Fgdsfg

Members
  • Content count

    2,093
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Fgdsfg

  • Rank
    Lrod-Iniquitsor
  • Birthday 02/26/1948

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    Klippan, Scania, Sweden
  1. You're muddling the RAW with "...I see it only fair..." and "I would have...". For reference: The RAW is in fact very clear in that unless you have a suitable special ability or Talent, you cannot normally affect the mortal world. In effect, unless it specifically allows you to waive those restrictions in some capacity, they apply. That this RAW is not only the RAW, but also the RAI, is further supported by the nature of the Dimensional Instability Gift of the Gods and the Aegis of Euphedros Psychic Power, but that point is ultimately moot; my point is the RAW. It is highly debatable (IMHO) whether this all makes sense or not or whether this is how the Incorporeal Trait should work, and as written, Aegis of Euphedros is utterly useless, but the RAW itself is actually very clear on the matter.
  2. Then please tell me what's unclear to you and I'll try to clarify it for you step by step, because it appears very straight forward.
  3. Holy Father Nestor Urgle says that there is no point to your struggle. You should be happy with what you have and make do with what you get, it is all you will ever need!
  4. Except that's not at all what the RAW says. I practically quoted what the Incorporeal Trait says on the matter in the preceding post. Not only is that RAW, but I believe it to be RAI as well, judged by the wording and mechanics (however broken) of the Gift and Power(s) discussed in the thread. Now, I may not agree with those rules, but they are pretty clear.
  5. Nope. There are potential narrative "costs" to becoming increasingly mechanical. Haywire Field effects come to mind. You're arguably susceptible to scrap-code. You'd probably become increasingly heavy, and the GM could decide to modify difficulties of certain tests accordingly. Much of this is also up to the Craftsmanship of the bionics or implants in question. Poor-Craftsmanship (or even Common-Craftsmanship) cybernetics often come with considerable drawbacks, whilst Best-Craftsmanship models can be anything from intricate works of art to completely inseparable from the real thing. But no, there's no "hard" drawbacks or game mechanics that cover limitations to the amount of "cyber" a character has "installed", aside from the potential cost involved.
  6. and it's a common argument, which I really don't understand. I'm used to GURPS, where my five players all have almost the same stats: Str 10, Dex 10/11, Int 11/12, Health 9/10 yet their characters are very very different in fluff and in play. That's all. Well in GURPS, that could mean anything. For all I know, one is a cactus, the second is a blob of eyes and the third.. whatever, you know what I mean. It also has a lower range, meaning that it's more likely to lump characters into generally the same stats. I think it (GURPS) is a fairly bad basis for comparison. But if your players are all - ability-wise, skills-wise, "class", etc - pretty much playing the same (or same-built) characters, but still manage to pull off vastly different experiences in fluff and play, then that's great. But I still prefer to have characteristically and mechanically diverse characters, even when they are built around the same general concept or role. Are there other ways than with characteristics? Of course, and I'd be surprised if your players aren't taking advantage of that, but that's really beside the point.
  7. I'm not sure how that's relevant or why there'd be some bigger point in having stats that are nicely rounded. I don't see what you're getting at, really. WH40kRP already suffers somewhat from individual points not mattering enough, for a number of reasons. I don't see a reason to exacerbate that. So much this. I know how I get myself, when I have no reason to roll for stats. I come up with an awesome background and character, and then little by little I find myself rationalizing or even revamping to get the most out of everything while staying as true to the concept as possible, sometimes ending up discarding it because I know I won't be able to keep up with my concept. I've seen it time and time again. There isn't anything inherently wrong with point-buy or min-maxing, nor did I ever say that there was; it's just not my cup of tea and that's why I dislike point-buy, that's really all there is to it. I much prefer to have a degree of randomness to the stats, if only to make the statline(s) more "human" or approachable, or to be able to work with a concept without feeling like something is holding it back or that the concept needs to be reworked because it doesn't line up very well with how I'm pushed to spread the points based on my career. Both statlines and rolling forces you to make do with what you have, the ups and downs of life, and try to balance out the good with the bad. Just makes it feel more 'alive' I guess. This might tie in with the fact that I have no problems at all with multiple careers/archetypes/specializations in the same group; with point-buy, the odds that everyone of a certain 'class' will end up with near-identical characteristics is nearly a given.
  8. Point-buy allows you to fully max out whatever you want and place all points at given brackets - such as no-one will ever have a Toughness not dividable by 5, etc. Statlines still force you to make a choice, even though yes, they will still place their highest score in their most relevant stat. But obviously, you'll always do that with any kind of free distribution. This makes perfect sense, because it stands to reason that characters with a certain set of characteristics gravitate towards certain specializations, careers and professions. With pure, free point-buy, you will (practically) always end up with 20 Willpower and 0 Ballistics Skill, and that sniper character will practically always end up with a 0 in Fellowship and a 20 in Ballistics Skill, and so on and so forth. Depenidng on the points pool, you might even end up with multiple 0's and multiple 20's. Set statlines prevents this completely.
