Jump to content

Jolly P

Members
  • Content Count

    154
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. I think it's the Assassinorum conditioning that would decide this. It preaches absolute loyalty. The Inquisition is absolutely capable of breaking that conditioning, but many of the abilities that an Assassin has depend on the fact that they have an absolute loyalty. To break that training and re-indoctrinate to a similar level could take a lot of time; time, by which, the assassin may have passed the peak of his/her physical potential. Whilst still a useful Inquisitorial agent, assuming the Assassin has picked up the necessary skills, they won't be as useful as an Assassin OR an Inquisitor as, perhaps, the notion assumes.
  2. The few extras tied to Leadership really aren't enough to make it a going concern. With your Houserule....mmmmmaybe worth a shout if you liked the rest of the offered "package" from the Role or Background that granted it, but I still wouldn't go out of my way to get it.
  3. Hah! If you're going to have a Space Marine in play, might as well make it an interesting Space Marine. It certainly opens a lot of doors, plot-wise, most of which are probably very painful for the PC's. I like the idea of SgtGoon's "slow burn" as a build-up to this being the conclusion, because once something like this gets out, I can't see it going anywhere but fast-paced and frantic (Space Marines tend to do that at the best of times, let alone a 10,000 year-old, not-a-Traitor Space Marine that every Imperial, Chaos and Xenos organisation of any significance will want a piece of). I also like the idea of such a priceless artefact being in the possession of some two-bit cult in the back-end of nowhere; seems...fitting, somehow. Kind of like a certain puzzle-box that comes to mind or that jungle-themed game...
  4. I was imagining a scenario where stealth-guy is trying to get from points A-to-B, but only gets so far before having to make that choice to re-roll or bug-out; not a success for stealth-guy (he hasn't got to point B) and not a success for awareness-guy (he didn't detect stealth-guy). Stealth-guy has committed to the action, so has to make the choice and may not enjoy the benefits he had on the first attempt. In this case, moving the action along a little and altering the stakes and parameters is more fun than simply re-rolling the same test. In the case of staying hidden; the onus is on the looker to find, not the hider to stay hidden. Advantage should probably go to the guy hiding and be accounted for in their respective modifiers. In the case of a mutual failure, I'd say re-roll until a result is delivered; this isn't a case of actual failures and success and more tests=more time elapsed, but rather of simply determining the outcome; there's no real "stalemate" situation and either the looker will find or he won't; you just need a result. In the case of a standing guard; here the onus is on the stealther to sneak and the advantage should probably be with the Guard in most circumstances. In the case of mutual failure, I'd rule the same as for getting from A-to-B; change the parameters slightly, reduce any advantages the sneaker might have had for now being committed, but grant that at least he has a second shot at success because the other guy failed too. For any opposed test involving mutual failure, I think that letting the dice fall and moving the action from there (what I call the "temporary stalemate") is always preferable to "re-rolling for result", but sometimes there's no other choice than simply getting that result. Giving the players more choice, heightening tension and advancing the story, is always preferable to mindlessly throwing dice at the table until you get a result.
  5. First up...deals with the DM are a lot like deals with the Devil; be very wary of signing this contract! To address your question, though, it's what it says it is in the description; a small mutation or deformity, typically easily concealed. Traditionally, a witch-mark would be a large or oddly shaped birthmark, but other things like a club-foot, hunched-back, hare-lip or other "unsightly" deformities could also be taken as "signs of the beast". In DH, however, you've a lot more scope for getting creative, as demonstrated by Utherix. It also depends on how much you want this aspect of your character to come into play. Is it something you want to largely ignore? If so, have a weird birthmark on your shoulder and be done with it. If it's something you want to have to deal with regularly, have an extra mouth on the back of your head, or something, that forces you to wear a hood or helmet at all times.
  6. *Stealth-guy accidentally kicks a can, stops in his tracks and winces to himself, convinced he's given himself away* Awareness-guy: "What was that?" *Looks around, sees nothing* "Huh, must have been a rat" *goes back on patrol* Temporary stalemate. Stealth guy can choose to continue (re-roll), back-out (re-roll, escapes unseen if successful) or bolt (gets out of dodge, but almost certainly detected). Or, you know, he could say "to hell with it" and open fire. His choice, of course!
