Jump to content

GreyHunter88

Members
  • Content Count

    31
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About GreyHunter88

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  1. I'm still a little confused about how exactly the ballistic mechadendrite functions. For a half-action, or as a reaction, you can fire the shoulder mounted weapon. Limitations of "One attack action per round" apply. What I understood from this is as follows, and this is how I play it. The tech-priest can fire his weapon as a half action the same way he'd fire any other gun in his hand. He can also use a reaction, in reaction to an enemy's action, to fire it. For example, if an enemy shoots at him, he can react and, instead of dodging, shoot back. However, he can't take a half action to fire his shotgun, and then take another half action to fire his ballistic mechadendrite, because this would be making two attack actions. He can, however, use "two weapon fighting" to fire both of those weapons, or make a dual shot with them, since he's 'holding' both weapons, and that is only one attack option. How close/far am I?
  2. I still find the MIU Interface slightly confusing. So, one can fire the MIU weapon as a free action, no matter what other actions they are undertaking. It says "one additional" weapon, implying that it can be fired in addition to any other weapons held. However, in the errata, it says that they are still limited to one attack action a turn. How exactly does this work? a) The character can fire a held weapon and the MIU, but they just have to take the same attack action with each b) The MIU weapon can only be fired in addition to other weapons as part of a two-weapon attack, requiring the talents, that doesn't suffer off-hand penalties c) The MIU weapon can be used by itself, if the character is running, working on a door etc., but you can only take one attack action per turn, so without using two-weapon fighting, it can't be fired as well as another gun.
  3. I still find the MIU Interface slightly confusing. So, one can fire the MIU weapon as a free action, no matter what other actions they are undertaking. It says "one additional" weapon, implying that it can be fired in addition to any other weapons held. However, in the errata, it says that they are still limited to one attack action a turn. How exactly does this work? a) The character can fire a held weapon and the MIU, but they just have to take the same attack action with each b) The MIU weapon can only be fired in addition to other weapons as part of a two-weapon attack, requiring the talents, that doesn't suffer off-hand penalties c) The MIU weapon can be used by itself, if the character is running, working on a door etc., but you can only take one attack action per turn, so without using two-weapon fighting, it can't be fired as well as another gun.
  4. Two questions. Firstly, in the Extended Repairs section at the very end of the Starship chapter in the main rule book, the Captain chooses a length of time to repair the ship. Then the Explorator (or whoever) rolls a number of Tech-use tests equal to the number of weeks you're repairing. At the end, if successes outweigh failures, you repair 1d5 hull and all components. Why bother doing this for longer than one week? I know that statistically, if you have a high tech-use, the longer you spend repairing, the more average your rolls will be, and thus the better... lemme rephrase this. If you have 60 tech use, and you roll once, you have a 60% chance to pass. If you have 60 and roll 10 times, chances are you will roll more 60s or under than over 60s. Therefore you're slightly improving your chances of getting successes. I'm really not sure if this pans out, given that one roll of 100 will cancel out 3 rolls of 40 or whatever, but ... Is that the only reason you would spend more time repairing? Secondly, in the Simplified NPC morale/population in the last chapter of Battlefleet Koronus, it says that a ship can sustain damage to either statistic = to its hull integrity + crew rating. It lists an example of a hull integrity 40 ship with a Competent (30) crew, and says it can take a total of 43 damage to either stat. Correct me if I'm wrong, but 40 + 30 is 70. Or does it mean "Crew Rating Bonus", and it's just unclear. Seems to me that the 70 would be a little high, but I haven't played many ship battles so maybe someone who has used the rule a lot can help me out? Thanks
  5. Why would a tech-priest see the need for food and sustenance as a weakness? Their precious vehicles need constant resupplies of lubricating oils, fuel etc., but they don't consider THAT a weakness. Some funny ideas in here. So it's mostly a matter of however the player chooses to hand-wave themselves into being able to eat. For the most part it's just a banal triviality, but sometimes, like when the acolytes are sitting down to a poisoned meal, it becomes important. I like the idea of them eating nutrient paste and water capsules etc, but then they miss out on all the fun! =)
  6. Hey everyone, Stupid question, in a sense, and one I imagine has been asked several times before. It's come up several times in my group though, and none of us has a certain or satisfactory answer as of yet. How does a tech-priest eat, when they all come equipped with the respirator? Some suggestions were that the tech-priest's respirator can come unlocked and swing back, revealing their mouth. That's fine for Rank 1 tech-adepts, but even then, and especially at the later levels, that seems more like a respirator hinged to their jawbone than any kind of respirator implant. One idea I came up with is that they eat through their fingers? Sort of intravenously, dissolving little bits of food and then using syringes in their arms to absorb it. Suffice to say, both of these ideas seem a little strange and result in our Secutor being mocked relentlessly every time food becomes an issue. I have a feeling that this is part of the 40k art/fluff that has always been ignored (and outside the realm of an RPG it's perfectly fine that way), but I was wondering if anyone knows of anywhere in the background that it discusses this at all, or what kind of cool ideas you guys have come up with.
