Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Arkhan3

  • Rank

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    , NRW, Germany
  1. In my opinion it's highly dependant on what orders your watch captain has given you in detail, since that is what you have to adhere to. If he said "go with the inquisitor and do what she tells you" then you obviously are under her command. If he said "go an protect the inquisitor" then you have to protect her, but you can do that the way you see fit. So if she wants to send you somewhere, but you think it would be sounder to stay with her, then you can say "No". After all, you are the combat expert, not her. Now, if your captain said "go and help the inquisitor with her task", then it becomes difficult. I'd agree with your assessment that you are not bound to obey her. It's more like a partnership, where you work together for a common goal. This partnership should be one of respect. So if she has a task for you, you should only turn it down if you have good reasons for doing so. But she, on the other hand, should also be respectful towards you and a phrase like "you're my bodyguards so do the hell what I'm saying" is not showing much respect towards you and your team. In such a situation, I guess it comes down to playing your character. Marines are no robots, they are not 100% alike. A diplomatic, calm battle brother may overlook such rudeness and still do what the inquisitor wants him to, but there are also many hotheaded marines who would get more or less incensed.
  2. Arkhan3

    Mark of Xenos

    No problem, just the fact that most people don't need such detailed guidelines. Provide a basic "mold" (like the standard CSM) and most people can easily derive their specific enemies from that. Like pushing WS and/or toughness if you want to employ some kind of elite melee combatants. And increasing BS for ranged specialists. Pretty simple actually, since most adversaries usually have but one job - they die by the hands of the PCs after putting up a more or less tough fight. So in fact I think coming up with really detailed advancement tables for adversaries would be a waste time for the developers and a waste of space in a publication. They should instead focus on releasing new adventures or subsector descriptions or new enemies etc.
  3. We houseruled that one marine can carry one main weapon (heavy, basic, pistol, melee) and two sidearms (pistol,melee) with him. This way my players are forced to choose their loadout more carefully. One question related to this topic: Do heavy weapons require players to permanently hold them in their hands? The situation that brought up this question was that our Librarian chose to requisition a lascannon for one mission (I know, totally inappropriate but unfortunately not forbidden). Now, during one mission, he wanted to put the cannon aside and ready his force sword and his bolt pistol. I ruled that one of his hands had to remain on the lascannon because it's too big and bulky to just dangle on a belt or something like that. After a long discussion, he complied, but wasn't happy at all, and I'm sure he still feels mistreated. I tend to take the TT miniatures as rolemodels for Deathwatch characters, and there you never see marines with heavy weapons having even one free hand. I also don't think these weapons are built to be put aside when close combat is imminent, otherwise devastator squads would not need to be protected from melee foes. What do you think? Am I being too harsh here?
  4. Thanks for the reply, I also had the feeling that the Librarian should not be able to use these powers in melee, but you know how players are when you want to restrict their characters' abilities... I think it's high time psychic powers get specific action subtypes, so that there is no ambiguity whether or not a certain power can be used under specific circumstances.
  5. Greetings fellow Space Marines. I have a Librarian in my group who wonders if he can use his smite and avenger powers in melee combat. The rules state that one can only use actions with the melee subtype in close combat, but most psychic power have no specified action subtypes at all. Did I overlook something? How do you handle that in your groups? I am sorry if this topic has already been brought up, I couldn't find anything useful.
  6. Yeah that's how we played it - insertion by drop pod with a thunderhawk starting at the same time for pickup.
  7. Hm basically you said what AMs do. They do melee. Their role is (in my experience) to prevent the enemy from engaging the ranged specialists in melee combat (so yes, they are are kind of "roadblock"). But don't look at this as a trivial task. Without the AM, a kill-team fighting melee-specialised opponents (like tyranids) could be destroyed pretty fast. But also when fighting ranged specialists like tau, it's the AMs task to engage the most potent foe in close combat in order to prevent him from firing his deadly weapons. This is a highly dangerous and honourable job that shouldn't be underestimated. Now regarding the "underpoweredness". In my group (we are currently rank 2), there is noone who can deal nearly as much damage to enemies as the AM (we do not have a devastator). That is to hordes as well as to boss monsters. The AM wields a power sword and a power axe, causing over 1d10+25 pen 6 damage with either one of them, and he has 4 attacks per round. His base WS is 70 and he gets a shitload of bonuses, raising this characteristic near or even well above 100 (depending on the enemy). Boss enemies (excluding the really big ones like Hive Tyrants) do not last for more than one round against him. And hordes are decimated easily because of his wrathful descent and the fact that 2 degrees of succes equal 1 additional hit. So killing around 20 magnitude of a horde in one round is nothing rare. So in my experience, you don't have to focus on one kind of enemy. AMs are deadly no matter what foe they fight. They are always where the fighting is thickest, protecting their brethren from harm by slaying huge amounts of adversaries with their mighty blades. Always remember that a kill-team only functions when everybody works together. You stop'em by going close, your brothers pop'em from afar.
