Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Cthulhu Cultist

Weapon Training (Low-Tech) and weapon training groups in general.

Recommended Posts

So, our GM just got his DH 2ed book and am I the only one who finds it odd that starting characters with Adeptus Arbites and/or Outcast background don't get the training to use low-tech weapons? Am I missing something? I flipped through the book and I haven't found any exceptions or clarifications... Seems like if you don't have the weapon training (low-tech) talent then you get -20 penalty if you use any low-tech weapon, period. It's so weird... I mean... Arbites are trained to use shock mauls and shock WHIPS (!), but they have to spend like 200 experience points to learn how to properly hit a heretic with a regular club? Really? I just can't wrap my mind around it. 

 

When I looked at the NPC stats I noticed that some characters don't have weapon training (low-tech) talent on their lists at all... Like space marines have only (bolt) and (chain), sisters of battle canoness has (power), etc. So by RAW they are going to get -20 when using such "primitive" weapons as combat knife or a regular sword? It's just mind-blowing. I don't get it... Please explain the logic, I'm so confused. When I'm going to run a game myself I'm definitely going to house rule that somehow, but right now I just want to understand the logic behind this.

Edited by Cthulhu Cultist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I beleive its a case they have an option for low-tech or SP firearms, depending on their starting weapon choice.

Yes it is weird they don't get both, but just consider the baseline to mean a particularly junior character with regards to training. Use that starting XP to buy what you're missing.

 

As far as NPCs, assume they all have the needed weapon training, as per the blurb in the NPC section where it specifically says assume NPCs have all needed training (except as the GM deems fit).

Edited by KommissarK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weapon training groups as talents and not skills remains one of the smaller problems in this system. Among others are 3+ rolls for every attack, WS and BS as characteristics, linear dice, and far too many combat rules for a game "about investigation."

*shrug* It's the medicine we all swallow to play in the setting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tossed that medicine out the window along with most of the silly arse rules. Given weapon proficiency is a to hit factor, and nothing else such as, say, ensuring your weapon remains properly maintained, we reduced them drastically. You may also want to go over the exotic lists and basically assign them to a more sensible proficiency. One of the most braindead examples back from rogue trader was the eldar power sword under "exotic", which handles exactly like a normal power sword in combat, but RAW, you need extra rules to use the elf blade.

 

In short: Weapon proficiency makes no sense. Scrap it or change it, if it bugs you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t see why it is so bizarre? Weapon proficiency means the (N)PC is fully trained in certain weapons and has sufficient experience to use it properly to achieve maximum effect.

 

The rules don’t prohibit a (N)PC from using other weapons but because they lack the familiarity with that weapon/weapon group, they face a penalty.

 

Doesn’t seem so strange to me. In fact it makes perfect sense.

 

An arbiter trains regularly with a shock maul. It is his weapon of choice when patrolling the mean streets. So why would he be just as good in combat when he has to use a club? It’s not that he suddenly doesn’t know how to swing a club around, the penalty simulates that he lacks experience with a club, he doesn’t know how the club is weighed, it doesn’t achieve quite the same effects as the weapon he knows so intimately….If he trained with a club (e.g. gets the proficiency), he can use a club without a penalty.

 

Same with the power sword vs. eldar sword. They aren’t exactly the same weapons. They are weaponized expressions of very different cultures, as different as broadsword vs a rapier or khopesh. While they are all swords, it would take some getting used to it to be able to wield it properly. Hence the requirement to acquire exotic weapon proficiency for an elf blade.

 

You might as well get rid of all the lore subtypes. After all, if you know one, you know them all, right? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aside from your comparison regarding lore being a ridiculous strawman, I'd happily hear you explain how these two weapons handle completely differently to the point of requiring an additional five hundred experience points to weild properly. Keep in mind the penalty for "untrained use" is no small thing, but rather a whopping -20.

 

Eldar power sword, exotic proficiency:

http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/warhammer40k/images/e/e4/EldarPowerSword.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20120926053711

Imperial power sword, power weapon proficiency:

http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/warhammer40k/images/b/b1/IG_Power_Sword.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20140105000840

 

Your explination should be hilarious. After all, you're trying to convince me that two clubs handle differently, while an axe and a sword, if both primitive weapons, handle exactly the same.

 

It gets even funnier when you take a look at pistol weaponry. You have several recoilless side-arms of similar make and build, and your penalty for untrained use is to hit. I could understand increased reload times, trouble with weapon maintenence etc., but with weapons of almost identical make and ballistic handling, things get ridiculous fast.

