a MELTA GUN!?) should probably instakill anything human (including unarmoured marines). Oh and 'human' includes PCs :-D

 

More realistic? Maybe. More fun? Not at all.

 

Especially not when couple with players' sometimes unreasonable assumptions about what a sniper can do...somehow they think they (certain breeds of players at least) can find hidden spots high up where they can't be seen, reached or shot back at. From where they can see all, know all and kill all.


  • doomande likes this

#47 Arrakiz

Arrakiz

    Member

  • Members
  • 30 posts

Posted 07 January 2014 - 03:39 PM

 

 

If you raise minimum damage, you are in effect saying that there is no such thing as slight grazing. Slight grazing is literally impossible for the sniper. Not only will he reliably one-hit-kill or seriously wound things, he will ALWAYS do it.

That's a fine effect for the Vindicare, but I think non-Ascension assassin snipers are pretty good as-is and don't need changes.

 

 

Well I agree with you; my position is that snipers are very playable (except for the 4000-meter part) and very deadly.

 

When the OP means "sniper" he doesn't mean "sniper" -- he means "guaranteed killing machine who literally cannot fail to make a kill."  :)

 

And I have to stress, yet again, that I agree that it shouldn't be possible.

 

All I'm saying, is that I would greatly appreciate the books being honest about it. Is it really so hard to get?



#48 Kshatriya

Kshatriya

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,686 posts

Posted 07 January 2014 - 04:05 PM

40k RPG fluff is based, in large part, on tabletop fluff. On the tabletop, the Vindicare can 1-shot Land Raiders (or could in previous editions at least). FFG likely does not have the power to rewrite the existing fluff, which dictates the power of the Exitus and contributes to its fearsome tabletop rating.

 

At the same time, directly porting the tabletop stats to make the Exitus able to insta-kill Rhinos, Vultures, and Land Raiders terribly upsets the balance of the game. So, in that case, there's a discrepancy between fluff (which likely cannot be changed) conflicts with the crunch (which has to be reasonably balanc----looooool I couldn't finish that).

 

I'm not really sure what the issue is.


  • segara82, doomande, Ghaundan and 1 other like this

#49 Lynata

Lynata

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,172 posts

Posted 07 January 2014 - 05:09 PM

40k RPG fluff is based, in large part, on tabletop fluff. On the tabletop, the Vindicare can 1-shot Land Raiders (or could in previous editions at least). FFG likely does not have the power to rewrite the existing fluff, which dictates the power of the Exitus and contributes to its fearsome tabletop rating.

 

Sure they can. FFG has been rewriting existing fluff all the time. The Vindicare himself is an example of this, considering that normally every single mission would have to be authorised by the High Lords of Terra, whereas here he's just added to the group as a permanent asset.

GW doesn't care as long as they keep to the most simple basics.

 

I think the people at FFG have already been rather clever about this, actually, by giving the Exitus rifle a rather sensible damage profile (2d10+2 Pen 5), with only the special Turbo Penetrator kicking it up to 4d10+2 Pen 9.

As a GM, I'd simply give a Vindicare only a single Turbo Penetrator, or a single clip of 10, and tell him to take good care of it as he won't get a replacement any time soon, forcing him to rely on the standard rounds for most enemies, and only breaking out the good stuff for critical assassinations. This way, I would not see a balancing problem with giving it a higher minimum damage.

 

Besides, is a maximum damage of 42 not a balancing concern already? The current profile only means the result will be highly random, fluctuating between "it's not even a scratch" (Toughness Bonus ftw) and "ohmygodinstakill!". This in itself is something I actually find more worrying than the "merely average" minimum damage.

 

If it were up to me, I could see the Turbo Penetrator being changed to a flat +10, which not only increases the minimum damage but also lowers the maximum damage to 32, somewhat reducing the lulzy randomness.

