Jump to content

spaceratcatcher

Members
  • Content Count

    49
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by spaceratcatcher

  1. The mechanics should feel familiar for players of the Star Wars Roleplaying lines, as End of the World uses a very narrative system featuring both positive and negative dice added to a pool. Tests can inflict Stress on a character even in the case of a success. It's a much lighter system, with only two types of dice (both six-sided), and no extensive skill or talent system.
  2. Traumas heal over time, whereas features are (generally) something permanent. So, if the dodgy right knee is the result of a recent injury and is expected to heal, you would list it as a trauma when making your character, and would remove it during play after enough time passes (assuming you survive long enough!). If it's something you've had for years and don't expect to go away anytime soon, it could be a feature. In any case, you can absolutely start the game with a trauma, if you choose (page 23). That's my take, anyway!
  3. I would think the Corrosive quality is just what the plague doctor ordered. You could simply increase its value as the power grows/awakens. And be sure to check out the Daemon Weapon rules in Enemies Beyond or even the Legacy Weapon rules in Tome of Blood! (Shameless plugs.)
  4. As a GM, I would probably allow it in most situations, as long as the bodyguard could conceivably push/tackle the other character out of the way. Although, I might rule that they both end up prone after.
  5. It is, in my opinion, always ultimately the GM's call on what abilities an NPC has, regardless of what a book says. If you feel a character should have a certain Talent, give it to them! Even if it doesn't match the authors' original vision of the character or their fighting style, what's important is that it fits your interpretation and how you plan to run the character/combat in your game.
  6. Fellowship is listed as an alternate Characteristic for Commerce (table on page 99). Presumably it could apply in many of the small-scale transactions Acolytes make, as opposed to evaluating items, negotiating major trade deals, or examining years' worth of business documents, all of which would better suit Intelligence.
  7. Just wanted to pop my head in and mention there's an erratum for this talent in the latest version of the FAQ.
  8. As it's a new system, and this is just my understanding of it, a single hit only translates in a single wound, then you roll on the correct wound effect table. Mooks have 2.wounds. As Manchu pointed out earlier,the max you can roll on the correct table is a stun, and this is taking tearing into account. A roll of a natural 10 on any damage die causes Righteous Fury, which results in a Critical Wound so long as any Damage gets past Defence. Novice and Elite NPCs are instantly killed or incapacitated if they receive a Critical Wound. The third category, Master, follows the same rules as PCs. Novices also do not use the Wound Effect tables, but simply die or become incapacitated after receiving two normal Wounds (and again, after receiving a single Critical Wound). Novices also cannot cause Righteous Fury. So, any time a PC rolls a 10 on a damage die (a requisite for maximum damage) when attacking a mook (including both Novices and the more dangerous Elites), it instantly kills/incapacitates the target. If you don't cause Righteous Fury against a Novice, it means a glancing hit, flesh wound, etc., and a second successful hit is necessary to put them down.
  9. That's not the point though. The point is to distill the system down to the very most basic act you can do with it and see if it behaves in a logical manner. Shooting someone in the head with a large caliber armor peircing round should do a lot more than: "The edge nicks the target's temple, causing pain to shoot through his skull, forcing him to fight through the agony to find his balance. The target suffers Blood Loss (1) and is Dazed for 1 round." when rolling max damage. Stop and look at this from the average player's view: Shooting a mook in the head and rolling max damage only stuns them. Well, actually, rolling maximum damage (a natural 10) against a Novice or Elite NPC kills or incapacitates them (as long as the damage is enough to bypass their Defence), regardless of the weapon used. Unlike in first edition, there is no test to confirm Righteous Fury, so it's actually easier to one-shot mooks. Also, Novice NPCs don't use hit locations, although a GM could of course describe it as a bolt round blowing apart the NPC's head, or whatever. Edit: And with Tearing, Bolt Pistols are going to one-shot their fair share of NPCs.
  10. Leaving aside the unnecessary hostility and personal insult of your comment, first edition had plenty of random tables. So that seems like an odd thing to complain about.
