Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
ffgMark

Week Seven Update

57 posts in this topic

Thaddux said:

Maybe there should be a way of making weapons Ogryn-Proof. :P

That's a very interesting idea, but as a GM I'd be very careful what I'm putting in an Ogryn's hands, and so would the Munitorum Quartermaster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

HTMC said:

 

 

Maybe I just completely missed something, but… what problems? The biggest concern I remember reading was having 1 leftover point, which was addressed. I know there's some controversy about some people thinking Aptitude-granting bonuses are inherently better than other options, but I haven't seen anyone complaining about anything regarding commander type, homeworld (besides wanting mixed regiments), etc. I certainly haven't seen any issues brought up that are the magnitude you are describing: most people seem very happy with the regiment creation system. Perhaps I'm just stupidly missing something, though, so please expand on what you're talking about.

 

 

 

Well, for example, we have no rules for Rough Riders, but we have Hunting Lance weapons stats.  Drop Troops are missing valks, which are as basic a peice of kit for them as the Chimera is for Mech Infantry.  Armored Company doesn't make much sense (To me, anyway) unless you throw out the Comrades rules and have a party of pretty much nothing but Operators manning a single tank. (Not that this is bad, mind you, it can be fun, but seems to make little sense in the context of the regiment creation system.)

 

In the case of Armor, as an example, most of the Doctrines make zero sense, or have little use.  Price requirements mean that the few that do make the least bit sense are too expensive to take.

 

So, you either have to take less then three doctrines, or use one as a dump stat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HTMC said:

 

Maybe I just completely missed something, but… what problems? The biggest concern I remember reading was having 1 leftover point, which was addressed. I know there's some controversy about some people thinking Aptitude-granting bonuses are inherently better than other options, but I haven't seen anyone complaining about anything regarding commander type, homeworld (besides wanting mixed regiments), etc. I certainly haven't seen any issues brought up that are the magnitude you are describing: most people seem very happy with the regiment creation system. Perhaps I'm just stupidly missing something, though, so please expand on what you're talking about.

I'm talking about the thread I made pointing out flaws in the Regiment Creation chapter:

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=306&efcid=3&efidt=690826

and this other thread discussing Doctrines:

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=306&efcid=3&efidt=678779

and this other thread suggesting being able to include penalties in order to receive more points to use elsewhere:

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=306&efcid=3&efidt=678141

There are probably other discussions as well, but those are the ones I tracked down just now.

Also, I found where I got the impression that the Regiment Creation rules weren't quite finished. N0-1_H3r3 posts in these two threads:

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=306&efcid=3&efidt=673852

N0-1_H3r3 said:

I'm not sure why this happened - at the time of writing, Aptitudes worked differently, so the original version of the Fieldcraft doctrine was quite different (the same can be said for many of the Doctrines in the book), so the change was made entirely after I handed in my manuscript (and thus I have no justification for it). I fully support changing the benefit of the Fieldcraft Doctrine to granting the Fieldcraft Aptitude.

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=306&efcid=3&efidt=671149

 

N0-1_H3r3 said:

 

This is very much the case - the Imperium is vast, and you can't expect to see everything covered. The choice of homeworlds/origins in Only War is meant to be a fairly broad representative sample (and one that didn't fall afoul of GW's approvals process).

Modifying them to suit is entirely possible, and doesn't take much for those so inclined - both the Tallarn and Krieg regiments have a different trait to the Death World and Penitent origins that they're based on.

Considering how much influence the choice of regiment is going to have on the game you play, it seems worrying how one of the only two pieces of official-ish feedback I've been able to find consists of "It worked differently when I wrote that".

There's been no word on what the rest of the squad (and the Comrades) are supposed to be doing in Reconnaisance or Hunter-Killer regiments where the squad gets one Sentinel Walker to share. Or why Hardened Fighters is superior to Warrior Weapons despite being the cheaper doctrine. Or whether regiments with Demolitions as a doctrine should have Tech-use as a starting skill (or be able to use Tech-Use as a Trained Skill when Crafting or dealing with Explosives, as another suggestion was). Or if you can change what counts as your Main Weapon for the two extra clips provided by the Well Provisioned doctrine (such as a Commissar's Bolt Pistol or a Heavy Gunner's specialist weapon).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still maintain that the Lasgun Overload setting is either too expensive for the improvement, or too weak for its cost. Its alright as it is on laspistols churned out from mass-produced laspistol mass-production factories, but when you start hitting rare, high quality las technology, quad ammo + unreliable is just too much for what SP weapons could just pick up as special ammo.

Likewise, Good and Best quality Ranged Weapons could use a little something.

I am very happy to see the Hunting Lance made useful though. Combined with good strength and charge talents [i could easily see being mounted give bonuses to this as well] someone on a bike or creature could really put a hole in things. Solid alternative in packs to power weapons too if you can't get your hands on them.

Can punch through rear Chimera armour, with some lucky damage rolls right now. About **** time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please change the Primitive quality, to better reflect its usefullness on primitive armour. Thank you. (As I said many times before, you know how to change the wording).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll toss this around here too, though it was originally asked in Black Crusade: Just how definitive is the destruction of a Hunting Lance?

Does someone with a Slayer Limb grow or regenerate it, or do they get one smack with it and are permanently left with a broken club-arm?

What about a Daemon-Weapon lance? Is that a stick wrought for the purpose of causing Perils of the Warp? Or does it slowly grow back throughout the fight, ready for the next?

I imagine those two cases would have the same answer, though, given the similar nature in both cases. One could also wonder if its possible for a good or best quality, or integral weapon version, to instead be reloadable [chances are the warheads are the same availability as the lances themselves, given they're the important part], using little shaped charges at the top?

 

 

For the squads with Sentinels, it might be most appropriate to give all of them a sentinel, but at the cost of, say, such a unit getting only half the equipment points to work with. Those choices are obviously meant for less common, all-operators kinds of parties; and this much could be warned about: You don't ACTUALLY have a regiment entirely made of sentinels; selecting this just means that the party IS one of the few [or the only] sentinel squadrons of the regiment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kiton said:

I'll toss this around here too, though it was originally asked in Black Crusade: Just how definitive is the destruction of a Hunting Lance?

 

Pretty definitive as the head of it is basically an explosive charge.  The Munitions Handbook actually lists hunting lances, demo charges, and grenades as the only weapons that gaurdmen are not punished for destroying, as, by thier very nature, they're one use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plushy said:

Cifer said:

 

Yup, definitely a great update. I'd still like to see Medicae errataed, as (as I've noted before) right now, it may be better to let a critically injured soldier heal on his own or via repeated First Aid rather than risk a failed Extended Care check which has a high chance of killing him.

Regarding formatting, it might be an idea to make "variable settings" a weapon trait rather than writing it into the lasgun and referring to the weapon rather than a trait for all the other lasweapons.

So… what else? Please indicate whether the Favored Weapons one can obtain via the box on errata page 3 are actually weapons put into the standard kit or just more weapons for whom the Favoured Weapons rules count.

 

 

 

I believe that it adds them to the standard kit.

According to the writer that originally suggested the Favoured Weapons bit, it adds one of those weapons to the squad, not to the standard equipment for everyone. I don't know if that was changed, since we've seen no update on it since then, but that was the original intention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Tech-Priests have far too much good stuff at character creation. There's no specified limit on their cybernetics or ballistic mechandendrite, they have a lot of aptitudes and a comrade… I like the bloody cogboys and think he needs a nerf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plushy said:

 Tech-Priests have far too much good stuff at character creation. There's no specified limit on their cybernetics or ballistic mechandendrite, they have a lot of aptitudes and a comrade… I like the bloody cogboys and think he needs a nerf.

Aye, I think a rarity limit needs to be put in place for the extra bionics/cybernetics, and a limit on what type of ballistic mechadendrite should be added.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I think maybe limiting it to only plasma pistol & hot-shot pistol for starters. As for starting bionics, limit it to very rare or better. Also I believe the number of mechandrites are limited to your toughness bonus. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By strict RAW, the ballistic mechadendrite doesn't come with a weapon attached to it actually…

Yes, the Techpriest has the option of taking one, but then in its wording: "This two metre limb may be armed with any Pistol-class weapon with the Compact Upgrade." I view that the Compact pistol should need to be provided by the PC for attachment, although it might be best to state it comes with a Compact Laspistol by default (this eliminates the question, and make the item "useful" when first acquired).

I sincerely doubt the acquisition of a Very Rare item allows for the attachment of an Extremely Rare pistol (e.g. Inferno Pistol).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KommissarK said:

By strict RAW, the ballistic mechadendrite doesn't come with a weapon attached to it actually…

Yes, the Techpriest has the option of taking one, but then in its wording: "This two metre limb may be armed with any Pistol-class weapon with the Compact Upgrade." I view that the Compact pistol should need to be provided by the PC for attachment, although it might be best to state it comes with a Compact Laspistol by default (this eliminates the question, and make the item "useful" when first acquired).

I sincerely doubt the acquisition of a Very Rare item allows for the attachment of an Extremely Rare pistol (e.g. Inferno Pistol).

Inferno Pistol is now Near-Unique, Meltagun is very rare, and Multi-Melta is extremely-rare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Manyfist said:

 

Inferno Pistol is now Near-Unique, Meltagun is very rare, and Multi-Melta is extremely-rare.

You're only further proving my point then (and I was aware, was just too lazy to pull up the errata notes to double check what I had, didn't think it mattered that much).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 So with the new intregrated weapons from DH, I wonder if that can be applied to Ballistic Mechandrite. It doubles plasma & Melta Clips, or seeing how it's compact, it would give the full clip. Las Weapons are fully powered by the tech-priest, and there's no recharging needed but overheating still applies. Compact Plasma Pistol using Maximal Mode every shot or having a compact Triplex Lasgun…

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do believe you'd have to micro the basic weapons… Personally though I'd prefer a compact Wrath or Ripper, or better yet an Autocannon MIU. The flesh is weak: The Omnissiah frowns upon a shoulder wtihout a barrel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dark Eldar Talos Pain Engine and Chronos Parasite Engine both have armour (machine) of 4. In TT game they have equivalent of SM armour so I think in OW they should have armour (machine) of at least 8.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While its a bit annoying, and very very troubling for weapons like the supposedly AP3 Hellguns, part of damage resistance in the RPG line here is the Toughness Bonus.

Both engines have a 9. This actually makes them extremely resilient: a Lasgun on Overload [1d10+5E Pen 2, unreliable… still say that's not enough] loses 11 damage per hit from the combined armour and toughness. Any roll of 7 or below does nothing.

Its true that its technically a little less well protected than a marine, but, at the same time, it averages a bit over twice the wounds and deals very marginally better with high-AP weaponry, thanks to its toughness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kiton said:

I do believe you'd have to micro the basic weapons… Personally though I'd prefer a compact Wrath or Ripper, or better yet an Autocannon MIU. The flesh is weak: The Omnissiah frowns upon a shoulder wtihout a barrel

Where can you find micro weapon upgrade?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hostile Aquisitions.

But before you jump with joy, know this: The weapon's weight and range are both quartered, base damage reduced by 2, and ammunition becomes two steps more difficult to obtain.

It only functions on Pistol or Basic weapons of the Las, SP, Bolt, Flame or Plasma categories, but transforms a basic weapon into the pistol class. In either case, it applies a -30 to find the bloody thing.

Put that on your catalytic mass-driver and you've just created a devastating storm of wasted time and failure.

 

Leaves you with some questions, though. Does a legion weapon given the micro treatment still count as too-big? Does a Long-Las or Sniper Rifle lose the extra damage from Accurate due to the class-shift?

I'm still trying to find out if a daemonic or slayer-limb hunting lance has "unlimited ammunition" or if you just explode yourself into a Perils of the Warp for blowing apart a daemon-weapon the moment you strike an enemy… and is it his fault or yours [ie; who's the center of it] if and when that happens?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Kiton

I'm still trying to find out if a daemonic or slayer-limb hunting lance has "unlimited ammunition" or if you just explode yourself into a Perils of the Warp for blowing apart a daemon-weapon the moment you strike an enemy… and is it his fault or yours [ie; who's the center of it] if and when that happens?

Apart from the fact that these rules belong to two different game systems and thus it's unlikely their interaction will be covered: Why would you create a hunting lance slayer-limb/daemon weapon? The idea sounds about as good as a slayer-limb grenade.

