Jump to content

Vulken

Members
  • Content Count

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. From the Fluff a Psyker can tell if someone else is a Psyker. Obviously if there using a power it's easier but if not it harder. So I would be temped to say as a GM if your PC are trying to detect wether someone is a Psyker without the having used a power give them a -20 or -30 modifier. Meaning if there not a Psyker they will have no chance and if they are it will be difficult for low level Psyker to tell only when you get on to high XP characters would they be able to look at some and go WITCH, HERETIC BURN! and be right.
  2. Although having had a quick skim through the post and to be honest the influence system in the beta I'm not sure I like the idea of using influence for equipment purchasing. I in my view there should still be influence but this should be for getting hold of thing like loaning imperial guard troops, renting a nobles house so that you can infiltrate a noble group, getting transport from one world to another, etc. While the purchase of equipment should be from a purchase system although be more balanced than the DH 1 version was. As to me influence is your standing society how your inquisitor, the Ordos and other group view you. While this might mean you are well received it does not always mean you will be able to get your hand on equipment. Hopefully over the Bank Holiday weekend I will get a chance to finish reading up and can possibly come up with an idea or two about how I would like to see it work.
  3. That is true they will have a page count to keep to but I would rather see pages taken from something like the fluff to add in some of the very good ideas that have be floating round. As the chances are anyone who is GM is going to know much of the fluff already either from previous DH games or from knowledge of the hobby in general. I can't see many GMs going into a session and only knowing the basic stuff that will be in the rule book. As for general players that's what experienced players, GM and source books are for as they can more than likely tell any player a lot more than what will be in the core rule book.
  4. You also have the problem that in the fluff there are a small proportion of Psykers who develop later in life and if they are useful are sanctioned and used. Currently there is no way to play one of these but take the AAT background. Really I think there should be two Psyker elite advances one sanction and one not with the one not being cheaper XP wise that would create an interesting choice do you go down the cheap path save XP for other advances or save more up for the sanction advance.
  5. quote name="KommissarK" post="839954" timestamp="1376507851"] Dual wielding is the only way to perform 2 attacks in one round. Otherwise, you're performing 1 attack, with a high RoA. Wound modifiers are locked in at the start of an attack. In other words, just because you got a lot of hits in, doesn't really mean you'll get a benefit of having the wound modifiers. Having a second attack means you can get a bonus from all the wound modifiers you inflicted from the first attack. For example, if the target began the turn with 0 wounds, and the first attack you made inflicted 3 wounds, then each of those wounds receive a +0 effect modifier for each damage roll. Not +0, +5, and +10 on each of them. With the second attack though, any wound caused will receive a base +15 to their wound effect score. Thats a big deal. This works when you are using a high ROF attack for the first the only one of which is the Autopistol which would be good a against low power appoints but when dealing with higher level enemies this will be much more unlikely because of the low damage out put. Of cause I'm dismissing the idea of taking the recoil gloves or custom grip and dual wielding with basic weapons as this leads to some rather amusing but ridiculous sights of people dual wielding with bolters, autoguns etc which while funny would not be realistic.
  6. Not really I know many people who never took Ambidextrous in DH1. And this was because it didn't suit there play style. This was always a mix of both combat and non combat characters. The only characters who took it were combat characters who were dedicated to wielding two weapons. I've been thinking about dual wielding in this beta and realised its been really downgraded there's no reason to dual wield the same weapon type any more as you can get just as many attacks with a single weapon and with the changes to Melee weapons it really makes dual wielding melee weapons pointless unless you are are using one weapon solely for defence until you are a high level character. Unless I'm missing something.
  7. True I suppose didn't of it that way really. I do still like the rule but could do without it.
  8. I know there are no direct indication that they still exist I still feel that they are the ones that crew the blackships from the small indications given by GW. Much like until recently the only indication of the lost legions was the jump in legion numbers and the sheet with record purged where there should be records. I think GW have just never fully explored them in the 40k setting as they hate focused in other areas. I not read any mention to inquisitors or sororitas in them. Expect for inquisitors who have been on blackships as they are psykers and being taken to terra for sanctioning before they became inquisitors. I know there are mention of inquisitor storm troopers being used to guard those being held for the blackships but not on them themselves. And sometime there is a confusion over The Blackships and the inquisitorial warships which are painted black but aren't true Blackships. Really I think we could debate this forever but I know in my gaming circle the prevalent view is the sisters exist in the 40k setting just GW have never expanded on them as they see them as a limited interest area.