It's a "hypervelocity heavy gravity round" - even a grazing shot should hurt. A lot.  :lol:



#50 Kshatriya

Kshatriya

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,686 posts

Posted 07 January 2014 - 05:16 PM

Eh, I see them as adding to the fluff a lot, with few changes, but a lot of "FFG canon" from their designs of the sectors and their inhabitants. From the outset I disagreed with including Vindicare as a playable career though, let alone one that an adult street killer could get into with a few strings pulled. I don't think Temple Assassins should have fully-formed personalities developed through normal human growth and socialization. Doesn't really fit the missions they do very well. 

 

I think 2d10+2 is pretty shoddy at a baseline though. But I'm guessing it also has Accurate.


  • segara82, Green Knight, Tenebrae and 2 others like this

#51 Lynata

Lynata

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,172 posts

Posted 07 January 2014 - 05:23 PM

Oh, yes, don't get me wrong - I really love a lot of their additions (which tend to be well written and thus fun to read, too) ... and I picked up a lot of cool ideas which I've added to my own vision of the 41st millennium. For better or worse, the IP allows everyone to cherrypick what they like and discard the rest, which goes for readers just as much as it goes for the writers.

 

Let's just say I don't particularly like most of the cases where the fluff contradicts. Most of the time I simply brush it off as unnecessary deviations, but a few cases keep grinding my gears.

 

I fully agree on the personality thing, by the way. That should be a big trait/issue of such characters.

 

And yes @ Accurate. I misremembered on the Penetration, though, it has 9 as basis and gets a further +5 for a total of Pen 14 when used with Turbo Penetrators!



#52 Cymbel

Cymbel

    Member

  • Members
  • 735 posts

Posted 10 January 2014 - 07:54 PM

Forgive me if someone mentioned this, but since RT apparently (and it is IN the beta book), you can replace the results of one dice roll with the DoS you scored on the test and 10 DoS = auto RF. So having a high BS and a lot of modifiers + rolling well means that when your shot hits, it gets a superior version of proven and if you are using good ammo/variable (which you should), you are getting a lot more and reliable damage output.


  • Tenebrae and Lynata like this

#53 Arrakiz

Arrakiz

    Member

  • Members
  • 30 posts

Posted 11 January 2014 - 04:34 AM

Forgive me if someone mentioned this, but since RT apparently (and it is IN the beta book), you can replace the results of one dice roll with the DoS you scored on the test and 10 DoS = auto RF. So having a high BS and a lot of modifiers + rolling well means that when your shot hits, it gets a superior version of proven and if you are using good ammo/variable (which you should), you are getting a lot more and reliable damage output.

Yes, but the weapon's own damage output is still very random. That's why I said it should be pointed out that the only thing that can make it effective is the user. On it's own, it's unpredictable.



#54 bogi_khaosa

bogi_khaosa

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,155 posts

Posted 11 January 2014 - 08:07 AM

It's not that random. Randomness decreases as number of dice increase. The odds of rolling <10 on 4d10 (or 6d10!) are really low.

 

Conceptually, it's a large slug weapon, no? It should realistically do less minimum damage than a bolter (which it does -- 4). Because it can nick the target.

 

Really, the fearsome thing about the Exitus should be that it is a Vindicare firing it. Otherwise it's just a glorified high-caliber stub rifle. Maybe give him a Talent that lets him add Tearing to Accurate weapons?


  • Green Knight likes this

#55 Tenebrae

Tenebrae

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,043 posts

Posted 11 January 2014 - 11:46 AM

It's not that random. Randomness decreases as number of dice increase. The odds of rolling <10 on 4d10 (or 6d10!) are really low.

Mnyea-no.

Depends on how you define randomness. You certainly gain a wider spectrum of possible results with 4d10 than with 1d10.

On the other hand, instead of a silly flat distribution, you get a bell curve (from the puissant distribution).

So basically you have a greater probability of rolling average, but extreme rolls are much more extreme.



#56 bogi_khaosa

bogi_khaosa

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,155 posts

Posted 11 January 2014 - 12:40 PM

 

It's not that random. Randomness decreases as number of dice increase. The odds of rolling <10 on 4d10 (or 6d10!) are really low.

Mnyea-no.

Depends on how you define randomness. You certainly gain a wider spectrum of possible results with 4d10 than with 1d10.