  7. Haha! It's not so much a well-done moment! It makes me unhappy. =( I think I'll fix it by emphasizing the rule stating that you have to decide all actions at the start of the turn. If the players want to take evasive maneuvers, I'll make them roll that first, and then take the penalty for the shooting, even if it comes first. That way they can shoot at an enemy in range, and then move away, but they'll still take penalties to hit. Everything's supposed to be happening at the same time, so it makes sense to me that the penalties to hit would affect the entire turn.
  8. If that were the case, why do the rules state, "or a ship may move before or after shooting"? That seems pretty clear to me, and it's under the ACTIONS subtitle of the ship combat section.
  9. You recall incorrectly, unfortunately. The chapter does make it seem, due to some ambiguous wording, that this is the case. When discussing the actions it says stuff like, "After you take your maneuver, you may shoot". However, Pg. 212, under Actions, states: "Players may perform actions in any order they choose, so an extended action may be performed before a shooting or maneuver action in order to provide it with a bonus, or a ship may move before or after shooting."
  10. In the rules for Starship Combat, it states emphatically that you are allowed to take your actions in any order you so choose. If you choose to shoot, and then move with Evasive Maneuvering, do you not suffer any penalties? RAW I don't see any reason why you couldn't just fire first and then jink around, gaining all the benefits but none of the downsides. I have a pretty easy fix for this problem, but I wanted to see what people thought about it first. Thanks
  11. We had an arbitrator join up at Rank 6, using the Proven Innocent background. It worked perfectly, since it gives the character a great reason to re-join (in our case) the Inquisition after helping with an investigation, and it suits the tragic hero archetype that so many role-players love. He started with 0 fate thanks to it though, which is definitely a big disadvantage. Also, +3 to every stat is not THAT great. Like sure it's good, but for an arbitrator that +3 agility, fellowship, and strength, in our case, isn't going to get him too far. Not being able to re-roll, and having the first death be final is a big price to pay. Also, the Indoctrination rule is a disadvantage, in my opinion. You're immune to tests that make you think poorly of the Inquisition? Sure... I'd never make my players act a certain way just because the enemy rolled well on Charm. So for us, it's pretty much just a role-playing guide, and being FORCED to act a certain way is always a disadvantage. Secondly, the part about needing -30 WP tests to betray your team-mates or the Inquisition is also a negative. You could say "Why would you ever want to anyways", but the point is that it's taking some control out of your hands. In our case, if it was the Precinct Marshal screaming at him that these imposters have broken the law, he's going to be stuck between a rock and a hard place. He might not even get the priviledge of choosing his actions, thanks to the background package. All in all, I'd say it's one of the cooler things in the book. That and the gutterforged armour.
