Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About karn987

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • MSN
  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  • Yahoo
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Location
    , Massachusetts, United States
  1. Yeah its called the DH Apocrypha-Vehicles but I cant find my link to it heh. Just peruse the DH files and look at all the shiney bits ;D
  2. @N0-1_H3r3 Ahhh for some reason I never put that page and the obvious (now) name at the top to you. I love that stuff and I've been using it for a while as a basis for stuff you haven't covered or just plain out using it. I love the stuff man, keep up the good work and get an eldar pdf out soon! ;D
  3. Cardinalsin said: @Graspar: If I have understood it right, you're making a game-mechanical point that everyone should always get a chance to defend themself, with no possibility of dying by chance without an opportunity for defence. The thing is, going back to the abstraction point (sorry Varnias!) you can take a hit because you failed some or all of your reactions, or you can take a hit because your opponent passed all their attacks and therefore left you with too few reactions. They're all a matter of chance, so why complain? Because you didn't get the chance to roll? It's still down to random chance. As I said earlier in the thread, the real argument, it seems to me, is that in a melee the defender's WS should always be a factor in whether they get hit. I think it's a fair complaint that as the system stands combat is supposed to be an "abstraction" with some minimum level of defending being factored into the basic attack roll, yet the defender's skill makes no difference to that roll. Well you shouldnt be putting words in people's mouth boyo. As for this thread, I think it has just gotten stupid. Varnias, obviously you are unhappy with the system and your not going to be happy until it's a system based on pure realism that fullfills your slightly elitest view. So I'm done with this, there is nothing worthwile out of this thread at all. @Varnias if you want to purpose a change to the combat system, start a new thread but leave our your self toating. Honestly you have knowledge and some "experience" fine, but you don't need to get your feathers ruffled just because I didn't mention your experience. Others here have experience, experience with games and game mechanics. More important then the realism you want is balance and a working system, because without that you don't have a game and that is what we are all playing. So either start a new thread and tote the improvements as an actual improvemnt to the game system or stay here and rant about your experience and your realism that obviously isn't doing much for you. Your idea was fine, I don't agree but you made some agrument towards it but you need more and you need to focus on game mechanics and balance first and foremost. So I say to you, either put up or shut up.
  4. Eh sounds interesting and I think the mechanics need some work obviously but I think it would make the game even more deadly when it already is plenty deadly. Besides, most monsters have no need to go into critical damage so it would hurt the players more then anyone else and most players are already at the mercy of their GM to begin with. A nice idea but I don't think it's needed.
  5. According to the rules, just the threshhold because its a PT check exactly LIKE (but not actually) you are manifesting the power.
  6. Btw just to state again, yes all bolt weapons should have tearing because it is more of a quality of the ammunition and a defining factor in what makes a bolt gun compared to a rocket propelled SP weapon. (Yeah I know they basically are but thats the point, basically and actually are not the same here)
  7. Yup despite the Anthema being a HUGE rip off in price per content (Yeah Im looking at you FF, that was NOT cool ) it gives you several very nice starting points for exapanding some of the classics. The Eldar, tyranid, and the Ork entries work rather well and really give the feel of the race translated from the table top game and serve as a good spring board for creating the rest. I wish they had flushed them out more butttt FF seems intent on gouging pockets so we will see if them ever make a Anthema 2 (and if it's any longer >.>). I've started work on adding additional versions of the said races for my campaign, so far Im working with Orks (which really were easy since there aren't a huge variety). If you want to be really really accurate just use those stats as a spring board and compare them to the 40k stats for what your trying to make and what you have to work with and go from there. Can't really do ratios but you can atleast keep the feel of what they are supposed to do rather easily and always remember talents and traits, they can really set hte feel of the creature. To often I know I find myself forgetting this creature has this talent or trait etc.
  8. Eh I'm of the opinion that melee combat is fine where it is right now. Admittidly I would like to see more talents that add special menuvers and attacks but they aren't exactly needed. As far as the balance of melee attacks to parries it's already balanced, or did you forget that your character is already assumed to be defending with whatever they have in their hands or dodging out of the way of the blows? This represents what you are having an issue with and has already been addressed by the system. If you wan't to become harder to hit, use defensive stance, make talents that make the defensive stance even better. I don't think you need to create any additional talents to add parries because all you are doing is creating a less brutal combat system and slowing game play down with excessive dice rolling. Remember, with the dodge and the parry talent you have a dodge, a parry, and another of your choice each round to evade attacks... thats 3 attempts after they already have to roll against you. Thats still a hell of a lot of goodness going your way because it is infact easier to parry then it is to hit with an attack, a lot easier in many cases (not all mind you). The example about the MR is interesting because thats what they do. I would be terrorfied of anyone who could actually parry that many attacks and do them all in the same round. But as stated before, thats what specialists do and the average character should not be able to easily counter a specilist performing their focused abilities. Yes you have some knowledge of swordsmenship but as you already stated, a style that is more of a sport then realistic combat so really I wouldn't bring that up again. Besides, it's a game and we all know realism always takes a back-seat at times =P If you really really want to make more parry options make sure they are ONLY available to classes who would make sense having them and make sure that they can't just be picked up on a whim. They need a lot of pre-reqs and heavy stat requirements probably higher then that for the attack talents becuase you do have to be even quicker to parry correctly because it is a reaction. I honestly think only the assissin would have access to any of these advanced parry talents and rightly so, what over class is going to have that level of melee training?