On the other hand, instead of a silly flat distribution, you get a bell curve (from the puissant distribution).

So basically you have a greater probability of rolling average, but extreme rolls are much more extreme.

 

 

A 1) greater probablity of rolling average damage and 2) decreasing randomness are the same thing.

 

Rolling 1d100 is a lot less likely to give around a 50 than 10d10. Orders of magnitude less likely.

 

You are never going to get extreme rolls barring phenomenal luck or rolling thousands of times.

 

I mean, people are literally worried about something that has a 0.01% chance of happening! Really. Are you going to play the game for decades, roll hundreds of times for the Vindicare's damage?


Edited by bogi_khaosa, 11 January 2014 - 01:14 PM.

  • Ghaundan likes this

#57 bogi_khaosa

bogi_khaosa

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,155 posts

Posted 11 January 2014 - 01:25 PM

Actually, it is IMPOSSIBLE for the Exitus to roll 4d10+2 and get 4 +  2 = 6. Because that requires a minimum of 5 DoS, which will replace the lowest die. So the actual lowest possible damage is 5 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 2 = 10. (Actually 12, since Vindicares all I assume have  Mighty Shot.)

 

(Assuming that this rule, which has been in every 40K game since Rogue Trader, is imported into Dark Heresy.)


Edited by bogi_khaosa, 11 January 2014 - 01:38 PM.


#58 Tenebrae

Tenebrae

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,043 posts

Posted 11 January 2014 - 03:05 PM

 

 

It's not that random. Randomness decreases as number of dice increase. The odds of rolling <10 on 4d10 (or 6d10!) are really low.

Mnyea-no.
Depends on how you define randomness. You certainly gain a wider spectrum of possible results with 4d10 than with 1d10.
On the other hand, instead of a silly flat distribution, you get a bell curve (from the puissant distribution).
So basically you have a greater probability of rolling average, but extreme rolls are much more extreme.

 

 
A 1) greater probablity of rolling average damage and 2) decreasing randomness are the same thing.

 

No.
 
That's decreasing the spread, or occassionally "tightening the peak".
Randomness can equally well refer to the number of possible results.
 
I know what you mean, but the mathematician in me is crying. Because randomness is underdefined and so talking about it means talking nonsense.
As a note aside, did you know that the probability of rolling 11 on 2d10 is 10% - or exactly the same as rolling any one specific value on 1d10?
Or that not only is the average value of a (2N+1)d10 roll (for any interger value of N, including 0) not the most commonly rolled value, it is infact a value never actually rolled.

Rolling 1d100 is a nlot less likely to give around a 50 than 10d10. Orders of magnitude less likely.

Just a quick note: An order of magnitude means a factor of 10. I realise that's not necessarily how journalists use it, but then most journalists are ... not very gifted.
Since rolling a 1d100 has exactly 1% chance of of giving you exactly a 50, and 11% chance of giving you a value in the [45;55] range, that's not going to be orders of magnitude.
10d10 is much less likely to turn up a 100 than a 1d100 (by 2 orders of magnitude) though. It also won't give you any values in the [1;9] range.

 

I mean, people are literally worried about something that has a 0.01% chance of happening! Really. Are you going to play the game for decades, roll hundreds of times for the Vindicare's damage?

Well, if all this math is to have any relevance at all, that's exactly what we'd have to do. Probabilities aren't all that relevant without large numbers of outcomes. Ultimatively, what matters at the gaming table isn't probabilities, it's what the dice are showing right there and then.



#59 bogi_khaosa

bogi_khaosa

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,155 posts

Posted 11 January 2014 - 03:18 PM

Yeah, I meant the extreme results.

 

Anyway, the point is that the possibility of an extremely low roll is so low that it doesn't matter.



#60 Tenebrae

Tenebrae

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,043 posts

Posted 11 January 2014 - 03:22 PM

Also, sorry if that looked like a personal attack. I really shouldn't go to forums when running a fever.

The wierdest things become horribly important.

As could be seen above I suspect.






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS