Space Patrol Edition>RPG Rulebookshttps://rentry.org/40kRPGLinks>Homebrew Collection (Feb 2025)https://rentry.org/40RPGHB>WANG/Imperium Maledictum Newshttps://cubicle7games.com/blog/warhammer-40k>Bestiary, armoury, weapon quality and NPC databasehttp://www.40krpgtools.com/>Dark Heresy 2e Character Creator:https://apps.ajott.io/dh2chargen/>General 40kRPG Encyclopediahttps://www.scholaprogenium.com/>Offline Combined Armory (v6.48.161023)http://www.mediafire.com/folder/i3akv9qx9q05z>Make your maps look just like FFGshttps://www.mediafire.com/?laj4tr275fl2s09>40k Musichttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UCm9WFeqTgvRvyRoGD8jVFVA?>40k Arthttps://40k.gallery/>Rogue Trader Shipbuilderhttps://redlar.itch.io/rogue-trader-ttrpg-ship-builder#News>Dark Heresy CRPGhttps://store.steampowered.com/app/3710600/Warhammer_40000_Dark_Heresy/>Imperium Maledictum Armouryhttps://cubicle7games.com/blog/imperium-maledictum-macharian-requisition-guide-cover-revealImperium Maledictum: Voll Adventures>https://cubicle7games.com/en_EU/blog/imperium-maledictum-voll-adventures-curious-to-find-out-morePrevious: >>96476640How big of a fleet size do you allow your players to have? What was the most amount of ships you had as a player?
>>96542500>TQ:As many as they can afford (and bother to manage), and five (six if you count the hulked LC I sold off instead of refitting). Starter frigate, captured transport, purchased transport (on loan to local SM chapter), purchased mass conveyor (being refit), and tricked-out heavy cruiser (bargained for with STC shard).Would've kept going but the GM's hours changed and while we were rescheduling, TTS ate our sheets. Such is life.
>>96542500As a player, I've had to struggle to get even one ship, since my GMs really really hated ship combat and often just handwaved it away. As a GM, I started my players with three ships once - a light cruiser for combat, a factory ship for gear, and a mass conveyor for holding the last remnants of their people. Only one or two were ever used at a time though.Speaking of ships, I was thinking about new ship types from earlier, and roles that would open up when fighting new enemies. One new type is early in the thought process. Start with a frigate class and a light cruiser class. The frigate class would have two keel slots, the light cruiser would have four keel slots, or maybe three keel and a dorsal or prow. However, these keel slots can only be be equipped with special weapon types that are only effective against attack craft. In the same way I fiddled with Halfus torpedoes, these guns would be a special type of macrocannon. Consider a gun that's Strength 4, Crit 6, Range 5, Damage...1. Not 1d10, just 1. However, when you fire at a strike craft wave, each point of damage eliminates one squadron. So a doing 4 damage to a strike craft attack with four squadrons would wipe it out completely. While turret rating is a purely defensive system, these allow one to go on the attack. Anti-strike craft ships are, to my knowledge, a new niche that has yet to be explored, especially against enemies who specialize in spamming strike craft.
>>96542500The rulebooks seem to be missing. I know it's retarded to ask, but looking for them?
>>96542500I was musing with the idea of a khornate warship that was primarily/only a carrier on the basis that it is closer to melee combat to fight in strike craft than with macrocannons or lances, boarding craft aside. Also enhanced engines and such for ramming and ship to ship boarding.
>>96543694You motherfucker, I spent a full hour trying to remember where I'd seen anti-attack craft torpedoes to compare with only for them to be the shit you invented yourself.Fuck my reading comprehension and my life, I guess.Anyway, Fleet Defense Turrets a la BFG.>>96544282Hellbringer-class Planetary Assault ship, BFK p.105. Dorsal macros, prow bombardment guns, port and starboard launch bays.
>>96542500Guy I know floated running Deathwatch in Calixis, doing it poverty-style and saddling the Kill-Team with only a Scout Sloop. How feasible is that?
>>96544331A kill team would just need their astartes equipment, a way to get to and from the surface, and maybe a transport for vehicles. They're usually saddled with less for void ships since they're just a means of transporting the kill team.
>>96544331Whaddaya know.
>>96544608"Because I want it like that." It really doesn't need to have any greater depth or purpose other than their whim.
>>96544367Huh. Does that have rules in Battlefleet Koronus?
>>96544608He likes ruling like a king over peasantsThere's some old archaeotech device that cleanses the world and that awakens if the technology level goes above a certain level across the world (he can take his ship down but that's about it)He's bound by ancient deal signed by his ancestors with the Inquisition that forces him to keep it a feudal world despite how potentially lucrative it could be to exploit its natural resources because (insert reason here)
>>96544847no. its dimensions are about the same as the viper, which could be a good starting point if you wanted to stat it up
>>96544847Afraid not, but if I were to brew it I'd probably start with a Viper and MAYBE drop any weapon slots for cruiser shields and a bunch more armor.
>>96544039GW/C7 marketing interns sometimes try to get them taken down. Which set are you after, I'll dump them somewhere?
>>96543694Seems flatly OP. The whole point of attack craft is to be hard-to-hit, easy-to-kill wasps that assault giant vessels.Which are being bought on a single squadron basis and known to be ludicrously expensive, on par with torpedoes and nova shells.And this shit can just fly over and delete any attack craft in the area in a few turns. While Navy's doctrine is to use escorts' turrets and other attack craft to deal with them.I wouldn't let it exist at all desu.As a side note, I've just notice how similar this cruiser looks to the craftworld if you squint.
Uhm, also, another thought.Imperial targeting optics and guidance systems are pretty shit, if even anti-ship torpedoes are highly inaccurate and rely on volume.How do you expect to target tiny, fast-moving attack craft otherwise?It would be archeotech-level precision.
>>96545353You have a point, might be better to do it another way. Maybe you roll an attack and on a hit you roll for defensive turrets as though they were making an attack run on a ship, counting the number of hits as the turret strength. Or maybe you nominate an area of space to be covered by a 'flak field' and anything entering the field is treated as specified above, with the 'turret strength' of the field equaling the strength of the guns turrets dedicated to that area.My heart tells me to go for the latter for maximum Battlestar energy, and also because if you bring enough you can make a giant wall around your entire fleet.Range should probably be very limited though. BSG Fleet Defense Turrets had range 15cm, the baseline macrobattery is twice that - so do you call it range 6 because a Mars can reach out to 12 at long range, or do you call it range 3 because a Mars has a baseline of 6, and should it be able to attack at doubled range at a -10 malus like normal macrobatteries or not?
>>96545427Why not just make it a rare upgrade to the ships turret rating, since that's what it is?And make ship turrets participate in combat a little more by allowing it to attack preemptively once. Perhaps as a Special Order/Extended Action.Pilots naturally should get an opposed roll in both cases to avoid the damage.Also some of the fighters ignore/reduce the turret rating, most notably BFG Eldar craft.Alternatively, it could be an archeotech/xenotech component allowing it to attack preemptively once again, though remember baseline turrets only get up to +15 bonus. Added weapon shouldn't be more than that, or receive bonuses for aim or range.I also don't like letting players use their BS beyond +5 assistance bonus, to put more effort to have good crew.
>>96545108>>96544039Actually, fuck it, I just dumped my entire 40k rpg pdf folder into a disposable mega, so grab what you want. Some of the wrath and glory and IM stuff is probably incomplete, I haven't paid much attention to it, but I think I've got most of the fun fanworks. mega<dot>nz/folder/up4BkI7S#-vWvKeOlV8BhRcpJeqJ3NgIf anyone is aware of some free russkie filehosting site that says 'lol' at dmca takedowns let me know and I'll throw it there, we can have something a little more permanent than mega.
>>96545367>Imperial targeting optics and guidance systems are pretty shit, if even anti-ship torpedoes are highly inaccurate and rely on volume.It really depends on who you know, what your status is, and how big the computer you can hook up to it is.Ships are more accurate than a torpedo because you can fit a 50 ton pc on it to control telemetry. In smaller devices, especially bog standard ones, you have much less space, with concordantly much less processing power.>How do you expect to target tiny, fast-moving attack craft otherwise?LASERS, anon. Also point defense space flak guns. Works great on nids in space.
>>96545522There really ought to be a Gunnery skill, which you would then use to modify the crew rating for shipboard tests, aye.I'm of two minds regarding the preemptive attack, letting ships reach out and touch nearby ordnance would definitely give them more presence on the field and better justify keeping escorts, but it would also require a rebalance to ordnance to ensure it stays relevant.BFG used turrets as a coinflip to destroy inbound ordnance and a malus to bomber attacks, I'm not sure they need to be more complicated than that. I do think FFG kinda flubbed the bomber rules though, they feel far clumsier.
>>96545558No WFRP 4e? Is that so rare?
>>96545689You are in the wrong thread for that. I have them, but they should also be in the actual thread - find the warhammer fantasy general.
thoughts on blackshield PCs?
>>96545864Not especially interesting in and of themselves, as always it depends on the player.
>>96545695Thanks, I'm a dumbass. NTA btw. I nabbed the missing pieces of from you too.I had no idea 4e had spilled just so many supplements.
>>96546087Most of 4e is "oh our actual rules were unusable, but have you considered buying this update? It has two lines buried in a pile of shit that kind of change things. Editors? Those are the things that keep the twitter mob at bay by putting on non-binary elves, right?" And then there's the war and magic books which are "We added pages and pages of rules that are almost, but not quite, the same!"There's actual rules for a dark magic lore in captain-something or other's whatever, for example. A lore attribute, a handful of spells and nothing else.
What megastructures exist in 40k? Is the knowledge of how to make them still around?
Anyone know the symbolism of the XI forehead tattoo/scar on the Drill Abbot? I know this is more or less a soft release of the Preacher Jozef model, so maybe it's unique to him?
>>96546203>Preacher JozefWasn't his friend and mentor turned into an arcoflagellant due to politics whose name added up to 11? That plus the skull as the reference?>>96546200Generally no, or they're conglomerations of ancient building that become megastructures. The Imperium controls a number of hollow worlds and at least one quasi-dyson sphere, and the Tau settled on a discworld they found. Galatan is an Ultramar star fort that's several hundred kilometres in width.
>>96546200Mars has this:The Ring of IronThe massive shipyards orbiting the Martian equator are known collectively as the Ring of Iron. Spacecraft and other large constructs are constructed within the Ring’s extensive orbital factories, and many of the ships of the Battlefleet Solar are based in its huge floating docks. As of M41, the Ring of Iron is the largest known man-made structure in the galaxy.
>>96546200T'au have a few space habitats with the population equivalent of a continent-sized megacities.
>>96545353It hard counters fighters and bombers but would die to a TRANSPORT because it doesn't sound like it has any other weapons.
>>96545353>Seems flatly OP. The whole point of attack craft is to be hard-to-hit, easy-to-kill wasps that assault giant vessels.Attack Craft are fairly OP in Rogue Trader if you can afford to field them. There just aren't a lot of counters to bombers aside from having your own fighters on Combat Void Patrol, and even that can be overwhelmed. I've always been bothered by this since the setting is supposed to favor battleship type designs with big guns over carriers. I really think that there's something wrong with the way defensive turrets work in the game. Maybe larger ship classes should get higher turret ratings than they do, or maybe the effect of turret rating should be class-based; +5 for escorts, +10 for Cruisers, etc. It also seems like ship formations should have some way to combine their turret power for shared defense.>>96545522>And make ship turrets participate in combat a little more by allowing it to attack preemptively once. Perhaps as a Special Order/Extended Action.It might be nice to simply let ships use their turrets against any small craft within 1VU or something like that. This is already kind of how torpedoes work, though that's because torpedoes auto-attack anything in that range. It would improve the screening function of escorts if they could actually force attack craft to engage. It would also help in scenarios where a Voidship is chasing a small craft for some reason. This seems to come up from time to time in games, and it gets awkward because the Voidship can't really do much if it catches the small craft unless it has launch bays or armed lighters of its own.
