Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by BrotherSurge

  1. macd21 said: No, there's very much a point where characters are 'too powerful' for Ascension and that's when they break the math. With about 14 dodges at over 100% the VA has reached that point. It's also not represenative of what their actual power level should be. While VA's should indeed be powerful, they aren't supposed to be totally immune to all attacks from a Greater Daemon of Khorne, for example. Indeed. Which is why I suggest that you nerf their Temple Assassin trait. There have been some very good suggestions above. What I meant is that I don't think Vindicares are too powerful fluff-wise.
  2. I think the Vindicares as represented in Ascension are ok, and playable. This isn't acolyte-level we're talking about here, but Ascension. The players get to try out being Inquisitors and their cadres, so there's nothing like "too powerful" for Ascension. That said, the Temple Assassin trait that Vindicares get needs to be slightly nerfed. At the very least, don't take Unnatural Agility into account. Also, you might have to specify exactly which situations are completely undodgeable, even for a Vindicare. The magos also represents something of a conundrum, when you consider his ability to soak. It is possible to push a tech-priest's toughness bonus up to 5-7 through ranks 1-8, and add the toughness bonus of the machinator array as well. Later in Ascension, you get to pick Unnatural Toughness, which brings your Tougness bonus to 10-14 somewhere (or even higher, if you keep stacking Toughness). Add Dragonscale armor, for an AP of 8, Armorer trait for another +2AP, and the Flesh is Weak for another 4 points of armor, and your soaking ability will soar. You'll also get to pick sound constitution 9 times in ranks 1-8, and another six times in Ascension. This will give you a soaking ability of some 14 TB + 14 AP and 25-27 hp. In comparison, a Rhino APC has an armor of 24 and a structural integrity (hp) of 25. So the magos needs to be tweaked, in my opinion, at least slightly, to be believable. However, my biggest gripe isn't the overpowered careers, but rather the careers that fall short in comparison. Crusader is the worst example of this. His Ascended traits are forgettable, as there's even a talent that allows you to mimick his ability to shield a friend. The iconic suppression shield is nice, but seems paltry compared to the Vindicare's ability to dodge, and the magos ability to soak. Worst, though, is his complete lack of talents of influence. Apart from rank 16, the only talents of influence you get is peer, good reputation, rival and enemy talents. Granted, the crusader isn't supposed to be a career with a big social skill set, but other classes (like death cult assassin and vindicare), who beat the crusader in the race for best set of combat skills, also get more talents of influence. This needs to be amended, to provide players of the crusader and the stormtrooper (who also gets shafted in the Influence talent area) with some more leeway in their play.
  3. I strongly recommend reading through all the trilogy books, if you intend to run the entire Apostasy Gambit. It is likely that you will have to rework major plot points, as they just don't fit together very well. Individually, they all containt very interesting suppositions, but put together, it will seem like a patchwork of conflicting ideas. The main story arch is extremely epic in it's scope, and if you're not comfortable with plunging the entire sector in disarray, chaos and mayhem for a looong period of time, you'd have to tone down some of the events in the Apostasy Gambit trilogy.
  4. BrotherSurge


    Do you mean like an advanced career? If so, then no, there's nothing like that. However, in Book of Judgement, on page 106, is an adventure hook which involes The Spire Stalker. The Stalker is rumored to be a spire noble serial killer (possibly the neice of Marius Hax) and the inspiration image looks very much like the necromundan spyrer.
