Jump to content

Maxim C. Gatling

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Maxim C. Gatling

  1. I hear you. Surely and Inquisitor with enough Thrones and influence can sweet-talk an Arch-Magos into manufacturing anything the Inquisitor requires, given time and materials.
  2. What was the reason for this rule? Is it to prevent GM anguish when Sniper players get good enough that the -20 doesn't prevent them from scoring headshot after headshot after headshot?
  3. Hmm... I haven't read the rules on this completely, so I'm confused. A MIU is a Mind Interface Unit. In the original 40k book it was described as Bluetooth technology but run by the inherent but latent psychic potential all humans (except Nulls) possess. Pretty impressive, seeing as Bluetooth was still 15-20 years away at the time 40k was written. MIU's were mainly used for remote controlling things. Servitors, cyber-skulls, mechadendrites and enhancing your weapon's ability to score hits. It also hinted that there were limits to the number of objects you could control with MIU's, that there were better qualities (more objects could be controlled) and that installed MIU's had to be linked to specific objects and had to be re-programmed to access different objects. For instance, an MIU controlling a cyber-skull would have to be reprogrammed to interface with a Servitor. There's been a lot of debate over the years on what an MIU consists of and how they work, but speaking from a strictly old-school 40k perspective, an MIU weapon interface would not allow you to fire the weapon as a free action unless the weapon was installed in a mechadendrite. OR a shoulder-mounted weapon. There used to be a big difference. Are shoulder-mounted weapons considered mechadendrites now? While you could put an MIU Weapon Interface on a Heavy Bolter, it would give you different benefits. Long, long ago in an Imperium far, far away, a normal dude (guardsman, noble, Space Marine) could have an MIU implanted in his skull and link it to the appropriate hardware mounted on his gun which gave him bonuses to hit with it. I think you could also use it as a camera, i.e. point it around a corner.
  4. I realize this has probably been asked/answered already....somewhere.... I notice you can't buy it on DriveThruRPG anymore, so I assume it's coming out sometime soon?
  5. Long ago I made some charts and posted them. They were based on WH40k: Rogue Trader (the original Rogue Trader book). I must have quoted too much of the book because GW's IP Inquisitors made FFG take down my post. Bummer, it was a great chart and pretty much answered all these questions. The answers to the questions you seek are in the original Warhammer 40,000 Rogue Trader by Rick Priestley.
  6. As this is a 40k game, I usually refer to 40k canon when I decide these things. For instance, look at the Ogryn miniatures. None of them wear armor. Sometimes the Bone-'Eads will wear a ridiculous Viking horned helmet, but thats from games like Dawn of War. Originally only the Sergeant got a Ripper-gun (because he was a BONE-Head and the only one smart enough to use them). The rest of the Ogryn got clubs. Not nice clubs, but like 2x4's with nails in them or tree branches. A lot of this was based upon the assertion that Ogryns had the intellect and mentality of a (violent) 6-10 year old. AND that the game designers obviously didn't have any 6-10 year old children. They're supposed to be dumb, yes, but where does everyone assume all Ogryn have Down Syndrome? Eventually they evolved to all the squad having Ripper Guns, the Viking helmets were gone as well as their 1% chance of having Psychic powers. But still no armor. Ok, but in the fluff, some Ogryn do have armor. Well, if they're mercs or work for an Inquisitor. In those cases, you may even find them using plasma cannons. Point is: anything is possible. Especially if the Regiment is under the command of a Rogue Trader. If you've ever raised a child past the age of 6-10, you can immediately see that Ogryns have (or at least should have) a lot more potential than they're given credit for.
  7. We always use miniatures if there's combat. 1cm = 1 meter Not knocking anyone's playstyle, but we just have a lot of 40k minis and none of our group likes abstract combat.
  8. Technically, it means Close Quarters Combat, which in 40k could mean both opponents could be dual-wielding pistols. If you have trouble visualizing what "Hand-to-Hand" with 2 guys and 4 pistols looks like, watch Roadblock and Firefly duke it out in GI Joe 2. I have no use for that movie, but that particular scene was awesome and it alone makes it worth the rental price.