>>96547395>>96545353You know, speaking of Novas and Torpedoes, I had another consideration of new ship types during my daily walk - the 18th century Rocket Ship. Right now, you have torpedoes, which are meant to take out ships, and the Nova Cannon, which is akin to ottoman cannon / dardanelle guns with a timed fuse and big damage. But what if there was something akin to sustain? A nova cannon could be fired every five minutes, but I mean a constant stream of smaller-scale rockets / blasts, a true artillery ship that fills an area with explosions. Consider a hull, maybe a frigate, with a prow and a dorsal as normal. But this prow has a rocket system that fires a storm of very inaccurate rockets at extreme ranges. Like a nova cannon, it would have a blast 1, be blocked by shields, and ignore armor. However, it would have lower damage to compensate for the fact that you're launching a ton of explosive rockets out that inflict only a single hit each. Your rockets would basically always scatter a certain distance, regardless of ballistic skill. Better versions could be akin to energy howitzers, slightly more accurate, but still focused on spreading blasts to multiple areas rather than one focused blast, absolutely perfect for use against Old Slann whose vessels shift configurations and webway shunt across space while spamming fighter craft. This one needs some workshopping, I'll come back to it eventually.
>>96542500No ships yet. The biggest vehicle we had so far, is a modified Cargo-8 Ridgehauler we borrowed from some Astartes.
>>96545558Not that guy but thanks chief.
>>96547395>the setting is supposed to favor battleship type designs with big guns over carriersBecause GW enforced 17th century age of sail combat by making you fall to chaos if you launch too many strike craft, like what happened to the Gareox Prerogative.
>>96542500GW needs to make a jokey side-universe from 40K where everyone uses miniature wargaming, basically playing 40K tabletop, like Fantasy's Blood Bowl. The god Arengi smiles on using wargaming instead of actual war, every faction is somehow into it, and you have a blonde Ultramarine boyscout playing Ultramarines against an Ork warboss playing Orks, and the outcome of that wargame is used to determine conflicts rather than actual warfare. That would be fun for promos and illustration content or comics to be included with new edition sets, where an Eldar farseer talks about playing his Eldar units, et cetera.
>>96550148I'm fine with that style of combat. I just want the game's mechanics to actually reward doing it that way instead of favoring carrier strategies. I'd also like to leave at least some room for carriers to work. I think an ideal way to do that would be to make attack craft defenses like turret rating scale better with ship size and numbers. Attack craft should be very strong against lone transports or escorts, but weaker against large ships or well-organized formations. The Navy's focus on big gunships will make more sense then, while still leaving some room for carriers in specialized roles (and carriers should still work against big ships - it should just be costly in terms of fighter and bomber losses). The way things work RAW, big ships are very vulnerable to bomber attacks unless they have fighters to defend them, while escorts are almost immune to bombers and assault boats due to being able to outrun them. Escorts also can't really do their job protecting slower ships from such attacks since they generally lack launch bays and turrets only work if the escort itself is the target. This part of the game wasn't thought out well.
>>96550148I went to look that up in the books and found this. God, I remember the times before GW became just another corporation.
>>96550310GW doesn't want carriers to work because it goes against their ideology for the faction, so they take the heavy-handed approach to enforce that ideology.
>>96547395>Attack Craft are fairly OP in Rogue Trader if you can afford to field them.Math that out for me, please? I'm not seeing it. The sole advantage I can find is that they can spend multiple turns piling up bomber stacks to defer damage, which like. Normal guns can do that by just shooting a guy over several turns. You're legally allowed to broadsides your opponent in a space fight. The Arbites won't stop you.
>>96550755what can a voidship without fighters of its own do against attack craft?
>>96550852Put the guy with 70 BS on the turrets and become immune to strike craft thanks to bonuses.
>>96550870and the typical 30 crew rating 1 turret npc?
>>96550755Ships have lots of potential defenses against Macrocannons and Lances. They have positioning, Evasive Maneuvers, Shields, and Armor. Bombers and Assault Boats bypass almost all of those. Only maneuvering (Evasive Maneuvers, not being in range - pretty difficult without fleeing entirely), Combat Void Patrol (which requires you to have a carrier yourself), or Turret Rating (which is a very poor defense against well-organized attacks, doesn't scale up well, and can't be buffed much by character skills) can defend against Attack Craft. Meanwhile, carriers can play maneuvering games to avoid retaliation from ships equipped with standard weapons. Evasive Maneuvers in particular scales very well with Piloting/Crew Rating, but impedes shooting and not launching small craft. It's generally a problem of only carriers having good defense against other carriers, while carriers can have good offense and defense against everything else. CVP is also the best defense against torpedoes, which you can basically only try to avoid (and really can't at close range) if you have no fighters. Additionally, Attack Craft benefit more from Character Skills than other attack methods. Ship weapons rely on BS, with lots of limits on what can provide bonuses. Attack Craft rely on Command to succeed and Tech Use to prevent permanent losses. There are far more Talents and items that boost Command and Tech Use than BS, and the BS boosters tend to be much more limited to specific use cases (many only apply in character-scale combat). >>96550731>GW doesn't want carriers to work because it goes against their ideology for the faction, so they take the heavy-handed approach to enforce that ideology.My complaint is that they don't actually do that in game rules, only in lore. I want the game rules to support the lore better.
>>96550998Addendum: I skipped armor. Bombers bypass shields. Armor does work, but it's hard to stack enough to overcome the kind of damage bombers can do.
>>96550998>My complaint is that they don't actually do that in game rules, only in lore.They technically do it flawlessly in game...but that game is Battlefleet Gothic. The reason the carrier guys in >>96550148 lost is because it was imperial vs imperial ships. The heavy ships used their armor to tank the bomber damage, got into a brawl with macros and lances, and decisively defeated the carriers because they had no screen. BFG reflects this well, and strike craft basically tickle your 6+ save ships, and that's before the turrets reduce the ordnance strength. (It's been like a decade and a half since I last played BFG tabletop so I forgot a lot of stuff). The RPG allows you to stack attacks to mitigate armor which is why so many more things are effective.Speaking of carriers, I wonder if it's possible to make a frigate-level carrier, whose only point of existence is to bring more strike craft in...
>>96551070if the travois counts, then yes
>>96551070>The RPG allows you to stack attacks to mitigate armor which is why so many more things are effective.Bombers are pretty strong even with Mathhammer rules that count armor against each hit. Their base damage is comparable to a lot of the higher-end macroweapons without the guarantee of shields eating hits, and very limited risk from turrets. If you allow the Excess Void Armour option from Lure of the Expanse, you can push ships into silly "Only Lances Can Hurt Me" territory, though.>Speaking of carriers, I wonder if it's possible to make a frigate-level carrier, whose only point of existence is to bring more strike craft in...I think Defiant LCs are the closest thing built for this purpose. Generally mini-carriers are going to be Transports that convert a Main Cargo Hold into a makeshift landing bay. Lokis in particular can potentially provide a silly range of attack options (like combining Torpedoes/Lances, Macrocannons, and Bombers).
>>96551088>>96551181Yeah, I'm not above making new components. The issue is that light cruiser launch bays are already S1. A frigate would likely be built around a launch bay, retaining that S1, so its other weaponry would likely be limited to the anti-strike craft guns from before. I don't mind - in most games, carriers tend to have good AA to support their aircraft.Between these three ship types, it is a completely new adaptation to fight completely new enemies, which is perfect. It's using carrier-based warfare against enemies that line battles can't be used against. And that's not even considering the shield ship and stuff that I've been mulling.
>>96550998If PC skill is being accounted for, you must also take it into account for the defenders, as stated by >>96550870. Otherwise you're just saying "PCs can easily outfight NPCs", which is true regardless.A single squadron can only make up to three successful hits of 1d10+4 against a target. Taking into account the fact that a cruiser launch bay can launch two squadrons per turn, that's a total of six potential hits, the same as a normal broadside - and you get zilch if the turrets manage to disrupt the attack run, which you're playing the odds of if you try to max your damage. Assuming you assemble them into a wing, you now get three plus one for every spare squadron, let's take a standard Dictator with four wings, that's a total of six attacks for the space of TWO broadside components. Granted that's at parity if you're firing on only a single target (due to guns only pointing one way), but it's still only parity.>>96551181Even with mathhammer rules they only average 2.1 damage against cruiser-grade armor of 8. Assuming you abandon big guns entirely with a full carrier layout and you play fast and loose with your squadrons, you can expect to max out at about 50.4 damage. Every one of those eight squadrons which is shot down reduces your expected damage by 6.3, and against a target with turret strength 2 and crew rating 30, you can expect to lose 40% of those squadrons - or 3.2, which we'll round to 3. This drops your expected output to only 31.5, and your attrition is severe. Put a lance in the prow and you do nothing because shields eat it. Put a Sunsear in the prow and you do about 3 more damage (4 hits, shields eat 2, avg damage vs armor 8 = 1.5).Meanwhile, an all-macrobattery ship with a Munitorium and Good macros punches with the same 1d10+4, with a throw weight of 16 (counting prow), drop two for shields, you're at 29.4. Replace the prow with a lance because you have a brain, your macros now deal 21 and your lance deals 15, total of 36 (38 if GQ).
>>96551070>>96551385Also this is basically just an Escort Carrier, picrel.
>>96551405So they do exist already. Fascinating. I checked the Imperial Fleet, Ships of the Gothic Sector, and the Additional Ships compendium, I forgot the Appendix had ships too. Although, from the description, the Escort Carrier seems to be what the BFK book references as Hold Landing Bay, with S2 and a jury-rigged setup.>Freighter hulls were often converted to “escort carriers” installing fighter support equipment into their cramped cargo bays to launch out the cargo doors. The difficult conditions meant that accidents abounded, and few squadrons of craft could be carried in any case.
>>96544829I'll add: it would need those things if you're trying to make it so the world being this way gives them something. If it doesn't, then it can just be for a whim. If you're looking for justifications that it's important it be this way, then things get different.
>>96550870>Put the guy with 70 BS on the turretsRAW turrets use the ships' Crew Rating. Not character BS, not Command, not even enhanceable by Extended Actions like Lock On Target (even Put Your Backs Into It specifies Weapon Component). One of my main complaints about this is that there are so few ways to boost turret defense vs. tons of ways to enhance attack craft offense and defense. Is there a rule or Extended Action somewhere I missed that allows this, or are you using a House Rule of some kind (perhaps a very reasonable one - my point is that this needs changes)?>>96551389Now throw in the potential effects of Evasive Maneuvers. An all-in carrier can run Evasive Maneuvers with few or no downsides, applying large penalties against all incoming shooting attacks. A lance/macroweapon equipped opponent can't use that without messing up its own shooting, and it has no effect on Bomber or Assault Boat attacks anyway.
>>96551515>are you using a House Rule of some kindWe probably were, GM just said "somebody roll for turrets" and never corrected us when we used our own BS.
>>96551515>RAW turrets use the ships' Crew Rating.Good catch, I missed that. Regardless, Flak turrets are a flat +1 turret rating for 1 power and space per, and each additional point of turret rating is another +5 to shoot down incoming ordnance - which, notably, said ordnance does not get a say in contesting. Shooting them down means they do nothing, there's no way to evade it.>Evasive ManeuversAlso a good point. Of course, while a carrier is evasively maneuvering, the other ship is free to close distance with Adjust Speed, going from a -10 to target to a +10 (a net +20). Meanwhile, unless the carrier is piloted by a PC (which, again, is just a win button), it has about a 10% chance to inflict a net negative on the other ship, when accounting for this change of distance, and a 60% chance to do nothing at all, handing the other ship an advantage. PC vs PC shipboard combat depends entirely on who stacked the highest bonuses. I can get a character's effective shipboard ballistic skill to 110, and maluses can be overcome using the Voidmaster's ability. While in theory it's possible to stack maneuverability as long as there's power spare, in practice nobody's going to cram that many augmented retrothrusters into a hull.
Methods of removing corruption and insanity in the ffg games? Both have "spend a week for 1 drop in appropriate surroundings" and I know at least one has "100xp to remove 1 point of insanity". Actual removal, not just prevention.
>>96552329what's wrong with that webm
>>96552329Get touched by a saint
>>96552371Every other frame is Gorillaman talking to Yvraine in the Bro Explaining pose. I can only assume it was intended to inflict a seizure.
