Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Inquisitor Game Discussion / Re: IRE - Inquisitor Revised Edition project
« Last post by MarcoSkoll on June 20, 2018, 10:42:12 PM »
I'm looking at expanding the Psychic Powers section, with general rules for Daemonic Possession (which can potentially occur as a Perils of the Warp result, or through misuse of a daemonic weapon*), Sorcery and Psychic Nulls.

*Possibly, the current IRE rules for daemonic weapons might have to be rebalanced slightly to make possession less likely, as I've decided to make Possession a bit nastier than it is in the LRB, with a penalty to regaining control. (Although, as characters will generally lose less Wp in IRE, it may balance out?)

It's possible that Sorcery and Psychic Nulls will end up moved to a supplement rather than being in the core rules, but they do need to be thought out one way or another, as the original Pariah rules won't be very compatible with the IRE psychic rules.

I've opted, at least in this draft, to make Psychic Nulls affect Psy Rating, rather than being a penalty to the psychic test like they are in 1st edition. I felt this was probably more appropriate, and it also helps make them feel different to Nullification - Nullification is beaten by skill, Nulls are beaten by raw power.

Quote
Daemonic Possession
On badly fumbling a psychic test, a psyker may find themselves possessed by a daemon, although daemonic possession may also occur in other cases, such as by a character wielding a daemon sword.

While a character is possessed, control is passed over to the GM (or another player, if appropriate). The character should act in a self-sacrificing, destructive and chaotic fashion - lashing out at allies, deliberately provoking conflict, carrying out casual murder - but cannot deliberately directly cause themselves harm (they cannot choose to jump off a building or shoot themselves in the head, for example).

They will also gain a random Daemonic trait, and the Possessed trait while they are possessed.

They will remain possessed until they pass a Willpower test at -30 in the Recovery Phase.

Sorcery
Not all characters who can manipulate the warp do so through innate psychic talent - some instead must rely on the deeply blasphemous art of Sorcery, shaping aetheric energies through dark ritual and arcane practices.

Characters can have a Sorcery Rating, allowing them to use Sorcerous Powers.

Sorcery uses the same basic framework as Psychic powers, but when using Sorcery Rating:
- Sorcerers test against their Sagacity rather than Willpower
- When calculating the Hazard for using a power, a character counts twice the Sorcery Rating being used.
- Sorcery requires the character to be able to gesture and incant the ritual, so the character must have at least one free hand and be able to speak. (Although some very talented Sorcerers may be able to invoke their powers through sheer will, but more on that in later versions of the rules!)

Although both rare and exceptionally dangerous, a character is permitted to be both a Sorcerer and a Psyker. In this case, they can combine their Psy Ratings and Sorcery Ratings if they wish.
They may test against either Willpower or Sagacity, although the Hazard for the power is still doubled.

Psychic Nulls [Experimental]
An exceptionally rare mutation within humanity, psychic nulls (also known as blanks, untouchables or pariahs) are a formidable weapon against the energies of the warp. Valued and reviled in equal measure for their soulless natures, untouchables can absorb and nullify the energies of the warp.

These characters have a Null Rating, expressed as a dice roll.
A weak psychic null might only be Null Rating 1D3, a formidable blank would likely have a rating of 2D3 or 3D3, but a Culexus Assassin would have an obnoxiously high Null Rating such as 3D6.

If any psychic power (friend or foe) is used or targeted near a psychic null, then roll the dice that relate to the Null's Rating, subtracting the full number of yards between the null and the power's user or target (whichever is closest). Should this result in a negative value, the Null is treated as having rolled zero.
For example, if a null has a Rating of 2D3, and the power is targeted three yards from them, they should roll 2D3-3.

This value is immediately applied as a negative modifier to the Power's Effective Psy Rating, reducing its effect. As detailed in the Psy Rating section, should a power's Effective Psy Rating fall to zero or less, the power is entirely negated.

Similarly, if the target of, or a psyker maintaining, Persistent powers is near a Null (or Nulls) in the Recovery Phase, roll again - should this equal or beat the Psyker's Psy Rating, then all associated Persistent powers are immediately nullified.

