Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About evilamericorp

  • Rank

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    Austin, Texas, United States
  1. Cifer said: If I want to play a game where I pretend to sit around drinking, and trying to figure out which vampires are gay for each other, I'll play a World of Darkness game. That's actually kinda funny. If I had to compare Deathwatch to any other RPG, I'd say Werewolf: the Apocalypse. An honour-based society with a rich cosmology where the characters are a well-oiled pack of elite warriors, each with a different social background and specialisation, with the survival of the world (well, humanity in the case of DW) at stake. HAH! Hit it on the head. You're a WoD larper. "well-oiled pack" indeed.
  2. Space Monkey said: ...and if there isn't an enemy within your run distance? Oh, and I don't need to read the sentence again thanks, I've read it many times already. If a Frenzied character is 200 yards away from the nearest enemy then it's not possible to engage it and therefore the only rule I must follow is that I "must move toward the enemy". It does not specifically say I must run toward it. That may have been the writers intent but as I've already pointed out, the wording only says I have to MOVE toward the enemy. It does not say that I MUST run, so as long as I move toward the enemy I'm within the letter of the rules. Once I close to Charge range then I must Charge as it is now possible to engage the enemy in melee. But thanks for your opinion. You either didn't read or didn't comprehend any of my posts. If there is no enemy within your run distance, it would be impossible to "move towards the enemy and engage" and therefore Frenzy doesn't oblige you to do anything.
  3. Cifer said: (*) which, to be fair, Evilamericorp has pretty much brought on himself - if you spend no XP on noncombat stuff and expect your character to be as good at it as those who do, that's some BS (no, not ballistic skill) in my book. If a system has stats like fellowship, charm or interrogation and you don't invest in them, you'll suck at social parts, however much you want your character to succeed. If you go binge-drinking and don't have the Carouse to back it up, you'll likely wake up with a hangover. If I want to play a game where I pretend to sit around drinking, and trying to figure out which vampires are gay for each other, I'll play a World of Darkness game. If I want to play a game about being a SPACE MARINE who is on a xenos hunting KILL TEAM, I'll play Deathwatch. Yes, non-combat skills are important to have in many RPGs, but Deathwatch (at least the version of it that my friends and I want to play), is about a kill team going on missions to... you guessed it... kill things. Let the Inquisitors and the drunken space sheep herders do the investigation, I prefer to slaughter. How hard would it have been to have both combat and non-combat skills for all the chapters?
  4. Space Monkey said: I'm merely pointing out how it is worded. If you wish to read more into that then that's your call. If I have to move toward the enemy "where possible" then I choose a half move and shoot. I am still moving toward the enemy where possible because there is nothing in my way to stop me from advancing. Once I reach the enemy I must engage in melee but until that time I choose to shoot them as I close. No. Read the sentence again. The character MUST - (you have no choice in this) move towards the enemy and engage - (this means get your character into melee range) if possible. - (Meaning that if there is an enemy within your run distance, you only have one option to take)
  5. Space Monkey said: Also, regardless of what the intent of the rules may be, the actual wording of the rules says nothing about having to move "at best speed". So as long as you move toward the enemy you could simply choose a half move. Then you can use any half/reaction/free action Psychic Powers you wish. "If he is not engaged with the nearest enemy, he must move towards it and engage if possible." This sentence says that if it is possible for a space marine to move towards the nearest enemy and engage it, then that is what he must do. So if an enemy is within his run range, he must move and engage in melee, because it would be possible to do so. He cannot take a leisurely half move in the enemy's general direction and shoot.
  6. Jhaeyde said: sh*tty role playing skills... Wow... Well, here's an idea. Don't play the ROLE PLAYING GAME Deathwatch, just play WH40K on the battlemat. It's obviously what this bull is about. If you had wanted to role-play characters, the books fine. Yes, I agree that everyone personal interpretation of their favorite chaper will mean that their favorite chapter got boned while their 'enemy' chapter gets all the benefits that 'my' favored chapter should have. Everything's fine, wait for the errata. It is easy role play your character without paying for skills to back it up. It is much harder to do well in combat without useful skills. Frenzy > Performer any day of the week.
  7. Brother Praetus said: Work off of the list in the book as to which skills are trained. There have been noted to be several errors on the character sheet in this regard. -=Brother Praetus=- Wow, thanks for mentioning that. It looks like all characters get Dodge, Intimidate, and Deathwatch Training to start, and none of those are listed on the character sheet online. I was about to waste 300 XP.
  8. Dalnor Surloc said: 1)The RT was charged (maybe as part of his/her warrant) with the destruction of a Xenos race which is either had to find or tricky to fight in some way. The PCs were seconded to him to assist in his mission. The Fuzzy Cave Newts of Paradisetopia have become too great a xenos threat to ignore. You there, Space Marine... go squish them.
  9. ItsUncertainWho said: You seem to be ignoring the “if possible” at the end of each of those lines. I had a character that was in a situation where he was frenzied and it was not possible to move to, or get within melee range easily. He had an autogun in hand and the GM approved of my shoot until the weapon was empty, then tossing the weapon aside, instead of reloading, I proceeded to get off of the roof, which meant going away from the enemy to get to a ladder on the far side of the roof I was on, sprint across the street and scale the outside of the building the nearest enemy was on. I then tore him to shreds with my chainsword. This situation of no possibility of engaging an enemy without being out of the fight for several rounds and having to go away from the enemy to get to the enemy, was resolved by the “if possible” Allowing me to attack at range, until I couldn't. Our ruling was that, you are frenzied, not stupid. You have at hands a means to attack. There is no reasonable way to get to the enemy without moving away from him. Instinct says pull the trigger. Out of ammo/Jam, no way to attack in hand, then take the long way to move. As far as Mental Rage goes: the Frenzy is always going to favor melee attack. If you can use a power to get to the enemy faster, use that. If you can't use a power to get to the enemy, run but try to kill them along the way with the warp. If you can't reach them by moving, smack them down with the warp. I would also go so far as to say Mental Rage forces you to push any power you use, if it doesn't say that already.. The second to last paragraph in my post is all about the "if possible." The way Frenzy is structured, you MUST attack if you are engaged in melee. If you are not engaged, you MUST move to be engaged if it is possible, i.e. if there is an enemy within range of your run. If there isn't an enemy in range, then you are free to shoot as much as you want.
