Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
KommissarK

Enemies within Rules Questions

Recommended Posts

-Is it intentional that there is no wording preventing a male character from selecting the Adeptus Sororitas background? Or could it be considered like the AAT, where a non-psyker character is considered to instead be a handler type? If that is the case, then should there not be a gender requirement on the Sister of Battle elite advance?

 

-How do talents interact with a Sororitas "gaining" corruption points? Obviously in the absence of anything they just get that many IP, minus 1, but what about other talents? For example if the character has a talent that reduces the amount of CP they gain by 1, does this affect the total IP a Sororitas would be gaining? What if they also had a talent that reduces IP gains by 1? Would a Sororitas have a net IP gain of that many CP - 3? Seems rather effective. The wording on the Sororitas ability says "gain 1 or more Corruption points," so it would seem the rules interacting with CP gain would kick in to reduce that, but then it still goes on to say they "gains that many Insanity points," thus also triggering the IP related reduction effects.

 

-Can Sororitas become Psykers? Seems entirely possible (and I would say preferable that its at least an option for all those wacky character concepts), but given the above, seems like there are several tools at their disposal to mitigate anything bad. Consider too if they take the new Tainted Psyker talent combined with the possibilities of the above rules interpretations. The Sororitas Psyker could willfully take 3 CP points each time they manifest, get a +30 bonus on the test, and still suffer no ill effects. Now sure, this is a partciularly able character, having picked several talents with pretty high pre-reqs, and its definitely an awkward combination of RP conditions, but still, a -constant- +30 bonus to all manifest power attempts!

 

-Cleanse With Fire: can it keep triggering re-rolls or is it just one re-roll?

 

-Penitent's Cleansing Pain: Can they use this bonus on extended tests (e.g. flagellents hurting themsevles before studying in a library)

 

-The Snapper Repeating rifle seems exceptionally heavy for a "basic" weapon

 

-Cerberus Heavy Flamer: Do you realize what you've unleashed by having a spray/flame weapon with semi-automatic fire?! It can now fire under Surpressing Fire, cause Pinning, and make it remarkably more difficult to put the fire out (they have to break pinning, all the while also having to test to not take any actions that turn). Also of note is this might be the first time a Spray weapon does have semi auto - how does this interact with Surpressing Fire? 30 degree cone and still hit everything?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is my take on this.

 

- while it is not explicitly forbidden in the box, the text makes it very clear that it is an all-female order, so no boys in this club.

 

-I think the effects should stack, but IIRC the only thing outside form some inquisitor talents that can decrease insanity or corruption are some divination results, so it should never be more then -2 and impossible to deliberate build. 

 

-Everyone can become a psyker (unless he is untouchable). However what you describe should not work, since pure faith should not shield you from deliberate corruption. At least that is how I would rule.

 

-not sure on this one. I have the same question about Hammer of the Emperor.  

 

-I see no reason why not. The Pain helps you focus. 

 

-I never cared about weight rules, but yeah I guess it is heavy.

 

-i'd say it causes pinning but you get +20 to the AG roll to avoid it. 

Edited by Duskwalker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-Is it intentional that there is no wording preventing a male character from selecting the Adeptus Sororitas background? Or could it be considered like the AAT, where a non-psyker character is considered to instead be a handler type? If that is the case, then should there not be a gender requirement on the Sister of Battle elite advance?

 

At several points in the text it denotes that they are all female, there is no such thing as a male sister of battle, merely thinking there should be is heresy.

 

-How do talents interact with a Sororitas "gaining" corruption points? Obviously in the absence of anything they just get that many IP, minus 1, but what about other talents? For example if the character has a talent that reduces the amount of CP they gain by 1, does this affect the total IP a Sororitas would be gaining? What if they also had a talent that reduces IP gains by 1? Would a Sororitas have a net IP gain of that many CP - 3? Seems rather effective. The wording on the Sororitas ability says "gain 1 or more Corruption points," so it would seem the rules interacting with CP gain would kick in to reduce that, but then it still goes on to say they "gains that many Insanity points," thus also triggering the IP related reduction effects.

