Jump to content

Symmos

Members
  • Content Count

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Symmos

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    Galway, Galway, Ireland
  1. Aloha, Just google "Descent 6 Player", there should be several entries on boardgamegeek.com you'll find optional rules and discussions around this topic. It should be easy to adapt those house rules for Imperial Assault. Vanilla, there are no 6+ player rules. Sym
  2. Absolutly! Even if we don't figure out some fancy way to convert the EotE rules: the tiles, the miniatures, all the cards and tiny bits and pieces will support your "normal" EotE experience in a great way. I am really excited!
  3. *throws money at the screen* I just screamed like a little girl. OMG! ******* Star Wars Descent! HOLY MOTHER OF... This is just.... I... beyond words... I can use the tiles for Edge of the Empire... I can take non-RPG player on the ride... I can buy more tackle boxes... HOLY **** - ships interiors with bulk doors... Speeder MODELS... Hutts! Ugh Ugh... from the look of it you can probably mix and match with Descent tiles. Dear FFG, you guys are amazing. I don't know... There are companies that just get it right. I am riding the hypetrain... Pardon the language...
  4. Yeah - without having looked at Warhammer 3d. Ed.in comparison to the upcoming Star Wars. Its not the same having Dwarfs, Humans and Elves dice-wise and a giant elephant-man, a silicon based creature and a rabbit. There HAS to be some kind of major MIN and MAX. A orangutan is able to perform feats, that a world-class strongman and athlete could only dream to achieve (like lifting his 200+ pound body with ease while peeling a banana and swinging through vines). A strong Wookie is NOT the same as a strong Human - period. In D6 WEG - Wookies could go up to 6D6 - while "unaugmented" human would stuck at 4D6. This gave the Wookies the "narrative and mechanical" background they needed to convince people that they were able to rip apart a gamorrean guard. While I welcome the idea of a strong narrative story. They should not forget that having a small human with a beard and a drinking problem, or a slim one with pointy ears is the same as a ape-like tree-dweller with climbing claws and a living crystal with no physical feature whatsoever. In my opinion, this diversity made star wars so special. They are using different dice - why not use different dice for "superhuman characteristics" and "substandard characteristic" - like giving the Wookie the same basic mechanic, but with a dice that is "legendary/strong" - that has a better chance to pull over impressive stunts. While in social aspects, having the "weak" die, for all things that would relate to charisma-based actions. Therefore circumventing the whole issue with just 2 more dice *cough*. This would give the caps meaning. A Wookie with strength 3 would still be more potent than a human with 3 strength or even 5 strength. But the 5 strength human would know simply better ways to use his strength in various situation, therefore exceeding the wookie in several tasks. Lets spin it even further, take the Givin, the Givin has an alien mind and could easily calculate astrogation routes in his head. While a "average" givin would be able to do just that, a savant human with "INT" 5+ would be able to "maybe" propose a jump, but on the other hand would have a very perceptive and agile mind - therefore doing all kind of versatile thinking. hm…. Cheers, Sym
  5. Oh well, look at the design and the development of the weapon training talents. First of, we got a very much broken down level of knowledge in DH. Every character had to learn every single weapon system. You had the Class (Handling and Size) like Pistol, Basic, Heavy Melee and Thrown and then you had the agent (Ammunition, Material) like Bolt, Flame, Chain. All neat and clean - not much to tell you. You needed a lot of space on your sheet. Then came RT. The Classes were still there - but with the "universal" trait you got a number of "similar-ish" agents (Bolt, Las, Launcher, Melta, Plasma, and SP) put together (the "some kind of projectile is flying towards the enemy" types). Primitive was left out - for a good reason. But - maybe a foreshadow - you got "Agent" Weapon Training - which in itself seems comprehensible at the time. For example, you had Flame - giving you the understanding on where to stand if you release a stream of hot liquid-based fire or acid. BUT back then, you had the Heavy Weapon Classes separated - mainly for balancing reasons I guess - and while the Universal classes of Basic Weapons and the Pistol Weapons seemed to get along fine. The Heavy variants were broken down - you needed to get Heavy (Bolt), Heavy (Flame), Heavy (SP) etc.. separate. Again, I can image for balancing issues. Now with Only War - you have the former agents as categorization and all the classes included in a new kind of "universal" - except Heavy - Heavy this time around, attaches itself to an agent - giving you knowledge of that particular "class" - but in itself is impotent and omnipotent at the same time. As soon as you learn the "Heavy WT" once - you know in principle ALL weapons with the heavy class. If you learn how to use a Laser based Weapon - you automatically learn how to shot a Lascannon (Las) - but if you learn how to shoot a Heavy Bolter (Bolt), you are unable to properly fire a Heavy Stubber (SP), let alone as auto cannon (SP) - as long as you don`t have the SP WT. But with the same argument - the different architecture and the handling - you are somehow able to swing an axe, fire a musket, throw a molotov and fire a bow - if you buy the low-tech specialization. Again, balancing reasons I reckon. In the end - the new system - is another take on the whole weapon training issue. One can back up every one of them with "RP-Logic" - but it is a interchangeable matter in its core. I have to wait and see - right now, I would probably run with the RT setting. As it "underlines" the military background of the guardsmen better. Vehicle Weapons, I would completely separate and put with the skill "operate" or as a single "specialist skill". I would also make the clear distinction between man handled weapons, mounted weapons and turret fire. As for Heavy… I honestly don`t know. In the end - if rogue trader is to "high end" I would rather go with the DH setting and giving the soldiers more WT to start with. Sym
  6. No - you misunderstand my point. As you point out. Being able to run with an assault rifle does not make you a genius with the machine gun. BUT it is closer than - lets say: A knife (Low-Tech) and a Sling (Low-Tech) or a Hammer (Low Tech) and a Bow (Low tech) and a throwing knife (low tech). I GET your point - and I get the point to consolidate all the minor weapons and the not very popular weapon systems in bigger categories. But with every edition we get new categorizations, and this one is by far the most questionable one. but seeing that this is the proofreading part, and to beat the book further - the sentence you quote refers to "specialization" NOT classes - the relevant sentence can be found in my first entry. Don`t get me started with the fact that vehicle weapons are part of the different specialization and heavy not. Does this means - a vehicle operated Heavy bolter in a turret can be fired, but a tripod/lafette mounted one is something completely different? Sym
  7. Hm… so Heavy is something else then? No Class (as per description) and no Group (as per your description). My problem with this categorization is simple: I got DH giving me Basic (Las), Heavy (Las) and Pistol (Las), but also Pistol (Flame) and Heavy (Flame); then I got RT giving me Basic (Universal), Pistol (Universal) but also Flame (Universal) - NOW I get Las (Pistol, Basic, Melee, Thrown, Vehicle but NO Heavy) and I get Heavy - that, in itself, is an auxiliary talent at best. And therefore making the whole categorization obsolete or at best questionable. At least with DH, I got consistency. Putting melee weapons and throwing weapon in the same talent is also very questionable. Wielding a light saber has nothing to do with shooting a laser pistol - let alone a laser rifle. I understand the need to "streamline" the weapon categorization. But this feels just - glued on.
  8. Yes, why not. If you read the information about mutants and abhumans in correlation with the Guardsman, you come across Homo sapiens variatus, Nightsiders and *cough* squats. I can see the appeal of having a penal legion with mutants and abhumans - doing the most dangerous and ungrateful jobs. Only to have a shot on "being" something other than vermin in the eye of the imperium. Sym
  9. Weapon Training makes no sense. The description reads: The character can use all weapons with Class: Pistol, Basic, Melee, Throwing and Vehicle within the group he has selected with this Talent. It does not make a whole lot of sense bundling Melee, Throwing and Shooting (Pistol, Basic, Vehicle) together. Three totally different areas of expertise. Also, Heavy is not a Class anymore (Why?), therefore indicating that there are Heavy Pistols, Heavy Throwing Weapons or Heavy Melee Weapons. On the other hand, there are Heavy Bolter, Heavy Lasweapons and Heavy Flamer etc. Please review and revise. Thanks, Sym
  10. Aloha, is there a conversion rule-set for Only War/Black Crusade to rogue trader? I found nothing via search function. Maybe one of you guys have an idea where to look. Thanks, Sym
  11. Dispatch mono-task servitors and a Secutor to the BETA Only War Forum; Mech-wright CodenameXXIII is clearly corrupted and requires adjustment. - to quote a very famous Archmagos
  12. hm… as mentioned before - a more modular approach would be nice. Meaning, having the option to just drop the comrade into the lap of the GM completely (classic NPC handling), run the comrade as a passive pet (as it is now)- or in the end run the comrade as a "active" NPC (buddy, subordinate, part of a fire-team etc.). All scenarios have there appeal, merit and flaws. The passive approach though, is - at least for me in terms of roleplay and fluff - the most boring one. I would like to give my NPC/PCs a more "involved cohesion"-feel.
  13. Strap a Voxcaster on the back of any Guardsmen (with a knack for techie stuff)- and you will have a Radio Operator. In the end, I don`t think - especially in a long running campaign - that the operator will have the option to stay in a vehicle all the time. So him being the "vox"-guy seems to me a good back-up solution. Also, as of now, the Squad will lose men fast, so consolidating roles or step in as back-up for certain roles will be a common sight, I reckon. Sym
×
×
  • Create New...