>>96551723>Good catch, I missed that. Regardless, Flak turrets are a flat +1 turret rating for 1 power and space per, and each additional point of turret rating is another +5 to shoot down incoming ordnance - which, notably, said ordnance does not get a say in contesting. Shooting them down means they do nothing, there's no way to evade it.Fighter escorts mixed in with the bombers/assault boats apply a -10 penalty to turret fire per escort squadron in the wave and also get removed before bombers if turrets hit anything. For dedicated carriers with large bay counts (4xS2), it's definitely possible to suppress turrets to the point that they don't do anything. An optimal mix probably puts the fighters at some risk to mostly guarantee the bombers will be untouched. You lose some hitting power here, but it's probably a good trade in most cases. Also remember that Flak turrets can only be taken once per ship, and hurt the user's shooting BS when active, similarly to Evasive Maneuvers. Again, turret bonuses scale poorly. If you really want to max turret defense, there's a Xenotech option (Micro Laser Defense Grid) that boosts Turret Rating by 2 with no penalties, but that's a big investment to mostly counter the benefits of a single fighter escort squadron.>>96551723>the other ship is free to close distance with Adjust Speed, going from a -10 to target to a +10 (a net +20)I'm not sure this will guarantee the gunship gets into short range. A ship using Evasive Maneuvers still gets to move normally, and can still play with speed using Flank Speed. Dumping fighters while running instead of using EM is also an option for the carrier. I'm not saying carriers are impossible to beat carriers with gunships, but the game gives them better options with fewer tradeoffs.>nobody's going to cram that many augmented retrothrusters into a hull.I didn't realize those could be taken more than once, but it looks like they can.
>>96553073You know, I had checked for the fighter escort rules because I thought they existed, but I missed them the first time around. Regardless, their presence has the same effect as the turrets would, by decreasing the amount of bomber squadrons you can bring to bear. If you dedicate a single fighter escort to each bomber squadron, you've halved your damage output for only a -10 on the test to shoot them down, and if you use them all as one big blob and dedicate four fighter squadrons to fully suppress turrets, you'll have four left for a maximum of six attacks and only deal 12.6 damage (ten attacks and 21 damage if you use an Avenger or Exorcist, but that necessitates you roll ten successes). The scenario I outlined was the maximum possible, remember.I thought for certain you could take multiple flak turrets, but upon review you are correct. That's weird, especially since retrothrusters and other similar components are functionally 'as many as you can fit'. The penalty's only for detection, though, not BS.Flank Speed, beyond being very risky for any ship not piloted by PCs, can be performed by the chasing ship as well as Adjust Speed, so we can fairly safely assume that the chasing ship will either keep pace with the carrier or that the carrier will eventually flub the roll (a 50% chance for two DoF with Crew Rating 30), ruining its engines and becoming easy prey.
>>96552329Make another character. This one is dead.
Uhm, how do the Tau have interstellar communications without Astropaths?1:1 space weeaboo magic? Was it ever mentioned anywhere?
>>96553467Courier ships, one would think.
>>96551405>>96551456That's basically just Hold Landing Bay and already exists. I'm pretty certain it was the inspiration behind FFG component.But specifically because it exists, there's just no reason why nothing else can't have them.My opinion is to take a Falchion and give it Prow Escort Bay in exchange for 1 Dorsal slot.>>96551088Speaking of, just where did this Travois came from? I mean inspiration.
>>96553467FTL capable drones that jump around using their special drive and deliver data like the pony express.
>>96553123>I thought for certain you could take multiple flak turrets, but upon review you are correct. That's weird, especially since retrothrusters and other similar components are functionally 'as many as you can fit'. The penalty's only for detection, though, not BS.That's because turrets are already close to flak by themselves.Though by RAW you CAN have multiple Micro Laser Defense Grids,which I assume was an error similar to Field Bracing.
>>96553526>micro laser defense gridsWhich are xenotech for some reason.
>>96553526If Field Bracing stacking is an error, what's its fucking point? Six points of hull is a rounding error.
>>96553544Because you can make a simple Firestorm escort jump to Battlecruiser fattness with them.
>>96553569Sure, if you don't bother with weapons worth a damn.
>>96553591Well, okay. Just a cruiser. Shame no archeotech drive.
>>96544328>bombardment gunsKhorne looks over in shame at your fear of assaulting fortifications
>>96553733Fear? No, the bombardment guns are to flush the rats from their warrens so they have no choice but to meet you on the field of battle. Obviously.
I'm kinda hype for the Horus Heresy RPG. Should I not be?
Tips for running Twilight Crusade? I'll let them keep the Ardent Bane, if they duel Modren rather than fight the ship. Just a little iffy on unrailroading it. Forcyz communication through hologram only as a way to fuck with his lessers? Forcyz the maulerfiend centaur? Modren using a bond style escape hatch and other such gimmicks, possibly including more subtle mutations or sorcery? The one thing I definitely want to keep is the tide of daemon engines. I'm considering adding a point system to the local five potentates as well as the system being a quest hub for a bit. Here's your berth, be a good slave. Do quests or murder the locals to get your invite to the palace.Same for tips on removing the railroady aspect of Soul Reaver, actually.
>>96554541Remember that it sucks until proven otherwise. Wait two weeks after release and then see what folks are saying.Personally, I've heard it might have ship combat, and I'm a huge sucker for spaceships, but until I lay eyes on and play through some of it I won't know whether it's good or not.
>>96554541You are cringe and everyone else fawning over that ridiculous shitfest.
>>96553533>Which are xenotech for some reason.I think they were implied to be Jokaero tech - basically bigger versions of digital weapons. The fact that it's such an expensive option is indicative of the general tendency to restrict turret defense options in the game, though.>>96553123>The penalty's only for detection, though, not BS.You're right here. That's not so bad, though it's a pretty small benefit.I still hold that carriers have the best choices. They can launch attacks from beyond gun range and avoid getting into shooting range using the same movement options as whatever is trying to close, but with fewer concerns due to squadrons moving independently. If the enemy does manage to close, the carrier has Evasive Maneuvers to fall back on. Carriers have extra defenses against torpedoes and attack craft without losing any defense against shooting attacks. Maco/lance gunships have only turrets against torps and attack craft, must close distance and manage fire arcs to fight, and can't use Evasive Maneuvers without harming their offense. These are basically similar to the reasons battleships fell out of favor IRL (though less severe as RT doesn't really allow carriers to strike from "off the map" distances). Beyond that, carriers require focus on fewer skills and attributes to operate (Carriers need Piloting, Command, and Tech Use; gunships need all that plus BS). Additionally, Launch Bays use little Power compared to large Weapon Components, and similar or less Space, allowing carriers to load up on other Component types to provide various bonuses. Gunships aren't useless against carriers and can be objectively powerful, but are the inferior choice, at least at sizes that allow launch bays.
>>96555233Carriers would be the best if not for the fact that pure carriers inescapably fall to chaos by author fiat to maintain age of sail aesthetics.
>>96555472>Carriers would be the best if not for the fact that pure carriers inescapably fall to chaos by author fiat to maintain age of sail aestheticsIn addition to being a silly oversimplification of the Gareox incident (they turned to Chaos after losing the fight, implying that battleships really should be better apart from any Chaos issues), this viewpoint still isn't supported by game mechanics. You don't get Corruption Points for using Attack Craft.
>>96555472>>96555526The Gareox incident was just another way of explaining the Imperium's regression. Carrier warfare IS superior to battleship brawling. Chaos uses carrier warfare because their ships are from a more "enlightened" age, and ten thousand years later, the Imperium has regressed from 20th century ship warfare to 17th century ship warfare. Carrier warfare is the Chaos voidship identity. That's why the Imperium doesn't do it and ADB personally manifests into the setting and slaps away any attempt to change it.
>>96555233Carriers work because aircraft travel in a different medium than their vessel. If the carrier moves as fast as the aircraft, it's far less effective. Bombers have speed 6-7, so most ships can actually outrun them.
>>96555555Understood, sextanon, it is now my mission to kill ADB.
Any updates on the Hospitaller game? What happened with the time travel stuff?
>>96556085Time travel was a short thing, may have met their Lord Inquisitor 35 years in the past
>>96556085It's a game that plays on Friday, I think, so you'll get your update in three days.
>>96556085Dumb question, is this a real model you can buy or something specially made? [Spoiler]or is it just AI?[/spoiler]
>>96556085Time travel was more of an exibit walk through a corridor seeing events of the past. They didn't and couldn't change anything that happened, other than completing a prophecy.Something something fate is set and things happen because they're meant to happen. This is actually GM railroading.Since then they ruined the plans of Tsyiak the Dancer at the Threshold, put Warlord Ko'ske to be planetary governor since now he can harvest Ghostfire to make the tithe, after we killed his biggest opp. The tithe is "basically restored."We returned to port suffering only to find 5 battlesisters in a rhino. Turns out the Abbey is under siege by some crazy and oddly organized fanatics. Now we have to get the Guard to help, the same one that was coming to fix the tithe issue. But since the tithe is restored and they won't have anything to do, might as well send them to solve the siege issue.And I'm hoping we get major rep with the Abbey and =][= for fixing all these problems.>>96558195It's AI. I used Gemini AI with "Turn this image into an action figure similar to the ones from Bandai Namco" prompt. For this one I used a fumo drawing i made and asked to turn it into a fumo plushie.I made a few gens with the Callidia art I had, now i'm trying to learn blender to make the 3d printables real. If the gay furry artist from overwatch can make high qualirt 3 prints, so can I.Anon probably got that image from my xwitter post. https://x.com/lazer_groove/status/1967172240296005731
Is it theoretically possible to restart construction of the "disgraced" ships?Like Desolators and Despoilers? Legally I mean. I assume they're also lacking advanced drives like Grand Cruisers though.
>>96559629>Is it theoretically possible to restart construction of the "disgraced" ships?Sure, just need the blueprints, a shipyard to do it in, and a trained staff of techpriests or hereteks willing to do so quietly. You would need sector-level resources at your disposal to pull it off, probably, but in theory it's perfectly possible.>Legally I mean. lol no, the moment an Inquisitor or techpriest that isn't in your pocket discovers the operation, you and everyone at said shipyard is getting punted into a black hole. This would happen pretty quickly as soon as you started deploying the forbidden designs into combat and someone recognized them and word got out you had a private fleet of them. If you had an Inquisitor's backing, and the support of a powerful Magos in the Mechanicus, you might just get away with it, as long as it's only produced in limited quantities on a local level.
>>96559662Hmm, I thought not every Chaos ship is explicitly banned though? Some are even still produced, like Iconoclasts.
The talk of ships reminded me that DW Keepers are also captains of vessels that deliver kill teams and I also cannot help but hear them speaking like this guy.
>>96559801Most kill teams are described as having to hitch-hike anywhere.It's quite amusing to imagine a towering, black-armored terminator bargaining for a ride with Chartists, Rogue Traders and Navy Officers.
>>96559838Being a space marine keeper of the deathwatch does provide some (read a lot) of leverage in such negotiations. Looking at their advancements and talents in rites of battle, they have a combine +50 to getting support from the navy, maybe making their disposition 2 degrees more favorable, and being able to spend a fate point to get the total support of them.
>>96559687>Some are even still produced, like IconoclastsI'm not sure Iconoclasts were ever exclusively Chaos ships. I'm not sure they even date back to the Great Crusade era. I think they were supposed to be an original design produced by a variety of unaligned human factions (especially pirates) and shady groups within the Imperium, and they just happened to get picked up in numbers by traitor fleets. They may not be as firmly associated with the archenemy as some of the older designs.That said, this also raises questions about prizes. It's obviously not OK to seize Chaos ships that are half fleshmetal and infested with daemons, but I'd assume retaking relatively normal ships is different. Rogue Trader lets you use the Repulsive, after all.