 

Well, they are utterly incorruptible, they are extremely unlikey to have much worry with corruption or insanity since they tend towards high willpower wo sure let it all stack

 

-Can Sororitas become Psykers? Seems entirely possible (and I would say preferable that its at least an option for all those wacky character concepts), but given the above, seems like there are several tools at their disposal to mitigate anything bad. Consider too if they take the new Tainted Psyker talent combined with the possibilities of the above rules interpretations. The Sororitas Psyker could willfully take 3 CP points each time they manifest, get a +30 bonus on the test, and still suffer no ill effects. Now sure, this is a partciularly able character, having picked several talents with pretty high pre-reqs, and its definitely an awkward combination of RP conditions, but still, a -constant- +30 bonus to all manifest power attempts!

 

Nope, no chance.  Psykers are mutants, sisters are immune to mutation, it can't happen, they have saints and saintly powers instead

 

-Cleanse With Fire: can it keep triggering re-rolls or is it just one re-roll?

 

Hmmm not sure, i'd say go for it, reroll away, flamers are terrible late game so maybe it keeps them viable

 

-Penitent's Cleansing Pain: Can they use this bonus on extended tests (e.g. flagellents hurting themsevles before studying in a library)

 

naw, she'd have to make the roll to study next turn, and studying takes hours.  It's clearly intended as a combat buff.

 

-The Snapper Repeating rifle seems exceptionally heavy for a "basic" weapon

 

Well it is basically 8 rifles tied together, the thing is gigantic, think of a less refined gatling gun than the one at the end of Last Samurai, its basic cos its just the best they can do.

 

-Cerberus Heavy Flamer: Do you realize what you've unleashed by having a spray/flame weapon with semi-automatic fire?! It can now fire under Surpressing Fire, cause Pinning, and make it remarkably more difficult to put the fire out (they have to break pinning, all the while also having to test to not take any actions that turn). Also of note is this might be the first time a Spray weapon does have semi auto - how does this interact with Surpressing Fire? 30 degree cone and still hit everything?

 

pg224 Suppressing Fire Second Paragraph, The charachter does not roll to hit following the usual penalties, instead the char makes a hard(-20) BS test to see if he hit anything, if it suceeds he hits one thing, for every 2 successes.

 

So GMs choice really, he can use these rules or use the spray rules, but with a +30 bonus on peoples agi checks (+20 cos the penalty for suppresion, +another 10 cos standard attacks are +10 base) or just use the suppresion rules so maybe you get 1 or 2 hits.  As for how being pinned and on fire work: start of the turn 1) take d10 energy damage ignoring armour, 2) you test to see wp (+0) if you run around in terror, if you don't, then 3) you may either, a) move your agility rating to hide in full cover, if you can't then you must b) move your agility rating directly away from the flamer.  4) At the end of your turn you may test wp(+30) if you are in cover to remove pinning.

 

Taking all that into account, its clear that you should use the rules for suppresion fire and not spray when firing it for suppression, since using the spray rules, just means you set way way less people on fire and sure its harder to put them out, but not enough to make up for the difference.  Using the suppresion rules means its got some superb uses, vs high agility eldar, which a flamer is normally pointless against, you can now swap to suppression mode, and although its a hard BS test, you might at least score some hits, and even if you don't they all get supressed.  Its nice to see a flamer that works into the mid game, normally they are just totally brutal starting char weapons that quickly become obsolete. Even Eldar may struggle to dodge a 30 metre long cone of flame!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-But couldn't the Adepta Sororitas background be used to create say... male instructors or other functionaries that work closely with the Sororitas? Similar as to how the AAT background doesn't necessairly mean that the character is a psyker. Also, look up "Frateris Militias" Again, I would say its more a failure on the part of the rules, and unless its intended that the background could be used for the above sort of examples, some sort of wording should be added into the rules block for the background.

 

-On the talent interaction: being able to reduce any source of corruptuion by 3 or more strikes me as a fairly vast decrease of potential CPs-turned-IPs.

 

-The mechanics of the game should also refelect the fluff then. Its a failure on the writing of the book if the mechanics do not include relevant fluff based things such as sisters not being psykers.

 

-Flamers being crappy is hardly a justification for infinite rerolls/"super-proven" weapon quality. Besides, given that fire damage isn't reduced by toughness, I'd hardly say they're that bad.

 

-Its a bonus to an action taken the next turn. Just because studying takes time, doesn't really mean that the roll for the action isn't the first thing done. Yes, its clearly a stretch of the rules, but why should they be so strict as the bonus being for combat?