  5. I've just recently finished Church of the Damned with my playing group, and we're determined to finish the trilogy, even though none of us are really enthused about it. Chaos Commandment seems to be more of the same. It promises more combat encounters, and after reading through most (but not all), it does seem to be a pretty linear adventure that mostly just links very epic combat encounters together. If I had got all books beforehand, and had time to rework them a lot, this might have been an enjoyable trilogy, but as it is the scope of the adventures just doesn't suit my group. [spoilers ahead!!] The backdrop is extremely epic. The Calixis sector is engulfed in a civil war. Sadly, the book mostly glosses this over, leaving the GM to come up with most of the explanations here. Some pointers, at least, would have been good to have how to handle it. The first act has the acolytes join a platoon (100 men) of Imperial Guardsmen to apprehend a psyker, who is an "oracle" of the Big Bad. Exactly why the acolytes need to apprehend him is unclear, as doesn't leave any information, except a breadcrumb clue to go seek out a noble house. The second act has the acolytes go to said noble house on Fenksworld, to get yet another prophet of the Big Bad. When this combat encounter is over with, the acolytes withdraw to find out where the Big Bad is hiding. The third act is a prelude, that has very little to do with the overarching plot, a survival horror-style game aboard a spaceship. The final act is where the acolytes face off with the Big Bad, a fight of epic proportions. If you like the whole "The Sector is in flames! Apocalypse looms!" premise and rails-shooter style of games with lots of combat and very little intrigue, then this adventure is for you. There are a lot of demons and psykers in this one, the Dei-phage makes a return. After the final combat encounter, you're left with a lot of questions, and a lot of "mopping up" in the Calixis sector, but very few suggestions how to handle the situation. Be prepared that this messes a lot with the status quo of the Calixis sector, and the canonical setting.
  6. What we don't know is how you spell it. Is it Baraspine, or Barsapine? The spelling seems to differ in every sourcebook. There is some information on Baraspine in the adventure module The Black Sepulchre, where you can find a small gazetteer.
  7. Luthor Harkon said: --- SPOILER --- [...] My main problems so far are: [...] • The Lector X has critical information regarding the Arch-Cardinal, but dares not to involve anyone (at least locally), but he seems the PCs appropriate (weird enough…). Then the PCs must do him a favour (i.e. exorcising his friend), so that he tells them? Sounds really inexplicable, that the alter egos the PCs are representing should do such a thing. The PCs are in fact doing him a favour involving themselves and are sort of helping him… • I am rather sure the Venomskin lead won’t be enough for my players to leave the cathedral for Gunmetal City. [...] More to come I fear… SPOILERS GALORE 1. Yeah, this seems really inconsistent. We ran the first part this weekend. The PCs went extremely suspicious, that this stranger, Lector Xavieticus, would 1) Cast suspicions against the head of the Ecclesiarchy, the very first time they met the lector. The -only- thing which stopped them from executing him on the spot for high treason was the fact that they themselves were already suspicious of the Arch-Cardinal. 2) Ask complete strangers to aid with an exorcism of his possessed friend. This smack dab in the middle of one of the most holy sites in the Calixis Sector. 2. The Venomskin lead is extremely weak. Supposedly, there are documents in the Arch-Cardinals office that leads to planet Stonegarden (though they're only mentioned in Chapter three, where it is assumed the PCs have found these documents. There's nothing on where they are found, except a very general note about them being in the Arch-Cardinals quarters). By breaking into the Arch-Cardinal's office, plus finding the documents in the secret Forging Wing, the PCs could concievably build a case against Ignato already in the first chapter, without even having to travel to Gunmetal. Some further points: 1. The Inquisiton is suspecting Arch-Cardinal Ignato, head of the Ecclesiarchy, of treason. The acolytes get told this by their inquisitor at the start of the adventure, and the inquisitor then leaves to take care of "more pressing matters". More pressing like what? Preventing a full-scale invasion of chaos forces that threaten to annihilate the Calixis Sector? Stop Marius Haxx from mutating into a daemon prince? Prevent a bloody and prolonged civil war within the Inquisition? I fail to see what would warrant a serious inquisitorial investigation than the suspicion that the Arch-Cardinal himself is a heretic. Especially with the evidence gathered from the Black Sepulchre. Add to that the subplot which Luthor Harkon pointed out. Cheese. 2. Why would the PCs actually try to study the relics? There's -no- point to this whatsoever. It could serve as a smoke-screen, to verify their identity as inspectors, but what if the PCs fail their verification? Will they be gunned down by the sororitas? Will the Arch-Cardinal hang them high? It seems like a filler, and something to do to just pass time. 3. The Synod meeting. Why does the PCs have to attend? Again, it serves no purpose at all with regards to the plot. A filler, and a slightly cheesy one, just to show off the high-and-mighty of the Calixis Sector. 4. There's an entire subplot that's hinted at in several places, but seems to have been edited out. In the descriptive text of the Hospital wing it mentions "Three important NPCs", and yet only two are ever detailed. There's also Medicae Gallican which is hinted at having some sinister scheme, it even says someone has fallen prey to him, but this is never clarified. I appreciate that the designers want to give the GM some leeway and add plots of their own, but this just seems sloppy. If you're going to edit out a subplot, make sure you do it completely, not just cut out an NPC and leave it at that. It might seem that I'm complaining, and maybe I am. But the reason I buy adventures instead of making up my own is because I have precious little free time in which to work out adventures. This adventure module requires a lot of work to make it work, instead of being just a cheesy romp through the Cathedral of Illumination, where the acolytes has to stop the Arch-Cardinal OR MILLIONS WILL DIE!