  9. My interpretation of the fluff has always been that when someone is taken by the Black Ships (or equivalent), they essentially - at least legally - lose all claims to land, assets, wealth and titles. For years, possibly decades, they are indoctrinated and trained, and finally sanctioned - in the case of Astropaths, a sanctioning involving a spiritual experience so strong that it literally burns their physical eyes out. The Imperium is a massive bureaucracy, and out of all the castes of the Imperium, all the titles and hierarchies, psykers are arguably amongst the lowest, and the Imperium's reliance on them is out of sheer necessity. Psykers are taken from their families, secluded, and essentially forced to go through processes no human would willingly do, to become part of a form of brotherhood, and although not formally a religious institution, nearly clergy. There would be a lot of issues with psykers retaining their positions once they are taken, from the feudal system of the Imperium and the authority a nobleman might have (you might very well outrank the man that is your superior), the wealth of potential resources in the hands of filthy psykers that are the first to become corrupted, to political leverage directly in the hands of psykers. All of that leads me to believe that at least formally, psykers are stripped of titles and so forth - although some psykers may certainly regain some, or gain new titles, depending. Or maybe they retain their titles, but they are legally moot. So it doesn't matter if you're a Duke, Archon or Sultan - you get to keep it as part of your name, but it has no legal weight. That being said, an Astropath that was born from a noble family may very well maintain some contacts to his old life, or may still have some political clout to throw around by virtue of his bloodline, if not his own authority, then authority-by-proxy. I'd honestly need to know more about the character and it's backstory to judge even subjectively, because it's a complicated subject (because the Imperium is complicated). My immediate idea for a character like this is someone that was a nobleman from the beginning, and used that clout to be assigned near his own noble family, perhaps as part of the choir on the same planet, using his and his family's contacts to be exactly the kind of corrupt Astropaths aren't supposed to be, and became involved with the Witnesses of Dusk (I forget the exact backstory of Witness of Dusk, but didn't it have something to do with Erasmus Haarlock, as well?). The family used it's pull to have the Astropath protected by the Rogue Trader's Dynasty and secured a position on the ship to avoid a nasty and protracted investigation regarding these ties between the family, the Witnesses of Dusk and Erasmus Haarlock (or something like that). So. Does a psyker lose it's nobility status when it is discovered that it is a psyker? Easy answer: I'd say yes. Long answer: Possibly, but the extent can vary.
  10. To FFG:s defence, whatever deal they have with GW likely stipulates that they aren't allowed to comment on GW interference - which by itself is part of the problem, but that's somewhat beside my point. Sometimes, the rules for what rules are allowed to be written seem oddly specific and just plain weird, but it's not like FFG can throw GW under the bus and just go "Hey, we wanted to do it, but GW said no." GW regularly run around like a group of headless monkeys bullfightning elephants in a whole chain of china shops, has an extremely narrow focus in regards to their IP(:s) and a terrible business sense, so these things are pretty much par for the course, unfortunately.
  11. I was thinking the same thing; altering or removing a rule such as declaring "Armour does not stack" is a long way from saying "Flamers do not exist". I think removing flamers is an unreasonable way to deal with it - but so is, of course, altering every encounter just to deal with flamers. I see no easy fix to the power of flamers, myself.
  12. By RAW, it's possible, but personally, I would say no, unless anyone can come up with very good reason as to how Discordants objectively work in-universe.
  13. Incorporeal itself is actually very clear in that you cannot normally affect the mortal world, and thus can't damage non-incorporeal opponents unless it has a suitable special ability or Talent. However, in this case, the power that grants Incorporeal specifically allows you to use psychic powers. Funnily enough, by RAW, there isn't actually anything preventing you from already using Psychic Powers - they just won't damage anyone or affect the mortal world - whilst Incorporeal. The power, interestingly, specifically allows you to use psychic powers, but says nothing if these will now "affect the mortal world". I believe that the intent is for the power in question to allow you to use psychic powers unrestricted, but by RAW, it doesn't actually do anything.
  14. Exhaustion in DnD 5th can kill you... and in fact seems to be a hell of a lot more deadly than actually getting stabbed by a sword, as you just need 8 hours rest to recover from being repeatedly stabbed, while repeated Exhaustion takes longer to fall off. I have a hard time thinking of systems where you *can'*t die from Fatigue or Exhaustion, really. I'd expect it to be way stranger, considering that it's a pretty common cause of death.
  15. By RAW, you only check Alignment after spending your starting XP. There's no reason to check Alignment before every Gift, because at no point between the checking of the Alignment and the granting of the Gift can your Alignment change.