  11. Here's another thread on the same topic, which might be helpful. It includes a response (#7) from one of the book's writers: http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/71045-necron-weapons/
  12. AlphariusOmegon7 said: Spacerat, I wouldn't nerf them that much. No1 is right - Necron weapons should be hilariously good. Just not gamebreaking (which is what they are currently). Dispersion Shield I agree - it should barely be a weapon, its primary trait being its very good special ability. Hyperphase sword 1d10+7R, keeping everything else the same, maybe increasing pen by 1. Void Blade 1d10+5R, +1 pen, everything else the same. And Warscythe…I'm still working on that. bogi, in ToF it gives rules for PCs getting their filthy little mitts on necron weapons, saying that some don't phase out, or you grab it from the dude and run. I think that with the numerous Qualities attached to these weapons and the high SB of the Necrons wielding them, the stats I posted above should be sufficiently scary. I guess it depends on how much you (dis)like your players. :-) Finding Necron weapons that won't phase out could very well be the basis of an adventure.
  13. I was also a little shocked by the Damage values on some of the Necron melee weapons, which is funny, because I wrote the Necron section for Tome of Fate. Let me preface this by saying that I do not speak for FFG, and this is in no way an official answer, but simply my own opinion. That said, if I were to include Necrons in my Black Crusade campaign, I would modify the weapons like so: Dispersion Shield: 1d10 I Hyperphase Sword: 1d10+6 E Rod of Covenant (Melee): 1d10+6 E Void Blade: 1d10 R Warscythe: 2d10+6 E I would leave the Pen values and Qualities as-is.
  14. Ghaundan said: Current fluff suggests no, but as others have said that's somewhat debatable as fluff is ALWAYS written as seen from inside the universe and thus might be false. I agree that it's stupid to have a large group of humans are incorruptible. Individuals? Yes, possibly. Xeno's? Certainly, by their alien nature being immune. It's a Matt Ward'ish fluff, I'd honestly say f*** it and do what I felt would make a great story. As far as I'm aware, the background has always held that no Grey Knight has ever fallen to Chaos. Also, I don't think a couple thousand people is a large group. The point is, this small group is culled from a much, much larger group. Out of millions of potential candidates, those individuals who are proven "incorruptible" are formed into a group. In fact, I'd say, if anything, the idea is somewhat diluted by the latest codex, since the Purifiers seem to indicate varying degrees of incorruptibility….
  15. signoftheserpent said: The people playtesting Only War have had to pay FFG to do the job for them, which is why I consider that unacceptable. Frankly I don't care how it gets done: what i care about is that FFG publishes books that are not full of mistakes. It has nothing to do with low print runs or that gaming books don't sell like bestsellers. That's irrelevant. Either you can afford to put out quality product or you can't. If it's the latter then don't bother publishing. Anything else is just exploiting the customer. I agree that typos, etc., can be quite jarring to the reader but… are you serious? You would rather have no 40k RPG products at all than put up with a few typos? For full-color hardbacks, the FFG books are very reasonably priced. While I would love it if they were free of error, I still find the books to be a quality product; I certainly don't feel "exploited." When you notice a continuity error in a film that you paid to see and otherwise enjoyed, do you feel that you have been exploited?
  16. I read Tattered Fates in English recently, and I do not recall any mention of xenos enjoying the festivities. As you say, that's a pretty big deal, so I think it would stand out to me. That said, there could be room for xenos, as other posters said, but these would be exceptional cases.
  17. Mrakvampire said: Polaria said: 2) Give the mission to Vindicare who will then recon the territory, stalk the heretic for several days and finally put a single bullet through the heretics cranium. Or he can simply walk into front door, and kill everyone with poor quality lasgun. ;-) Cause he is invulnerable to cultist's attacks (16+ dodges per round with 115% chance of success) :-) And, btw. What restricts Vindicare Assassin to have Command skill, huh? He can have it via standard elite advance rule. So he would be able to command that 10 man kill-team. :-))))))))))))))))))) Well, hopefully the character would have a good in-game reason to take such a skill, since Command would usually not be very appropriate for an assassin that works alone and follows orders. It would be just as simple to come up with an in-game reason for the Stormtrooper to undergo extensive gene-therapy, as well as surgical and bionic enhancement, in order for him to take Unnatural Toughness (or whatever) as an Elite Advance. After all, I am sure those things are a large part of the explanation as to why the Vindicare has access to unnatural abilities. Under normal circumstances, Temple Assassins are expected to undergo all the sort of stuff, while Storm Troopers are not.