  7. I would still allow Foreboding without the Operate skill, but at the same penalty I would apply to any other maneuvers that I was inflicting for not having the Operate skill (which I'd rule, at the very least, -20 for being non-proficient in Operate). If he's in any way a decent Psyker and he doesn't have Operate as a Known Skill, his Perception (even at -10 for using Foreboding) will probably be better than rolling against Operate. With additional penalties, he's still going to be a little better, but not a lot. I'd allow it. Consider: - The Psyker has an advantage for being able to see the future. - He can't drive that well; he can turn the ignition and hit the gas and the turny thing makes the wheely-box go the way he points it. - If he knows that the shooty thing will hit to the left, he can turn to the right to try and avoid it...he's just not good at it when the wheely-box is going Throne-knows-how-fast-and-they're-shooting-at-me-and-i'm-scared-and-can't-focus-on-my-Powers-right-now-AAAAAAAAARRRRGH WHY AM I DRIVING!! - If he didn't have psychic powers, he'd be even worse at avoiding that hit to the left, because he wouldn't see it coming and drive straight into it.
  8. Wrong approach. Don't give him/her X-amount of XP to spend, give them all the abilities you want them to have and then calculate how much XP they have based on those abilities. This way you get an Inquisitor that is exactly as competent as you want it to be, without struggling over "do I spend this XP on improving his X skill or getting Y Talent?". You also then have an XP figure to use as a base-line to work out the rate at which you hand out XP to your players and to gauge the difficulty of the encounters you'll actually be using the Inquisitor in. ...Having said that, yeah, an Inquisitor should probably end up with around 13,000+XP. Anything over 10,000-11,000 would probably do for a particularly young, new or (dare I say it) incompetent Inquisitor (relatively speaking, of course).
  9. Back in the day, the first "Exterminator Cartridge" was attached to an Eviscerator, as standard, for Redemptionist Crusaders in Necromunda (or at least, that's the first I ever heard of them). It was only later that it became a weapon mod that was applicable to other weapons. As MijRaj points out, compared to the massive weight of a two-handed chainsaw of doom, a little one-shot flamer isn't much and I can quite easily see the bulk of it being built in to a weapon, rather than just being bolted on, which would ameliorate any unbalancing effect.
  10. So I've been thinking about the Random Homeworld table and the relative chances of getting a particular result and it doesn't quite sit right with me. Here's the current table, including the results possible from Enemies Within/Without/Beyond: 01-15: Feral (Odd: Death) 16-33: Forge (Odd: Feudal) 34-44: Highborn (Even: Frontier) 45-69: Hive 70-85: Shrine (Even: Garden) 86-100: Voidborn (Even: Agri) Doubles: Research Sum 8: Daemon Sum 13: Penal "ones" digit 0: Quarantine This gives you the following percentile chances of getting a particular result (I think I've calculated these correctly; any mistakes should only be out by 1 or 2 percent): 09% Agri-World 09% Daemon World 08% Death World 15% Feral World 09% Feudal World 18% Forge World 06% Frontier World 08% Garden World 11% Highborn 25% Hive World 06% Penal Colony 10% Quarantine World 10% Research Station 16% Shrine World 15% Voidborn Even a cursory glance at these odds and you can see that there are some things that...don't quite add up; - More Acolytes come from Hive Worlds than any one other world; that sounds about right. Hive worlds have massive populations, so lots of people come from them. Great. - More Acolytes come from Daemon worlds than Penal Colonies; hang about, I'd have thought Inquisitorial recruits from Daemon worlds would be pretty rare and aren't the Imperium somewhat renowned for it's free and easy use of penal recruits? "Strap on a collar and send 'em out" is practically an Imperial Guard slogan. - More Acolytes come from Quarantined worlds than Agri-worlds...err, what? Of course, the actual instances of Acolytes from the "optional" worlds (i.e. non-Core Book ones) are going to be lower, because they overlap other results and there's the matter of choice involved, both of the player and the GM. So there'll be less Daemon World Acolytes in practice than the above numbers indicate, for example, but the point still stands that the odds of having that choice seem a bit skewed. My second issue with the current distributions is thematic. Ignoring the numbers for a minute, let's take a look at the table. - Death Worlds are, thematically, quite similar to Feral Worlds. Great. You have the option, if you roll a certain number, of picking a slightly different, but similarly