  8. I try to style my adventures after sandbox RPGs too. I find this gives PCs a feeling of "being in charge" of their investigation. We had quite fun with our latest adventure, which revolved around serial killings in Nova Castilia. It was fully dependant on which clues the PCs decided to follow up, which actions they took, etc. The danger with this approach is that it is easy for PCs to "get lost". If they don't get where to go next, you might have to help them along, and point them in the right direction. And this might lead to railroading. It also takes more work to pull off, for the GM. You'll have to be prepared for situations which might be avoided in a railroaded adventure. Whenever I want to push a particular theme very hard (if you want to create a very focused narrative, or a cinematic feel), or want the PCs to feel that they aren't in control of their situation, I go railroading, but I think that sandbox adventures are ultimately more rewarding.
  9. Noticed there's two threads. I'll repost in the other. Lock/delete this one?
  10. Peacekeeper_b said: So can I ask what stats/rules/notes are in the book that may be useful? Most modules from the 40K line of books become just reference material for me anyway. There's stats for a penitent engine. That's it.
  11. Bring on the weird stuff. Gas-grenades, psychic powers, radiation, people armed with flamers and the Cleanse and Purify, Blessed Flame trait coupled with an Astartes Incinerator. At Ascension-level, you can expect the PCs to be hard enough that conventional ways of hurting them - like, say aiming a gun at them and pulling the trigger - might not have the desired effect. If all else fails, bring in a team of havoc chaos space marines. Three heavy bolters, fired at high BS, and a couple of multi-meltas is sure to hurt. I'm not arguing that Vindicares aren't OP. But if you're not prepared to change their rules, be prepared to bring on some major ****.
  12. Gregorius21778 said: Hi Brother-Surge, since you already have a copy of it, could you post the rules for the Excorzismn mentioned by H.B.M.C ? I will otherwise actually end up buying a PDF copy for five sentences . Talking the "underhive settlement" mentioned by H.B.M.C. as well: would you say it is well established? Like (say) the Sinophian Gazeteer? Will one get a good picture of such settlements in general? In that case, the whole affair might be worth the USD-Pricetag for the PDF. Thanks! 'lo The exorcism doesn't strike me as a this-is-how-we-always-do-it mechanic, more of a flashy way of letting players roll their various skills. Which is nice. Essentially, there's an NPC which leads the exorcism, Max Von Sydow-style. One PC is assigned to hold the possessed patient down, and the rest roll various skills (like Performer (Singer) and stuff) to force the daemon out. If the acolytes succeed with a set amount of rolls, the exorcism succeeds, and doesn't kill the host. If they fail a set amount of rolls, the exorcism succeeds, but kills the host instead. @Gregorius21778 / H.B.M.C regarding the underhive settlement The underhive settlement is pretty well realized. There's no Gunmetal gazeteer, sadly (I like 'em too), but you can still piece some stuff together from the chapter that details it. Frankly, out of all the stuff in Church of the Damned, I think I like Blinding Gulch the most. It has a nice pace, lots of optional stuff the PCs can look up, and several different outcomes (which admittedly, matter very little to the main plot). It would have made a very decent stand-alone adventure. My main gripe with chapter 2 is that the map doesn't correspond in any way with the area notes. There's a few areas marked and numbered on the map, but the area notes very often describe something else entirely. A few areas that are marked on the map aren't described in any way. I understand that GMs might want to put out red herrings, or have some extra areas to fill on their own, but then again, if we have to do all the work, why did we pay for the adventure? I don't buy the argument that every big adventure/storyline requires a number of sidequests. Because the plot in Black Sepulchre and Church of the Damned is so epic in scope, all available pages should, in my opinion, be devoted to further that plot. 20 out of roughly 70 pages, that do nothing to further the plot, besides providing the acolytes with some piece of evidence which could, in all fairness, have been placed elsewhere isn't good adventure design. Especially when other things seem to have been cut/ommitted to keep to the page limit. Making the Blinding Gulch area into an adventure of it's own would have done it more justice. Here, it just seems like a speedbump, even if it's a very nice speedbump.