 

-But thats the point. If the Snapper repeating rifle is "gigantic," shouldn't it be classified as a Heavy weapon that requires bracing? Why is it Basic? I have a hard time imagining slinging around a 100 pound rifle. I could see carting this thing around or having to brace it, but again, that means heavy weapon. What do you mean by "its the best they can do"? That doesn't make sense. The weapon itself is astoundingly heavy and would require most normal people to at least brace the weapon before attempting to fire, if not at least have it mounted on some sort of platform.

 

-The Spray quality negates the need for a BS test with Surpressing Fire.

I'm not sure where you're getting this idea that the Ag test to avoid the hit from a Spray attack gets a bonus. Thats only if the attacker isn't trained. While I think its a bit of a novel idea to apply the Surpressing Fire BS penalty as a bonus on the Ag test to avoid, I don't think thats a really fair way to handle it.

 

Do you not think that having to make 2 WP tests to avoid moving at just your Ag bonus towards the nearest cover, all while suffering 1d10 unresistable Energy damage, is a rather dire state to be in, and is all the result of a single weapon attack?

 

I mean sure, getting hit by a Lascannon would suck too, but this is a Spray weapon. The dice economy is already not in the favor of the victim. No roll to hit had to be made, and its purely a result of failing an Agi check, failing to dodge, and then failing the WP test for Pinning. It just strikes me as exceptionally effective for a single weapon, especially given that it can inflict this state upon multiple targets at once. Yes thats just how brutal things are, but I think the primary issue is that someone wasn't thinking when they gave the weapon a Semi-Automatic rate of fire. They just felt it was a good way to make it more impressive and deal damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-But couldn't the Adepta Sororitas background be used to create say... male instructors or other functionaries that work closely with the Sororitas? Similar as to how the AAT background doesn't necessairly mean that the character is a psyker. Also, look up "Frateris Militias" Again, I would say its more a failure on the part of the rules, and unless its intended that the background could be used for the above sort of examples, some sort of wording should be added into the rules block for the background.

 

I would say its fine to make a male character using the adepta sororitas background as long as you have an alternate fluff justification. First edition ascension heirophants could be largely immune to corruption so male characters being able to use this background to continue to represent that is a good idea to me. They probably were just trying to leave character creation open to possibilities. Its a big galaxy.

 

-On the talent interaction: being able to reduce any source of corruptuion by 3 or more strikes me as a fairly vast decrease of potential CPs-turned-IPs.

To really do anything crazy would require the combined use of sister of battle and inquisitor talents along side the adepta sororitas background so I don't think its really an issue. An Inquisitor and Sister of Battle being in the same group or being the same character should be very difficult to corrupt.

 

-The mechanics of the game should also refelect the fluff then. Its a failure on the writing of the book if the mechanics do not include relevant fluff based things such as sisters not being psykers.

adeptas sororitas are immune to warp related mutation. That doesn't mean they can't be born with the psyker gift/curse since it can be passed down genetically and go undiscovered until it manifests. It would however make for a challenging roleplaying situation since sororitas generally do not like psykers and the only way to do it is to be unsanctioned too. It would probably lead to a crisis of faith. This should be a rare situation but not impossible which, I suspect, is why they didn't forbid it.  If you were to find a psyker adepas sororitas anywhere it would be working for the inquisition.

 

-Flamers being crappy is hardly a justification for infinite rerolls/"super-proven" weapon quality. Besides, given that fire damage isn't reduced by toughness, I'd hardly say they're that bad.

I'd say only can reroll it once. In my experience most games do not allow indefinite rerolls. Also fire damage IS reduced by toughness. It ignores armor and that's only from being on fire the initial hit from a flamer doesn't ignore either.

 

-Its a bonus to an action taken the next turn. Just because studying takes time, doesn't really mean that the roll for the action isn't the first thing done. Yes, its clearly a stretch of the rules, but why should they be so strict as the bonus being for combat?

Agreed

 

-But thats the point. If the Snapper repeating rifle is "gigantic," shouldn't it be classified as a Heavy weapon that requires bracing? Why is it Basic? I have a hard time imagining slinging around a 100 pound rifle. I could see carting this thing around or having to brace it, but again, that means heavy weapon. What do you mean by "its the best they can do"? That doesn't make sense. The weapon itself is astoundingly heavy and would require most normal people to at least brace the weapon before attempting to fire, if not at least have it mounted on some sort of platform

 

-The Spray quality negates the need for a BS test with Surpressing Fire.