>>96555233 With the inability to stack them, flak turrets are essentially pointless, yeah. Given my previous calculations, carriers average from 19 damage (full combined wing of 8 bomber squadrons, turrets average one downed/driven off) to 31.5 damage (8 independent bomber squadrons, 3 downed/driven off), whereas traditional ships average from 21 damage (full baseline 1d10+2 macrobatteries, minus two hits from shields) to 29.5 damage (macrobatteries upgraded to d10+4) to 38 (upgraded broadside macros plus prow sunhammers) to 46.5 (single broadside macro, dual GQ sunhammer batteries) on a baseline cruiser. In essence, they have the same baseline (if one is foolish and does not make use of even a single lance), but standard ships have near double the potential damage output, which only increases if they become able to fire both broadside arcs simultaneously (up to 74, accounting for cruiser shields on both targets - 46.5 to one, 27.5 to the other). The engagement envelope of a carrier is certainly greater than that of a gunship, as you say, but to a limited degree. The maximum engagement range of a bomber is 36 VU, double that of a Sunsear or Sunhammer's 18VU but only a third longer than Hecutors or Godsbanes. Granted, both are Battlecruiser-grade, but it still must be said. A macrobattery's base range can be increased by two (turbo-weapon batteries and quality), increasing a Sunsear's maximum to 22 and a Hecutor's to 26, further cutting into the carrier's operational range. Another factor is enemy maneuvers - at extreme range, bomber squadrons can be far more easily evaded, as they must attempt to predict your trajectory. Preserving their final maneuvering stage for targeting, their effective range advantage becomes at maximum 12 VU and at minimum 4, an amount which is by no means insurmountable.
I like Mathhammer rules, but I can't reconcile Macrobatteries becoming flatly useless against high-end ships.And especially merchant-grade ships becoming wet paper-tier.Honestly it feels like BFG rules are still superior to this day. If not really perfect at all.
Returning normal armor values, and stacking, but only stacking a single weapon component salvo against armour seems to achieve a desired ratio of damage equivalent to BFG.Otherwise the staple Mars-pattern becomes obsolete.Also solves any other issues with balancing bombers.>>96559925I doubt anyone uses quality for range, ever. Even shit space is more valuable.
>>96555233>>96559925(cont.)All this considered, it is clear to me that a carrier is incapable of holding its own against an equivalent gunship in a straight fight, thus compelling them to either bring a screening force (in which case this has become a standard fleet battle and the range advantage is essentially nullified), or engage in maneuver warfare - a strategy complicated by the fact that multiple enemy factions maintain roughly twice the average speed of an imperial hull, rendering this barely viable as a tactic unless one is in possession of an energistic conversion matrix. That being said, a carrier conversion of a chaos hull would alleviate many of these difficulties, at the low low cost of your soul.>>96555472False, Nemesis-class, Jovian-class, a few others. They're great at punching down, is the thing - a cruiser-scale carrier sweeps escorts, and a battleship-scale carrier tends to mop up cruisers relatively well. They just don't have the punch to contend with their own weight class.>>96559629If you'd like to wake up one day in an Inquisitorial cell, certainly.>>96559687Iconoclasts are so prevalent in so many places they absolutely should not be that their design is considered by some to be memetic in nature.>>96559904Very few traitor ships are actually daemonships - some are merely defaced, others are minimally tainted and can be reconsecrated and restored to service, others ought to be melted down and their adamantium recast to form the bones of a new hull, still others are best consigned to your local sun.>>96559955Mathhammer does try to emulate BFG rules, but the absence of the gunnery table greatly harms escort-scale ships.
>>96559980Mars are already obsolete, they're just Sunsears but bad.
>>96559984Emperor and Oberon are the most notable Imperial carrier vessels.Despoilers weren't pure carriers anyway.>>96559987You don't call Sunsears obsolete because there are Staravars though.Mars are very economic if you roll Titanforge for instance.The issue is no damage against 13 armor ships, where even cheer volume would not be worth it.Meanwhile BFG has Transports armor to be worth something. RT actually buffed them for it, by adding HP to make escorts last more than one round of combat.Gunnery table is basically just range bonuses. Well one could add +1 free hit at brawling range, but that might be overkill for the already short-range Pyros anyway.
>>96542500>Necron Homebrew: For RT & DH 1.6.5isn't set to read only?
>>96560022They're the exact same rarity and the exact same damage. The only justification for Mars pattern is that you pissed away your entire power budget for something else, which is only excusable on a transport.I would also like to see these hypothetical 13-armor ships you speak of, because the maximum possible is 11 (Avenger class with armor plating and Wrested from Space Hulk) unless you're either using an Armored Prow, in which case target something other than the fore arc, or you're a moron who lets Excess Void Armor exist in Mathhammer without at bare minimum appending "to a maximum of 10".BFG's 'armor' stat functions as both a ship's ability to endure damage and their ability to evade enemy fire, which is why nothing ever goes below armor 4+.The gunnery table matters for preserving escorts because they're smaller targets, and there is thus a malus to hit them compared to any other ship.
>>96560067Mathhammer rules exist specifically with Excess Void Armor in mind, though. Don't go making things up.That was meant to be specifically for the lances.And no, it doesn't. BFG armour is just armour. The ability to avoid enemy fire is Special Orders to maneuver and Brace for Impact.
Do astartes have music or some form of entertainment in their helmets for when they travel?
>>96560150In the very first post of the mathhammer thread it is explicitly stated, and I verbatim quote, "Excess Void Armour may be too powerful all by itself". Said post also advises that you do not allow armor bonuses to stack, so even if you do allow it you're going to max out at 11, or 12 on an Avenger.In BFG, lances, explicitly stated to ignore armor, hit every ship on a 4+. Thus, on a roll of 3 or lower, you missed. Therefore, a 4+ target is 'unarmored', as the save is miss chance. Special orders are an explicit refocusing from a basic generalist stance, inherently including baseline evasive actions because nobody helming a ship is going to beeline down a straightaway when trajectories aren't hard to figure out, see literally every naval battle in existence as an example.
>>96560213>probably shouldn't>may beI've heard you.>In BFG, lances, explicitly stated to ignore armor, hit every ship on a 4+. Thus, on a roll of 3 or lower, you missed.Yes, lances work by hit or miss. Literally.Macrocannons specifically test against Armour value and range modifiers for volume.>Special orders are an explicit refocusing from a basic generalist stance, inherently including baseline evasive actionsGood. Thanks.So back to the point, mathhammer doesn't fully emulate for BFG ship combat works if everything is used.
>>96560211They have physical training for entertainment. Or personal instruments for hobbies.But there can be upgrades with hymn casters or hypnodoctrination making them sing to themselves when unconcious.
>>96560272>"doesn't fully emulate for BFG ship combat works if everything is used"Word salad, please restate.
>>96560308>I want to use all the component bonuses and still have most weapons usable to a degreeBut I already named the solution I prefer.Oh, and crew-only for ship combat besides aeronautica.
>>96559629I remember there being some fluff about how they would cleanse the corruption from heretic vessels and then use them as back up ships when they couldn't field enough ordinary vessels for a mission. it would probably take a loooooooong time but it's doable with enough holy promethium and contempt
>>96560370>Oh, and crew-only for ship combat besides aeronautica.I- dude, you're gonna have to provide context for some of this shit. I'm sure that made sense in your head but the internet people don't actually live up there.
>>96560285I meant for when they are traveling to or from a planet surface. I remember something about Spartan's in Halo having some for of entertainment built into their armor, can't remember what though.
>>96560379But isn't that obvious?The cannons aren't operated by the characters on their own, dozens if not hundreds of crewmembers are involved in maneuvering them around, loading, pointing etcetera. Rows of macrocannons.Just like in historical naval combat you mentioned.You can say that there are automated targeting and electronics, but then it also limits character participation.You can't be everywhere pointing and tuning every individual cannon on your own. Or lance, for the matter.Or turrets covering the hull.So characters may only assist and direct people. Perhaps you can throw a stat bonus into equation. Making +5 assist into +11.Aeronautica is difficult to justify crew only, but you can instead throw in your stat bonus into your own wing's damage, for example. Which would be nothing to scoff at.The only issue is that macrocannons would still be dominating the scene if you can stack hits. So an average blast from a single Ryza battery will obliterate even kitted out escorts in one salvo if all hits connect.
>>96560472"Use the Crew Rating for rolls instead of PC stats" is a good and sensible sentence. I agree with it, in fact, though I believe PCs should be able to contribute their training bonus to a roll, and probably Talented if applicable, for a maximum potential of +30 to a given roll.That doesn't come across when you just say 'and crew-only'. Crew only what? What's being restricted to the crew? I can't peek inside your brain my guy, please use more words in the future.Also there'd then need to be a skill for ship gunnery, I guess, which leads into design issues for what skills we have and what they do, which in turn leads to problems with RT's career system, but that's beyond the scope of the discussion probably.
>>96560404Likely mission indoc - in a shuttle they'd meditate, talk or listen to intelligence reports. In a drop pod they're hooked up to what the machine spirit is sending.That said it's not impossible. They've mental control via the carapace, there's bound to be SOME who pipe in smooth jazz or something for dull moments. Techmarines especially.
>>96560503To be honest, crew rating on it's would be bad enough even in raw, if all possible modifiers align.Really adds a good element of random into calculation.The idea is to outsource almost everything running in ship to the crew unless the character is crucial, i.e. all extended actions besides perhaps Active/Focused Augury, Lock On and Flank, which can get simple stat bonuses instead, but even that isn't necessary.Suddenly all default penalties are important, and ship hiding with Cypra Drive and Empyrean Mantle is really fucking hard to spot with -35 penalty, Eldar are a menace, and Orks plug every hole with numbers.Though it's all complimentary to the Mathhammer itself. Since the macro/flier balance is essentially the only things that matter.
>>96560573...Yeah, man, I'm not arguing against it. I very explicitly supported it in fact. You don't need to convince me, I was already aboard this train before the thread even began.
Since you're all discussing ship combat: how do you guys prevent the emergency warp jump action from making macrobatteries and lances meaningless, and how do you prevent psykers from simply setting the entire enemy ship on fire and instagibbing it the second it gets within 10VU?
>>96560404some chapters probably blast hymns and choirs, might even be an effective tactic when fighting the archenemy
>>96560621I simply ignore the existence of the Navis Primer - 'tis a silly book.Unfortunately, the fact that you ask implies this is an ongoing issue, in which case I remind you that a failed roll kicks you out a minimum of 1d5 days away from wherever you entered warp, and then an escalating distance ranging from somewhere significant next to where you left, somewhere within the general subsector, somewhere within a neighboring subsector, somewhere random within the sector plus bonus timewarping, and "The ship was lost to the Warp with all hands". Poor news for any transports you were escorting, colonies you were defending, or loot you were acquiring, not to mention you yourself. If your Navigator is playing silly buggers with the Warp, kick them in the fucking teeth for it, because the Warp is not for playing with. Not for nothing is it considered reserved for only the most dire situations.If this isn't enough, inflict a solid d10 of Morale damage whenever the fucker tries it - that'll put a stop to it right quick.Also remember that the test to ignite an enemy ship is Hellish (-60), so if your Astropath is managing it with any degree of regularity, check his dice. If they're weighted, make him eat them, and ban him from ever playing anything but a Male Human Fighter or closest equivalent again.
>>96560621Not near books or pdfs, but: Isn't a psyker setting stuff on fire like -60 for wp WITH help?
>>96560698Lmao, failing skill checks in Rogue Trader. Good one. It's piss easy for the astropath too - with assistance from the choir, turning that -60 into a +60 is trivial.The warp jump isn't even OP - enemies can do it too, so it just means no one can ever shoot anyone - it's just stupid.
>>96560713Gotta run out of Fate rerolls eventually.I'm also gonna need you to run out the exact mechanical process of getting an effective +120 to a test, because I do not into psykers and I'm doubting that pretty hard.Regardless, if you're a GM and this is an actual problem in a game you're running, that's your fault for allowing the Navis Primer. Don't do it next time. If you're not a GM and this isn't actively happening in a game, why bother bringing it up?
>>96544941>>96545020Improvised a statblock for the Beachhead-Class.
>>96559984It's imperial policy to toss ALL chaos ships into the sun. They don't salvage and reconsecrate anymore, its too much of a threat. No point in removing taint, just build new ones.
>>96560751>Why would you ever try to anticipate a problem and solve it in advance?How would you have felt if you hadn't eaten breakfast this morning? It has happened in my games, by the way.Anyway, with 70 Int, a rank of skill mastery and either talented or whatever that thing is that grants a bonus to navigation tests, you're not gonna need a whole lot of rerolls. As for the astropath, I had to go back and count, and he did only have a +90 to psychic power tests. +20 from his own psy rating, +40 from his astropathic choir and familiar, +5 from that Origin Path choice that gives you +5 to WP tests on board a ship, +10 from the Rogue Trader's inspiration and +15 from a psychic hood and psy-focus (Only War rules). I feel like I'm missing some other thing he had, but oh well. I guess I'm going to have to back down, looks like +120 is the most you could possibly have, at Rank 7 and pushing with aethyric wave spars. Still, with a base WP of 80 and an effective bonus of +20, it's not terribly hard to dispatch even the largest enemy ships, given there's no defence against the ability. Even accounting for fatigue, the odds are on your side. Hell, even if you get knocked out from fatigue, that only takes you out for one voidship round, so you can get right back to it on the next if there are still enemies left.