  13. egalor said: So, the quality of Black Sepulchre was... rather mixed. How does CotD feel in this regard? Less or more room-after-room bashing? Choices / different paths to success? Investigation opportunities? Clues handling? Also, a comparative example would serve good from the entire Warhammer Roleplay line (fantasy/40k). Thanks! I GMed Black Sepulchre with my gaming group, and while we all had fun with it, the dungeon crawling left us a bit "meh". The players are enthused about the next installment though, so I went ahead and bought it. After having read through most of it, I'll venture to say Church of the Damned's quality is pretty much that of Black Sepulchre's. There's less dungeon crawling. The two first chapters are done in "sandbox" investigation style. There's areas to explore, clues to uncover, before you move on to the next chapter. As in Black Sepulchre, some clues are absolutely vital to progress. I get the feeling that some might be easily overlooked, especially ones where there's just one way to find them. The second chapter consists mostly of a subplot that has no connection whatsoever with the main plot. Your players may find the motivation to complete it, out of a need to be noble/stamp out heresy etc. but the outcome isn't vital in any way for the main plot. The only real reason why they'd want to follow it through, is that it's necessary to progress. This chapter also has a reputation mechanic which can, if the players fail hard enough, break the entire adventure. It'll effectively hinder any means the character's have to obtain a vital clue. What's really irksome are the glaring errors. In numerous places, something is hinted at, and never expanded. The most glaring I've found yet is where three NPCs (three patients in a Hospital) are described as having information which will help the PCs, and only two of them are ever described. There's also another NPC in the same location who is hinted at having some dark secret, but there's nothing further on that. If this is simply a result of the editing process, as I can imagine there's a page limit on this adventure, why are several pieces of information throughout the adventure printed two times over? The adventure, like Black Sepulchre is very epic in scope. The PCs have the chance to interact with some of the most powerful figures in the Calixis Sector Ecclesiarchy. The difficulty level is very varied - some ridiculously easy encounters, some hard - with very few pointers how to scale the encounters. One boss-fight in particular (yes, there's a penitent engine involved) might be nigh-impossible for acolytes who are not very martially minded.
  14. Kirov said: Asajev said: I got a question for you guys I know it might be a simple No type answer but here is the question. Can you combine origins from the radical book and those in the inquisitors book if they do not contradict each other? You may have only one origin. If an origin is a modification of an existing one, it'll say so as well as what to modify (example: Tainted Blood of Malfi is a modification of the Noble origin). If you are speaking of Background Packages, you are likewise restricted to just one. You may combine an origin with a background package as long as you meet the prerequisites of the background package and if the GM allows you to take background packages in the first place. -Kirov Can we get a quote from the rules that say you're restricted to just one of either type? As far as I can see, it doesn't say anywhere that you're restricted to just one alternate origin package, or just one alternate background package. As a GM, I'd probably still rule - or at least very pointedly advice - my players to only pick one of either, but there's nothing in the rules that outright restricts it. If it fits the story, and no contradictions exist, why not?
  15. Spoilers ahead I ran the adventure with a big group. The core members (3 of them) were rank 4-5, and the rest were just above starting rank. That said, we only really had two combatant characters, and in many fights the non-combatant characters did stuff like hide, fall to their knees and prayed to the Emperor, etc. It all depends on what type of group you're playing with, their equipment, skills, willingness to engage in combat and such things. I did notice the same thing you did, the level scaling all but stops after the first chapter. Some fights took a long time to finish, Gustavus Hekate being the prime example, while they found others, like Nikea Hekate, to be a cakewalk. When the characters reach the Haematite Cathedral, it seems like all "trash mobs" are extremely easy to dispatch. Nikea Hekate's henchies are broken down servitors that fight with rusted serving trays (?), and will be trivial for anyone above starting rank, imho. Same goes for the mutants in the Asylum wing. If you're running with a rank 5 group, you'll need to bump them, and employ unusual tactics, since most enemies will only use melee attacks. The last part, when they're off to face the daemon, will largely hinge on what type of group you have. My group had a Sororitas, which had the ability to counter the daemonic auras that the furies and the Dei-Phage employ. It'll also be somewhat dependent on the players making the right choices in fighting the daemons, otherwise the fights have potential to be really challenging.