 

Las pistol:

http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/warhammer40k/images/8/82/Accatran_Pattern_Mk_II_Hvy_Laspistol.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20130309035156

Plasma pistol:
http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20140103082204/warhammer40k/images/3/37/Archaic_Plasma_Pistol_2.jpg
Melta/Inferno pistol:

http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/warhammer40k/images/9/97/Inferno_Pistol_%27Melta%27_Pattern.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20121129173330

 

None of the above weapons have recoil, they all operate within the same range and shoot at similar frequencies and with similar speed til impact. Given their nature, they also lack scatter, and do not "pull" in any particular direction. So, please do tell me, why do I pay out of my arse for additional proficiencies to compensate an ACCURACY penalty, with weapons that have identical handling?

Edited by DeathByGrotz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always envisioned the Weapon Proficiencies to be like having a background in handling a certain type/group of weapons, so not limited to just 1 weapon. So in case of Primitive weapons, that will include both swords and axes for instance.

 

In case of Exotic Weapons, those kind of weapons are just so rare and illegal that you'll be very limited in your training, hence you can't devote as much time training compared to normal weapons groups.

 

Some things may seem a bit odd, but I'd just file it under "game balance" + "abstraction for simplicity" and be done with it. You can twist it in some other system, but you'll always have certain quirks when you abstract something out. It's the nature of games in general, it all just comes down to what you personally prefer. 

 

And as DeathByGrotz stated in his ever happy demeanor, you can always just alter the rules if you don't like it.

Edited by Gridash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aside from your comparison regarding lore being a ridiculous strawman, I'd happily hear you explain how these two weapons handle completely differently to the point of requiring an additional five hundred experience points to weild properly. Keep in mind the penalty for "untrained use" is no small thing, but rather a whopping -20.

 

Eldar power sword, exotic proficiency:

http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/warhammer40k/images/e/e4/EldarPowerSword.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20120926053711

Imperial power sword, power weapon proficiency:

http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/warhammer40k/images/b/b1/IG_Power_Sword.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20140105000840

 

Your explination should be hilarious. After all, you're trying to convince me that two clubs handle differently, while an axe and a sword, if both primitive weapons, handle exactly the same.

 

It gets even funnier when you take a look at pistol weaponry. You have several recoilless side-arms of similar make and build, and your penalty for untrained use is to hit. I could understand increased reload times, trouble with weapon maintenence etc., but with weapons of almost identical make and ballistic handling, things get ridiculous fast.

 

Las pistol:

http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/warhammer40k/images/8/82/Accatran_Pattern_Mk_II_Hvy_Laspistol.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20130309035156

Plasma pistol:

http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20140103082204/warhammer40k/images/3/37/Archaic_Plasma_Pistol_2.jpg

Melta/Inferno pistol:

http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/warhammer40k/images/9/97/Inferno_Pistol_%27Melta%27_Pattern.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20121129173330

 

None of the above weapons have recoil, they all operate within the same range and shoot at similar frequencies and with similar speed til impact. Given their nature, they also lack scatter, and do not "pull" in any particular direction. So, please do tell me, why do I pay out of my arse for additional proficiencies to compensate an ACCURACY penalty, with weapons that have identical handling?

 

Sigh...

 

We are not talking about a rule which is poorly written or overly complex and thus in need of a bit of massaging.

 

This is a more fundemental issue, in which something is considered "illogical". Obviously, proficiencies aren't totally logical. If they were made to be, they would have to make many different subtypes to cover any and each possibility. So for example, for weapon proficiencies, they have gone with broad groups. Now you can question the rationale behind those choices but in the end, you have to either take proficiency for every single weapon or accept broad categories. Listing how each weapon either is different or stunningly similar doesn't change that...

 

The game rules assume you are proficient with certain weapons if you take that weapon proficiciency and that you aren't if you lack the weapon proficiency. It's that simple. Now that may lead to some illogical situations (like with a club) but in a game you have to accept certain abstractions.

 

And the game provides a solution: either take the penalty hit for using a weapon you are not considered proficient in or invest in the necessary proficiency (You want to use an elf blade? Then learn how to....!)

 

Arguing about the rightness doesn't really help unless you want to rework the entire broad group to satisfy your own personal penchant. Which is fine. Every player can play it their own way. But arguing that its unfair to have to spend (precious) XP on exotic proficieny because a sword is a sword is wrong IMO because the game makes that distinction. Just as it makes a distinction between certain lore skills.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not arguing it's unfair, I'm arguing it's a failure in design that could be remedied by something so simple as this:

 

Proficiency in:

Unarmed (replacing the unarmed master etc. talents and allowing proper use of unarmed supplementaries, like shock knuckles)

Swords

Axes

Polearms

Pistols

Rifles

Recoil automatics

Launchers

Thrown weapons

 

And there we go. That's all it takes. If you want more, slap on chain and heavy as tier one blanket upgrades, and you pretty much got it all covered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And then we could start arguing that a sword like a katana handles differently than broadsword or a scimitar, needing additional changes to the difficulty level when striking or parrying. Same for normal swords and chain swords.