I'm not sure where you're getting this idea that the Ag test to avoid the hit from a Spray attack gets a bonus. Thats only if the attacker isn't trained. While I think its a bit of a novel idea to apply the Surpressing Fire BS penalty as a bonus on the Ag test to avoid, I don't think thats a really fair way to handle it.

 

Do you not think that having to make 2 WP tests to avoid moving at just your Ag bonus towards the nearest cover, all while suffering 1d10 unresistable Energy damage, is a rather dire state to be in, and is all the result of a single weapon attack?

 

I mean sure, getting hit by a Lascannon would suck too, but this is a Spray weapon. The dice economy is already not in the favor of the victim. No roll to hit had to be made, and its purely a result of failing an Agi check, failing to dodge, and then failing the WP test for Pinning. It just strikes me as exceptionally effective for a single weapon, especially given that it can inflict this state upon multiple targets at once. Yes thats just how brutal things are, but I think the primary issue is that someone wasn't thinking when they gave the weapon a Semi-Automatic rate of fire. They just felt it was a good way to make it more impressive and deal damage.

It seems reasonable to apply modifiers to the agility test to avoid the spray weapon hit depending on circumstances. All tests can be modified due to circumstances so just because untrained is the only one mentioned doesn't mean others can't come up. You could also forbid flamers from using the suppressing fire action since suppressing fire specifically mentions Ballistic skill tests and spray weapons don't make Ballistic skill tests. Could save a whole lot of trouble considering how stupid pinning flame weapons can be. Here's another interesting question, how does a semi auto burst even work for a spray weapon? It doesn't explain this anywhere. Does it cause two agility tests one for each shot? Is it one agility test that needs 3 degrees to avoid both hits? Is it one agility test that requires 3 degrees of failure to cause the second hit? Does each successful hit then each cause a separate agility test to avoid catching fire or one or one with a penalty? Depending on the answers to these questions that possibly 4 freaking agility tests per turn per character in the area of effect not counting dodge attempts which is a ridiculous amount of rolling for a GM who's NPC's just got shot at. Add in all the potential willpower tests it can cause from suppressing fire and it can really bog things down.

Edited by Skarsnik38

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bracing represents the fact of being prepared to endure the recoil of the heavy weapon. A weapon that is heavy by itself but firing "normal" projectiles would not need to be braced, in fact, its own weight would be enough to soak the recoil.

 

So no, the snapper is logical as it is. It is heavy because it has 8 small canons to shoot "normal musket shots", but each shot is still the same recoil of a normal musket/flintlock rifle. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bracing represents the fact of being prepared to endure the recoil of the heavy weapon. A weapon that is heavy by itself but firing "normal" projectiles would not need to be braced, in fact, its own weight would be enough to soak the recoil.

 

So no, the snapper is logical as it is. It is heavy because it has 8 small canons to shoot "normal musket shots", but each shot is still the same recoil of a normal musket/flintlock rifle. 

Where does a weapon like a lascannon fit into that then? From DH1, its only slightly heavier at 55kg, but arguably has no recoil either. Yet its a Heavy weapon. Why? Most likely because for the average human to be able to wield it (e.g. point it in the direction they want to shoot), it must still be braced.

 

I'm sorry, I guess I just don't lug around exceptionally heavy objects around all day to know what wielding a weapon that weighs this much would be like, it just strikes me as particularly odd.

 

A 45kg gun just doesn't fit into the "rifle" form factor. This thing should clearly be mounted onto some sort of gun carriage, or at least rquire some form of bracing to fire from a standing position. Not due to recoil, but due to size/weight.

Edited by KommissarK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm there is a load of material out there on the web about the sisters of battle, my knowledge is a little out of date (i stopped playing the warhammer 40k 15 years ago) and there has certainly been a lot of softening on what the sisters of battle are, but basically, they were the brides of the emperor(i note this is change to daughters now), what else they are depends a bit on what lore you read, either filled with holy calling, or chemically neutered and indoctrinated, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle, but the same things remain, they are so full of the love of the emperor they don't need men for companionship, they have no sexual desire and they have no desire to reproduce (if they are even capable of it).  Being female is not the only requirement of being Adepta Sororitas it is just one of them, actually getting all the lore and rules to govern all this stuff into the book would have been all but impossible.  The reason they are immune to corruption, is that the emperor protects them, they are bonded to him, and this is the benefit they gain.  There is no reason you couldn't use the background to create some other char with a bond to the emperor (or interestingly a bond to a Daemon, under the justification that the daemon is the only one allowed to corrupt you and protects you from the other chaos powers) you'd have to work it out with your gm though.