themed Homeworld. - Forge Worlds are...er, not like Feudal Worlds at all? - The Highborn share a similar outlook to Frontiersmen? No, apart from Daemon Worlds, with their "Sum 8" thing going on, the thematic elements of the table are all over the shop. So...how can we fix this? First step, let's look at theme; Agri-World: There's a lot of these and some have large populations. The rural equivalent of a Forge or Hive World in many ways, but also has some thematic link to Feral worlds with the type of Acolyte it produces. Daemon World: Few enough of these are even in the Imperium, let alone suitable for recruiting from and very little of the populations of those few are suitable for recruitment. No real thematic links to other worlds. Death World: The Feral World connection is undeniable; the harsh conditions, tough Acolytes they produce and so forth. Typically less of them than Feral Worlds and lower populations. Feral World: Feral Worlds are, I think, relatively common and though their populations are typically low, they make good recruits for the Imperial Guard; easily indoctrinated, tough as nails and "warrior cultures" are common. Feudal World: Many of these share a religious connection with Shrine Worlds. The Feral World connection of being technologically impaired is also pretty obvious. On the whole, these should be pretty rare; it's a peculiarly specific real-world time-period that these default to (though not limited to, of course). Forge World: The Inquisition needs techs and the best techs come from Forge Worlds. Acolytes hailing from them should be relatively common. Frontier World: These backwaters are probably pretty common, but their low populations and hard to reach places should make Acolytes coming from them fairly rare. The resourcefulness and tech-savvy of Frontiersmen make them attractive recruits, though. Thematically, I think they have a lot in common with the Voidborn, but where the Voidborn are weird and spooky, Frontiersmen are up-front and earthy. Garden World: Ah, the life of privilege. The Highborn connection is clear to see; not all Garden Worlders are rich, but they live in luxury nonetheless. Soft and squishy, they're better suited to the talky-talky than the fighty-fighty; whilst the Inquisition needs fast-talkers, the squishyness and naivety of Garden Worlders makes them typically unsuitable. Garden Worlds are and should be pretty rare and Acolytes from them should be equally rare. Highborn: Not so much a Homeworld as much as it is a Rank, I imagine the Inquisition enjoys employing the strong-willed upper-classmen this entry can represent. Still, the nobility is small compared to the untold billions of the unwashed masses and many Highborn will be entirely unsuitable for the Inquisitions purposes. Hive World: Ah, the Hives. Home to a grand majority of the vast population of the Imperium. A common Homeworld because of sheer numbers. For the Inquisition, though, the resourcefulness of the typical Hiver is an attractive quality. Penal Colony: Escapees or former inmates should be rare; the Inquisition doesn't like disobedience, but recruits from the Penal Legions, for use as Inquisitorial Cannon Fodder are a definite option. With the right incentives, Penal Colonists can make good Acolytes; tough, resourceful and paranoid; everything an Acolyte needs to survive! No real themetic links to other Homeworlds; perhaps Frontier? Quarantine World: Rare. As. Rocking Horse. No one is supposed to go to or leave these things, regardless of their populations or frequency. That makes Acolytes from them a true rarity. Thematically linked to Death Worlds, I guess, depending on the reason for the Quarantine, but either way a good choice if you're looking for someone with a bit of guile. Research Station: The intellectual bretheren of the Forge Worlds, Acolytes from Research Stations are Loremasters beyond compare. 'Nuff said, really. Shrine World: The Emperors Will burns brightest here and the populations reflect it. Easily manipulated by invoking the Holy Throne, Acolytes from Shrine Worlds are attractive Inquisitorial candidates, if a little unsubtle at times. Relatively few worlds can claim the title of Shrine World, but lots of people like living on them, so it kind of balances out. Voidborn: There are many ships and thus, many Voidborn, but they tend to be insular and don't like leaving their ships. The spacey weirdos that live on them have a strange kind of personal independence vs. community reliance; a dichotomy that sets them apart from ground-pounders, but gives them a link to those who live in Research Stations or other small communities. From here we can start pairing them up; Agri-World - Forge, Hive, Feral? Daemon World - None Death World - Feral Feral World - Death, Feudal, Agri? Feudal World - Shrine, Feral