Jump to content

Varnias Tybalt

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Everything posted by Varnias Tybalt

  1. Agmar_Strick said: I always took the power field to disrupt the binding force between atoms, not doing much damage itself That's one theory, however if this was really the case, then Imperial "scientists" wouldn't be so flabbergasted over how Necron Gauss weapons work (these weapons all work by the principle of disrupting the force between atoms and thus de-construct any atomic structure that it hits and "flay" the target until it is dead). How this is achieved is a mystery to the Adeptus Mechanicus. So if that's a mystery it would be sort of contradictorial that all power weapons work by the same principle. Also, according to the rules at least, it is the powerfield that does the real damage. THis question was posted in the dark heresy messageboards where a player wondered if the Moritat assassin would benefit from The Bloody Edge trait whilst using power weapons. The official answer from FFG was no if I remember correctly, because while a power sword might have an edge, it's not the edge that does the damage, but the powerfield surrounding the blade. With these things in mind, im guessing that power weapons use something... well "simpler" in the way of disruptive power. Something that seems to generate heat because it is listed as energy damage and not rending damage.
  2. BaronIveagh said: Yes, power gamers (homo sapiens munchkinis) are a reviled form of mutant which pours from the eye of terror on a regular basis, which all Imperial GMs should rightly fear and purge where they are found! There's an non power gaming exception to this that still as to make use of what might seem like power gaming tactics to outsiders. For instance, let's say that you're interested in playing a character (for the roleplaying opportunity's sake, not because you're supposed to be able to kick ass all the time) that has superhuman strength from mutations? What if there's some special roleplaying/acting avenue that the player wish to explore, but doing so pretty much demand using some sort of strategy that might resemble power gaming in order to get the stats of the character to resemble the concept of the character? Is it still "reviled" power gaming, or is it accepted power gaming?
  3. St. Jimmy said: It's not that hard, the ecclesiarchy is forbidden from maintaining it's own fleet, and are entirely reliant on other organisations for inter-planetary travel. This is why Adepta Sororitas are often found alongside the Inquisition or Imperial Guard, but an independent order might agree to lend the Rogue Trader some warriors in exchange for transporting a lot more somewhere else. The thing is, why would you ever want a bunch of Adepta Sororitas aboard your vessel unless you're an ultra puritan even for a Rogue Trader? As soon as you start dealing with xenos goods or some other "borderline heretical" business practices, the Sororitas will either just abandon you or even might try to kill you for your crimes. Of course, you might want to try waving a writ of trade in their faces and claim all manner of "rights" and "priviligies" but remember, we're talking about zealots here who are used to using violence to solve debates regarding faith. Also, Imperial Guard commanders tend to dislike having to work alongside the Adepta Sororitas for these reasons, because they never follow orders from any other hierarchy than their own, and they don't have any sense of "strategy" either due to their zealous fanaticism. If I was a Rogue Trader, I'd take a bunch of stone cold killers for hire or other kinds of sellswords over a bunch of fanatic warrior nuns any day of the week, because the latter will eventually cause you more headache than they could possibly solve martially for you. Just sayin'
  4. Dyckman86 said: Also, the word disruptive makes me think of bad things, like jagged edges and other unpleasentness, not cauterizing the wound as it passes. The word "disruptive" in this case wouldn't have much to do with jagged edges, but rather a form of disruptive energy flow that apparently instantaneously collapse and breaks matter on atomic levels and thus generate a "cutting" effect. However, considering the energy requirements, I'd say that being able to slice through armour (like power armour) would require a heck of a lot of this disuptive energy, and the friction caused by this energy field would likely heat up anything it touches and would probably have no problem to severely singe and burn flesh it comes into contact with.
  5. Cryxx said: No it wouldn't, lasguns use a high powered laser a power sword does not but as you said is surrounded by a power field, it slices through an opponent it dosn't burn. The power field in question cause Energy damage, not Rending damage according to the rules. So it wouldn't be very off to assume that the weapon actually burn whatever it comes in contact with. Personally though, we have changed the damage type of power weapons from Energy to either Rending damage or Impact damage depending on which weapon is being used (power swords = Rending, Power fist = Impact). But that's a houserule of ours and not something that goes along with the RAW. The RAW says it cause energy damage, hence it might cause burns just like las weapons do...