 

And trust me, sister of battle are like pyskers, they really don't have to worry much about corruption, those high WP scores bounce so many fear checks that it doesn't matter much they just don't gain it very quickly, whether its too OP or not won't actually come into question since by the time a sister of battle is going insane, everyone else is on their 3rd char for the same reason, stacking anti corruption stuff for them is pretty pointless.

 

The talent is sister of battle only, it requires you to be buying an elite advance that has a prerequisite of 50 influence first and costs 750xp, at the same time you get given bolter training and a bolter.  It requires you to have a ton of ballistic skill hardly conducive to flamer usage, it makes your flamer twice as likely to jam, and toughness does reduce fire damage so by the time you are picking up this talent, you really need all the help you can get if you are using a flamer.

 

Because as you say, it is clearly stretching the rules, and it is so obviously utterly abusable, 1 dmg to get +10 bonus on any test? utterly unbalanced its like having as many fate points as you have wounds, pretty ludicrous.  Oh wait forgot you can use your actual fate points to heal back the damage, so it would turn into ~ 3d5 +10's on a skill check per session, so eerrrr well thats all the skill checks in a session really.  It is an excellent bonus as it is, it doesn't need to be improved further.  

 

Basic just means it has no real recoil nor needs any special training to use.  It weighs 40kg because it was forged from iron, instead of whatever high tech ceramics and alloys are used by the imperium in the 41st century.  It is a feudal world weapon, worlds that are kept deliberately low tech and it is the pinnacle of their engineering.

 

Spray applies any BS penalty as a bonus modifier on the agility test to dodge the attack.  Untrained -20 BS turns into +20.  Unbraced normally a -30 penalty turns into a +30 modifier.  It's pretty easy to extrapolate from that the -30 penalty from suppression would translate into a +30 bonus.  Also why i pointed out it is far better to just use the suppression rules instead, since you will just miss all the flame attacks if you give them +30 to dodge, and it gives you a chance for your flamer to actually hit an eldar and even if it doesn't you have a chance to pin.

 

As mentioned before, it all sounds incredible, but in an actual game use its nearly worthless, enemies fall into two categories, 1) those who die in a ball of fire because their agility and toughness suck and 2) those who you can't hit in the first place, or simply can't be hurt by flamers.  By the time you can acquire this weapon, you guessed it, everyone is in category 2.

 

You may be right, they may simply have intended you get 2 sprays per turn and that's all, as i said before everyone will have their own take, i just choose to look at it in the best possible light, being able to use a flamer for suppressive fire, and using the rules and BS tests.  And it is an incredibly effective weapon vs starting bad guys, however it isn't as effective as a Heavy Flamer vs starting bad guys, but maybe it can be of some use vs the harder ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Bracing represents the fact of being prepared to endure the recoil of the heavy weapon. A weapon that is heavy by itself but firing "normal" projectiles would not need to be braced, in fact, its own weight would be enough to soak the recoil.

 

So no, the snapper is logical as it is. It is heavy because it has 8 small canons to shoot "normal musket shots", but each shot is still the same recoil of a normal musket/flintlock rifle. 

Where does a weapon like a lascannon fit into that then? From DH1, its only slightly heavier at 55kg, but arguably has no recoil either. Yet its a Heavy weapon. Why? Most likely because for the average human to be able to wield it (e.g. point it in the direction they want to shoot), it must still be braced.

 

I'm sorry, I guess I just don't lug around exceptionally heavy objects around all day to know what wielding a weapon that weighs this much would be like, it just strikes me as particularly odd.

 

A 45kg gun just doesn't fit into the "rifle" form factor. This thing should clearly be mounted onto some sort of gun carriage, or at least rquire some form of bracing to fire from a standing position. Not due to recoil, but due to size/weight.