Forge World - Research, Agri Frontier World - Voidborn, Penal? Garden World - Highborn Highborn - Garden Hive World - Agri Penal Colony - None, Frontier? Quarantine World - Death Research Station - Forge, Voidborn Shrine World - Feudal Voidborn - Frontier, Research Now let's get the basics down. As far as I'm concerned, there's five common Homeworlds, the rest being anomalies or variations of them; Feral World Forge World Hive World Shrine World Voidborn Now let's add some linked variations; Feral World - Death World Forge World - Research Station Hive World - Agri-World Shrine World - Feudal World Voidborn - Frontier World That leaves five anomalies/rarities; Daemon World Garden World Highborn Penal Colony Quarantine World We can link Highborn and Garden worlds easily, so let's go ahead and do that. Penal Colonists should be far more common than Daemon or Quarantine Worlders, so we need to make sure we account for that. Now we need to mash it all up and plug in some numbers. Once we do that, we might end up with something that looks a bit like this; 01-15% : Feral World (Odd: Death World) 16-30% : Forge World (Odd: Research Station) 31-55% : Hive World (Odd: Agri-World) 56-70% : Shrine World (Odd: Feudal World) 71-85% : Voidborn (Odd: Frontier World) 86-87% : Quarantine World 88% : Daemon World 89-00% : Highborn (Odd: Garden World) Doubles: Penal Colony Which gives us (original percentage in brackets); 13% Agri-World (09%) 01% Daemon World (09%) 08% Death World (08%) 15% Feral World (15%) 07% Feudal World (09%) 15% Forge World (18%) 08% Frontier World (06%) 06% Garden World (08%) 12% Highborn (11%) 25% Hive World (25%) 10% Penal Colony (06%) 02% Quarantine World (10%) 07% Research Station (10%) 15% Shrine World (16%) 15% Voidborn (15%) Which, to me, seems like a far better distribution and thematically linked table (you'll also notice that all the "alternative worlds" are on an odd result; no having to remember which proc on an odd result and which on an even result). The only entry I'm not entirely happy with is 86-87, because it's the only result you don't get a choice on. I could juggle the numbers a bit and make Quarantine Worlds an option on 01 or 00, perhaps, but I differed on it. Do you agree with my table, assumptions, judgement on the different worlds and their thematic links and rarity? Have you managed to get this far, through my ramblings and thoughts-out-loud to reach the end result? If you have, my thanks for bearing with me! Any suggestions, criticisms or comments are more than welcome.
  11. Heh, it's a stylistic choice, but I like this sort of encounter being tough. If you're infiltrating a base and the lift is the only way down, then my immediate reaction as a player would be "let's not all stand in plain view in the lift...that sounds like a good way to get shot." Pressing up against the walls, sending the lift down and climbing down the shaft or using an alternative entrance (ventilation ducts, sewers, a laundry chute, whatever), hiding on top of the lift...just some ideas off the top of my head. Without knowing the specifics of the scenario, I can't say which, if any, would work, but it's the kind of thing I think should be inherent to a DH game. The front door is usually not the most ideal way in! If it's a true ambush; i.e. the PC's have absolutely no idea that someone is waiting for them, then that's still part of the intended encounter design; they're supposed to be taking a bit of flak at that stage of the campaign and it's then up to them to deal with it; wither by taking the flak or thinking their way around it. It's also worth bearing in mind that Overwatch isn't an "instant death" sort of deal. Yeah, you can get unlucky, but the PC's always have the advantage; namely Fate points. On top of that, they tend to be slightly more competent than the average foe, so to avoid "easy mode" it's important to remind them of their mortality every now and then. Overwatch is one of the few ways to do this without simply ramping up the deadliness of their foes, which can get a little silly quite quickly and break suspension of disbelief. Cultists -> guards -> elite guards...this is fine, but where do you go from there? Chaos Space Marines? Daemons? Xenos? They're all options for sure, but it's also nice to remind the PC's that even a lowly conscript can be a threat if he's got the advantage. I don't think Overwatch forces you to pull punches; for me it gives you the option of offering a threat with otherwise unthreatening enemies. It allows you the option of swinging full strength and that strength actually being a threat. This obviously doesn't lend itself to the gung-ho action movie style combat that many players enjoy, where the PC's wade through armies of mooks Commando style, but I've never seen DH as that kind of game.