  6. nethru said: then a character with the fearless talent is completely immune to insanity is this correct? No, not really. While the character might become immune to acquiring insanity points due to fear tests, there are things that still grant insanity points without requiring fear tests.
  7. Toharent said: Military grade I'm inclined to say no, but arbitrator grade yes. I could see a shop/ dealer that is favored by the local authorities being allowed to get some in legal for the officers to carry in their off duty weapon. But this would be a closely watched transaction, course it's also got the potential for graft. As well this sort of thing only works in the more controlled and built up areas. There's not really any standard gun laws throughout the Imperium, much less standardized ammunition laws. I'd say that the Availability rating is based on a number of factors, "legality" being one of them. The more rare a type of weapon or ammunition is, the more likely it is that it is proscribed on certain worlds and might require less-than-legal ways to acquire it, at least on the open market. But the fact that even lowly underhive gangers have means to acquire rare types of ammunition like plasma fuel flasks and bolt shells seem to indicate that, regardless of legality, if you have the right amount of thrones, you can get the ammunition you need.
  8. Lord Inquisitor Kadmon said: It is not certain that the 'Dragon of Mars' is the C'tan known as The Void Dragon, only likely. Naw, it's pretty certain that the Dragon of Mars and the Void Dragon are one and the same. The one thing that is disputed however is if the Void Dragon/Dragon of Mars is actually the Omnissiah or not. The fluff doesn't give a coherent answer to that question, only that there are certain (heretical) factions within the AdMech who believe it is.
  9. Baldrick said: Players can get a standard void suit which provides no armour or penalties but they can wear their own armour underneath it (carapace though may be a problem) Uhm... That sounds like a pretty complicated solution. Why not just give them a voidsuit that's basically a sealed, skintight bodyglove with a helmet and an oxygentank, and let them wear armour outside of this? (sort of like a diving suit but more sealed) I know, it might sound like a high-tech solution, but if you ask me it sounds even more high-tech and advanced to actually have a voidsuit that let's you wear a full set of armour UNDERNEATH it instead of over it. Just my 2 centi-thrones
  10. I haven't really needed to do it, because most of the time it doesn't matter what Ordos a few acolytes belong to, because they will inevitably stumble over threats and conspiracies that their Ordos usually don't deal with, but still have to figure out a way to pull through.
  11. St. Jimmy said: A trader who follows the imperial creed would execute the muties on sight Not really. Even followers of the creed don't go out and murder every mutant they see. There are plenty of worlds where the mutants can enjoy a life of toil, underpayment, starvation and generally being treated as a 63rd class citizen, where they run the risk of being shot or burned by mobs of local religious fanatics and lynching gangs (like the Red Redemption). Also, certain Inquisitors investigating certain crimes might think it's a good idea to purge the mutant population a little (just to be safe). But the Imperial Creed doesn't usually say: "shoot all mutants on sight!" it's rather more of a: "the mutant is bears it's corruption on the outside, never trust the mutant. Hate them for what they are... But don't kill them too often in case they are working as an underpaid workforce." The Imperial Creed does by no means "accept" mutants, but it tolerates them as long as they are kept downtrodden and persecuted. Only the extremists factions preach that all mutants should be exterminated wherever they are discovered, but these extremist factions are sometimes even less tolerated by the Ecclesiarchy than the mutants themselves. (the Red Redemption don't have the best reputation, and they wear masks for other than purely religious reasons)
  12. Polaria said: If you assume Acolytes always have unrestricted access to local arms dealer then they will probably go for automatic weapons and manstoppers. If you start to enforce the rules of the restricted availability, then you will see a gradual shift towards lasers and other powercell powered weapons. That's no guarantee. Manstoppers are of Scarce availability, and while it will provide a penalty to try and find them, most groups of Acolytes usually contain at least one guy/gal who have good social skills and work as the general "fixer", finding places where the Acolytes can buy stuff they need. It's usually when ammunition reach the Rare and Very Rare availability when things tend to get difficult, but if we're talking about enforcing rules here, then it wouldn't be appropriate to increase the rarity and availability of manstopper bullets (which aren't really "military grade" since the Imperial military opts for lasguns rather than autoguns most of the time. The choice between dumdums and manstoppers are basically the same thing as choosing between different kinds of hunting ammunition, which are available to civilians)
  13. Nihilius said: Hm, I always pictured the hives way more cramped than those illustrations, at least in general. Is that not the case? The thing is, there is no "standard" hive in the Imperium. They can either be built like the termite mound/spires of Necromunda, to a sprawling metal landscape of Volg. Some are even more strange like the walking hive city of Ambulon. The cramped conditions are largely dictated by how the hive is built and the state of the planet in general.