  9. I use 1 meter = 1 Centimeter on the ruler and either doubled or triped the ranges (can't remember, but one worked perfectly) I can't remember exactly what the problem was (we've only played one game so far) but I think I just doubled or tripled the ranges for everything and it worked out fine. Even so, the player with the Melta had to get reeaalllly close to use it. I mean, you don't want ranges as short as 40k (pistols shoot 12") but you don't want every gun to be in-range all the time either.
  10. Congratulations, Soldier! You've just been promoted. I'm all for Servo-Skulls and my Medicae requested one also. I'm going to use the stats from DH or RT. He will, of course, have to earn it or make an absolutely amazing Logistics roll. Even then, it's only one bullet away from needing replacement. The Emperor giveth and the Emperor taketh away.
  11. I've absolutely forbidden Syn-Skin in my game. Unless your character is an Imperial Assassin. FFG's description and usage are far too removed from the official fluff in my opinion.
  12. I like this. I find it a fine line between making the sniper deadly as well as the Heavy. I find at this juncture that my players are more concerned with landing at least one round and will choose whatever option gives them the highest BS advantage. If you skew this toward single-shots, then they never use Semi or Full Auto. What you don't want in this game, but is hard to avoid is the min/max mentality. If you skew it either way, mathematically, the players will figure this out quickly and you'll find them all wanting to be either Snipers or Heavies. Single and Full Auto have to be equally appealing depending on character class, with Semi being a viable in-the-middle alternative with no real downsides. My thinking is that if you're spraying at a single target with the intention of killing them, not surpressing them, then you have more chance at least one bullet will hit. Like dodging rain. I do it like this: Single shot: +0 BS, but you can Aim multiple times Semi-Auto Mode: +0 BS, one hit for every DoS, but you can only aim once. Full-Auto Mode: +10 BS, one extra hit for every TWO DoS, but you can only aim once. If you don't "aim", then essentially you're firing from the hip, so why would you get a bonus to-hit with half-action Single Shot? Along those lines, "aiming" with a Semi or FA burst and only allowing the benefit of one "aim" simulates only the first shot being accurate. See, we use an Action Points system. Your AP = Willpower and Agility modifiers divided by 2. For example you have a 20 Will and a 40 Agi, you'd have 2+4/2 = 3 Action Points. Each half action in general equals 1 Action Point and each full action is 2 Action Points. "Aiming" in our game is 1 Action Point. You see, how much you can accomplish in a turn isn't just how fast you are (Agi) but also a measure of how cool you are under fire (Will). This way even less-physical characters can do about the same amount as the super-quick Ratlings. It works out really well and in general most characters can do pretty much the same amount of stuff in a turn as they would in the stock rules, but as the character levels up it develops their "fog of war" experience letting them do just a little bit more in a turn which also benefits the GM as I can throw harder stuff at them. As far as ammo expenditure goes, it's up to the player to ration their ammo. Otherwise why even bother having them keep track of it? You can always be a nice GM and have them find an ammo dump or extra ammo on a corpse or something.
  13. Servo Skulls. I would allow him to create Servo Skulls with various functions, like Gun-Skulls he controls in Combat. You may want to fiddle with the Servo-Skull stats and research the fluff to come up with some list of resources he'll need, etcetera and expand what kinds he can make. Plus, there's several nice Servo Skull miniatures available. For a Gun-Skull, I got an old-school Marine Bolt Pistol and glued that to the side. They're a lot smaller than modern ones, so they don't make the Skull look like it should be flying lop-sided. What could be more fun than making Servo-Skulls out of deceased Comrades? "I live...to Serve again!"
