Jump to content

susanbrindle

Members
  • Content Count

    201
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About susanbrindle

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    Berrien Springs, Michigan, United States

Recent Profile Visitors

240 profile views
  1. Aww, still no individualized phenomena tables?
  2. I would really like to see this question answered.
  3. I agree fully with No One Here- The Skitarii are going to work a lot like the Imperial Guard, in that there's a world of difference between regiments from Cadia, Krieg, Catachan, Valhala, Mordia, Tallarn... and that's mostly just cultural differences. Factor in the huge variety in technological specialties and you're never going to have a standardized example. That said, one could define a few of the common Admech flavors in the Askellon sector, if they wanted to release something like The Lathe Worlds in 2nd edition.
  4. This is a somewhat minor quibble, but the flavor text of Precognition refers to seeing the future days in advance (and the summary on the little table refers to it as a seeing-the-future power) but the power itself is only good for one round, which I'd interpret as meaning the vision only refers to the immediate future (After all, why would knowing that the city will explode in three days help you dodge a bullet now?) In a similar vein, the Prescience power gives a bonus to WS and BS, which I think most players would interpret to mean their Prescience is limited to "Oh! He's about to jump up! Shoot now, shoot now!" The GM sidebar on divination, however, seems to assume that players and GMs might think it reveals useful information about the actual future. Does anyone else think these powers need clarification?
  5. So, essentially, make Armor into what Force Fields are right now? (Presumably, Force Fields would be better than armor in offering a save that can't be reduced, and probably a higher one too) I like it. Of course, someone will instantly appear to point out that this adds an additional roll to combat which already has piles of rolls and takes forever, but I'd say it's a small price to pay for removing skin armor.
  6. Well, assuming that the needle actually kills the target.
  7. That only works under the assumption that 1. The NPC in question is a bad guy 2. The bad-guy faction in question is in conflict with the military/police 3. The armor in question is associated with the military/police 4. The bad guy in question does not see any value in attempting to coerce members of the military/police into joining his faction. Again, it'd make much more sense to have the DM freehand it than to have static, universal modifiers.
  8. Also, they really need to retcon what they said in Rogue Trader and have realspace distance play some role in determining warp travel times. If it takes as long to cross the sector as it does to cross the street, then there's absolutely no reason to have starmaps, or to even organize the galaxy into sectors, since every point is adjacent to every other point for travel purposes.
  9. That actually makes a lot of sense. Languages come up pretty infrequently, and it's unlikely you'd learn a language without learning anything about the speakers anyway.
  10. I'm unclear what your message here is. Can there be a one true build? Roleplaying games involve encountering such a variety of different circumstances that even in high-op games, different players will want to be good at different things. You can make Punchpriest, the Techpriest who Punches Hard Enough To Kill Carnifaxes (Canifaxi? Carnifaxus?), and I can make Orkface, the Ork Who Can Survive Being Hit By Planets, and Steve can make FaceFace, the Noble Who Can Convince Any Enemy To Switch Sides In Twelve Seconds Or Less and they're all absurdly overpowered but not identical or even measurable on the same metric. (Well, I suppose you could run the builds through hundreds of hypothetical scenarios and then grade them based on how many they could resolve, and how effectively they could resolve those, but even knowing that Orkface is the tactically optimal build wouldn't stop party members from wanting to play FaceFace, just because they like diplomacy) I strongly doubt that preventing over-optimization of builds was FFG's intent with the Aptitude system, seeing as how the best builds in any system involve taking lots of related things that have good synergy, and the Aptitude system suggests doing exactly that. If anything, it's more likely to be broken than a flat rate, because it says to the player "No, don't have your assassin pick up Pilot! There's a tax on that! Just focus on Improved Knife, there's a discount on that." This is a fair point, but I'm still not convinced that class-based systems really add anything. That sounds more like a problem with the player/GM, as mentioned. Also, how is that jumble nonsensical? Clearly, they were a veterinarian with a yen for tactical explosives before they joined the air force! Lots of people do it! And it's the 40k universe, so clearly their plane just has heavy flamers instead of heavy bolters! That's convenience, rather than aptitude though. It's easier for me, as a rural person, to learn to ride horses because if I ever want to ride a horse I can walk out the door and shout "Hey, you! You with the horses! Could you teach me?" It's not that being born in the open sky gives me a secret spiritual bond with horses so that I can master the art of riding in half the time.
  11. Me neither. I mean, if everyone wanted to play a combat master, they could! Make sure to get combat Aptitudes, and you're done.
  12. We should continue this conversation in PMs, but I'd be really interested in your GMing advice, then. I've long been mystified by how to simultaneously please combat and noncombat oriented characters.
  13. Does the Aptitude system really achieve that? It seems like you're identifying people by their background and roles rather than by their Aptitudes. The Aptitude system says "If you're playing an assassin, don't take too many not-assassin talents" but that's a good rule of thumb for any character build. It'd be quite disingenuous for a player to say "I'd like to make a psyker!" and then not raise willpower or learn any psychic powers. Why do we need a ruleset specifically to prevent that? Can't we have Backgrounds and Roles without Aptitudes? Also, I'm really curious how freedom leads to identical characters? I mean, with flat rates, my Assassin is as likely to pick up hacking as a secondary gig (to fit the infiltration theme) as he is to pick up psychic powers (for a more mystical vibe) as he is to pick up investigation-related skills (for that hunter-of-prey vibe). With Aptitudes, I'm penalized for picking up any of them.
  14. Yeah I'm really unclear what that chestpiece is meant to be. Is it made of metal? It looks like it has rivets. Admittedly, that guy doesn't look like he uses Charm a whole lot- but the point being that that top doesn't inherently make him less charming still stands. He'd be conspicuous in a less ostentatious environment, but certainly not by nature alienating. I think the hit to SUBTLETY is the best representation of the drawbacks of wearing armor.
  15. You know I was about to say "Well at least it's better than the old Career Path system!" but now that I think about it, uh, yeah, why not just remove that entirely? Can't we just have a Shadowrun style system where you buy whatever you think your character needs for the same point cost as everyone else?
×
×
  • Create New...