Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Olifant

  1. My idea of granting the free attack is based off the combat rules of engagement. Personally, I wouldn't allow it, as it would annoy my players (mooks or bosses shooting at other player while engaged would be really cheesy... But attacking outside or more than once a turn is not without precedent: if you run past, touch, or try to leave melee combat, every enemy you do so with on your turn (or anyones turn) is granted a free attack against you/them. Costing them nothing and putting you/them at risk. I just figured that since it was kinda similar, (entering or leaving melee or in this case, quasi leaving/ignoring melee) it would make sense to apply the same or similar penalty.
  2. I house rule jump packs simply to keep them easy and clean. For the most part, I ignore the flyer trait or manipulate it to fit my house rule. Jump packs come with an Agility Bonus (often I use the flyer trait number), this allows the use to move forward, be it a direct charge/run, a leap/bound or straight up, that many metres. No real true sense of flight. I also give it fuel which acts as its number of uses before needed a recharge. The bookwork is simple, easy to keep track of, and mostly just enhances current abilities. I and my players like it because its direct, easy to understand and still practical.
  3. In FAQ they say, that corruption is mind, body and soul. Blanks have a mind and body and those can be corrupted. As a GM you may feel suited to grant a bonus resistance to some sources of corruption, but that's about it.
  4. Why in the world would he want a Halo device? Unless his character was insane, or was desperate to prolong his life (in the short term). His talents and skills can mitigate its ability, but on temporarily, as a GM, I would let your player know that if he does use this thing willingly, he is expecting to replace his main PC soon. Those devices are akin to deamon possession. Highly heretical. Also any inquisitor pure and radical or even his own agents may turn on him and hunt him down as he becomes a deamon, Xeno, or whatever monster it will eventually turn him into. Halo objects are really cool and interesting, but should only be taken by NPCs or player who wish to retire their character. Or if you're feeling kinda mean, but may make for a good story, don't tell the player what will happen to him to make it more exciting.
  5. I don't recall anything that says you cannot fire out of close combat. I'd be inclined to allow it but with a -20 penalty due to the melee confusion and not being stabbed as you said. This would only be limited to pistols though as you are still considered to be engaged in melee with the enemy combatant. I don't see any way you could bring your lasgun around and fire on a different target if someone's swinging an axe at your head. I think the passage covering this was in the 1st edition DH rulebook but was never included in the second edition of the rules. It's consistent with the table top game rules, which FFG often uses as inspiration for their RPGs. I'll check when I have access to the hard copy of the rules at home. I'll double check later when I get home. First edition did explain this, but I do not remember if 2.0 did or not. I can safely say though, that all the RP follow that rule set (rogue trader, Only war, Black Crusade), so its a safe bet. If a player really wanted to shoot outside of their melee combat, I'd allow it, but grant whoever they are engaged with an easy +30 free attack action.
  6. I would allow the stacking, but subtly would take hit, and I would also make a permanent penalty to their carry weight to represent the bulk and mass of all the bionics and armor
  7. Always need them? No at all. Always useful? Yes. Except when you have them strapped to your combat vest and someone sets you on fire... Then not so much.
  8. Maybe I am just a mean GM but, I have never thought that this system needs to be more lethal. I used to play quite a bit of DnD, Shadow Run and Vampire and when I came over to this game, it was assumed PC would die. Admittedly 2.0 is a little less mean, but for our group no less lethal. My players often outright kill mooks and even mini bosses or monsters. On the other end, mooks and squad leaders often nearly cripple my PCs with one or at most two hits. I would say the only time I have run into issues trying to threaten my players is when I had a psyker who cast Iron Arm and was wearing full carapace armor effectively was immune to all small arms fire. But I mean, that is what he intended and he and the rest of the group were clever and outfoxed the hertics they were hunting, so it was fine with me. Then again, I never punish players for being clever or surprising me with tactics (I always play, if I didn't think of it, neither did the BBEG). I should also mention I run my sessions as investigations primarily, and thus both the player and NPCs are often only wearing a hidden combat vest with side arms. All out OW style combat is rare in our games, unless its a dungeon dive/beer and pretzel ark. Making an average TB of 3 and a AP of 2-3 only mitigate around 5-6 damage. I usually have mooks or bodyguards equipped with compact stub revolvers and mono knives which do 1d10+3 and 1d10+ SBP2 respectively. Two or three rounds of combat usually knocks at least one or two of my PCs down to a couple wounds and makes them sweat or run for cover.