 

I'd rather call it a failure in presenting reality than a failure in design. The outcome of the design is what they intended it to be, being therefor a success. However presenting reality accurately would make it overall very complex, more complex than the abstracted system you just suggested and claiming to be the holy grail that the designers somehow overlooked.

 

Any roleplaying system uses abstractions to present reality, I'd even argue that computer games does exactly the same. It doesn't matter if it isn't entirely realistic, it should be fun for the mainstream player.

 

The difference is, you prefer your abstracted design rather than the abstracted design presented in the book. If that's a failure to you then yes it is, in your opinion and just for you and a select few others.

Edited by Gridash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh, what?
DeathByGrotz, I generally agree with what you're saying but what was that post supposed to mean?

To be a bit pedantic because I find it fascinating, Las and Plasma weaponry should have some recoil. MUCH less than comparable kinetic weaponry, so that, iirc, the guns of an X-Wing would have a recoil like a .22. Light does carry momentum, after all.
Plasma would have more recoil, due to operating with high-strength magnetic fields. Still less than traditional firearms since the plasma weighs almost nothing and has an essentially explosive effect which would require heavy bullets to achieve but not nothing.

More on-topic: I think that grouping Weapon Training the way it is now only makes sense if and only if Weapon Maintenance were a thing. Because caring for a Las-Weapon will be different than caring for Plasma, if you do it in depth. Since only the Mechanicus can likely do that, all that is interesting here is weapon use. And for that, DeathByGrotz' grouping is massively better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Myrion: Basically, it means the "arsepull" notion is universally applicable, since literally every idea regarding a fantasy setting and its rules, in the end, comes from someone's rectum, if one chooses to be so flowery about it. Hence my dismissal of that notion and how it was originally phrased by Gridash (He's since edited, I see) as flamebait :)

 

The light and recoil bit is neat, mind. I'm going to run that by my group and we'll see what we come up with.

Edited by DeathByGrotz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I stated it as that he pulled it from his bottom (those exact words). I didn't know what he was referring to as flame bait, but I edited that part out to keep things more civil here, not to obscure things about who said what. Apparently his reaction was exactly to that part then.

 

On topic, I still stick to my original statements however.

 

So DBG, where are you going to put Shock Mauls,Shock Whips, Knives, Shields, Warhammers for instance? Are you going to create seperate groups for all of those weapons?

 

What about Flamers? 

 

What about the vastly differences between I dunno, Bolt Pistols and Las Pistols? Surely those are completely different in handling/training. Same for Bolters vs Lasguns or projectile weapons vs melta guns.

 

What about Chain Swords vs Rapiers? (Edit: I guess that one is answered since you'd add a "chain" weapon group if necessary)

 

What about machine pistols, do those fall under "pistols" or "recoil automatic"?

 

Please update your proposed changes to reflect these things first.

Edited by Gridash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aside from your comparison regarding lore being a ridiculous strawman, I'd happily hear you explain how these two weapons handle completely differently to the point of requiring an additional five hundred experience points to weild properly. Keep in mind the penalty for "untrained use" is no small thing, but rather a whopping -20.

 

Eldar power sword, exotic proficiency:

http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/warhammer40k/images/e/e4/EldarPowerSword.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20120926053711

Imperial power sword, power weapon proficiency:

http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/warhammer40k/images/b/b1/IG_Power_Sword.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20140105000840

 

This was a really bad example for your case DBG. Eldar Power Swords are made out of crystalline-wraithbone material and bedecked in (possibly) soul stones, with very strong implications that the weapons retain a semi-sentient psycho-reactive memory of it's former users. So precious are these weapons that the Eldar will literally arrange raiding parties to reclaim their blades if they discover another outside of their species bearing one, or if a warlock/farseer read the portents to do so.

 

In essence, it's strongly hinted at being able to subtly influence the user's action, or fail to react properly outside of an Eldar's hands. An Imperial power sword, by comparison, is just a sword and obeys the motions of the wielder as it is just an inanimate object with no intrinisic value outside it's own design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, live and learn. Now if only that stuff were actually in the weapon entry in the book. If only!