  12. I don't get your reference to the Skitarrii and their logic. The Vox-Legi shotgun is better than their Skitarri shotgun, no ifs ands or buts. You can wax poetic on the cogs of the great machine, and their cyber-ogryn drop-troopers and what not, but it is ultimately illogical to equip yourself with the weaker of two weapons. There is no possible explanation that they would prefer to equip their elite troopers with the weaker "full-auto" weapon, when they have the much more effective semi-auto shotgun at home. Also, I'm not sure what kind of reasonably tough opponents you have your arbitrators fight, but 8 or 9 soak!? That's insane. A guardsman has 6 soak. 7 MAYBE. Luckily, the arbitrators don't use their shotguns to deal with renegade guard invasions. They have bolters, explosives and all sorts of other fun equipment in their arsenal to deal with just such an occasion. Hive gangers have what, 5 soak? 4 against non-primitive weapons. Fighting in a hive, where being able to peg someone from 500 metres away is meaningless. Now an average arbitrator, point blank at the roaring crowd... BS 35 + 30 PB + 10 Semi Auto... = 75. Assuming an average roll of 50, that's 3 hits with the shotgun. Each hit doing an average of 15 - 4, 11 damage. That's 33 damage. That's 3 dead rioters. We use a regular combat shotgun and it goes down to 6 damage a hit, or 18 damage. Enough to kill one or two. The point being, a regular shotgun is still more than enough. It says in the B.O.J. that the Vox-Legi is designed to intimidate, with a load chamber and all that. Doesn't say it needs to pulp things. There are excerpts about Astartes weapons that say that to fire them as a mortal would break your arms in 40 places and send you flying (paraphrasing, naturally). Yet the arbitrators can fire ones pretty much just as powerful without issue? Perhaps the marines have pen, but that seems to be more a quality of the ammunition than the simple size and calibre of the projectile. Either way, it seems silly. The S.O.B. in our game has remained balanced because she is hamstringed by certain elements outside her control. Bolts are very rare, for example. She's a walking beacon, she can't use stealth, she has to follow very stringent codes of faith and quasi-chivalry, etc. Here's an example: Some daemon TB 8 against non-warp attacks. S.O.B fires a 16 throne bolt at it, hitting for Tearing 1d10-3. Let's say she gets lucky rolls an 8, and does 5 damage. Next the shotgun waltzes up, on fairly easy to acquire rolls gets 3 hits, and voila. Doing an average of 18 damage in one shot for 0.05 thrones. Like I said, where can my inquisitor get one of these? Oh.... not to mention if you throw Executioner shells into that thing. It now does 1d10+13 damage with 1 pen, re-rolls to hit and ignores cover. Plus scatter and reliable, semi-auto, and a clip size of 14. Oh and you can load an executioner in without having to reload the entire gun, just in case. Now I can understand that this makes the shotgun more relevant at higher levels, but I'm of the firm belief that this kind of gaminess needs to be avoided. A shotgun is what it is, and it should not be as effective as plasma weapons, bolters, power swords etc. Once that arbitrator reaches end game, he should (like the proctor marshals and judges actually do) take up a bolter, for example. He's outgrown the tried and tested little shotgun when dealing with daemon princes, arch-magos hereteks and their ilk. My group and I are staying far, far away from this. I merely posted to see others thoughts, and the vast majority seem to think it's grossly overpowered. There are a few who have tried to rationalize it, and while I don't buy their arguments, it is a beauty of RPing that nobody is going to burst into my living room and beat me down for playing "the wrong way". EDIT: I don't mean to sound overly confrontational. Everyone has opinions, and they are all valid. I guess the best way I can describe my wariness of the weapon is that if I allowed it, then everyone in my cell would want one. The tech-priest was already infuriated that his 'top of the line Vanaheim was a cap-gun in comparison. I know that the range is the only legit criticism, but in my years of experience playing this game, range has been a factor in I think two scenarios. Then I could limit it to just Arbitrators but that's playing mega-favourites, and it all just starts going downhill from there, in my opinion.
  13. Your solution seems very reasonable, and pretty close with what I thought would work. I was thinking that if the player got First Aid within a turn or so, they'd get the bonus. The problem facing that was First Aid being a full action, so it would be a rare case that they could receive it within a turn. It just seems weird that such an oversight could go through 4 main rulebooks and not get addressed.
  14. One question that's still been plagueing me from Dark Heresy through Black Crusade. In the Damage sections of the rulebook, it says that certain critical effects force you to take a toughness test or lose a limb permanently. That's easy enough... but then it says that if someone with Medicae is assisting you, you can add a +20 bonus to this test. Master Chirurgeon, the talent, also lets you add an additional (by my understanding) +20 to that test. Now, my question... every critical effect that presents limb loss asks for an immediate toughness test. How, in this case, could someone with medicae ever be helping someone against this? If it's immediate...
×
×
  • Create New...