 

You might want to think not just about the weight of the weapon but also its bulk. The snapper might weigh a lot, likely due to what its made of, but it would still be roughly rifle sized, and therefore usable in two hands. Difficult to carry due to its weight but not requiring extra support to fire. The heavy weapons weight may be spread out in a much larger, bulkier package due to being made of more futuristic materials. The extra bulk may be part of what separates a basic weapon and a heavy weapon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two questions I have are:

 

1. Under Witch Finder, it says the character counts as having Psyniscience as a Rank 1 (Known) skill.  Under Master of All Trades, all Known (Rank 1) skills are advanced to Trained (Rank 2).  It does says that experience cannot be spent to advance Psyniscience gained through Witch Finder.  I would say that under Master of All Trades, the Psyniscience skill gained through Witch Finder would be advanced to Trained.  Just looking for other thoughts.

 

2. Under the Foundation Stone of House Dane in the Profane Relics section, it states that it grants the "Fearless" talent.  Now as far as I know this did come over from DH1 to DH2 as I don't see it in the DH2 Core Rulebook (unless it is in Forgotten Gods which I don't have).  I don't see a problem using Fearless from DH1, just want to confirm that this is what they meant.

 

~ alemander

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2. Under the Foundation Stone of House Dane in the Profane Relics section, it states that it grants the "Fearless" talent.  Now as far as I know this did come over from DH1 to DH2 as I don't see it in the DH2 Core Rulebook (unless it is in Forgotten Gods which I don't have).  I don't see a problem using Fearless from DH1, just want to confirm that this is what they meant.

 

That's the kind of shoddy FFG editing I've come to know and love. Bravo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2. Under the Foundation Stone of House Dane in the Profane Relics section, it states that it grants the "Fearless" talent.  Now as far as I know this did come over from DH1 to DH2 as I don't see it in the DH2 Core Rulebook (unless it is in Forgotten Gods which I don't have).  I don't see a problem using Fearless from DH1, just want to confirm that this is what they meant.

 

That's the kind of shoddy FFG editing I've come to know and love. Bravo.

 

yeah, no fearless talent, instead you have "adamantium faith" and daemons with the "from beyond" trait.

Edited by BillMcDonagh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two questions I have are:

 

1. Under Witch Finder, it says the character counts as having Psyniscience as a Rank 1 (Known) skill.  Under Master of All Trades, all Known (Rank 1) skills are advanced to Trained (Rank 2).  It does says that experience cannot be spent to advance Psyniscience gained through Witch Finder.  I would say that under Master of All Trades, the Psyniscience skill gained through Witch Finder would be advanced to Trained.  Just looking for other thoughts.

 

2. Under the Foundation Stone of House Dane in the Profane Relics section, it states that it grants the "Fearless" talent.  Now as far as I know this did come over from DH1 to DH2 as I don't see it in the DH2 Core Rulebook (unless it is in Forgotten Gods which I don't have).  I don't see a problem using Fearless from DH1, just want to confirm that this is what they meant.

 

~ alemander

Hi all, saw these and a quick reply here:

1) I agree, that would work. 

2) Yes, mistake there—it should be Adamantium Faith. 

I'm working the errata update which will include Enemies Within and will include these, thanks!

 

–Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another question occurred to me in regards to Witch Finder.  Witch Finder is specifically there to allow purchase of Psyniscience to non-Psykers.  What about Jack of All Trades and Psyniscience?  Jack of All Trades specifically says it grants all non-Specialist skills as Known skills and Psyniscience is not a Specialist skill. 

 

I would assume that Jack would grant Psyniscience without issue, since Jack is an Inquisitor-only talent, while Witch Finder is open to all with the correct prerequisites.

 

~ alemander

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't psyniscience already possible to buy as it is described that a non-psyker having it represents his capacity to spot psycho-reactive traces in pattern of dust, frost, paint, etc. 

 

And then they put a talent to buy Psyniscience level 1?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't psyniscience already possible to buy as it is described that a non-psyker having it represents his capacity to spot psycho-reactive traces in pattern of dust, frost, paint, etc. 

 

And then they put a talent to buy Psyniscience level 1?

The Psyker trait in the book states that non-psykers cannot buy Psyniscience as a skill.