  8. Ok, first of all, good idea Secondly, I think according to RAW, you roll the attack first, and if it hits, you ask the player if he or she wants to dodge. As far as I recall this is how it's described in the rulebook (and how I handle it). But if you and your group have played in a different way for the whole adventure, then the complaint of your female player comes pretty late. If she wasn't satisfied with the way you handled the dodge rules she could have said something earlier. So, in my opinion, she has no right to complain now, the rules are set. But if you feel uncomfortable you can always ask your group which option they would prefer (although they will most certainly go for the RAW way).
  9. Hi! First off, I'm playing an assault marine too, and I can totally understand your criticism. Most of the odd things in the advancement table mentioned by you seem odd to me as well. Regarding Thunder Charge, Battle Rage, Frenzy: Well, I have to say that in my opinion it's ok to have certain chapters get talents others don't get. I mean every system has races (or watever they choose to call them) that favour a certain kind of specialization. Perhaps most common are elven mages or archers in fantasy RPGs. That is basically similar to Storm Wardens and Blood Angels getting their special talents in DW. Regarding the other talents you mentioned. Yes, I agree, some of them are not very useful in standard combat (not useful at all to be exact). Look at them as "special situation" talents. Maybe in one adventure your kill-team has to arrest or capture a powerful xenos or heretic without killing him? Or you fight an adversary who is packed in thick armour, but has no helmet? I know, these occasions will be very rare, but when they occur, the talents mentioned will be very useful. Concerning "devastators and tacticals are somewhat superior": From my personal experience, I can say that it's not as bad as one might think at the beginning. When I started playing my AM, I was constantly whining about how inferior melee is compared to ranged combat. But after we had our first couple of fights, and I learned how to utilize squad mode abilities, my AM kicked ass big time. We do not have a devastator in our group, but all the other specializations are there, and I can tell you none of them kills as fast and as many enemies as the AM. Of course, it is highly dependant on the situation. On a wide plane, ranged specialists will always have the advantage. But from my experience, most combat situations will be at medium or close range, with the kill-team fighting through tunnels, forests, swamps, narrow streets, corridors, etc. There you AM can shine.
  10. I don't think that you make general judgements like that. Your "facts" are just subjective claims without any proof whatsoever. Now, don't bother posting links to scientific studies or stuff, that wouldn't convince me either. Why? Because I'm now reading and posting on these forums for some time, and I know how many discussions we had about almost every aspect of DW and FFG releases. So I know that noone is being illogically "defensive" towards a product. These are, believe it or not, opinions that have been formed through hours and hours of practical gaming experience (using said products) and not pure fanboyism. That's how we evaluate things. We try it out and THEN form an opinion. How long you said you tested the DW rulebook? Nothing at all? Hm, interesting. Now you'll say "I don't need testing, I can judge the facts". Well, believe me, evaluating a product from a purely theoretical perspective is always inferior to theoretical and practical expertise. For instance, when I got my hands in DW, I was furious about all the errors in the rulebook, the unclear formulations, the confusing layout, the balancing issues. I thought "how could FFG screw up so badly!" My group had similar attitudes. But then, we just swallowed our anger for a second and began to play. And what do you know, it wasn't nearly as bad as we thought. It was actually quite fun. All the points of criticism turned out to be just minor issues, which could be left out or houseruled with no trouble at all. And regarding the adversaries. Yes, I still think FFG could have developed DW to be compatible with DH and the CA, so that I don't have to rebalance some of the adversaries described there. But that's also something that does not take much time, and I can accept the fact that this is MY personal opinion and FFG chose to do it differently. Every system has one or two flaws, where you think "they could have done this and that a little bit better", but that's hardly something that prevents me from buying an otherwise good product. So perhaps, instead of discussing things that cannot be changed anymore, you should go and try out DW, form an opinion and then come back to tell about it, and to discuss what can be made better in the future. Because that we can maybe influence in some way.