  14. Dyckman86 said: and Mutation is a sign of Corruption, which is a sign of the Ruinous Powers, even overly mutated Navigators get put down because of the problem inherent with that much corruption. So to sum that all up, what are some people's thoughts on Mutants and Hereteck in 40k and the usage of by PCs? Not all mutations have their origin in the ruinous powers or warp taint you know. The reason why many imperial citizens believe that is mostly due to superstition. Also, remember that Rogue Traders operate mostly outside of Imperial society, hence the general laws and discriminations against mutants don't necessarily hold the same sway in Rogue Trader groups than they would inside the Imperium. Second, mutations can open certain doors and provide certain gifts that normal people don't have access to. And speaking from a Rogue Trader's point of view, where the goal is Profit and ALWAYS Profit, it would be stupid of the Rogue Trader to not take advantage of certain mutants that are "friendly" enough to "play ball" instead of trying to eat you. Still, the mutant will always be followed by a social stigma whenever he or she is trying to move arouind openly in Imperial institutions (as long as the mutations in question are clearly visible to the naked eye, which is no guarantee when it comes to mutations), and that social stigma might in some cases come back to haunt the Rogue Trader and the group's endavours. So there will most likely be drawbacks from having a mutant in the gang, but that still doesn't make it "wrong" to include mutants in the group. In fact, Rogue Trader might be the only game where mutated PC's are more or less acceptable unlike Dark Heresy where the Inquisitor employing a mutant as an acolyte would gain a very ill reputation and might even be considered a radical by certain elements. So to answer your question: No, I don't find it strange or bad that players choose to play mutated PC's, and since the Origin Path has an inbuilt mechanic to actually let the player choose which mutation his or her PC have, I don't see any problem with the player getting a mutation that might stack with other modifiers and such. These choices will sooner or later come back to bite the group in the ass anyway, and it let's the GM send crazed Redemptionist mobs against the PC's whenever they are conducting business on shore. Fun for everyone involved.
  15. ZillaPrime said: I cannot stress enough that it is a BAD idea to try to "field test" this in a LARP format..... What? How could playing with explosives possibly be a "bad" idea? ... Oh right, im probably speaking with normal and relatively sane people here.