  10. Cifer said: My question is whether Mental Rage overcomes this compulsion because it says a character may use his psychic powers "normally." If, for example, there is an ork nob 10 meters away, could I decide to Smite him instead of running up and engaging? Or would Frenzy force me to move because it is possible for me to engage him, and then force me to attack because I am engaged? What would be the point of the talent in this case? That's my point. It wouldn't do anything other than allow a character to use psychic powers if there is no enemy within his movement distance. I'm going to play it so that it overrides Frenzy's compulsion, allows the character to use psychic powers instead of movment or melee. I just wish the talent said that instead of just "may use psychic powers normally"
  11. ItsUncertainWho said: Frenzy does not stop you from making ranged attacks unless you are within melee distance. If you are unable to attack the nearest enemy, at range or melee, you move toward them at best speed. Mental Rage allows you to use Psychic powers to attack with or to get you to the target faster so you can engage in melee. From the Frenzy description: "The character must attack the nearest enemy in melee combat if possible." "If he is not engaged with the nearest enemy, he must move towards that enemy and engage it if possible." How can the character make ranged attacks? These two sentences seem to explain EXACTLY what the character must do with his actions each turn; move or melee. Grammatically speaking, of course, because there is not a comma after the last "enemy" in the second sentence, if the nearest enemy is more than the character's maximum run distance away, it would be impossible to "move towards that enemy and engage it" with the character's alloted actions, leaving the character open to perform other actions. This may or may not be intentional on the part of the developers, and there is no way to be certain without clarification. My question is whether Mental Rage overcomes this compulsion because it says a character may use his psychic powers "normally." If, for example, there is an ork nob 10 meters away, could I decide to Smite him instead of running up and engaging? Or would Frenzy force me to move because it is possible for me to engage him, and then force me to attack because I am engaged?
  12. Cuagau said: However, does the second "attack roll," by way of Focus Power test, provoke Psychic Phenomena? I mean, how much would it suck to Smite someone unfettered only to get righteous fury and turn into a demon prince? By that 'logic' every time you Righteous Fury on a Pushed power, you generate an automatic PP. I just think that with the bonkers amount of d10s librarians can throw around, especially with Blood Angels getting RF on 9's, psychic powers should be except from RF, or at the very least, have their own way of handling it. I think I'm going to play it as only needing to confirm by rolling under the WP needed for the initial roll, without the chance to cause perils. Psychic powers are already risky enough to cast without chaining psychic phenomena on a lucky roll.
  13. bmaynard said: Howdy! Asked the folks that wrote the game a few questions about psychic powers and got the following responses from Ross Watson. Hope these help a bit as I saw some mentioned on page 1 and 2 of this thread. Q.) Is Willpower bonus or a flat +3 added to Psy Rating when using a power with push? (The Push description says + 3 but the example mentions WP Bonus. p.185) A.) The rule is +3 to Psy Rating (the example is in error). Q.) There is no mention of Focus Power test difficulties in the rules for it, but in the examples on page 185 and 186 it mentions +10 for Push and +0 for Unfettered. Does Fettered require a test at -10, or do they all use +0 and the examples are erroneous? A.) All focus power test difficulties (unless stated otherwise) are Challenging (+0). The examples are in error. Q.) Does Righteous Fury work with Psychic Powers? In the righteous fury rules on 245, it seems to indicate that it only happens due to weapon damage. However some powers (Avenger and Smite mainly) function like ranged weapons. Does Righteous Fury work with all Psychic powers, none, or only ones like the 2 I mentioned here? A.) Psychic Powers can score Righteous Fury (assuming that they are being used by a PC or an NPC with the Touched by the Fates Trait). Q.) Just for verification - Where the damage is listed as 1d10xPR, is that 3d10 for a PsyRating 3 character, or 1d10x3? A.) 3d10. My GM and I have talked about Righteous Fury a few times and we agreed that we're going to go back to the DH method of just rolling an extra d10 for damage as opposed to the damage of the weapon again. Best argument for the single d10 I could come up with was a starting Rune Priest pushing with Living Lightning. 6d10 damage with a possible further 6d10 damage for each 10 rolled on the damage dice. I mean, it would explain why the Inquisition leaves Fenris alone, but seems a bit excessive... Thanks for that, clears up a lot of the issues of developer intent. Did you get any indication whether or not they were planning on putting out any sort of errata document?
  14. ItsUncertainWho said: The player will still be predisposed to close and engage, he just has the option to use psychic powers instead of being barred from them. How could he ever use a psychic power if the frenzy forces him to use every available action to either move up or attack in melee?
  15. The rules for Frenzy state "The character must attack the nearest enemy in melee combat if possible" and that if not engaged he must move towards the nearest enemy. This seems pretty clear cut to me that, while Frenzied, the character can do nothing on his turn but advance and make melee attacks. So how does the Mental Rage talent work? It says that while in a Frenzied state "the character may use his psychic powers normally." Does this override Frenzy's compulsion to move or attack in melee? Does he then have the option to either advance and attack OR cast/sustain whatever powers he wants during his turn?
  • Create New...