  16. Cifer said: @Adeptus-B There's an important distinction to be made here: Chaos as the energies and beings of the Empyrean and Chaos as the mortal followers of the aforementioned. Regarding the first, I completely agree - these are forces of nature which, when running unchecked, will certainly doom stuff around them. The second, however, are still humans who generally had a reason for turning to the powers of Chaos. How much of this reason survives depends on how much of the human that made the pact still exists and how much of him has been reduced to a mirror of his patron. This is not fan-think, it's what has been described in the FFG news and what has been hinted at in some of the more nuanced sources. In fact, if the idea of using Chaos to at least temporarily achieve goals unrelated to those of the deities is impossible, radical Inquisitors would be rather pointless. Regarding the Imperium as a necessary evil... I disagree. It's an evil that demonstrably allows humanity to survive, but it's unknown whether it is the only or the best way to manage this. Even the keepers of the Imperium, the Inquisition, has quite a few factions in favor of tearing down parts of it and rebuilding them in another way. I guess this the matter of perspective which players and GMs will ultimately have to consider. Is Chaos amoral or not? Is the destruction wrought by a band of roving bloodletter daemons no more evil than say, a tornado blowing a town to bits? What natural phenomena would you compare with the actions (I'll let your mind run free here) wrought by a slaaneshi daemon? To me, Chaos is portrayed as a cosmic force of evil. It's wholly unnatural, but I understand if people view it differently. The ambiguous way Chaos is portrayed makes it easy to adjust and adapt according to taste. The lure of Chaos is such that it is easy to believe that you may escape any involvement unscathed, that it is a "force" to be manipulated and used, and not something that will leave you irrevocably damned. The idea of a cosmic force of palpable and very real evil is strange and cheesy to me, but on the other hand, that's how Chaos have been described in most sources I've read.
  17. Cifer said: @Brother Surge But what does that leave us with? I don't see how there will be any meaningful choices in Black Crusade. Why would you want to preserve your humanity? The only thing that'll do is hinder your ability to conquer, plunder and pillage. Plunder and pillage might be more difficult, but conquer? A glamorous Slaanesh demagogue would have a much easier time overthrowing imperial rule on a world if he actually walks the walk. Sometimes, simply being the one who doesn't burn you to death for looking different may be all it takes to win someone's sympathy. I mean, who would you rather follow: The guy who said he would throw down the oppressors and make life better for everyone and whose every action shows that these are his actual goals or the one who said the same and then killed a few of his own underlings for giggles? I'd totally follow the guy who seems to be too good to be true. But he'd still be feigning being good. Sure, he'll talk nice, give me pretty flowers to wear in my hair, but it's all so he can corrupt me later. It's all just variations of evil. No matter if you take the torch to the orphanage, or if you waltz in and use your stunning charisma to convince the orphans to shut themselves in and set fire to their own house, you'll still have burnt down an orphanage. Alright, so corruption isn't a fast track to daemonhood, because it's tempered by infamy. To raise your infamy, you'll have to... commit infamous acts, I suppose. And that, itself, tells you what it's all about. If you apply cultural relativism to the game, then yes, Chaos is just misunderstood, and if we just put ourselves in their shoes we'll see things differently. The Imperium of Man and Chaos are just two different cultures clashing, and no one's better or worse than the other. I guess it all depends on what particular view you subscribe to. I still feel that Black Crusade seems to leave you with very little choice as to whether you want to be good or evil, since "becoming the most badass evil guy" seems to be the whole point of playing the game. In Dark Heresy you can choose to pay only lip service to the Emperor, because the mechanics themselves do not dictate your allegiance. You're free to be as depraved or holy as you wish. In Black Crusade, you have no choice but to align yourself with Chaos.