  11. signoftheserpent said: It wouldn't be thicker than a phonebook at all, as i've explained. There are only 6 factions in the setting other than Chaos and the Imperium, you could easily give 40 pages to each faction and come out with a 240p supplement. If FFG want to do fuerther books with their own aliens then that's fine. But the core races of the setting are not infinite or number in the thousands. Printing this one book would be cheaper than printing three, slightly smaller, books as is currenlty the case. Imperial antagonists, if they need to be covered, can exist in another 40 pages, if necessary - that's still only 280 pages. The upcoming Mark of the Xenos release will feature almost all prominent W40K foes plus some additional less known ones. From what you write, this is what you want, right?. But I thought you didn't want to buy more than one book? You said yourself that you need about 280 pages to cover the most popular enemies in a detailed way, do you expect that to be added to the core rules? That wouldn't be possible without either erasing other content like the description of the Jericho Reach sector (which is much more useful than enemies, because it would take much more time for a GM to make THAT up), or by increasing the price. signoftheserpent said: we don't need EVERYTHING, nor do we need the entire history of every single race. WE are perfectly happy with the creature anathema and the upcoming mark of the xenos as adversary supplements. So far it's only YOU who is so absolutely non-content with the way things are. signoftheserpent said: Instead of being unpleasant and rude, you could respond to what i've said, not invent your own version of what I said Is this forum populated with aggressive trolls that don't know how to behave, or is it perhaps YOUR behaviour that upsets an otherwise very friendly and helpful community?
  12. Calonnau said: Hello there I’ve just started GM’ing Deathwatch, and I’m really enjoying it so far. I have a few questions which I haven’t been able to work out myself. They haven’t come up yet but I suspect that they might. The first is about unnatural characteristics and the fact that they give you a bonus degree of success. What I need to know is does this bonus degree of success only count if you actually *pass* the check? E.g. A space marine is making a strength test and fails by less than one degree. Does he in fact pass the check (with no degrees of success) or does he still fail? The second question is about signature wargear. When getting an upgraded version of a bit of standard issue equipment, do you have to buy the bit of equipment out of the points granted by the talent as well as the upgrade, or do you just have to buy the upgrade? E.g. A marine wants to use the signature wargear talent to buy a master-crafted bolt pistol. Does this cost him 5 points (Pistol costs 5 so doubled that would normally be 10, but he already has the pistol so it costs 5) or 10 (pistol costs 5 times 2 equals 10)? The third question is about the Deathwatch Champion from Rites of Battles special ability. Does the ability to kill an enemy who fails a toughness test only work on an opponent whose *current* wounds are lower than the Champion’s starting wounds or does it only work on an enemy whose *starting* wounds are lower than the Champion’s starting wounds? Thanks in advance Hi! I'm no hardcore expert either, but here's how I play it. Concerning your first question: The two degrees of succes do only count when it comes to opposed tests. For normal tests, you get a +10 bonus (well, to be exactly, all test are made one difficulty modifier easier, meaning a -20 test becomes -10 etc.). So if your marine would have to pass a normal (+/-0) strength test, it would turn into a +10 strength test because of unnatural strength (2). If he then fails that test, the two degrees of success won't help him. Second question: I think by RAW you actually have to buy the whole item, not only the upgrade. Of course you can always houserule that you don't. I cannot answer your third question since I haven't worked myself through Rites of Battle yet, sorry.
  13. So ehm... is there some set date for the next errata update? Last one was in December (at least that's what the document states). Perhaps I'm mistaken but it seems to me that there is a lot of stuff that should be added.
  14. Cameron said: I like sharing the XP to the whole team, considering they should be working as a team, and awarding additional XP to the Brother that did something remarkable. That's how I do it as well. You might want to keep these "special deeds" rewards low though, because they could lead to unwanted competition among your players ("I want to shoot the Boss Monster!" - "No, you got the XP last time, this time I want to kill it!").
  15. signoftheserpent said: Right, I get that eldar and marines don't match 1 on 1. But that doesn't help me build them as a credible threat for a Kill Team, and I really don't think that jsut guessing is the answer. This isn't about common sense or judgement, it's about strict application of mechanics. Make them too hard and the game stalls and the players get upset, make them too easy and they lose their value. That's ridiculus. As if statting an enemy is some kind of rocket-engineering which requires you to have three Ph.D.s. What group of autistic morons would cry out in agony if the Ork boss now has 61 strength and not 62? "Oh no! He is too weak! The game's broken!". Honestly, do you really believe in what you write? Then perhaps stay with TableTop or Card Games or whatever, but keep your hand off RPGs, because they require a certain degree of creativity and flexibility, regarding story as well as regarding rules.
  • Create New...