RAW, the weapon is one-use. The problem is not ammunition, it's the entire design - and daemonizing it or grafting it to your arm changes nothing about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the differences in system are themselves a little odd by this point: you'd think they would've unified the stuff, given each new book is more of a 'new edition of the rules + new campaign setting' than a whole new set of rules. Equipment in particular has a pretty strong crossover rate. Qualities from the other books get pasted straight in, and all that.

 

As for "WHY" a slayer-limb or daemonic hunting-lance or grenade, personally, no actual reason there [although with the lance's OW stats, you'd actually have a primary-class weapon capable of dealing damage, as opposed to everyone always having to go Power or Exotic or once-in-a-while Chain], but when you see possible interactions, and they aren't covered in the least… One that IS, for example, all in the same system, are the Launchers. What's standard for a missile launcher? PROBABLY krak or frag, but which? or both? And are slugs any less standard in a shotgun than just shot, when at least they're rated Common? What if you had an overcharge pack in that Long-Las there when it got assimilated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a thing called combinatorial explosion. If you have three parts of a system and each of them may contain ten things, you've already got 1000 combinations. If only one in ten of them proves in need of further explanation, that's one hundred explanations that you've got to cram into the system.

Now consider what BC has system-parts-wise: Archetypes, skills, talents, equipment, mutations, psychic powers, phenomena&perils and alignments. There are 8 archetypes, 27 skills (excluding skill groups), around 130 or so talents (again excluding talent groups), more than 200 pieces of equipment, 34 phenomena and perils, 45 psychic powers, 75 mutations and 4 alignments. Excluding interactions within one group (like a weapon interacting with a special ammunition), that's 2,577,744,000,000 combinations. Assuming that only one in a milliard of them is in need of explanations, you've now got two and a half thousand cases that need a ruling.

So… as long as the rulebook is not the size of certain books of law, it's rather probable that there will be fringe cases requiring GM (or group, if you're into all that democracy stuff) intervention and nothing can be done about it. The good thing about it is that unlike with video games, we have people around us who can change the system on the fly and improvise should it become necessary.

 

In your case, however, I think it's relatively clear-cut: the Slayerlimb doesn't need maintenance or ammunition, that's it. It doesn't say anything at all about the ammunition being standard issue, though as a houserule, I wouldn't allow for example psycannon-bolts without some serious additional work on the part of the player. It also doesn't say anything about single-use weapons becoming any less single-use, so they don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cifer said:

There's a thing called combinatorial explosion. If you have three parts of a system and each of them may contain ten things, you've already got 1000 combinations. If only one in ten of them proves in need of further explanation, that's one hundred explanations that you've got to cram into the system.

Now consider what BC has system-parts-wise: Archetypes, skills, talents, equipment, mutations, psychic powers, phenomena&perils and alignments. There are 8 archetypes, 27 skills (excluding skill groups), around 130 or so talents (again excluding talent groups), more than 200 pieces of equipment, 34 phenomena and perils, 45 psychic powers, 75 mutations and 4 alignments. Excluding interactions within one group (like a weapon interacting with a special ammunition), that's 2,577,744,000,000 combinations. Assuming that only one in a milliard of them is in need of explanations, you've now got two and a half thousand cases that need a ruling.

So… as long as the rulebook is not the size of certain books of law, it's rather probable that there will be fringe cases requiring GM (or group, if you're into all that democracy stuff) intervention and nothing can be done about it. The good thing about it is that unlike with video games, we have people around us who can change the system on the fly and improvise should it become necessary.

 

In your case, however, I think it's relatively clear-cut: the Slayerlimb doesn't need maintenance or ammunition, that's it. It doesn't say anything at all about the ammunition being standard issue, though as a houserule, I wouldn't allow for example psycannon-bolts without some serious additional work on the part of the player. It also doesn't say anything about single-use weapons becoming any less single-use, so they don't.

Very well said.
At the end of the day a book will only contain a limited amount of rules whereas player creativity can usually find or create situations that are not handled by the book so some GM oversight is always needed.

On an unrelated note:

Cifer said:

milliard

Are you from Germany, Austria or some other germanic country by any chance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0