  18. Novel idea. I thought up something along similar lines. A chapter of Space Marines, that are specialized in countering the Chaos god Slaanesh. However, they consider it a spiritual war, not a physical one, and eschew normal Space marine combat doctrines. Instead, they sail the voids of the Imperium in their Love Barges (having altogether abandoned the concept of battle barges), offering their services to those Imperial citizens that deserve it - and those with enough coin. Maintaining a Love Barge with all it's neon lights isn't cheap. Entire companies of love marines, who want only one thing - to piously satisfy your every need. Because only the Emperor's finest, with their strapping superhuman physiques (and think of the possible genetic deviations and new implants they could have) and hypnodoctrinated minds, are able to counter the abominable acts carried out by Slaanesh. Those with enough coin can access the Chapter Master himself and his honor guard all ready to kneel in front of you and accept whatever your "heavy bolter" has to offer. For the adventurous, you could visit the Forge Master in his dungeon. With tongs, pliers, aprons and leather straps, he would induct you in the secret arts of love marine toy making. The learned librarian would be more than ready to show you the 100 sutras of complete ecstacy.
  19. As many have pointed out, it's inevitable in a discussion like this to bring up the Imperium of Man and Dark Heresy. So let's look at it. Someone argued that evil is always connected to power. The tagline for Black Crusade says something along the lines of "Imba powerz at the cost of your soul." In Dark Heresy, this is always the lure of chaos. Your task, as an acolyte or inquisitor, is nigh impossible - You're to protect humanity from powers that are bigger than you can comprehend. There's always a choice here: Do you accept corruption in order to find a shortcut to power, or do you try to remain pure and fight the Ruinous Powers with lesser means? You can certainly play evil characters in Dark Heresy. There's even the question if you can play a good or decent character, because the task requires you to commit evil actions. The radical inquisitors take up the arms of the enemy to use against them. Still, they are lesser evils, compared to what might happen if the inquisition and humanity just embraced chaos. To a player of Dark Heresy, the prospect of completely getting rid of all moral implications might seem liberating. No longer will anyone look over your shoulder, and potentially put a bolter shell in your brain if you don't stay "pure". But what does that leave us with? I don't see how there will be any meaningful choices in Black Crusade. Why would you want to preserve your humanity? The only thing that'll do is hinder your ability to conquer, plunder and pillage. Like Lynata said, you might start out with noble amibitions - get rid of the imperium, down with the oppressors etc. - but that hardly seems to be the focus of this game. The corruption point mechanic in particular, where you achieve apotheosis when you score high enough, only seems to encourage inventive ways in how to burn down an orphanage. Or, if you've reached the end of the corruption point scale, don't want to be a daemon, you can remain a human, but you'll still have burnt down that orphanage. The Imperium of Man, Space Marines, the Ecclesiarchy, the Inquisition are all undoubtedly evil institutions. But there's a chance of redemption within them, for individuals. With Chaos, there's no such thing. Who would play a Black Crusade character seeking some kind of redemption, or trying to maintain his purity?
  20. By Nox Arcana: Crossfire , , or perhaps Another artist/band is Arcana:
  21. Macharias the Mendicant said: I find the mechanics of your system to be fine overall, I just wonder: why not simply use the Investigation rules from the DH core rulebook? Basically, "research" is just another way to understand investigation. Instead of using Inquiry to dig up information (for example), you're after a different kind of information with a different volume of data to sift through. What your systme describes is (essentially) just another type of extended tests superimposed on the mechanics that already exist. You could stretch this over the course of an entire campaign for a particularly difficult "Enigma." I think I get what you're trying to get at: you want to make playing a knowledge-based character interesting and dynamic out side of combat. And you want the cool Lore stuff that they pick up to matter. Also, we don't want all knowledge encounters/challenges to be a one-die-roll affair. O.o I think I've read the book a hundred times over, and still I've managed to miss just that particular system. Thanks! It might be that I overlooked this, because my gaming group has never used it :> I think investigation and research should be dynamic in the game, especially in a game that is so focused on these particular aspects. I can make it dynamic through storytelling techniques, and that's often how I do it. But it tends to end up with me, the GM, just prattling about obscure lore and stuff the character would know, essentially telling my player how his character is doing his research, instead of letting him do the decision-making himself.