  12. Well, there's a couple of things I'd point out; 1) Overwatch doesn't mean you auto-hit. 2) You can pass a Pinning test. 3) Frenzy 4) Armour 5) Assaulting a fortified position head-on is possible, but generally not considered a great plan unless you have no other option. There's a reason for this. A Normandy style assault is pretty much the definition of a suicide run. If you've got lots of people, some will eventually make it through, but the odds of any given person or group of people surviving are and should be very very slim indeed. As I said before; if you want a style of game where such things are possible, that's your prerogative, but the game design as written has a much more lethal focus. Call it unbalanced, unfair or broken, as you will, but that's the intent I glean from my interpretation of the rules. Nice maps, by the way
  13. I agree that it's something of a failure of the system that there's a disparity between what is possible using two different options. However, I think the success of the system lies in the abstraction. An odd statement to make of a system that is otherwise very granular, but it's the primary reason I support the written rules for Overwatch. You don't charge a machine gun nest, you don't run into the open when you know there's a sniper covering the area and you don't "make a move" when someone has a gun pointed at you. Overwatch being stupidly, brokenly good encourages the player to think like their character and really appreciate the advantage of "having the higher ground", so to speak. It's a part of the game design, in my opinion, that things aren't supposed to be fair and balanced and the Overwatch rules exemplify this mindset. Bring a knife to a gunfight and you'll end up in hospital. Try to wrestle an Ogryn and you'll get your arms broken. Try to charge down a corridor that's covered by three cultisits with autoguns and you'll go down in a hail of lead, no matter how many of you run around that corner; they have the advantage and you're going to have to solve the problem some other way than "CHARGE!". So in the example of the Sniper picking off an entire squad in one turn before they can close, the point is not that the rules are broken, but that the squad shouldn't have been trying to close in the first place; they should have been diving for cover thinking "Throne! That sniper's got us bang to rights. What now?". If the Overwatch rules are balanced with normal action economy, charging the sniper is a viable option and there's no reason the squad shouldn't do it, from a gaming perspective. If the Overwatch rules are broken, though, the squad of guardsmen don't charge because it'd be suicide; they act in a manner appropriate to the circumstances. If you want to play a style of game where charging the sniper is or should be a viable option, then that's your prerogative, but it's not the default assumption of the gaming style the designers, I think, intended.
  14. Ah, my bad. Misinterpreted your meaning.
  15. Well they do say you shouldn't bring a knife to a gun-fight... And really? A series of narrow corridors/streets like that is an awful place for Overwatch. Plenty of "backdoors" and easily blocked line-of-sight. Sure you can't weeny-rush someone from one direction, but a single smoke grenade tossed around the corner from a place of safety renders Overwatch completely ineffective. If that grid-pattern is a city-block, then attacking from higher ground is also an option, or if the Overwatcher has the higher ground then stealthing him from outside his LoS is possible. I can't imagine many scenarios where an Overwatcher will truly dominate a grid like that. The ideal Overwatch position is an elevated pill-box (e.g. a tower or wall) in open terrain. Wide field of fire, clear LoS, protected or no "backdoor". Smoke needs to be very accurate to land inside the pill-box itself (and possibly launched rather than thrown if the tower/wall is high enough), but can be used to advance at the cost of your own vision. Blocking LoS is the most effective foil to Overwatch; can't shoot what you can't see, so either spray and pray or wait for the smoke to clear. Neither is an attractive option! Next best is forcing them to break Overwatch themselves; a couple of grenades or a really big gun usually does the trick; no-one likes sticking around under heavy fire...
×
×
  • Create New...