  9. Yeah I agree it seems a bit clumsy but it really isn't that bad, it's just different which can make it seem clumsy until you get a hang of it.
  10. lord inquisitor revan darksoul said: if im going to throw something at you yes u can get out of the way but if i hurl verbal abuse at you youve kinda gotta take it....... i know it a crude analogy but one a bullet the othe is psychic. Actually I like it heh.
  11. Varnias Tybalt said: karn987 said: The difference between a bolt pistol, bolter, and heavy bolter isn't really the rounds, but the gun it's self. Though I do believe the civilian bolters use a slightly smaller caliber round because I can't figure out how else they wouldn't break your wrist upon firing. I think I can provide a reasonable explaination for that. Bolts are propelled sort of like a two stage rocket, first it seems you have a standard charge (like gunpowder in normal bullets), which gives the bolt a high muzzle velocity (like in a regular firearm), then during flight the miniature rocket motors kick in providing more thrust. Basically it functions like a real world gyrojet gun (which fire miniature rockets), but unlike the gyrojet ammunition that relies only on the thrust of the rocket motor (giving the bullet a severely unpredictable flight path/accidental "screwcorking", and a ridiculously low muzzle velocity albeit a high velocity later on in the flight path due to the rocket having picked up more speed by then) it has a conventional propellant as well, with the rocket motor kicking in after the bullet has left the barrel of the gun, adding it's velocity to the primary muzzle velocity. My guess here would be that civilian bolt pistols have reduced recoil due to the primary ignition chemicals (gunpowder or whatever they use for propellant) being of a smaller amount than the bolts used in bolters and heavy bolters. Meaning that bolts fired from a bolt pistol primarily rely on the miniature rocket motors for flight, while only using a small, necessary amount of "gunpowder" to make the bolt leave the barrel of the gun providing roughly the same high muzzle velocity, with the same calibre, but with less recoil and reduced range. While bolters and heavy bolters have a larger yield of "gunpowder", letting the bolt reach longer distances before the rocket motor kick in, giving the weapon a longer range, same stopping power but more recoil than the pistol. Another factor that would reduce recoil is the "chunky" design of all bolt weapons. The heavier a weapon is, the more recoil it absorbs, and if you look at the pictures depicting bolt pistols and bolters they look like they do weigh quite a bit more than conventional firearms. A third factor that would reduce recoil is the cycling mechanism of the gun in question. An open-bolt design further dampens the recoil since most of the recoil is used to push the bolt (the mechanical part in the gun, not the bullet) backwards, ejecting the spent shell-casing of the fired round and chambering the next round. I would expect that "civilian" bolters use an open-bolt mechanism (which further reduce recoil but make the gun slightly less accurate), while astartes bolters not only have a larger design and heavier calibre but also a closed-bolt system as well which would give the weapon arm-ripping recoil if a normal human tried to use it, but would also improve an Astartes bolter's accuracy and range. A somewhat pseudo-scientific explaination, but we're talking science-fiction here so I hope that you'll agree to this explaination being reasonable at least. Also I can't say that my explaination is guaranteed to be canon, but I've reasoned that if I were to try to build a real bolter, then that's the approach I would take. Still, the Tearing quality discussed here would not stem from the gun, but the ammunition itself. All standard bolt rounds work by the same principle, a two staged rocket with a mass reactive core that explodes as soon as it has penetrated the target. I'd say that the tearing quality comes from the fact that you get a hot chunk of metal lodged in your body that explodes from within, sending sharp shrapnel that rips through your entire frame. Even the bolters described in Inquisitors Handbook work by this principle, so it's safe to assume that those bolters have the tearing quality as well. *nods* Well that was well put. Heh, nicely done.