  16. Would it be safe to assume that the story has a bit of Kafka flair to it?
  17. Luthor Harkon said: D'oh! I always read it is only possible to 'interrupt' between the turns of different characters and not inbetween a single characters turn. That clears it up. Thanks a lot for the clarification Varnias. Khouri already asked my next question. So, character A would be able to interrupt B in the middle of his turn (and inbetween different actions - e.g. between Half Action - Ready (the weapon) and Half Action - Standard Attack (with the weapon) and he would also even be able to interrupt inbetween Free Action - Quick Draw and Half/Full Action - Standard/Semi-Auto Burst Attack? But, when character B also takes the Delay action and tries something fishy directly afterwards, both have to take an Ag-Test to see who goes first? Whether a Free Action is possible within the delayed Half-Action is a good question. Anyway, you are not allowed to make a Free Action between the turns, aren't you? Like C and D are in a fire-fight and C realizes (through a Per-test) an enemy is coming through the back door (at Initiative 7), but C already had his turn this round (at Initiative 9). Is C allowed to yell a warning as a Free Action towards D inbetween his turns, so that D can act in his turn (at Initiative 5)? I'll quote the rulebook again (just so everyone can read the relevant bits and not require people to flick through their own to clarify ) Free Action A Free Action takes but a split second and can sp be taken in addition to any other Actions you make in a Round. There is no formal limit to the number of Free Actions a character can make in a Round, but a GM should use common sense to set reasonable limits on what can be done in a few seconds. Now, this part of the rules is a bit more fishy, but if I am to interprate the rules as written, I'd say that you can take free actions between your turns, because the rules only mention rounds not turns (turn = one specific segment in a combat where it is one character's turn to act, Round = all turns baked together). A turn is over once a character has performed his or her full action. A round is over when all combatants have performed their full actions (and free actions and reactions etc.) The rules for free actions only mention that you don't have a formal limit to when and how many free actions you do in a round, so I'd say that you can in fact use free actions outside of your own turn and in between turns as well as your own turn. (Although free actions are usually not something that has significant impact on the battle, like shouting comments and such, only when certain talents come into play does free actions usually have a high impact on the battle at hand). So yeah, C would be able to shout a warning to D that some guy is coming through the back door in your example.
  18. Gregorius21778 said: I was (am) just puzzled about the rules. The rules say "It hits the body". In that case, I was wondering why there is a "flakk qualitiy helmet". So I assumed, I have it wrong (or missed some point) Then, I sought about what a fragg grenade explosion is like. And where the shrappnel might be able to hit you if you are about 3 meters away. Like "over the whole body". This is reallistic, but more then ackward the "mechanic" way (to much damage, to much roles, etc). This results in me askin question in a forum. Perhaps it is really best to stop wondering a simply counting it as "body hits" Well, just ask away mate. That's what messageboards like these are for after all. The standard rules for damage from blast weapons is usually to assign the damage to the body. I know it's not very realistic (arms and legs can get blown off in real life and all), but it's simplified to make the combats go a little faster. If you want specific bodyparts to get hit, then I just suggest that you use the body hit location chart for everyone unfortunate enough to stand within the blast radius of any exploding grenade or projectile and assign damage to whichever bodyparts come up. Though while this method is a little more detailed and allows for arms and legs to get blown off, it also has a few unrealistic "flaws" to it (I mean, while an explosion might do most damage to a particular body part, your entire body is still taking punishment from the blast all over). Other RPG's I've played usually solve this by having different damage values for different radii (i.e if you stand 1 metre next to the blast you get hit by X amount of dice, if you stand 2 metres away you get hit by Y amounts of damage dice and so forth). While that method is a little more simulationist in nature it can usually be a hassle because if many people are affected by the blast radius that will require a heck of a lot of dice rolls. So, it's your call if you'd like to change it to a houserule or not. It can be done if you want to, but chances are that it will bog down combat pretty much as soon as someone decides to use grenades. Hope you find the comments helpful.
  19. Khouri said: Would you say that if A had the quick draw talent they would be able to ready their weapon and fire using their delayed half action (assuming they win the agility test to act before B)? I would agree with that, yes. If you have the Quick Draw talent you are supposed to be able to draw weapons lightning fast anyway.
  20. Dalnor Surloc said: Personally I figure most tech priests in the =][= are there for 2 reasons. 1)The Inquisitor asked nicely for a tech priest acolyte. The higher ups assigned the PC in question because they either didn't like him (in the case where the Inquisitor isn't good ally), or they selected the PC based on being a good fit (in the case they like the Inquisitor). After all they get requests all the time for tech priests to crew ships, get assign to tank crews, and what not. One junior tech priest to keep the =][= happy is no big deal. 2)The PC did some thing that the admech would punish the PC for. The Inquisitor is either a radical or the the crime is only really a crime in the eye of the admech. In effect the =][= is either blackmailling the PC or protecting the PC. Those reasons are pretty much it.