More powerful Psychic Nulls will also generally cause an intense distrust in any nearby allies - the more extreme their nature, the more abhorrent they are to those around them. This will be addressed in a future update.

~~~~~

Outside of psychic powers, I've also opted to modify IRE's system shock rules to keep them streamlined:

Level 1 System Shock (10 damage from one hit) is now a +20 Toughness test
Level 2 System Shock (15 damage) is a straight Toughness test
Level 3 System Shock (20 damage) is a -20 Toughness test

(Previously in IRE, a character needed 1, 2 or 3 tests for each of these, with a +20 toughness bonus to the test if they started below their System Shock Value).

I'm reasonably happy with this, as although flattening System Shock to 10 damage means that high toughness characters will often now have to take system shock tests (as opposed to almost never against common weapons), the toughness bonus for the first level of System Shock means that they still remain fairly resilient, while also keeping lower toughness characters from repeatedly fainting. (Certainly, in the past, I've had to recommend against really low toughness characters, because they've got such a hopelessly huge chance of fainting that they're not fun to play or play against).

I chose to remove the bonus for being below the System Shock Value - it was an unnecessary complication, mostly put in there to keep SSV relevant in IRE. (The value is now not used in IRE, but I've elected to keep it mentioned in the Characteristics section to help players keep their characters back compatible with the LRB).
2
Painting and Modelling / Re: Freezy Geek's First Inquisitor Warband
« Last post by FreezyGeek on June 20, 2018, 06:09:02 PM »
Firstly, you're right about that being a Meltagun. No idea how I messed that up. As for the chest on the bounty hunter, it may just be the photo. It's about the same size as a normal mini with a larger neck width, which is fine as lore wise it's converted from a suit with a large protective helmet. The gun being bent, however, if true. I have fixed it, as it really bugged me not you pointed it out.

Thank you for the help!
3
Painting and Modelling / Re: Marco does something
« Last post by MarcoSkoll on June 19, 2018, 11:00:18 AM »
If you guys have been following the planning for the event I'm planning to run in August, you'll know that it's going to be set around the onset of a warp storm - and, obviously, the skein of reality being stretched thin is obviously going to have to have some detrimental effects. So we're going to need some detrimental effects.

I don't remember if I owned up to buying these, but the Juan Diaz Daemonettes were one of the early Made to Order runs, and while I think the Alex Hedstrom ones get more flak than they deserve*, there's still something about a single breast that makes me think "cancer survivor" more than "indeterminate sex/gender".
* Actually, although I don't particularly like the design, I think that the plastics are actually very skilfully sculpted, particularly given they're from before all the modern leaps in GW's plastic technology.

The other thing is that I'm a weirdo who's just generally more comfortable with metal and resin miniatures than plastics. As such, the Juan Diaz models at a reasonable price were the natural choice for me to explore the world of Slaanesh.

Now, the box was of 10, but a proper covey of Daemonettes of course has to be six, so as there were seven different designs, I put aside the three doubles and the one that I thought I might want to use as a specific character later on, and narrowed it down to these six:

Currently I'm trying to decide what to do with them. I'm not sure how much I want to do with them, although I am playing with the idea of giving them short tails (which is a feature I do like from the later design), and some reposing is always a possible option.
Suggestions on a postcard.

Something else I should own up to is that the new FW Necromunda bounty huntress Belladonna made her way into my backpack while I had a spare moment at the London GT last month:

Similarly to the daemonettes, I haven't yet fully settled on a plan for her, but she seemed like an opportunity to exercise my normal modelling style while working on a model that is actually from this decade. (Given I'm really not that comfortable with plastics, I often simply don't work on recent models, and when I do, it's still generally rather different to how I normally work).
4
Painting and Modelling / Re: Freezy Geek's First Inquisitor Warband
« Last post by MarcoSkoll on June 18, 2018, 08:48:59 PM »
I'm afraid I can't be staggeringly useful, as I have a very old-fashioned approach to 28mm Inquisitor modelling (I'm not very good at thinking in terms of bitz - I usually start from an entire model I like, cut it up, then put it back together more or less like it was, just with loads more green stuff.)