  14. Our house rule is if it's a headshot, then the target makes a Toughness roll (difficulty GM's discretion depending on weapon) or get knocked out (or stunned at GM's discretion depending on weapon and/or head armor). The roll is required even if damage doesn't penetrate. Gives additional incentive for players to have their characters wear helmets and provide more variation by adding additional protective qualities to some helmets. I.E. The standard Cadian-pattern helmet has "excellent" protective properties against shrapnel, but not concussive effects. The OLD helmets did, but the Mechanicus doesn't know how to make those anymore. You know, that "Dark Age of Technology" thing.
  15. Yeah, the more I think about it, the more I think "Hell, ya a Medicae Servo Skull would be cool". But don't just GIVE him one.
  16. I'd make him earn it in-game somehow. Instead of just "as a Comrade", how about "constructed from a deceased Comrade". Even in death, I continue to serve.
  17. Example: You, as a Guardsman, are responsible for your say…lasgun. If you break it, your responsibility is to "Take it to specialist capable and authorized to repair it". If it can't be fixed, then you must "Seek permission from superior officer to requisition new kit." That's just one of the paranoias players have thinking "OMG, I broke my lasgun…automatic execution." The crime isn't accidentally breaking your lasgun, the crime is not following procedure in a timely manner and not filling out the paperwork properly. Silly Brits and their dry, ironic humor!
  18. Depends on what they did, also. Summary execution isn't the proscribed punishment for every offense, per the Imperial Munitorium Manual. Often offenses call for flogging or transfer to a Penal Battalion.
  19. Make sure you have handy notes on the Comrades' names and Demeanors. Make a point of using not only their names, but the PC's names and roleplay the Comrades' Demeanors. I've found that the only way to get THEM to roleplay more is for ME to roleplay more. And make it mechanically rewarding to do so. After they start loosening up and really getting into it, you won't have to "reward" them all the time because they'll be having fun and will forget about it. I blame video games. I really do. We didn't have this problem back in the 80's.
  20. I left out something very important. If you play out the scenario above, what you're doing is telling the players that RolePlay will get them possibly three things. Information they can use later, Possibly goods/services and/or a Logistics roll, and experience. Sometimes you have to appeal to the min/maxing phat lewt wh0re in them. If it makes the game more entertaining for everyone, it's worth it.
  21. I have a player that wanted to play a Ratling sniper. He rolled perfectly on his Demeanors getting "Thief" and such… Then he decided to re-roll and make a Tech-Priest at which point I forbade it. He wanted to play a Ratling, he rolled up an excellent one, but I'd rather he rollplay what he wanted than go with a more practical choice of min/maxing "for the squad". If you have a problem with them clamming up because of the "Bullet to the Back of the Head" factor, just take the Commissar out of the squad. Not every squad has one and they're not omnipresent. Throw something like this in: You're in your barracks and there's a rousing craps game going on near the back, as Bravo and Delta squads have shown up to socialize. Several groups of troopers are relaxing, talking, bragging about their sexual conquests back home, and complaining about the chow in the mess hall. What do you do? If they actually do something entertaining, go with it. Roll-play (pun intended) the craps game if they join in. If they join in one of the conversations, throw in some useful information about the deployment or the Quartermaster. Go with the flow until you think the time is right and then have a Trooper enter the barracks and shout "Snap-to! Commissar is coming!" The craps game is hastily gathered up and most of the Troopers line up at attention with lackluster enthusiasm, like it was simply an annoyance. Now here's the key. Have a Jr. Commissar come in, alone, tapping on his dataslate and looking bored or whatever like he's doing chores. He immediately tells them "At ease…" without looking up from his data slate and have him do a cursory inspection finding a few minor things wrong, which he let's the offending trooper off with a warning. He gives the entire barracks a once-over look and says "As you were" and leaves. Then have the Troopers go back to what they were doing, including breaking out the craps game again like it was no big deal. Routine. In other words, there's no need unless you want there to be, for the Commissars to be hard-asses. Doesn't mean they don't/won't do their jobs. It just means they place maximum importance on Troopers doing their duty to the Emperor on the battlefield and are less concerned with minor infractions as long as they don't interfere with the smooth running and discipline of the post they're stationed to. Our Commissar for our game (an NPC) has a "Don't make me fix it" attitude. Know what I'm saying? He'll fix it if he has to, with Bolt Pistol rounds. He's just as likely to come down hard on the tattle-tale squealer who interrupted his morning Re-Caff as he is the perpetrator of whatever the crimes were, unless it was a truly grievious infraction.