>>96558402>>96558071>>96556213thank you. I look forward to what happens next friday
>>96559925Carriers can significantly extend their effective range by moving away from the target as they launch bomber attacks, assuming the target is trying to close distance in order to shoot. In this case, you need to add the voidships' movement speed to the bombers' speed to judge their range advantage. This also helps limit the target's ability to avoid bombers as it can't easily make big lateral moves when chasing. Also, you're judging only in terms of Hull Integrity damage. Crits also potentially matter here. Ignoring them does make sense for macros and lances with 30CR - they won't get many unless they have unusual components - but massed bombers can get more attack roll bonuses. The gunship is more vulnerable to these too. They are likely to take damage first, and crit results 3 and 4 are especially bad for them (4 is bad for carriers too, but mitigated by lack of fire arc concerns; 3 has little effect on carriers). Alternatively, with either higher CR or characters making rolls, crits, first-hit advantage, and Evasive Maneuver advantage are going to become increasingly dominant factors as rolls increase. I do appreciate your commitment to statistical analysis here, and I suspect it's similar to what the game designers used when trying to balance things. I also think that making it practical is forcing you to make simplifying assumptions that will throw off the results relative to actual gameplay (similar to what probably happened with them missing the brokenness of macro hit stacking - it isn't such a dominant factor at low skill levels). I do agree carriers lose some advantages in a straight fight with both parties in range, but at least against single Human ships of similar size, they can likely avoid or delay that. They may have more trouble keeping distance against Eldar or Orks. Also, I suspect Nova Cannon ships beat carriers by having better chances to hit first and front-load damage (though carriers can potentially use NCs too).
>Carriers discussionI've said it before and I'll say it again - Carriers on the whole were a mistake as originally implemented in BFG and should never have been implemented as they were. They were far too easy to exploit and 'break' the intended playstyles for the factions that have them.At most, they should've been 'close-in' weapons given travel times to and from the target (forcing you to move carriers within most weapons ranges in order to launch) and limited to 'you have only 4 squadrons aboard, if they die they're dead for good' rules.>>96561263>Actually bothering to incorporate 8th edition loreUnless the Imperium pulled some massive shipyards and production facilities out of their ass (alongside new battleship designs since they're basically all LosTech now), this makes the whole Imperium incapable of replacing anything larger than a Battlecruiser.
>>96563343>Unless the Imperium pulled some massive shipyards and production facilities out of their assCawl>(alongside new battleship designs since they're basically all LosTech now)Adjudicator-class, designed by Cawl, among others.
>>96563461>Cawl designed battleship referenced in a single BL novel, not even a sourcebook.Knowing GW, they'll use that as an excuse to sell a non-customizable ship kit for that and deprecate the Navy line like they did space marines.Either way, until we get actual ship rules in a nu40k game I'm choosing to ignore it's existence entirely.
With the time skip, have psykers become more prominent and numerous? I haven't read any new stuff, but that was supposed to be the thing that would happen given time in the universe.
>>96560855Looks workable, but doesn't have much to prevent it from being chewed up by any planetary defenses.>>96561386Like I said, if it's being abused, inflict consequences. 1d10 morale loss for an emergency warp translation means it doesn't take long to trigger a mutiny. If your astropaths are frying ships on the regular, change Flash Fire to require 2 additional DoS for every extra fire instead of one, and tell them that if they fail by however much, they set a fire aboard their own ship.Or, since you're anticipating the problem, say "we will not be using Navis primer in this game". Which I also already told you.>>96561263>8th ed loreFuck off to the Indomitus era thread. Oh wait, there isn't one, because nobody cares.
>>96564379Anon...8th edition was FIVE YEARS AGO. Everyone else moved on. You've become a bitter old grog. You need to let go.
>>96564645I restate myself. There is no Indomitus thread, and nobody cares.
>>96564728There's no indomitus thread because indomitus is the standard now. You're better off asking for people to make older edition threads. Perhaps >>96535222 is more to your speed, old-timer.
>>96564645Wait, what edition is the game up to now?
>>9656475610
>>96564743Indomiderp ain't my fortikay, son. Gorillaman an' his consequences have been a disaster for the setting, and you can backtrace it through to the Horus Heresy, which is actually shockingly adherent to the lore in that it ruined everything for everyone both in and out of universe.>>96564771Doesn't matter, nothing after 7th matters, because 7th is the last one that gave Deathstrikes a range of 'yes'.
>>96564756We are halfway through 10th.
>>96564783Deathstrike missiles in 10th literally have infinite range, just on one shot. Pick a spot on the board, lands next turn and hits everything in a radius.
>>96564771>>96564813Jesus christ...
>>96563343I mean, the Imperium still has the biggest shipyards around the key locations.If they still produced Battleships between Heresy and present, they definitely do. Just sparingly. No one is laying they lost.Recovering mostly untainted chaos cruisers is a thing referenced in FFG too, so it's canon for the game. But they're just as likely as to rip them for parts and decommission too after all.
>>96564371I think it was mentioned somewhere, at least about the rise about psychic powers. Not that you need GW to implement what it should have.>>96564379Navis Primer seems to be designed hand-in-hand with the notorious Lathe Worlds.The difference between Core and current power level is remarkable.
>>96562597You raise a good point, they can likely evade a singular peer vessel for an indeterminate amount of time, and if one handwaves the bomber's ability to return to a base that is actively moving away from them on bingo fuel, as the rules do, there is then not much stopping them from harassing a pursuing craft indefinitely - aside from, as you also mentioned, the presence of a nova cannon. Torpedoes may be capable of serving a similar purpose, but can be fairly simply countered by use of CVP - at worst they'll be another turret-equivalent roll, I estimate the average at two torpedoes downed (average of one from CVP and one from turrets). Of course, torpedoes also suffer from placing the onus of 'hitting' on the launching ship by way of an extraneous BS test. Given that they only approximate 9 damage a pop, the fact that they only average one hit in a salvo is ruinous.Crits, however, are an excellent point - a torpedo for example has a 25% chance to crit once, and a 2% chance to crit twice. Single bombing runs have... my gut tells me a 20% chance to crit, assuming crew rating 30 and components boosting Command to +20? Five rolls of that die gives roughly a 70% chance to crit at least once, a 25% chance to crit twice, a 5% chance to crit thrice, et cetera. Stacked bombing runs (assuming full strike wings) have about a 50% chance to crit once. Nova cannons can be generally expected to crit 40% of the time, though multiple crits are again less than likely. Your average macrobattery has perhaps a 10% chance to crit, but a lance generally has 20%, a macro/lance/lance ship thus has roughly a 40% chance to crit at least once.How that all works out I do not have the brain to figure tonight, I have done too much math already and my neurons have become a smoothie.
>>96564371Lore wise, yes, apparently the uptick is noticeable. But hard numbers are as always missing and not much else seems to have change. On some world even looking up is now punishable by death, so gee-dubs is really leaning hard into the retard aspect of things.
>>96564915Lathe Worlds is primarily equipment, and that equipment doesn't fit Dark Heresy's power level. It works fine in Rogue Trader, because in Rogue Trader you're actually meant to have wacky gear.Navis Primer, on the other hand, has really shittily balanced core mechanics, and massively overuses "There's demons all up in your shit now" and "You're cast into the warp, never to return". A Navigator built to abuse that system can consistently and reliably time-travel. I read an account of a game in which the players spent the entire time insider trading with future-knowledge and the guy who was meticulously recording the actual timeline to prevent meeting their future or past selves had a mental breakdown.It's really just easier to ban it and be done with it, the fuckery is too severe not to.
>>96564933>Torpedoes may be capable of serving a similar purpose, but can be fairly simply countered by use of CVPI've never found long range torpedo attacks to be especially effective - there are just too many ways to bring them down or avoid them (especially when the target is a carrier), so they become area denial at best. Ganking unaware ships from Silent Running generally seems to be a better use for torps.>my gut tells me a 20% chance to crit, assuming crew rating 30 and components boosting Command to +20?I was imagining maximum size attack waves from a cruiser: 8 bombers for CR 30 + 35. Assuming an average of 1 loss per attempt, they're rolling against 60, so only about a 10% chance to crit (15% for cases where all get through). You're right that carriers would probably have Command bonus components, though. Fleet Command Bridge gets you +10, Pilot's Chambers +2, maybe Good Disciplinarium +5. I'm probably missing some things, but 25% to 30% is likely achievable. Characters can, of course, easily stack items and talents that increase either Fellowship or Command. You're going to suffer bomber attrition doing this, but I suspect you'll do plenty of damage and get some crits before the enemy even gets to attack. If Sensors Damaged comes up it will make Turret defense ineffective for an extended period and give you a bunch of free hits (estimating duration is more trouble than it seems - they have to succeed on Emergency Repairs, then wait 1D5 turns and hope they don't suffer the effect again in the meantime). Running out of Attack Craft would be a risk with this sort of strategy, but you get the chance to do a lot of damage up front without return fire, and you can switch tactics to Hit and Run or Boarding (things you're likely good at with Command-focused builds) if you wear the enemy down some, or Disengage if things go badly since you're far away.
>>96564933>>96565924Addendum: It's likely that Assault Boats could be better than bombers at fishing for crit effects. Every successful H&R will deal a small (but guaranteed) amount of hull damage and a crit. I suspect single-boat attacks will work better than max wing, but that will depend some on the enemy's build (there are lots of anti-boarding components, and massed attacks might be better against those).
>>96565924>>96565996For a wing of 8 squadrons, CR 30, Starhawks are Craft Rating +0, the best a bridge will get you is +10 (Fleet Flag, BC+, or Bridge of Antiquity, Archeotech), all other components only give a Command bonus to resisting or aiding boarding attacks, the +17 is as good as that'll get. They will on average lose only one squadron when massed, and they only gain the bonus for surviving squadrons, so a +30. Baseline 30 + 30 + 17 = 77, they need 4 DoS to crit, so a 37% chance. Maximum hits are 3+6 for 9, but you can't score more DoS than your chance to hit, so that maxes at 8 instead for average 17 damage. If you're permitting a character to contribute a skill bonus that changes to 57% chance to crit, maximum hits are 9 for 19 damage, 67% if they're Talented in it. Drop all these chances by 5 if it's a baseline Cruiser since they can't get the Flag bridge and the Antiquitiy one is, well, archaeotech.The question of whether Assault Boats can be shot down or not is an important one here, because they're already hindered by turrets - do you apply the -10 per turret and also shoot down boarding craft? Do you pick one or the other? Regardless, preliminary calculations look very poor for single-squadron attacks, too many points of failure. Also take into account the fact that a character cannot both pilot assault boats and then command the boarding action, apparently - I wonder why, the restriction seems rather silly.
Do warp travel effects stack in RT? If I have a Miloslav drive and a Runecaster, is 4x speed to warp travel?
>>96566271Probably 3x. People already complain bitterly about Miloslavs, and I understand them, they're just OP.Thanks, space Slavs, btw.For the matter, Warp Sextant doesn't stack with Runecaster.And I would rule Supply Vaults, Arboretum and Suspension to compound for 4+ years in the warp.
Has anyone ever made their own treasure generator tables? Primarily for RT ship components, but I would love any other branches.
>>96566271>>96566271Logically, yes, it's 4x. However, the system does have precedent for stacking modifiers being additive instead of multiplicative, so pick what you like and stick with it. There really ought to have been a disclaimer somewhere stating things one way or the other.
How and Why did the C'tan shard on Mars influence the creation of the Machine cult? And how did it get there?
>>96566588How the fuck do we know? Probably either fled there after fracturing, or flew threw void of space and landed there after.How is easy, since the Dragon can influence machinery to an absurd degree, he can basically mindcontrol/puppeteer the tech-priests at will, within limits of his prison.Why is the bugger. If you believe the BL novels(don't), then Emperor specifically imprisoned it on Mars to 'naturally' develop the Machine Cult for future use. Preposterous.Otherwise it might desire freedom from whatever prison it was placed when it arrived. It might want followers in the first place as a god. And/or it might want an army to conquer, which is also fair given Mechanicus strengh and status.