  9. I was very hopeful that the expansion books would both add more leadership (which they did to an extent) ability and I was fully convinced they would re-add most if not all the roleplaying skills and talents. Which as we now know they did not. I love the new system overall with only minor hiccups and personal preferences here and there, but still the biggest problem they have is the removal of almost every roleplaying and investigating skills the original had. Lets hope for a few more supplements to add some of these things back, and hopefully more rules for minions, familiars and respective leadership benfits to them. Luckily though, house ruling with suffice.
  10. As bit pointed out, only certain special occasions can anyone attempt a stealth test when visible at all. The only thing that comes to mind for me is LIctors, but I am sure there are others. If it were me, I'd pretty much say no to any stealth tests once combat has started. Unless circumstances gave good reason or opportunity.
  11. Hmm... May we have more details about your group? Both character sheets and personality types would be helpful. Also any more information as about how often or what type of large mob engagement your players may do would be helpful as well. I can fully appreciate your not wanting to game or make convoluted reasons as to why counter tactics might rise up, as I always allow my fights to go one sided, if the players were clever and surprised me or vice versa. And since my games are more secretive and investigation based, they only run into combat when they screw up or are looking for a fight, and both of those tend to be circumstantial and nearly always improvised and just not very often. Is the main antagonist not particularly clever? Or are their minion's untrained rabble? Because I would think that very rarely do people actually charge machine gun nests, or entrenched positions. Unless obviously they don't know about military tactics. Mayhaps have one of the Acolytes friends or contacts betray them and give the enemies information on them? Have the bad guys (loose term) ambush the players? Or a good old fashioned competent bad guy always makes things fun for the players and the GM. Usually, if my players go in combat ready, gear up with armor and heavy guns, I raised their subtly by quite a bit and make a roll to see if the bad guys learn of this. If the test succeeds, the BBEG will either try to flee to fight another day or hunker down and pull out his nasty toys, or if like my current case of antagonist, uses puppets, will sacrifice one of his high commanders with a trap for the Acolytes. Maybe try one of these more sneaky tactics instead of a straight out furball? If they don't like the ability being nerfed and you don't like to (rightfully so) heavy hand counter it, just make it not practical for the situation? Or better yet, do both. Give the players the hoard of enemies let them grind through it for a good beer and pretzels session, and then have them break into the enemies lair/warhouse/bunker/club and find a small group of elite enemies well kitted to defend their master. Or have a trap: the players fight their way to the BBEG and he is sitting in his chair with a spacecat 40k and he has laid a bomb in a plasma reactor for the nearby city, which only he knows to deactivation runes. And taunts the players for being so gullible and predictable to allow his agents to do his nefarious plot while they stormtrooped around. Also, I'll try the sniper scenario again, with some new variants.
  12. A good point, but let us say, if a players influence reaches zero does he die? I would say no*. I would say RAW yes, but it is missing the spirit of the mechanic and probably violating the mutations intended use. Or maybe it is, and its supposed to represent the fame and hunger of glory for the Acoytle? This might be a good one to send to Tim. *Or did they do away with that in second edition?
  13. How I have handled it: Any item which is petty (loose definition; my personal concept, not worth arguing over or stopping narrative unless said narrative demands it. Example: Players want to get dinner, I will not have them roll influence to see if they have pocket change. Players are in a desert and find a merchant who has only a couple canteens of water, then the test will be rolled) is automatically given. Kinda unfun and breaks immersion a bit, but hand waving is something we all have to do sometimes. Scare resources (not a rules of it but just a descriptive term here) will be rolled for. I give a bonus, for search tests and any roleplaying the character does. I usually give the players contacts with the inquisition who can barter and lease items to them. If they want things which are not approved of, they go on mini-quests to find black markets and the like. One of the really nice features they added was subtlety and when it comes to item acquisition, it really shines as a mechanic. Multiple items or upgrades are always GM discretion here, but I try to be consistent: Lazgun plus upgrades? Difficulty (unless narrative says otherwise) is the highest rarity of any component. Every degree of success gives one addition upgrade or bump in quality to an item, the player gets to choose. I always encourage them to get high quality base guns, and then if need be (if they fail their tests) buy the upgrades or addons after the fact, both to speed the process up, and be more forgiving for the players. My players still ask me to bring back gelt, and I want to, but I don't like house ruling unless the rules pose serious problems, which for me and my group it hasn't. I dislike the influence system overall, but I understand it. Luckily those who have the previous books can simply note their cost and keep using the old if they so wish. For those who don't own the older books, its a bit trickier.