 

Adepta Astra Telepathica characters who are not psykers can start the game trained in Psyniscience, and indeed, what you say is what describes their level of ability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed; it is this sentence in the psyniscience skill description that stayed in my mind:

 

A characther who is not a psyker can also use this skill, representing his ability to recognise the subtle phenomen, such as strange patterns of dust motes or odd sensory distortions, which often accompany psychic disturbances

 

I thought it meant that non-psyker could buy it but it was represented that way when they used it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jack of All Trades bypasses the "special ability" requirement I think, since the character simply gains Rank 1 in all non-Specialist skills and isn't technically purchasing Psyniscience in and of itself?

 

~ alemander

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my first reply was no, why should they get Psyniscience they already got enough, it's like finding out your best friend is screwing your daughter, and instead of punching them, telling them your away next week why don't you see if the wife wants some company?

 

Then i thought on it a bit, and realised, what does it matter?  it's a silly talent, that just causes endless headaches that should never have been in the book.  it's flat out unfair.  You can't just give one player 2000xp and not the others, so you have to make up equally silly talents for every other player and hope they are something close to balanced.  If you ask a player if they still want to become an inquisitor even though they can't get those talents and they answer no, they should never have been an inquisitor anyway, and if they answer yes, then super.

 

I enjoy the flavour it's a cool idea, but it would have been -way- better implemented as a spend a fate point to have X skill.  Right now the talents just laughable.  Rpg games work by creating niches that people can enjoy can as a GM you can use to shine a spotlight hopefully making sure each player gets a fair share of the light, whilst at the same time allowing most players to participate in each action 9which DH already does super well, theres only a handful of things in the game a player can't attempt).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So has there been any errata on the flail thingy that--with Mono--can do 1d10+8+SB with Pen 4? I ask because that seems silly for a non-powered weapon that can be used in one hand.

 

EDIT: Oops! It's only Pen 4 with Mono.

Edited by HappyDaze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My apologies to whoever worked on the rules for the whip, but they clearly had no idea what they were doing.  The flavour of what they have tried to create is fine, but the rules are very far off.

 

this is what the rules represent:

 

A whip, which upon striking it's victim, entwines them in wire so sharp and so strong, that it is nigh on impossible to escape from without dying.  In addition, the whip does more damage than a 2 handed sword.  if that wasn't bad enough, ensnaring its victims requires no expenditure of resources, the whip may happily create enough barbs to ensnare an army, which then leaves the problem that the whip has now generated so much of this material that is better than anything else, that you can use it to build well i dunno really, but smelt it down and build a tank or something.

 

This is the rules i would use to represent the flail are stolen from the harlequins kiss in rogue trader.

 

D10+8 dmg, the whip does NOT get a strength bonus (no whip should, doesn't matter how strong you are, the ends moving at the speed of sound anyway), and you think we got this much pen without it being mono? it can't be modded.  But guess what, even at that it is simply still too powerful, and it still creates infinite wire. So we add in, that the whips owner may relinquish it to have its other effects.  Ta da, now we got ourselves a sensible balanced weapon that is still cool.

 

assuming strength 3 it is still a D10+5 damage weapon which is well, yeah super high, (3 higher than a chainsword) but we cover that with the rarity

 

leaving at it's current stats, it would need to be extremely rare.

 

Edit:  Oh other option would be to give it the toxic rules, but make them test strength instead of toughness, and tone down its damage greatly, d10+3 or 4 tops if you want str bonus) amusing as hell but you can mod toxic onto this weapon at the moment, nothing can withstand its power~

Edited by scarletepiphany

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My apologies to whoever worked on the rules for the whip, but they clearly had no idea what they were doing.  The flavour of what they have tried to create is fine, but the rules are very far off.

 

this is what the rules represent:

 

A whip, which upon striking it's victim, entwines them in wire so sharp and so strong, that it is nigh on impossible to escape from without dying.  In addition, the whip does more damage than a 2 handed sword.  if that wasn't bad enough, ensnaring its victims requires no expenditure of resources, the whip may happily create enough barbs to ensnare an army, which then leaves the problem that the whip has now generated so much of this material that is better than anything else, that you can use it to build well i dunno really, but smelt it down and build a tank or something.

 

I hadn't realized that you can Snare them and then just walk away swinging the flail at other targets. That does seem totally contrary to the intent which seems to be about entangling them with the flail (which would prevent the flail from being used for other purposes so long as they are entangled).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My group has table ruled that the flail only snares so long as it goes with the snared guy.  The damage after Mono is still patently ridiculous.  DH2 changed the Power Axe over to a two-hander, then makes this as a directly superior one hander...

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...