First time playing Rogue Trader, will be a missionary. Still need a proper image (something that works for a missionary just starting out, maybe not too buff or huge, but can ask the character art thread for that).GM wants me to give him some kind of ritual every player character does before going through the warp. Which can include even killing people. Maybe a bit too extreme. Would flagellating yourself work? I would even take some minor wounds into account for that (rolling a 1d4?)Also, my missionary is a troublesome one, and has the Ecclesiarchy as his enemies. Do you have any good ideas about some excentric stuff that he could preach? Or any supplements that go into more detail about the usual missionary work for someone that travels with a Rogue Trader.Pic unrelated, I'm really lacking priest pics.
>>96566568Not ship components, but fairly useful regardless.https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q0BGLDtKjNVaiZ7ikuCWqzY7rPeOP4tEt3p0Lon9dmMI tend to just refer to Stars of Inequity's tables, though admittedly most of them are highly situational (a bridge granting another +10 to Command is quite useful, but a component remaining powered for '1d10 more minutes' is rather less so). Come to think of it, Swirling Energy really ought to have just flatly decreased power requirements by 4 to match with Compact.Anyway, for various weapon components you can generally extrapolate a Broadside by multiplying power, space, and strength by 1.5x and rounding as you like (usually up, sometimes down). The vast majority of broadsides work this way, I believe Mars pattern are the sole exception. Sunsears, for example - 6 power 4 space to 9 power 6 space. Hecutors, 8 and 3 to 12 and 5 (they rounded down for space, there). Disruption macrocannons, 4 and 2 to 6 and 5 (bonus space there, looks like they were sorta cribbing from Mars?) My personal favorite extrapolations are Ryza plasma broadsides, taking their original 7 power 4 space and resulting in 11 power 6 space - identical to the Hecutors in total, but shifting one from power to space, which I believe to be fair. Archeotech Staravar broadsides would be 6 and 6. You can even, if you so desire, cut down Lathe grav-culverins from a broadside to a turret to cram into your dorsal, which under the previously mentioned pattern would be 3 and 3 - or perhaps that one follows Mars' example as well, and you'd actually just reduce space by 3 for 5 and 3. Damn the Martians for making my life hard. Maybe it's only energy-based that follow the 1.5x pattern, and all physical ones are as is but plus or minus three space - or worse, plus 1.5x space or minus 3/5 space.Ugh, math.
>>96566831Could've sworn there was a penitent's cloth somewhere that was made of rough fabrics designed to be uncomfortable, and it granted a bonus to willpower I think? It's either in Faith & Coin or Dark Heresy somewhere.It'd also be wise to link his pre-warp ritual to whatever makes his beliefs incompatible with the wider Ecclesiarchy. Might be he holds that a certain individual is a Saint, might be be believes a Saint is false, might be he thinks a Saint's handmaiden or manservant was the real Saint all along, might be he has certain doctrinal differences - like the Emperor requiring blood sacrifice, or using esoteric chemical compounds to induce a state of 'communion'. It could've been political, as well - he may have angered a Cardinal, and thus whatever he was preaching, which was normally well within the bounds of the Ecclesiarchy's party line, was deemed heretical specifically to target him.
>>96566922The entire saint pantheon is something that I need to read up on, but I like your suggestion. Worshiping a controversial saint (or a controversial depiction of an existing saint) seems like a good way to play a zealous, but unorthodox character. That still can fulfill his mission.And yes, currently reading Faith and Coin. I also like the Ashen Skull.
>>96566831Troublesome missionary sounds like a job for Redemptionist, if you are into space racism+.Flagellating yourself is actually one of the core tenets and specifically MUST be administered daily in their teachings.Also, since Redemption spread into Calixis and you're probably playing in nearby Koronus it will fit.The fuckery with redemptionists is their tendency to gather flocks of rabid fanatics and make pogroms after psykers, mutants and perceived heretics. And is easily the reason why Ecclesiarchy would hate your guts for mass purges. If you like red, flame and revving chainswords, it's a job for you.You can try to larp after the Redeemer both in and out of universe. However remember that your missionary isn't a nobody since he ended up as a senior officer aboard a vessel.Local Redemption dictates:>Wear Red, jerk to fire and blood>Don't do drugs and alcohol, ever>Abhor the witch, burn the witch>Abhor the mutant, rend them apart>Abhor the heretic, roleplay Asmodai with them>You can use Taqiya. Masquerate as others if you must>Wear red and hide your face when you face enemies openly and/or do battle, don't brag for you are a weapon of the Emperor and not on your own business>Flaggelate yourself daily
Also, Redemption is at the core is a cult of purity, which is going after sinners in general, witchcraft, heresy and mutation are merely the worst of them.You can roleplay as a bloody paladin or unhinged fanatic as you please. But the core points must be upheld.
>>96566970>>96567009Is that a career? Not finding it in Faith and Coin either. I'll stick to the regular missionary.
>>96566831Behold, Father Olav. For his ritual pre-warp, maybe mini pilgrimmages? He blesses himself, finds a crewman, blesses him and stands to defend him during the transition. Different person each time, leading him all over the ship. >>96566922Page 118 of Blood of Martyrs, DH1e. Blesed Sackcloth.
>>96567027It was a career in Dark Heresy. But I was talking about the roleplay aspect of your missionary.Though, in Faith and Coin there is a Red Consecrator, who are pretty close and can substitute if you will. Just ask your GM to add more flame if you will.
>>96567034Your picture gave me the inspiration to base the character on Durance from Pillars of Eternity, but considering the female players in the group, I don't know how wise it would be to constantly blabber about my whore-saint.
>>96566831>First time playing Rogue Trader, will be a missionary.Prepare for disappointment. You're playing a melee career that gets shafted on all melee stats except WS, and you don't get dual-wielding or Lightning Attack. Your career special ability can be picked up by any other class, and it sucks to begin with. Missionaries got screwed over.
>>96567165What's the most broken class after psykers? Mechanicus?
In Mathhammer individual ship armor points are more significant, right? If my group rolled a nose for trouble or something similar that decreases their armor should I modify the effect to be reduced hull points so it isn’t as punishing?
>>96567216Psykers aren't that broken without absurd exp. Mechanicus with a permissive GM.
>>96567619Kinda? You should be fine, the idea with mathahmmer is mostly to stop macrobatteries from being the be-all-end-all of everything.
Would daemons be immune to virus bombing?
>>96566046>The question of whether Assault Boats can be shot down or not is an important one here, because they're already hindered by turrets - do you apply the -10 per turret and also shoot down boarding craft?I think you're confusing Assault Boat rules with normal Hit and Run rules (understandable because they make you jump back and forth between books). Normal H&R requires a Piloting test modified by Turret Rating. Assault boats use Command for the attack like bombers and are shot down by Turrets like Bombers, then skip the Piloting part of H&R, but do use same Opposed Command Test as normal ones, but also ptovide +10 to the attacker's Command on this test for every "Hit" from the first (non-opposed) Command test. There is one added point of failure vs bombers (the Opposed Command Test), rather than two. There are a lot of ways for both sides to get bonuses on that extra Opposed Command Test (Stormtroopers, Murder Servitors, clan-kin Quarters, Tenebro Maze, boat wing size), so analysis is complex.>Also take into account the fact that a character cannot both pilot assault boats and then command the boarding action, apparently - I wonder why, the restriction seems rather silly.I always suspected this was a mistake and it was supposed to be that a character must accompany the boats (putting himself at risk) to do both Command Tests, while a character who stays behind on the carrier can only do the unopposed part and must leave the Opposed Test to either Crew Rating or someone who did go along for the ride.The more I look at the Bomber, Assault Boat, and Torpedo rules the more I think they needed another design pass and simplification (and the same for Boarding from the original book).
>>96567996The virus part, yes. The "set everything on fire part from shit that decays" part, no.
Asked this in the Traveller thread but relevant to Rogue Trader too. How do I manage the scope of my game? That's a common issue I have with any space opera game. How detailed do I make a system and its planets?
>>96567996>Would daemons be immune to virus bombing?Situational. Daemons manifesting in realspace or inside a gellar field are semi-real and may follow physics rules to varying degrees. Virus bombs aren't necessarily using true virus pathogens as we would understand them IRL, but something that attacks biochemistry of many varieties (including very alien types) and displays viral propagation patterns (though much faster and deadlier than anything real). Daemons in realspace are kind of like biological creatures (or are trying to be like them), so it might work. Trying to launch virus bombs into the Warp would be pointless and probably wouldn't have any clear or discrenable effect. Effects on daemon worlds would vary depending on the rules of the world in question and the whims of the controlling power(s). Don't expect any form of exterminatus to work consistently on planets fully overrun by Chaos - you need to do it before things get that far.
>>96568751>Daemons in realspace are kind of like biological creatures (or are trying to be like them), so it might work.I'd argue against this since they're creatures of the warp and thus don't work on biological system, but on conceptual ones. They have blood and skulls not because of DNA or cells, but because they can conceptually bleed and have their skull taken.
>>96567996Virus bombs probably work poorly against them, but the bombs would wipe out all the other life needed to sustain their existence in realspace. If you're bombing a daemon world OTOH regular torpedoes are probably better.
>>96568783>I'd argue against this since they're creatures of the warp and thus don't work on biological system, but on conceptual ones. They have blood and skulls not because of DNA or cells, but because they can conceptually bleed and have their skull taken.That's kind of my point. Virus bombs and bullets both kind of work on daemons sometimes because the daemon is manifesting as a creature, and hurting creatures is what those weapons are intended to do. Actual adherence to causality, physics, and/or conceptual rules varies in degree depending on a lot of factors, likely including the expectations and fears of observers. To the extent that any weapons work on them, it isn't for the normal reasons, but weapons do often work.
>>96542500Does anyone know where the Liber Xenologis lives? I have been trying to sort out a copy but I'm running out of ideas.
>>96567696That’s fair, I’ll probably keep it as an armor penalty because I don’t want my players to be too fragile to torpedos or lances.Also, where do you all get your battlemaps for vtt? I’m particularly looking for void combat maps right now.
Is WANG's combat fun?
DH 1e, 2e, or Imperium Maledictum?
>>96568322>The more I look at the Bomber, Assault Boat, and Torpedo rules the more I think they needed another design pass and simplification (and the same for Boarding from the original book).Cheers, mate, I'll drink to that. Hell if I know where to start, though.
>>96569253Can't speak for vtt, I just use dungeon or wonderdraft for sfuff.
>>96569093By Darius Hinks?
>>96569093>>96570516transfer <dot> it/t/f3LjLRkFgZQaBecause if this is what you were looking for, it's all I've got, sorry. Not the best scan. In fact, it's a photojob.
>>96571051Link broken?
>>96571067reeetransfer <dot> it/t/wa9MXEtxzTSB
>>96569307DH 1.And use them exploding psychic dice.
>>96571237Why 1 over the others?
>>965717381 has the lowest power level of all, and a bit different mechanics.The most important of them are aformentioned psyker dice, exploding dice Righteous Fury, actual money instead of Influence, and only having 3 melee attacks per turn tops for 1 pair of arms.Very high death rate, unlikely every other. Only beaten by Fantasy.
>>96571772I've read that 2e has better mechanics, but 1e has the better setting. What does 2e do worse/better mechanically?
>>965717772e is extremely modular, finally evolved from BC and OW system, and allows you to build basically any combination. That was very lauded by freedom-loving people. That's the most important difference.DH1, and RT and DW all have class tables, and Elite Advances only for variation.Also 2e has Unnatural stats increase by point instead of doubling stat bonus, and adjusted weapon stats.I think that's it basically.
>>96571777its a completely different game pretending to be the same game. 1e characters start very weak, and stuff costs money2e characters are much, much stronger from the beginning, and instead of tracking money you roll against your "influence" stat to buy stuff
>>96571820This. And also I forgot to mention slightly reworked weapon tables.
>>96571813>>96571820>>96571919So assuming I have no horse in this race, 1e seems less casualized and allows for more room for proper roleplay.