  18. In older 40k material, grav-technology was a lot more common. It's one of many of those little things that GW has changed/retconned over the years. It's perfectly reasonable to say that some Calixis Forgeworld was lucky enough to re-discover the ancient texts detailing the construction of grav-bikes (or whatever you want to call them). After all, grav-chutes are common enough and servo-skulls are flying around all over the place. Besides, the "rule of cool" holds sway in most of the published 40k material, and flying bikes are cool.
  19. Luddite said: I think this query is predicated on basically a flawed assumption; a misunderstanding of how great weapons were used. They were not 'slow but clumsy' at all. Most were swift, versatile and practical weapons developed in concert with the increasing effectivelness of armour to make the warrior even more deadly. The disadvantage of a great weopon lies in the space needed to wield it, since as pointed out above, they require a flow of movement to exploit, maintain and enhance their striking speed and power. A bastard sword for example, when used effectively is a terryfyingly swift and deadly weapon able to strick, slash, stab, block, pummel, and disarm an opponent in a flurry of blows in quick succession, from many directions. Sure if you stand like an idiot and simply swing/slash with it, it'll be slow and you'll get very tired very quickly. Use it as intended (think 'dance of death') and its swift and deadly. Even the feared early Medieval 'Danish' axe can be wielded swiftly, acting as a cross between a spear and an axe....stabs and short slashes would injure and slow down your opponent ready for the coup de grace of the 'mighty blow' that will cleave you from crown to groin. 2d10 is a pretty accurate damage to represent this i think...then again the whole Dh/RT damage system is pretty daft from a 'simulationist' stance...works ok from a 'gamist' stance though... Right. I'm (somewhat) familiar with the disparity between real-world medieval weaponry and the kind we often find in RPGS. But like you say, going for a "realistic" simulation of weaponry and combat would require many changes apart from just modifying the great weapon. We must also keep in mind the abstractions involved in this system. If we were thinking realistically, a single hit from any weapon should be sufficient to kill any character of any rank. Which, I suppose it is when you include the possiblity of Righteous Fury.
  20. I think they are just totally out of whack when compared to any other weapon. I haven't decided 100%, but for my games I am definitely going to modify it. I can't decide if merely dropping the pen to 0 would be enough, or if it should be changed to 1d10+something (3 or 4 maybe). Perhaps with all the other drawbacks merely losing the pen would be enough. As it is now a mono great weapon hits like a heavy bolter... yeah, sure. You could also ad-lib disadvantages. Say you're fighting in a narrow hallway, give the character with the great sword a penatly to hit, or give his opponent a bonus to dodge. If we assume we're talking about grotesquely oversized weapons, which, based on the artwork and the damage seems top be the case, you could institute a "critical miss" rule similar to that of the eviscerator (but less severe, of course). Actually, I think I may combine this with dropping the pen, that should be plenty.
  21. N0-1_H3r3 said: TheFlatline said: GEEK THE MAGE FIRST. As soon as the mage drops a fireball, or lightening bolt, or the psyker manifests, everyone proceeds to blow the f*cking psyker into the next realm. Either that, or the psyker takes cover, and can't manifest as easily. Grenade him, flame him, shoot him, just GEEK THE MAGE FIRST. In the 40k universe, this comes with an added requirement - as soon as the psyker demonstrates himself to be a psyker in a fight, the person who observed it is absolutely required to bellow "WITCH!" and start opening fire in that direction. Psykers hate that, because it draws lots of attention to them, and if the fight is going on in a crowded place, often draws the hostility of random bystanders, local law enforcement, nearby bounty hunters, etc, etc, and can potentially complicate an ongoing investigation, while giving the group's adversaries a convenient excuse for their actions (the Witch made us do it), that cannot be entirely proven or disregarded without another psyker present. In short, the psyker revealing himself is perhaps the single most ill-advised thing that can happen to a group of Acolytes, which will cause them far more trouble than almost anything else. In the last campaign I ran a psyker almost got killed by a random guy with a wrench in that exact situation (back when I allowed any old NPC to righteous fury), but a retroactive dodge saved his life/fate point.
  22. Well, that works out about the same as a lasgun does against your typical armoured guardsman. That sounds right to me.
  23. Well, they got nominated for "Best Rules," not "Best Proof-Reading". Congratulations to everyone involved in the game. I think it's the best RPG line I've ever seen.
×
×
  • Create New...