Jump to content

Gurkhal

Members
  • Content Count

    1,254
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Gurkhal

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    http://-
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. This forum is a bit silent but I'll try to perhaps inspire some activity. These are two supplements that I've written up for my own OW campaign. One details my take on the Ork Snakebite Clan and one on Death World regiments in the Imperial Guard. I personally found the Snakebite Clan to be less than inspiring and so modded them to my likening by making them more primodial and drawing inspiration from the Savage Orcs in Warhammer Fantasy. One a note I should add that the encounter with these Snakebites was the first time in my campaign that the Imperial Guard experienced a major defeat, had to call it a day and withdraw from a planet permanently. The Death World supplement is closer to what info I found in the Cathachans codices as in making them more in the Rambo-style as opposed to almost any kind of regiment. But its yet to be field tested. Snakebite Clan https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OxwA0IUzWswI06L3u9kP6DaQB0loPGCj/view?usp=sharing Imperial Guard Death World Regiments https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yL-gHcNBtKZM0GRobQzC7GE-fuXkuMPk/view?usp=sharing If there's any issues with the links, let me know.
  2. Lol! I realize that most of this was superflous although I think that the cavalry doctinres mostly have a value. Oh, well. Better luck the next time, Gurkhal. đŸ˜‰
  3. I know that the rules already published in OW allows solid rules for lancers, as well as the possibility to create mounted infantry, but as someone who is a bit of an enthusiast for cavalry I decided to write up something for creation of non-lancer cavalry regiments. The main reason for doing this is to focus it a bit more and also allow the introduction of some cavalry specific talents. I have thought a little on how to go about this from a multitude of cavalry type of regiments to building from the established Rogue Riders by offering a selection of choices of doctrines, talents and weapons with a cavalry angle. But in the end I kind of decided on the below model as a basis. And naturally I post here both to try and shake some life into this forum, and get some informed feedback on this first version of my attempt to expand the cavalry aspect of the Imperial Guard. ***** Imperial Guard Cavalry New Types of Cavalry Regiments Light Cavalry Cavalry designed for a variety of different missions involving rapid speed and manoeuvre. Cost: 3 points Characteristics: +3 Ag, -3 WP Starting skills: Survival Starting talents: Catfall, Horseman (Custom), Weapon Training (Low-tech, Las) Standard kit: 1 mount (as chosen for the regiment), 1 flak jacket, 1 flak helmet, 1 sword, 2 saddle bags, 1 saddle, 1 set of riding tack, 1 las-gun Heavy cavalry Dedicated shock cavalry with the intention of using the speed and power of their charge to crush the opposition. Cost: 4 Characteristics: +3 T OR S, -3 Int Starting skills: Survival Starting talents: Catfall, Horseman (Custom), Weapon Training (Chain, Las) Standard kit: 1 mount (as chosen for the regiment), 1 full set of flak armour, 2 saddle bags, 1 saddle, 1 set of riding tack, 1 chainsword, 1 las-pistol New Cavalry Training Doctrines Mounted Reconnaissance Cost: 2 Starting skill: Stealth and Awareness Starting equipment: Magnoculors Quick Mounters Cost: 2 Starting Talent: Service ready (Custom) Long Riders Cost: 1 Starting Talent: Long Rider (Custom) Shock Trample Cost: 2 Starting Talent: Trampler Shock Knock-down Cost: 2 Starting Talent: Knock ‘em off Custom Talents Knock ‘em off: When making a Crushing Charge Action add +10 to the opposed S test Horseman: +10 to all Survival skills involving riding Service Ready: Half the time to mount or dismount from a mount Long Rider: Add +1 Movement to the mount for Narrative Movement purposes Trampler: When making a Rearing Strike Action against a foe that’s one or more sizes smaller than the mount, the Survival test becomes one a -10.
  4. I've found that this is mostly a thing of feeling rather than numbers, and that situational factors and surroundings make really influence an encounter. As such the only three advice I can come up with are; modify number of enemies depending on number of players, introduce NPCs that can give some assistence and fill out the squad when the number of players are low, or introduce factors that improves the chances for either side, like advantage in cover to one side, possibility to suprise one side, enemies being wounded from an earlier fight, fog or darkness if one side or another would have an advantage in a situation like that. One advice I would give is however that if in doubt, make the encounter on the weaker side. Its in my opinion better to let a fight be easier than intended than make an unintended party wipe. And really, if the fight is going to easy, you can always let enemy reinfocements arrive or something. Its essentially always possible to make a fight harder after it has begun, its more much difficult in my opinion to make a fighter easier without it being obvious to the players that the GM is messing around.