  22. I guess one of the things I'm getting at is that if your Dynasty doesn't own a couple planets and the rights to command the IG Regiments/Companies that are Raised on those planets as part of their Imperial Tithe…then is the RT really powerful to the point of having IG Regiment(s) under his/her command in the first place? Think of it. Your RT rules a planet. The planet has to tithe anyway. So he gets to fulfill his Imperial obligations AND gets his own troops at the same time. The Departmento trains them, disciplines them etc. and supplies them from the material goods portion of the Imperial Tithe the RT's planet has to pay anyway. The RT's kids, relatives, friends etc. go straight to the top of the list of cushy, important IG officer postings and local Departmento Munitorium jobs. Sweet deal.
  23. I'm pretty much down with all of this as I had the same idea. Here's how I am going to handle it (indeed it is a popular idea supported by the fluff, an RT with their own troops) A long, long time ago the current Lord Whozitz' great, great, great, great…….great grandfather was awarded a RT Charter from some ubiquitous High Lord of Terra for saving his bacon at the battle of Whatchamacallit. (I'll fill in the details later…we just made characters last night) AND command of an Imperial Guard Regiment from the 1st Imperial Army. Why 1st Imperial Army you ask? Because I have a bunch of old-school 1990 IG figures which I've carved up and re-done with modern IG equipment. Anyway, from what I've read you have House Troops and IG Regiments under the RT's command. Essentially, it's a very fine-line difference. Both swear allegiance to the Emperor and the RT. The RT technically outranks everyone but Inquisitors, so that means the Departmento Munitorium can't just say "Hey, we want our Regiment back". However, an RT might agree to send his troops to battle with "regular" IG for a variety of reasons. Deals, Munitorium contracts, owed favors etc. Having an IG Regiment at your command is actually a boon to the RT. He can still have his Household Troops, which he bears the entire fiscal responsibility to equip, but IG troops have rights to be billetted, re-supplied and the Munitorium will supply replacement troops when casualties occur on the battlefield. I figure RT's with this sort of long-standing arraingement actually have a planet/planets that they have sole recruiting rights for. I would go so far to say an RT who doesn't maintain a working relationship with the Munitorium is at a severe disadvantage. Also, with the Regiment would come Commissars, Preachers, Tech-Priests, Missionaries etc. as well as Regimental retinues which provide new (and loyal) ship crew etcetera without having to resort to draining the scum from every prison within 200 light years. As to the rest, it's an IG Regiment with the training, doctrines etc. from whatever Homeworld they were raised on along with all the history and traditions thereof. And it's a mutually beneficial arraingement (usually) for the Regiment because they benefit from better Standard Kit, better chow and answer to a Lord that is probably not keen to use them as cannon fodder. Need a plot hook? RT: "Lord General, I'll commit my 1450th Callixian Grenadiers to your Crusade in return for mining rights in the Flatula System and a Munitorium contract to be the exclusive supplier of M36 Lasgun recharge packs in Sector 19. My brother, Lord Renardo will command them to victory for you against the Emperor's foes. Do you enjoy the amasec? Excellent. I had three cases sent to your Stateroom…"
  24. I'm very sorry guys! I find being 40 something with a job and a family I tend to get caught up in RL crap and the project was fraught with retyping. I haven't even gotten to PLAY the game in 4 months. As the months went on, I was sure they'd have put out something official by the time I got this completed, but it looks like I am mistaken! I'll dredge it back out, and post it with the caveat that it's not "complete" and if someone else wants to pick up the ball and continue (and maybe expand) the work, that would be awesome.
  25. For the record: Female Astartes don't exist and to suggest they do or should is Heresy. I'm simply stating a loophole allowing that they could exist, for you Heretics out there. You're welcome!
  • Create New...