>>96571944as i said, theyre different games. which is better depends on what you want.1e is designed around starting out as humanity's dregs. your odds of surviving or winning a straight up fight are often very poor, so it behooves you not to. money is limited so you are incentivized to do bad things to get more. 2e, in effect if not intention, treats starting pcs as much closer to being inquisitorial agents. you arent scraping for every grenade and power pack, you don't have much reason to rob the odd careless noble when the opportunity presents itself, and the average hive ganger is much less of a threat.
Oh wait, I also forgot the important piece, the shooting rules.Dark Heresy has bonus to it for automatic fire, which humoursly became a penalty in the later series. Since devs never managed to reconcile the amount of bullets with hit chance.So original lines have the most Dakka
>>96571820>2e characters are much, much stronger from the beginningAnd actually competent at what they're supposedly starting from
>>96572135Which doesn't fit real 40k in the slightest
>>96572115the easy fix would have been for semi burst to get one extra hit per dos, and full auto score one hit per two dos. single shot should be a bad thing to be stuck with, which a gun has to be good in other ways to make up for.also worth noting is that the new scheme still has extra bullets being more accurate with storm and twin linked.
>>96572139Why would an inquisitor pick shitty acolytes?
>>96572252Because they're cheap and the alternative is purging them for seeing/knowing too much.Do not waste what the Emperor provides.
>>96571944The prime differences are money vs influence and aptitudes. A 1e character has career levels and certain costed skills. A 2e has to spend time mapping out their desires pre character and can specialise more easily.
>>96571813Allowing you to build any combination just means everyone is gonna beeline for the best shit and all characters are gonna be the same.
>>96570364Turn them into variants of hit and run, and get rid of perma-destroyed small craft. In fact, I'm gonna do just that. Thank you (you being this thread) for the inspiration.
>>96572869If you play with the kind of people who feel the need to metaslave their way into everything.
>>96568594This
>>96567659You don't need a permissive GM, the machine trait and a mechadendrite with a suppression shield already puts you head and shoulders above everyone else. Add mutations from genetor and you're set. Add colchite servo-master and you don't need the rest of the party any more.
>>96572879>get rid of perma-destroyed small craftBOOOI hope the lance fire will perma-destroy your whole carrier instead, heretic.
>>96572898Also you can legally pick the best augmetic from the start - good quality cortex implants.
>>96572917Good point, yeah, that's the big fat cherry on top of servo master. Combat formation so the whole party gets a +14 or so to initiative. Plus with infused knowledge you know everything there is to know in the galaxy.>>96572899That would of course have to come altogether weaker small craft attacks.
>>96572880If you want to deliberately kneecap yourself, I'm sure the GM will let you no matter what the rules say.
>>96572150>>96572115If memory serves, didn't the original test rules for DH2e include a pretty significant combat overhaul that they wound up axing because it broke old statblocks? I think they might also have been bad, but that never stopped FFG, so I presume it was community backlash more than anything.
>>96573709I laid eyes on the prerelease once, it had a sort of 'action points' system a bit like Fallout 1's. You had (agility bonus) number of pips and actions cost x number of 'em. Word was it played really well, but folks ree'd about it anyway.
>>96572139Bullshit. People downplay just how elite the forces of Imperium are. They only take the best, it's a waste of resources otherwise.
>>96573744NTA but a significant part of the issue is that a lot of folks assume that +0 is the default for a test. An Easy task is a +30, a Routine task is a +20, an Ordinary task is a +10. You don't ask for a flat roll to pull out of a driveway, you ask for a flat roll to pit maneuver someone.
>>96573744Both are true.Forces of the Imperium cannot only consist of elites. Especially for the cheer size of it. There's infinite number of mooks, simplest of whose are PDF.DH1 specifically takes on low-level, the sorting level, where acolytes put through field tests and weeded out. You aren't working WITH the Inquisitor in DH1, you're working with his retinue at best, or their men's men, and so on.I don't see what startles you. Glowniggers use low-level enforces and infiltrators too, on small payroll.
>>96568746The best sandbox adventures have clear obstacles that horrify them or seriously piss them off, and a clear motivation. The obstacles need to be noticeable, though the extense of the underlying problem and their solutions can be complex. The motivation could be a cool, generous reward, or a sick situation they want to be in, like killing a Warboss with a Sub-zero fatality because the plot says so.Anything beyond these is unnecessary, but as a GM you think that you'll run a better game if you're "prepared", so you world build. I certainly do, but as you can see it's easier to teach than to do.>>965693072e is fun but if you don't like aptitudes like my players then it will suck.1e has charm, and you can see how the beast was still fine before bloating into a corpse (later FFG games) that allows laspistols to suppress people into cover by firing only two shots.IM is way too narrative, in the you don't have to reload kind of way and higher gun skill means higher damage. Character progression feels flat and unrewarding. Anyone can roll for anything, unlike previous systems where if you didn't know Survival you would automatically die on a Death World.>>96571777>>96571820>power level2e just starts you off as a promising acolyte. In 1e you have to prove yourself, and you'll likely die.Mind you, 2e isn't any less lethal it's just that you have more tools to defend yourself.>mechanicsYou can buy everything with XP, except for some prerequisites, but the cost depends on aptitudes which you get during character creation. This opens up character concepts to infinite possibilities. If you want a tech-priest pilot with agility, or an Arbites judge that uses a flamer, you now can have it.Combat was streamlined. Previously guns and melee had their own modifiers. In 2e they share the same philosophy of more is harder.
>>96573773I've been saying this off and on in groups for a few years, but I seriously think this system would benefit from a straight axing of test difficulties. Nobody uses them. Not a single GM I have ever goddamn had has ever bothered calling for an easier test unless it was a talent or ability that specifically said "Make a Routine (+20) Toughness test" or whatever. And if it's going to be that way, the tests may as well just all be flat and have required DoS levels instead, which will make unnaturals less stupid in how they're implemented.
>>96568746Cheat wildly. Come up with a broad outline, and prepare a handful of cards or slips of paper or a spreadsheet. Pick one randomly or roll on it when you need a specific aspect beyond what you've come up with. I recommend keywords that are suitably broad - so you might pick from a pile of 'feature' cards and get forest, then from a pile of adjective cards and get 'alien' or 'haunted' or 'full of wizards' or whatever. Stars of Inequity has a planet generator. It's a giant pain in the bum, but you can use it to generate random features.For example, you could do what I do with towns. I have two or three partially generated, and then I just quickly grab a card from a bag if I need a feature for something. Like if the players go into a sewer I quickly grab an adjective card and have 'haunted' or whatever and now the sewer is full of ghosts. Same should work for your systems. I'd recommend you prebuild a handful with, say, 1d10 planetary bodies and pick a name for it players won't see like "the arrakis system" or "the moon's haunted system", shorthand so you know what it means and what it's about. Give the system an alphanumeric designation and point the players at the feature, like the arrakis knockoff or the haunted moon.
>>96545558Many thanks, anon. The crusade shall continue eternally in your name.
Its finally fry day. My Dark Heresy day.When is your game days anons? How are your games going?You have games, right?
>>96574580My group wants to play Dark Heresy, and by the convo they've been having about characters they wanna make, they're not gonna last long.
>>96574580My game is cancelled tonight, and my game tomorrow is cancelled too. I'm gonna go to sleep early and spend the weeked writing house rules to tide me over.
Do all of you people genuinely believe that the 40KRPGs are a roll and assign system, or are you cheating on purpose?
>>96574580>haven't played on close to two months
>>96563569Bold of you to assume GW is ever bringing back BFG.
Would an Inquisitor permit a 7 ft tall lanky voidborn to pilot a guncutter? Would it be physically possible?
>>96574580I was in a nice Enemy Within campaign for Fantasy roleplay, but it just got canceled due to undisclosed conflict between the gm and one of the player, I don't have the details. Bit sad because we just completed book 1, and I was eager to continue playing my scummy tilean duelist.I was planning on doing either an Imperium Maledictum campaign with the inquisition book (and potentially the rogue trader book if it ever comes out) but I lost motivation, it feels like all of the Warhammer campaign I want to run or play in are cursed. Next up coming on from a reliable GM is a Wrath and glory focusing on the imperial guard, dont like the system much but I can tolerate it
>>96574580Ideally my Rogue Trader group will be starting our campaign this Sunday, it’s been a pain to get enough people together to start it.
>>96575094What's the party looking like? What's your first big campaign hook?
>>96566857Sweet collection of tables, yo.Actually, yeah, I figured I wanted moar broadsides of the stronger varieties myself, so I simply added exact same formula.But my favourite are actually Jovian Missiles. Because wouldn't YOU love to double the amount of Dakka, if only for a single turn?
>>96574821What, like rolling numbers for all stats then assigning the best one to BS if you want to be a shooting guy?
Infiltrators get an omni-scrambler. Essentially, it scrambles electronic communications for 1 km radius.Sounds great, right?Caveat: you need a successful tech-use test to activate it. Guess what infiltrators don't get? You CAN get tech use as a regular marine skill, but it costs 800 exp¯\_(ツ)_/¯Oh, you want to USE a piece of your introductory kit? Fuck you, pay 800 exp
>>96574580My Maledictum game got canceled because the players didn't care as much as the idea of a fantasy game, so I have that going for me instead. At least they seem excited about it more and have spent efforts actually making backstories, but we'll see if that matters at all when the time comes to play and schedule.
>>96575029A lot of Imperial vehicles can accommodate a wide range of builds, potentially extending to Space Marines in Power Armor. Gun Cutters are basically the civilian version of the Thunderhawk template (Same underlying vehicle design, but with worse engines, fewer guns, and more armor), so Voidborn are likely to fit. Voidborn with mechanical bonuses for flying small craft (treating pilot as basic) - that's a clue that's it's a normal role for them.
>>96575317Yeah, doing that is against the rules.
>>96575341which book
>>96575108I’m running Into the Maw and then Frozen Reaches, the party is a shooty Rogue Trader and Void Master and a Explorator with good armor and a conversion field but meh combat skills, and they have a Light Cruiser with good guns and not much else. The idea is to let them loot some cool military equipment and stasis frozen soldiers from the Righteous Path for the to play with against the orks. I’m a little worried about them struggling against ork melee since the RT is WS 30 and the Void Master is WS 40, but I guess I’ll see how well their pistol shooting goes against the orks they fight in Into the Maw.
>>96571051>>96571096Fantastic, thank you boss. I don't need quality when I just want to read the damn thing
>>96575822>Any important stat less than 50It's incredible to read about how different Rogue Trader parties turn out when people use different generation methods and/or don't know the rules.
>>96576251I meant 'understand the system' rather than 'know the rules'.
>>96575341shas will fix it
>>96574645>>96574714>>96574825>>96575168>>96575349Callidia is praying you get a good long running game, and that your current games are fun and last long too, anons.
>>96574580Still preparing for my game, though players are starting to coalesce character concepts and I'm having a bit of fun figuring out where to slot characters in.
>>96564946>Navigator built to abuse that system can consistently and reliably time-travelhow, exactly? I'm really curious
>>96575728Gold Experience requiem
>>96575341>>96577822I'll try to update infiltrators with tech use this weekend
>>96575903You're welcome. If you can't find things normally, russian dvach often has things as well as VK, their facebook equivalent. And telegram. I also recommend Yandex - even after google's enshittification it's not quite as good, but it doesn't filter your results as much. I got this by using yandex to check telegram and then using a telegram downloader site, for example. It's not perfect but it helps, especially for novels or older pdfs.Just do me a favour and pay it forward if you ever get the chance.
>>96577434Keep in mind this is second-hand. I am informed that the components used here were a Miloslav drive, a Runecaster, a Warpsbane hull, and a minmaxed navigator. I do not know what equipment the navigator had. Another quote from them:>They were able to casually go backwards in time on short, easy jumps, which made up for travel time from the Mandeville limit to in-system, and were able to jump from the Heathen Stars region to Stygies VIII in a short time period.>Departed in 816.744, arrived in 816.330, real time. That's a trip that should have taken years.
>>96574821Building a character you had in mind is impossible if your Arch-militant rolls 11 at their stat, or worse.The honest way is to roll for stats and building from them, but people hate being railroaded.Personally, I hate point buy even more, so yes I'd rather "cheat". It's not cheating if you make it a homerule.
>>96574821Straight roll is for when you want to laugh about how shitty your guy is and watch him die. Roll and assign is for when you want to actually play a game. Point buy is for when you want to minmax.