Reading that, though,  I'd treat it as a power sword and slap on a WP test on it, much like a daemon weapon, to control the blade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So DBG, where are you going to put Shock Mauls,Shock Whips, Knives, Shields, Warhammers for instance? Are you going to create seperate groups for all of those weapons?

 

I'm not DeathByGrotz, but here's my take, heavily inspired by GURPS:

 

Shock Mauls,Shock Whips, Knives, Shields, Warhammers

 

Mauls - Axe/Mace, Warhammer - Two-Handed Axe/Mace, Shock Whip - Whip (or possibly Shock Whip) - Knives -Knife or Smallsword, Shield - Shield. 

 

What about Flamers?

Flamers go in Liquid Projectors with the SuperSoaker and the Chem Cannon.

Las Pistols go in Beam Weapons(Pistol), while Bolt Pistols go in the Guns(Gyroc) group.

Rapier is its own group, Chainswords should probably go in Broadsword and Two-Handed Sword, depending on the model.

Machine Pistols go either in Guns(SMG) or Guns(Pistol). SMGs always go in Guns(SMG), while true machine pistols depend on firing mode: Single Shot uses Pistol skill, autofire SMG.

That leaves you with a lot of possible skills, but that's perfectly okay, because they a) are dirt cheap and b) default to each other!

If I know Guns(Pistol), I can use that, at a slight penalty, for Beam Weapon(Pistol) or a Gun(Gyroc). So if I'm a great shot with a laspistol, I'll be a decent shot with most pistols. 

Alternatively, instead of detailing it at all, there are only a few skills, maybe even only one, "Guns!" or "Swords!", governing all similar weapons. That would be close to the WS/BS situation, sans the bone-headed move of then crippling those broad skills again.

I talked about how I feel that the 40k RPGs fail to either have fewer, broader but more expensive skills or more, narrower but cheaper skills and how I think it limits the characters before. I think for this thread I've rambled enough, however ;)

Edited by Myrion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I think they should have the broad but expensive Universal weapon trainings, the grouping weapon training talents, and individual weapon talents. All three would fit nicely with an Expensive, Moderate, and Cheap xp costing. Would add alot of diversity, and eschew needless purchases for distinct character archetypes who may only need to know one particular weapon, or for the weapon-master types that need to know **** near everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Myrion:

 

You'll end up with a lot of categories, but nevertheless it could work. 

 

I'll think a bit more about it later.

 

@Cogniczar

 

Agreed. Maybe just add the option to specialize in 1 particular weapon without having to go for the whole category? Much like how the Exotic Weapon training talent is right now. Could be easily added to the current system. I know it's not the exact same thing as what you just proposed, just a side thought

Edited by Gridash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ooh, that's also an interesting idea, Cognizar. 

There needs to be cost balance to avoid false choices, but that could be done.
GURPS' !-Skills are priced individually, iirc, based on how many skills they replace. Talents (which are, come to think of it, the middle price bit) cost 5x as much as a single skill and give you ~8 skills. However, they are limited and can't be improved as much as a regular skill. In return they have some goodies on top, like a reputation bonus with people in the field it covers because your talent is obvious :)

Gridash, yeah, it'd be a different design, but it can work very well. Both GURPS and The Dark Eye went that way and for them and their goals it's good.
FATE went entirely the other way, having very few skills, which you can only upgrade at climactic points in the story, but again, for its goals that's exactly the right way to go.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More on-topic: I think that grouping Weapon Training the way it is now only makes sense if and only if Weapon Maintenance were a thing. Because caring for a Las-Weapon will be different than caring for Plasma, if you do it in depth. Since only the Mechanicus can likely do that, all that is interesting here is weapon use. And for that, DeathByGrotz' grouping is massively better.

 

 

The rules use a ballistic skill test to unjam a weapon which to me suggests maintenance skill with that weapon is covered too by this proficiency. The game just doesn't add regular maintenance tests of gear/weapons because that would be tedious in a rpg. But very realistic...

 

So if your ballistic skill is -20 because you don't have the required weapon proficiency, you'd also be less able to unjam an unfamiliar weapon....

 

 

And in-game, I rather doubt tech priests are responsible for routine maintenance of hand-held weapons for citizens or even the Imperial Guard. In a galaxy of guns, there simply aren't enough tech-priests to handle all of them......

Edited by ranoncles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not for the routine maintenance, but that's mostly cleaning the barrel and oiling the trigger, which is the same for all guns, no?

Sure, you have to take them apart differently, but that's true for Cadian Lasgun vs Bullpup Lasgun vs MkIV Command Laspistol and we don't distinguish there.

Again, the game can't decide whether it wants to be detailed (and needs to make skills accessible) or streamlined (and you don't need as many skills).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...