  12. Terelo said: karn987 said: The rules don't say you get overbleed on sustained power rolls. To sustain the power you make the PT roll and if you succeed (by any amount) you maintain it exactly as you had originally manifested it as. If you want overbleed, you drop the current version and try to remanifest the power because you can't change the effects of something you are sustaining, but you can establish new effects when you manifest a power. *cough* Quote from the book: Every 10 rounds a power is active, the Psyker must make a Power Roll to maintain it - just as if he were rolling to manifest it. I understand that most of you prefer the easier version without overbleed in the sustaining roll, but am I right that none of you has a proof it really should be that way? Just turn the situation around. I take Douse Flames as an example: The pyromancer scores 26 when manifesting the power. All flames within WPBx5m + 10m (overbleed) extinguish. When doing his sustaining roll he only scores 20. He clearly cannot sustain WPBx5m+10m as he does not channel enough warp power to sustain the overbleed. So 10m of the range are lost. The power gets weaker. Logically it must also be possible that the power becomes stronger again. Sense Presence, torch, weaken veil, white noise: If the psyker keeps this power up for hours before it becomes important, how should the gm determine how much overbleed is there when it becomes important ? Quite simple: Let the psyker do a sustaining roll when it becomes important. The very concept of sustaining an ability implies that it remains the way it was the entire time, hence no overbleed. That is the proof, simple understanding of the english language. If I am right hmmm you have no proof that is should really be the other way other then one sentance that as it has happened many times in the book is poorly worded, lack of an edditor again. Now, the wording your refering to "Just as if he were rolling to manifest it" the key word is rolling to manifest it not as if you were manifesting it. Yes it's very very subtle but it is difference. The word rolling is used as a catch all basically telling you to use all modifiers you would normally use to manifest the power not that you are actually manifesting it. You don't suffer effects of Psychic Phenomena or Perils and you do not get overbleed or the ability to modify the power in question because you are sustaining it and not remanifesting it. So again, you rolling just as if you were manifesting it but you are not actually manifesting it. Point out where in rules it says you are manifesting the power when you maintain it and you are right. But that sentance, does not say that.
  13. Varnias Tybalt said: karn987 said: Yeah its you get a +20/+30 (pistol and basic/heavy) to the test if you aren't proficient with flame weapons... otherwise it's just a normal agility check or you get hit by the attack and then have to make another agility test or get caught on fire. I think Varnias Tybalt just got confused, especially with the errata. Page 128 flame quality, says it quite clearly that its just an agility check, no bonus or minus. Errata 3.0 page 8 the flame quality blurb their just redifines and clarifies what happens if you are not proficent with the weapon and shows how it differs from normal weapons. Flame weapons are extremely deadly in Dark Heresy since most people have less then a 40% chance to avoid the high damage of hte weapon and then less then a 40% chance to avoid catching fire, and being on fire in DH is extremely scary. I've had players who have had to burn 2 fate points before they could finally be put out. You are correct. But still my main gripe is the fact that you don't have to use a normal Dodge roll, but can just use your agility roll instead. The Dodge skill is there for a reason, and it should be a dodge that save you from being hit by flame weapons as well as normal weapons. As my example tried to illustrate. You are not more likely to be able to dodge the jet stream of a fire hydrant (and believe me, a military flamethrower do fire a jet stream of burning fuel) than you are able to dodge a bullet fired from a gun, you would be just as easily hit by both. Hence why you should be required to do a Dodge test to avoid a flamer just like you do against a bolter or SP weapon, not just a simple agility test... Ahh so your real gripe is the difference between an agility test and a dodge test. If you are not trained in dodge then the agil test is more likely to succeed and if you are trained in dodge you are more likely to succeed at the dodge. But even then, the chance of actually dodge is less then 40% and a jet of water moves slower then a bullet and is easier to dodge hense the agil test. If you dont like it then just make it a dodge instead *shrugs* but any chance less then 50% isn't big at all and you are more likely to fail then pass it so I still don't see what your getting at.
  14. Yeah I agree with the issue of ammo, I intend to actually make them calculate ammo weight today. Going to give all the ammo weight depending on how much they have of it. (ex: 10 rounds weighs this little etc) it will add up eventually.
  15. Emprah_Horus said: Varnias Tybalt said: Cardinalsin said: I still think 30 degrees is a crazy arc for a 30m range. It must be a pretty impressive flamethrower to cover a 16m wide cone. I guess you can justify it by saying the shooter waves the weapon around a bit. The thing I find most wierd about flamers in Dark Heresy is how implausibly easy it is to avoid getting hit by a flamer. I mean a +20 Ag test to avoid it all together? Have any of you really seen a real flamethrower in action? (and then im talking about the military kind that fires a gout of burning liquid fuel, and not those hollywood version that use flamable gas). I thought it was only +20 if the person firing the flamer wasn't proficient with it? Maybe I'm thinking of something else... Yeah its you get a +20/+30 (pistol and basic/heavy) to the test if you aren't proficient with flame weapons... otherwise it's just a normal agility check or you get hit by the attack and then have to make another agility test or get caught on fire. I think Varnias Tybalt just got confused, especially with the errata. Page 128 flame quality, says it quite clearly that its just an agility check, no bonus or minus. Errata 3.0 page 8 the flame quality blurb their just redifines and clarifies what happens if you are not proficent with the weapon and shows how it differs from normal weapons. Flame weapons are extremely deadly in Dark Heresy since most people have less then a 40% chance to avoid the high damage of hte weapon and then less then a 40% chance to avoid catching fire, and being on fire in DH is extremely scary. I've had players who have had to burn 2 fate points before they could finally be put out.
  • Create New...