  14. Utherix, no problem like the ones we create for ourselves, am I right? There is only a problem where you let it be. Luckily the beautiful thing about pen and paper RPGs is you can do whatever you want. If the group likes to play that way, I gave options as to how to keep doing so yet still give challenge. I also gave blunt advice as to how to stop players from abusing. Regardless of wordplay, min/maxing or just jerk players, my goal was simply to give the ideas as to how to handle his dilemma. But yes, you're right, I simply solved the abuse aspect by negating it. If it were actually me, I'd do both. I would throw in a bunch of mooks to be mowed down to give the player the satisfaction of killing the crap out of some guys and then have more important or named enemies use some of the strategies listed above. Also I would hope it would encourage teamwork: take one of the counters I listed above and maybe the team would have other members try and counter the counter tactics, thus still giving viability to overwatch while creating a more dynamic combat environment. I have had the pleasure and misfortune of playing with people who either or both, think that RPGs are strict linear mediums or who are way to competitive. I simply try to remind people its a game, and work through it with your players, so they still have fun but still get challenged. I also love wargames and am a huge fan of the tabletop as well as Inquisitor and Necromunda, so when I run into strange rules or obvious mishandling of something by the players, I just give it to them the first time and figure out how to handle the next. I personally believe you should never punish players fo being clever or thinking outside the box, even if it ruins your plans but also don't let them agitate or take away the fun for the rest of the group.
  15. I don't really think its OP and to be honest I don't think there really is no such thing in a roleplaying game, this is a story, investigation and combat game run by the GM, not a PVP, I digress. If warband makes an all blank or psyker party and they all build it the same way, they are all going to be really good at doing whatever it is they built. This is true for anything. Deamon just happen to be on average much more powerful and deadly than the average baddy. I am in agreement with Frid.
  16. I would say no, because influence is not a characteristic in the same sense as the other. You cannot spend point to upgrade that stat line, nor is a representation of the acolyte mind or body, more of favors, wealth and fame.
  17. From your example I would do this. In battle and already exposed: Penalty for all stealth tests; enemies are now aware of the cloak and are wary of it. Chances are, the person who spotted the stealthing acolyte probably kept his or her eyes on the player when they dove or ran behind cover. They probably thus have their eyes fixed on movement and looking for the player to crawl or attempt something else, reduce or eliminate the cameolaon cloak bonus. If the player successfully evaded detection and circumstance supported it, I'd give them back their hidden statis and thus the penalty to the enemy. The best way to work things like this is circumstance. When in doubt remember rule zero. Then if still concerned role reverse, run the scenario in your head and have your player be the enmies and vice versa, if you feel like you'd be cheating or cheesing your players by mimicking their actions, you'll have a better idea of how to go about it.
  18. I would love to get my hands an a new Mech book, but I fear it would be quite underwhelming. Oddly enough my favorite expansion for tech priest and their gear has actually been the Inquisitors Handbook, lots of fun and interesting stuff in there. Lathe worlds was a good read and had some fun stuff, but overall it was really lacking in content. I was expecting whole chapters of augmentations, cybernetics, gear, implants, familiars and then Tech priest only stuff. What we got was almost three pages of well detailed but fairly 'meh' items. I don't regret buying it and it even has some great story hooks in there too, but for me it was really disappointing.