  22. He can still use them, but he'll be a total kluz with them. Afaik he takes a -20 to each ballistic/weapon skill test where he is not proficient with the weapon in use. Astropaths aren't generally meant to be great fighters :>
  23. Is it just me, or do the Organgrinder rounds from Into the Storm seem overpowered? Into the Storm, page 128: Organgrinder rounds Effects: These shells do damage equal to the weapon’s regular damage. If the target takes Damage from this shell, after reduction for Armour and Toughness Bonus, he must make a Toughness Test with a –10 penalty for every point of Damage taken. Success means the shell has either failed or is not powerful enough to cause further injury. Failure deals an immediate 2d10 points of Rending Damage to the victim with no reduction from Armour or Toughness Bonus. Used With: Hand cannons, heavy stubbers, and any Bolt weapons. So, at the very least, it'll do the damage of the original rounds. If you take any damage, you need to roll toughness to avoid taking 2d10 extra damage? And that's a -10 to the Toughness test for each point of damage inflicted? Now, I usually play Dark Heresy so I might not be entirely up to speed when it comes to the toughness of opponents. But Bolters are usually pretty decent weapons, that normally inflict at least a couple of points of damage with each hit. I haven't crunched any numbers, but let's assume you manage to do 3 damage to a guy with TB 6. That's a -30 toughness test for him to avoid taking another 2d10 damage. With the full auto capability of the Locke pattern Boltgun, that seems way overpowered to me. Most other variant ammo types come with some sort of drawback. You bump Penetration, but lose some damage. You bump damage, but change damage type so the criticals hurt less, etc. The only drawback on this seems to be it's availability.
  24. The Into the Storm supplement for Rogue Trader has an origin alternative that reads "Unnatural Origins". One of the options reads: False-Man Your life is not your own. It is the product of an arcane science only barely understood by those that wield it, who seek to emulate the Emperor’s mastery of genetics. Your form and your nature are manufactured, the result of tampering by those who seek to make men more able to perform certain tasks. You are a rarity in the Imperium and beyond it, a human being wrought by artificial means, and whether you embrace the purpose of your creation or deny it, the fact that you may not be entirely human is still weighs heavily upon you. One thing you do know is that you are still human in part—their science cannot create new life, it can only change that which already exists. However small a comfort that may be, even if it provides only solace through hatred, it is something. I'd agree with posters above; if the Mechanicus is doing it, it's legit. Otherwise it's prolly heresy.
  25. Shibby1431 said: I have a rank 10 Adept Sage currently that I have been playing with for more or less a year and a half (currently running skype with my gaming group cause of distances). I will attest at low levels when weapon and ballistic skills are low my adept only got into battle when the numbers worked in her favor, melee being the choiciest of battle modes due to the ease of stacking up bonuses. She is still a fountain of forbidden knowledge but over the course of her career I have also taken many elite advances to push up her melee skills to adequate levels. I'm not doubting the combat effectiveness of an adept. With experience, all careers can hold their own in combat. My player's adept has some edge in combat, but the player prefers not to engage in combat. It's just not his focus with the character. I want to encourage other styles of play, besides the action/fight-oriented style. Shibby1431 said: That being said lores in my gaming group have been used in less that standard varieties. For instance our acolyte cell in one mission managed to capture a cult leader who wouldn't talk in any known language. Our GM allowed my adept to use Forbidden Knowledge Cults to decipher what he was saying to get the information that was needed. We have also used Security as an Intellegence based skill to hack into data base systems for information. Our tech priest was busy at the time and we needed to hack a computer for something. And in one adventure the tech priest and my adept hacked into the programming of hostile servitors to shut them down and reprogram them to work for us. During down time she spends time in the Malleus libraries (our cell belong to Ordos Malleus our prime being an Inquisitor), and during missions if there is something that comes up that she may know (using Total Recall) she may "remember" reading some material. Indeed, that's very much the same way we've done it. I try to be creative when I ask for skill checks, and my players also help out, often asking if they can use Lore skill [X] to find out more on a subject. Shibby1431 said: I personally think the Enigma solution for you may not be needed. If played right with the right lores and a good enough roll the player can figure out the information