Does anyone know of rules for warp navigation using a Sorcerer? Fanwork, real stuff, whatever.>>96577434Not him, but:I'm not sure this is accurate. In Navis Primer, you might get the GM letting you go 1d5 years *before* with an inaccurate re-entry roll result of 121-140. And that's if they don't decide to make it after. It looks like you'd want to minimise journey time and aim for being severely off-course, then hoping you roll high enough to slot into that bracket and hope your GM would want to go 1d5 years backward instead of forward. Or maybe I've missed a big 'go back in time' result or power.
>>96579025>It's not cheating if you make it a homerule.That's fine if your GM okays it, but if you just go ahead and do it anyway, that makes you a cheating faggot. And if you actually believe that's how the rules work, it additionally makes you stupid.
>>96579238No, I ask how the rolling works first. Some GMs demand you roll in their presence, fine to me.I know how rules work, I just don't particularly care about bending them if it sensible.Why'd you bring it up in the first place?
Is there a list anywhere of what each card in the Emperor's tarot means?
>>96579381No. The names and numbers often vary. There's a mega link up the thread, the fanwork folder has two pdfs of some stuff on the tarot that might be plausible wank.The Emperor means warp travel, discovery, hope, inverted it is the warp and hopeless war and death. That's all I remember.
>>96579025>your character is unplayable if you are not minmaxing as hard as possible
>>96579579Please do tell me how rolling a new statline when the one you got doesn't serve the character you made is different from juggling the results of your first roll to fit.Or are you gonna tell me that's cheating too, you OSR-blowharding fucktard?
>>96579579>my swordmaster has whole 35 WS! take that!If core aspect of your character sucks, you won't enjoy it.That's not a problem if you're playing without a vague idea, but everyone jerks up to backstories.
>>96579277Because I've seen it happen many many times over the years, and a player in a game I'm in just did it the other day, which pissed me off enough to take it out on this thread.
>>96579610You're responding to a different anon than you think. I am >>96574821, and am not an OSR fan, I like point buy, because it puts everyone on the same level and lets people choose precisely what characters to play. When I run games, I give everyone max wounds and fate points for their homeworlds as well. I only point it out because I detest both cheating and people with poor reading comprehension.>>96579650Obviously if you're rolling stats, you would be stupid to create your character concept before rolling.
>>96579610>>96579676That is to say, the anon you were responding to is someone else. I would not complain about minmaxing, I encourage it.
>>96579663I think that's because most people independently came up with allocation in the first place and it's so widespread until it's a default assumption.At least that's my experience. Not that I'm above fudging a roll to get something important.>>96579676Uhm, no, that's not stupid at all. You can want to play someone specific from the beginning, as opposed to random.Dark Heresy and beyond doesn't even have a random career table like WFRP did.
>>9657965036 skill before any other bonuses from character creation, advancement, and equipment is perfectly playable.
>>96579695>I think that's because most people independently came up with allocationThat is a very charitable way of calling people DnD-poisoned.>Uhm, no, that's not stupid at all.This is barely worth addressing. I can't help you if it makes perfect sense to you to play a tech-priest with 22 Int.>>96579763It's a playable BS if you're a tech-priest whose main focus is being a nerd. And nobody said it was before bonuses from anything.
>>96579970>And nobody said it was before bonuses from anything.lets refer back to >>96579025>>Building a character you had in mind is impossible if your Arch-militant rolls 11 at their stat, or worse.
>Mom, help, they're playing the game wrong!You people disgust me. Can we go back to nerdfighting about which spaceship was best?Anyway, it's worthless to bitch about "allocation is cheating!" because point-buy is RAW and it's better anyway.
>>96579970>This is barely worth addressing. I can't help you if it makes perfect sense to you to play a tech-priest with 22 Int.Nice strawman. But you are either stupid or playing obtuse if you can't figure out wanting to play a certain character class since the beginning.>>96579983I said it. Though 11 is just serviceable and nothing more.>>96580025>>96580025>Anyway, it's worthless to bitch about "allocation is cheating!" because point-buy is RAW and it's better anyway.You can never take away people's desire to roll 180 stats someday.>which spaceship was best?Repulsive with Staravars and default rules.Or any homebrewed Cheese-class Battleship.
Given how the Eldar usually see humans as a lesser race how would one respond to a human trying to flirt with or date them? Say a human that is on a Craft World falls in love with a Eldar there. What is their response to this? Also, is the Eldar/human hybrid that became a Space Marine still cannon? I forgot his name.
>>96580097How would you respond to a paki trying to flirt with you? Exactly. Craftworlders in particular are the most prudish space elves.Of course "canon" in BL shittery and vydia games disagrees, but it was never canon.>Also, is the Eldar/human hybrid that became a Space Marine still cannon? I forgot his name.Illiyan Nastase. Never been since next edition, sadly.They kind of retconned him out of existance altogether, by introducing a normal Eldar of the same name.
>>96580097Much the same way you might a dog attempting to hump your leg, or a rapey jeet turning up on your doorstep with flowers and asking for bobs and vagene. Maybe a dark eldar might do it to be perverse, or an exodite if they're really weird, but I suspect it'd still be on the order of a serious perversion, like diddling children. It's telling that in the two novels I can remember, the MC occasionally has wet dreams about some *armour*, but not humans.GW never really de-canonises things, but your halfie has been replaced with a farseer who has the same name. A ynnari, I think. They definitely still know he exists, because he's turned up on community websites in shitpost form. Surprise to me too.
>>96580134Wait, never mind, I'm retarded, I just went and grabbed the book to check, it's 'amour', not 'armour'. That's fucking disappointing.
>>96580129>>96580134Lol. Jeet hivemind.
>>96580097really depends on the specific eldar and if they're of the amish or the spikey variety,play the rogue trader video game like unironically both flavors of eldar are romanceable and it's all cannon, so by all means 100% feasible so long as your in the right place right time and have the right amount of power over everythingfor example being a rogue tradertho the craftworlder in that is like hyper autismo and no sex happens with that one despite it being considered a romance, also drukhari are infinitely easier to bang
>>96579983Okay, fair enough, you're right.>>96580046It's not a strawman, it's the logical conclusion of your non-argument.>>96580129>Never been since next edition, sadly.People will shit their pants in rage about the concept of genestealer-infected Orks but still be all about this repellent half-breed.>>96580154I didn't know this because I killed all the Eldar as a true son of the Emperor should, but my opinion of the game is now one step lower. The navigator romance was cringeworthy enough, I don't want to know what the writing was like for the Eldar.
>>96580219>It's not a strawman, it's the logical conclusion of your non-argument.You are making non-argument.You had an idea in mind, you rolled bad, not doesn't fit. Easy to fix by shuffling stats, but you just had to be retarded about it. Typical.
>>96580219>People will shit their pants in rage about the concept of genestealer-infected Orks but still be all about this repellent half-breed.Actually, I like that idea. Chaos Orks too. They also make perfect sense.I don't approve of romancing Eldar or even want to hear about this because I fucking hate the sort of "people" this attracts. They're all getting a free assassination attempt for the audacity.Don't forget that shitty game had a Chaos C'tan.
>>96580239They're mostly silent and overseen by a genestealer pure-strain. I believe they're in The Emperor's Finest, a Cain novel.
>>96580239I agree with you on all points and hereby proclaim that you are based. The only caveat is I think both Greenstealers and Chaos Orks should exceptionally, unbelievably, once-in-a-lifetime-tier rare. I would hate for either to become a fad.
Are there any Imperial worlds with floating cities? What would they look like?
>>96580423Lanunder has chunks of crust floating in a chemical sea with antigrav keeping them up, the hives hanging below. Stratos is an ocean world with floating Loft Cities. They send mining subs down to the ocean floor, but the cities themselves are giant atmobubbles.The Imperium being what it is, there's probably a promethiun refining planet that has mobile aerostats floating in a Venusian style environment that gather chemicals. Those would be necessarily small places, probably returning to a home spire regularly to drop off chems.Have you ever played Netstorm? I fucking loved that game as a kid. There's likely some hostile world that has an odd metal in the crust that lets it hover easily and you'd get stuff like Nimbus, floating islands gathering storm power from the world below or whatever 40kifies it.
>>96580423Terra used to have orbital plates, but they were decommissioned during the Heresy because nobody wants a continent dropped on them.
>>96580423They would probably have a similar design philosophy to imperial space stations, assuming they aren’t old tech
>>96581291Actually, ARE the any other patterns of Star Ports mentioned besides Ramilies? No, not Phalanx.
>>96581455Goliath-class, Gaugamela-class, Tractus-class, Laskar-class.
>>96581650There are way too many Goliaths in 40k.
>>96581455In the RT core rulebook there’s the Wayfarer class that looks like it’s built into an asteroid, and Footfall is spread out across many small structures that are linked together.
>>96581661No, there's only one. The Necromunda Goliaths. Any construction named Goliath is just larger numbers of Goliath gangers taped together to form an appropriate framework.
>>96581661Huge-class WhateverBig-class ThingMammoth-class Object
>>96581678But enough about my dick, a-anon...
>>96581681Cylinder-class m&m's tube
What's the smallest possible ship a Rogue Trader can fly? My group wants to play RT but wants to play a "rags to riches" campaign, at least in the context of RT.
>>96581936rags to riches would be going from no voidship to one voidship.
>>96581952Don't put that evil on them.But if you do, Epoch Koronus has a plot hook ready and waiting for whoever can find the murderer of Justinian Krin.>>96581936Viper-class Scout Sloop, or alternatively, your pick of a basic-bitch Jericho or Vagabond. Of the two, I consider the Jericho to be slightly worse.
>>96572115Our group has reworked automatic fire and bursts to function similarly to battletech: a table determines amount of hits based on DoS and RoFBurst is +0, auto is -10, but a burst requires 6 DoS to get all of your hits versus auto requiring only 5 DoS for all hits. For example, a 4 RoF burst that scores 3 DoS would land (3/6)*4 = 2 hits. In effect: burst is a better chance of getting at least one hit, but auto gives you better saturation.We also pair this with rules for "magdumping" which gives low BS chars a bone. You can double your ammo expenditure for both burst and auto to add +20 to hit triple ammo expenditure for +30 to hit.This does not double or triple the amount of potential hits however. x2 ammo use gives +1 RoF to auto fire, and x3 ammo use gives +1 RoF to bursts and +2 RoF to auto
>>96581989Show me the tables, anon. You did make tables, right?
>>96581952>>96581978NTA but how would Rogue Trader work without a ship?
>>96582017Short answer: It doesn't.Long answer: It plays like DH but you're a snooty rich bastard for the first arc, after which you get your ship and it plays like Rogue Trader again.
>>96581998
>>96582035Aww yiss. That's the good shit right there.
>>96581936The way it usually works in Rogue Trader is that you choose between either having a small ship but a lot of Profit Factor (general measure of wealth and purchasing power that you test against instead of spending to buy stuff) or having a big ship and very little profit factor. So what you could do is give them a big ship with little upgrades and have them rebuild their dynasty and kit out their ship over the course of the campaign. Starting with high profit factor is kinda lame because increasing your profit factor is basically the whole goal of the game.
>>96582042Unfortunately the +1 or +2 from mag dumping make for "blind spots" in the table. I just add another row in Excel when that happens, but the formula is just linear ( DoS / maxDoS ) * RoF with rounding up halves
>>96582051my experience is the group usually has 40 pf and 50 ship points, or 50 pf and 40 ship points
>>96582035Why though? Drowning in tables doesn't sound very fun to me.
>>96581989>You can double your ammo expenditure for both burst and auto to add +20 to hit triple ammo expenditure for +30 to hit.This is just twin- and triple-linking weapons with fewer steps. Which I guess is fair, since they forgot to put in the rules for doing it with more steps.
>>96582060I have never seen this in my 15 years of playing Rogue Trader. In fact, I have never seen anything except max ship points and minimum profit factor. Profit factor is basically game progress, anyway, so why not start at the beginning?
New>>96582791>>96582791>>96582791
>>96562583In order:>Set up a plan to save abbey full of hot women in armour>Speak to the most disgusting woman ever to work in the Administratum>Get access to their Astropath>Astropath says weird shit, sends message to incoming Guard scouting force>Psyker makes contact with the planet and it tells him about something so horrifying the Chaos Gods don't want that smoke