  19. A good idea to build off of if you were to house rule this, maximum amount of attacks possible be equal to BS bonus?
  20. Alright, first, try to remember, that the combat in DH is very abstract and heavily influenced for tabletop warfare, but loose enough to allow descriptive fighting. I personally have never had any problems with overwatch and reading what you've mentioned above, simply tells me your players are trying to break the rules by manipulating terms and trying to insert their own agenda and abuse the system. This is fine as long as the tone of the group is okay, but just to be sure I wasn't mistaken I reread the overwatch and did a test run mimicking your sniper scenario. It didn't work. Sniper rilfes are one shot, once structure time came into play, the sniper was effectivly worthless on overwatch. He got two shots off, before the minions and mini boss, simply took cover, returned fire or scattered. Firstly, the wording they used in 2.0 is more clear but oddly enough creates this loophole your friends are using by trying to be more specific. "Each any time the specified conditions are met before the start of the characters next turn, he can perform that attack (so long as he is otherwise eligible to do so)"pg. 223 This is meant as, anyone who does a move action in this zone, or attacks, or some other action. Once that is established, the ability is quickly restrained but still useful. If people decide to try and abuse or use wordplay to break the rules or intended use, just plain GM it and say, "I know what you are doing, and I'm overruling it." Or if you don't wanna be so heavy handed, let the enemy take advantage of the rule word play too. They will quickly outcry and ask you to be more fair, then remind them of their own abuse and that should clear up fairly quick. If you don't wish to curb them, fair enough, tis a game and its your job to make the players have fun. Let them do it, but bring counters. If your players game it lots, then they will have a developed tactic which their enemies would now expect. Just whip up some counters based on the storyline and circumstance. Or if youre just not feeling creative here are just a couple examples to shake up their formula, that I'm pulling out of my behind. Fast sniper. This can be as simple as a random mook, with a hunting rifle. Give him agility 45 and dodge +20 and maybe a camo cloak if you want to be mean to your players. He will dodge any shots directed at him with an unmodified 65-85 chance (with and without camo cloak respectively), add in the probability that he is using cover and give him a dodge bonus and bam: overwatch can't touch him. With his high agility, and once structured time comes into play, he may act first before the players, if not, he can still dodge overwatch. Then on his turn, have him aim and shoot at the overwatch player. The player either takes the hit, or dodges the attack which ends his or her overwatch. Stealth, have an assassin or a good sneaker flank or just sneak past the overwatchee's awareness. Either or both, whatever your pleasure really, have them with really good stealth or just really fast. So they can quickly move in or out of the kill zone. Counter Overwatch. Just to be a ****, have an enemy show up with a Heavy Stubber. Have him setup overwatch outside of the players arc but ontop of said player and have him declare overwatch "Anytime this player uses overwatch, I will full auto counterfire". Now everytime the player decides to cheese and use the skill, he will receive a full auto burst of a heavy stubber. Forcing him to make pinning tests, potentially being shot quite a bit and more than likely stopping his own overwatch. Psykers, have lots of useful abilites, both in defense, synergy and raw damage. Check out Fire Shield, Telekine Dome/Shield, Mental Fortitude, Invisibility and Terrify, would all be useful counters to overwatch. Brutes: Have a really big brawny guy with lots of health and a high willpower or make him frenzy or fearless and just be a bullet sponge. Combat drugs: Stim packs, slaught and spook are all lots of fun. Have the enemy use them. Vehicals. Fairly straightforward. And just in case the most obvious answer was not mentioned already, a smoke gernade? Hope this helps with some of the issues you're running into.
  21. And the obvious, whichever God they are aligned with, give them bonuses based upon their affiliation.
  22. I am not sure what exactly you are asking, but I'll try to answer what I think you mean. Player Characters will always use their own Influence stat line acquisition things. There is a talent called contact network which allows you to replace that with fellowship rolls. Modifiers will always make things harder or easier on the final test based on GM discretion. It should be noted that players can invoke their Inquisitors name and use the Inquisitors Influence roll. Which should at least be 75 or higher (unless the GM has determined some plot device as to why an Inquisitor should not have high influence). This action should not be done lightly, unless they are given the Inquisitors Rosette or have his permission to do so. Using the Inquisitors influence without permission should be a desperate ploy and the players should feel the action be suicidal. The rulebook even gives examples of how to handle players and parties who do so, often send a kill squad after them. Cut off limbs. Or abandon them, fiscally and contact wise. Inquisitors influence can wain and gain based upon their Acolytes actions (and vice versa). But the two are not considered the same. If a player loses their inquisitorial connections or as mentioned above is cut from them. Its up to the GM to give a penalty of probably around 5 points or so, (I based that solely off the super crappy reference charts in the gain and loss of influence points). The bigger worry from that part would not so much be the influence loss, but if they gained an enemy trait in its stead. As for starting+peers could you elaborate more?
  23. This should pretty much show you how it would work.
  24. I have an andorid phone now, so I have the App. But I would still like a proper .exe program for my surface or any other PC.
  • Create New...