  9. I like this idea it's a good one it would balance out and not give too much of a penalty to either low level or non combat characters. Not sure I agree with this as even tho they are not as scary in combat it creates a difference between them and that can be used for non combat as well. Such as your trying to infiltrate a feral tribe well only primitive weapons/armour can be seen otherwise you suffer suspicion and attacks from the tribe as they try to take your advanced weapons/armour from you. It makes the PC really think about how they want to go forward do they limit there weapons choices and find it easier to infiltrate or use the better weapons armour and suffer from resistants and attacks. As for the modern armour comparison modern combat armour is very good at stoping knife or even low velocity attacks to the main body it only suffers in weak spots such as on the flanks, armpit and legs where it is difficult to place the heavier kevlar armour they have on the body. And as we are the setting is in the far future even a technologically regressed one I would have thought armour would have improved.
  10. Not sure if this has been mentioned else where but what do others think on Melee weapons and Armour? I like to see a few small changes. Melee Weapons For ROF I like the use of Ab but I think that either all Melee weapons should have this or none. As a person who has trained for long periods would be able to attack more often then someone who hadn't. Same with Sb I think if this is going to apply to some weapons it should apply to all. As after all an persons strength would determine how hard they could hit an enemy. I would also like to see a return to the primitive weapon quality with a possible upgrade to take this away from weapons like the mono or lathe weapon upgrade in the old rules. Armour I like to see a return to the different class of armour with effects so primitive armour only counting as half against non primitive weapons, Mesh armour that is better against blast and spray weapons. This would make different armour more distinctive. What do people think on this?
  11. Don't mean to be belligerent but in the fluff the only members of the AAT are psykers, there are no mention of non-Psyker members. The way in which the backgrounds read to me the background you chose is the Adeptus you were previously part of or in the case of outcast the fact you were not in an Adeptus. So the AAT background should only be taken with Psykers. I know this limits selection but is this not the point of the background to focus the character on what they are be that Psyker, Arbiter, Guardsmen etc. As in my previous post I think there needs to be more elite advances or similar to define characters better and things like being a scribe assigned to work with the AAT could be put within this.
  12. I agree with this. I really think handedness should be brought back along with the ambidextrous rule to counter this for some combat characters.
  13. As the fact that the black ships exist at all is a lot of evidence. In pre heresy silent sisters are the only trusted guardians of the black ships as they are the only ones to be able to resist the psykers on board. There is also in one of the HH books one of the silent sisters burns out her untouchable ability to send back a message warning of the HH which suggests at least some survived. And in many of the books it's states how difficult it is to find untouchable even for the inquisition and even tho they are rare it shouldn't be that difficult to find them for an organisation such as the inquisition unless some other organisation had first selection.
  14. quote name="Morangias" post="822271" timestamp="1374780382"] That's extremely constraining, and I don't think very accurate fluff-wise - or are only psykers ever counted among the ranks of AAT? The tough voidsman serving on a Black Ship? Sanctioned apparently. The clever scribe keeping tally of the transported wyrds? Also Sanctioned. The Emperor-damned Untouchable bounty hunter specializing in finding Wyrds and bringing them to the Black Ships? Apparently, also Sanctioned, and somehow able to see the Warp despite being a soulless abomination. Heck, the guy who fixes the Astropath's toilet is apparently also Sanctioned. Do these guys just open up all entry points on those Black Ships while hovering above the Imperial Palace and throw everyone out for sanctioning? In the fluff the ranks of the AAT are all Psykers. Those who run the black ships are the silent sisters who are all women and untouchable. And so the best way to represent them would probably the AM background then take the untouchable elite advance. As for the Scribe he would actually be part of the administratum just loaned to the AAT record the transporting of wyrds. As for bounty hunters they would be an outcast or ex imperial guard and in fluff wise would be better suited for creation along these paths then paying for the need specialist advance. In my mind both as a GM and player the AAT background should provide both sanctioned and Psyker talents as only individuals that are psykers are sanctioned then you can better represent the different roles pskers take by the roles sections. So warrior for those who served with the imperial guard, sage or mystic for those who are sent to serve with the inquisition directly etc. I would also like to see an option to take a sanctioned Psyker elite advance this would make players think do they take the cheap XP option and be a rouge or the more expensive but being sanctioned. I do think there needs to be more elite advances that help further define characters in all roles backgrounds A lot like the background packages in the inquisitors handbook in first ed. This would help define characters such as a Moritat Assassin more than just a standard assassin who as the player who wants to be Moritat and therefore restricts him self to only non firearms weaponry. Homely this is already planed tho in a similar book to the inquisitors handbook.
×
×
  • Create New...