that is needed. The more successes the better the information that the character "solves." But at the same time always have back up ways for the characters to discover the needed information because nothing is worse than a mission stalling due to really bad sets of rolls which will happen eventually. If the adept (for whatever reason) cannot get the relevant information then the player can have his/her character do research during down time to hopefully keep that from happening again in the future. I dont know what rank your players are but hopefully as your player's adept rises in the ranks and starts to think about ascending the Unfazaeble talent in Ascension is a emperor sent boon for those pesky Insanity/Corruption from reading those dark tomes and scrolls. The issue here isn't whether the players actually succeed or not, in what they're doing. My player's adept is reasonably good at what he does, he succeeds pretty often, and if he doesn't, I usually provide the Acolytes with alternate (albeit a bit more tricky or painful) ways to succeed in their mission. To me, this isn't an issue of bumping up the adepts ability in any way. I feel confident in scaling opposition against my players' character ranks. What I'm after here is something more subtle. I want to add new and interesting ways for my adept to conduct research. When our characters engage in combat, they have a multitude of options. They may choose which weapons to use, they may choose to engage in melee or stay ranged, they may choose their stance and mode of attack (guarded, aim + attack, all out attack etc.). They may even choose to break and try to escape an obviously overpowering foe, or what have you. Sometimes we engage in light freeform combats, where we don't roll any dice, sometimes the enemy is so powerful the group doesn't have to roll any dice (cue epic escape scene) etc. But we seldom just chalk up the entire combat scene to just one die roll. You don't just pile up your bonuses, and roll Ballistic Skill and check to see how well you did on that one roll to determine the entire outcome of a fight. What I'm after is some of that strategic thinking when my characters do research. What I'd like to add to the system above is a few different "actions" the players can take. I haven't worked anything through yet, but it could be something like Speedy Research (which is sloppy, possibly speeding up the process, but perhaps yielding less than satisfying results), or Thorough Research (which takes longer, but is yields better results in some way), Unconventional Methods (which makes it easier, but runs the risk of getting the character an Insanity point or two), or something like that. I could just freeform this, but my group likes to make use of mechanics sometimes. A fleshed out system, where my players may ponder different options when doing their research, such as what equipment to use, what methods to go with etc. is something I think we could have fun with. That all depends on the group's style of play, of course. Shibby1431 said: My adept isn't the greatest mind in the Imperium either. She has a 52 Int with one advance left to purchase and also has Unnatural Intellegence. Currently sitting on 5 Forbidden Lore Masteries (Cult, Daemonology, Heresy, Warp, Psyker, Inquisition) and specialized in Cult and Daemonology. She has the Conditioned Intellect, Mental Aegis, Mental Fortress and Armor of Contempt talents (much needed in daemon/cult hunting). Although I have yet to use the talent she also has Knowledge is Power for those rare instances where we need answers and we need em now. Depending on the lore test, she can push up to 80's and 90's on her test rolls. Your enigma test example with my Adept would automatically get a +10 for the Int bonus. 52 Int with Unnatural Int gives auto 10 not counting any other rolls. Yes starting out and at the mid levels being an adept seems to be boring. You can hit a menacing looking wall and the knowledge area is lacking definately. But remind your player once ythey get over that rank 5 hump, having an adept around can be a scary boon because its hard to keep the information out of that character's hands. With Int 52, unnatural Intelligence, several Forbidden Lore Masteries, and numerous Ascended mental talents, what's your idea of a great mind then? O.o Anyway :> No, my player's adept character is really useful to the group. In fact, he's pretty much the person who carries the entire group, connecting the dots, finding the odd bits of information that makes the entire plot seem obvious. He has had fun playing it from the start, and he's really useful to the group, regardless of rank. I'm not doubting the usefulness of having an adept in the group (in fact, the times when we've played a group without any Lore-type of character (lacking an adept/tech-priest/psyker), those are the times when we've really been stumped. I want to add new and interesting ways to conduct research in my game, to give my player some incentive to continue with his quest for knowledge. And do more than just add another +10 to one of his lore skills.
  • Create New...