  21. Katsue said: I can't imagine the Techpriests allowing a Cleric into the Lathes. Why not? Just because they belong to separate cults it doesn't mean that they are forbidden to interact with eachother. Even cathedrals to the god emperor needs to have lightbulbs changed from time to time, and I doubt any cleric would whine at the Techpriests replacing them. The same goes for paying customers in the Lathes. The Lathes are still a business centre of sorts, and if a Cleric is a paying customer and want something as expensive as a Lathe blade (which is supposed to be a best quality weapon once finished), certain customization and personalization is expected. IF the AdMech recieve the specs for which prayers and incantations are supposed to be engraved on the blade, they wouldn't likely have any problem to do it, and there's nothing stopping the Cleric from completing the sanctification of the weapon later on by splashing holy water at it and attach a bunch of purity seals etc. etc.
  22. Katsue said: As for Holy Lathe Blades, I'm not sure they exist. The description of Holy Blades says that the holiness comes partly from manufacturing components and Lathe Blades can only be made in the Lathes and presumably, can only be reforged in the Lathes. I very much doubt there's an STC Template for a Holy Lathe Sword. Micro-etched incantations and purity seals seem to be enough to make most weapons holy. I don't see why it couldn't be done to Lathe blades during the forging process. Just get a Cleric to assist the Techpriests and let them go to town with it.
  23. The storm bolter gets two hits per success. So on Semi-auto it puts out four shots (semi-auto 2 = 4 hits) if you get the initial success and at least two additional degrees of success. (Semi-auto needing 2 successes for subsequent hits). On full auto, if you get four successes, you'll get 8 hits. Ammo use should take this into account. Thanks! Sam Stewart It sure stumped me when I first heard it, but there you go. Apparently the Storm bolter can inflict eight hits even when the RoF says that four is the maximum.
  24. Luthor Harkon said: Did I oversaw anything? Or has character A no chance in such a stand-off according to the RAW? Which would be horribly unrealistic if you ask me. Any advices or ideas? I think you oversaw something. Here's the delay action from the book: You watch and wait for an opportunity. When you use the delay Action, your Turn ends immediately, but you reserve a Half Action for later use. Any time before your next Turn, you can take your reserved Half Action. If you try to do something at the same time as another character that used a delay action, you must make an Opposed Agility Test to see who acts first. If the prepared Action is not taken before your next turn, it is lost. I highlighted the relevant bit of text in bold as you can see. The opposed agility test only occurs if two characters that used the delay action have to compete in doing their reserved actions if they attempt them at the same time. In your scenario, the one person aiming his gun in the face of the other is the only one who have delayed an action, and if the other character attempts to draw his weapon the first character would be able to use his or her delayed action to "interrupt" the "Ready weapon" action used by the other character by shooting him/her in the face with the delayed half action (probably with a +30 bonus to hit as im assuming they are standing pretty close to eachother). Of course, the person having a gun in the face might try to delay a half action too, but since that person doesn't have his/her weapon out he/she would have to spend any delayed half actions to draw the weapon, and in that case it won't really matter if he or she get to draw the gun before the other one can fire it, because the one with the weapon out is still going to get the first shot off. If however the both of them had their weapons out and were aiming them at eachother, and both used the delay action, they would have to compete with eachother if they attempt to shoot the other first by rolling an Ag test. But in your scenario that wasn't the case. So no worries here, the character with the gun out certainly has the on the other and will be able to shoot the unarmed character before that character can attempt to do anything.
  25. Cifer said: The question remains whether this additional capacity will always be filled. If you're up against two hundred insurgents, does it make a difference if you utterly crush them with 10000 professional soldiers instead of utterly crushing them with 5000? In the same way, additional luxury quarters won't do you much good if you've only got passengers enough for one set. If you're going on an endavour that is intended to gain you specific kinds of objective points, then isn't it reasonable that you'll take on as large capacity as possible? It's "Profit above all" after all, so wouldn't a Rogue Trader ferrying VIP clients or troops try to fill his vessel to the brim with these elements if he's engaged in trying to achieve the relevant objective? Considering that both Chartist Captains and Rogue Traders rarely have to "look" for work, and spend a lot of the time just sitting around without anything to do, it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that they won't have any problem finding enough clients that want to take full advantage of whatever facilities and components aboard the vessel.
  • Create New...