  5. Those cents helps. The problem isn't that its harsh with not getting all wounds back, its that it would give the medic an edge over the tech-priest when it comes to healing. In regards to comrades I can't claim that I feel that our game has suffered in any noteable way, but then again we've been playing other military RPGs this way before so we got some experience with this way of doing things. While the specialist kit it nice, I'm not sure it can be attractive enough for players who are also tempted by the cybernetics that the tech-priest has.
  6. In my OW campaign something has come up, for which I would appreciate third party advice. I told the group that I would prefer if at least half of their characters, we play without comrades and with two characters per player, were Guardsman Specialities as it feels wierd with a squad consisting of only specialists and a sergeant to lead them. And that is that my players have concluded that the Medic specialization is really bad, as in a wasted oppertunity to pick. The main criticism is that the Medic is a one-trick-ponny and has a trick that the tech-priest ponny can replicate with ease, while at the same time the tech-priest ponny can also do other tricks as well. So far they've managed fairly well with the tech-priest as the medic of the squad. As as side note we would prefer to not make the Healing rules very complicated as we find that the grinds down the game. So that option has already been discussed´, I'm afraid. What I've suggested as additions to the Medic to make that Speciality more attractive has been: - Can heal the same attack the number of times that the Medic has Intelligence Bonus (instead of just one heal per damage suffered) - Can automatically stop a blood loss with a Half Action - +20 to all Logistics rolls for medical stuff (like medical gear, getting a party member on an express ticket to the surgeon, request a bionic replacement for a character and so on) - The Medic gets a an extra Apitude to be chosen at character creation The most vocal of them thinks its a good start but would like more before thinking that the Medic is an interesting choice. So do you guys have some ideas for how to proceeed or if I must give up and let the players dismiss this Speciality?
  7. Yes, I know that I come late. But to prevent the "everyone is a heretic" label I kind of say that the Dominate are heretics in the sense of them being against the Imperium but since they haven't forsaken the faith in the Emperor, "only" in Imperial institutions I would say that they should be termed "separatists" as they seek to break away from the Imperium. And from a Severian POV I could see that they can see themselves kind of similar to Sebastian Thor in the wars with, that Ecclesiarch with a name I can't recall at the moment, which lead to a great reformation of the Imperial Church and purging of corruption within it. Even the establishment of the Ordo Hereticus and present day form of the Adepta Sororitas, if I recall. In both cases people loyal to the Emperor saw the rot in the Imperium and refused to serve the corrupt officials while remaining true to the Emperor himself.
  8. Very interesting discussion. I am also looking for ways to introduce more forms of cavalry to my games, mostly looking at ways to bring hussars and cuirassiers, in addition to lancers and dragoons as well as other potential types, into the Only War battlefield. I do however agree that most can be used with the current rule set although some specialized equipment might, in my eyes, be reasonable in order to provide the tools for the cavalry trade.
  9. Looks cool and like something I will need in the future when I pit my brave PC Guardsmen against the Space Commies.
  10. Haven't look at it in detail but so far it looks really cool.
  11. Interesting news and its good to see that the Old World will live on. I don't know about Age of Sigmar but since I don't know about it I wouldn't be able to tell if its going to be gold or not.
  12. Just want to say, before the end claims this spot of 40kiness, that I've enjoyed my stay here wish the best of luck to everyone! Many really great people have frequented this forum and I hope that maybe we'll catch up again at some other forum in the future.
  13. Some people got way to much time on their hands.
  14. Or we'll get a Horus Heresy rpg before that. I wouldn't complain to much, but maybe that's where the trend will go?
×
×
  • Create New...