As far as things I notice that might need a tweak, the bounty hunter's parts seem a bit unevenly sized - I'm not sure if it's the head, torso or both, but Space Marine parts can be on the large size when compared to other models. It also looks to me a bit like his pulse rifle is somewhat bent in that picture.

For the Inquisitor, the "flamer" seems to actually be a meltagun (which might cause some confusion on the table).



5
Cool, thank-you for the detailed answer.  I can definitely come up with something that works.  My main concern was not to accidentally turn up with a parochial character that I had to shoehorn into a situation way beyond anything he should reasonably have become involved in.  (Which is not to say, having become 'reasonably' involved in these shenanigans, he subsequently finds himself massively out of his depth...)
6
Conclave News and Announcements / Re: Conclave ownership
« Last post by TheNephew on June 17, 2018, 10:46:30 AM »
I fully support your bid for dictatorship, Marco.
Front of house you are by far the most active community organiser that I see, and no doubt you are similarly vital to the work backstage.

I'd be happy to chip in a voluntary ticket price or summat for Guardian Abyss to keep the lights on, if the site is a financial burden.
7
Conclave News and Announcements / Re: Conclave ownership
« Last post by MarcoSkoll on June 17, 2018, 01:02:25 AM »
I would entirely agree - this was part of why I deliberately sought out a second administrator after I set up the second Carthax Wiki. (Although to be clear for people who weren't there at the time the first was lost not because of a single point of failure because the hosting changed its Terms and Conditions).

That is potentially a minor argument against my taking on the sites, because although passwords could still be shared and it wouldn't strictly be a single point of failure, I am currently a point of failure in everything - I'm an admin on the Conclave's forums, Facebook and Wiki, and if I got hit by a bus, then we'd need to find a new person (or persons) to spread around the points of failure again, so also putting me in charge of paying the bills would make that whole thing more urgent.

(But, at the same time there is a certain logic in it also being someone involved in all the 'Clave's sites).
8
Without knowing exactly how the campaign is planned, would such figures find themselves working with the Inquisition to find the Guardian?  Or could it be that an actual Inquisitor has leant on one or other of them (made them an offer they couldn't refuse) and set them on the trail, thus keeping that particular Inquisitor (or other interested party) at arms reach?
Those are both possibilities.

There are other variants on that - rather than the Inquisition "making an offer they can't refuse", there's also the possibility that the Inquisition is  manipulating them - there are a lot of very wily Inquisitors out there who can make things happen by whispering the right lies in the ears of the right people.

If the mob boss was never told any more than the myths, he could be lead to believe that the Guardian was a powerful weapon that could elevate his standing above the city scale. Maybe the preacher believes it's a holy relic.
Of course, they might have second thoughts once they start realising exactly what they've got themselves into. They may be already in too deep - or maybe their "patron" Inquisitor sweeps in and makes it clear that quitting is not an option.

(That could actually be quite an interesting concept, characters who start developing an "Oh no, not again" attitude when they realise that they've just fallen for yet another Inquisition "tip-off").

Alternatively, the characters could come to similar conclusions without the Inquisition initiating anything.
It's not unthinkable that a mob boss would have visions of grandeur, looking to elevate himself above merely an annoyance to the local Arbites, and depending on which version of the story he's heard, he might wish to find the valuable artefact... or perhaps he's looking to get himself a favour from the Inquisition by being able to give them what they're looking for.

Or, to be honest, even a low-life of a mob boss doesn't particularly want to see the sector collapse around him as a warp storm tears reality apart, so maybe he's asked a few of his informants to keep an ear to the ground regarding those old legends... he might be acting more selfishly than an Inquisitor, but he does still have a legitimate interest.

And for a preacher/cult leader? Depending on how deranged and/or fanatical he is, he could interpret a dream as a vision from the Emperor, commanding him to lead his flock to rescue the sector from the oncoming threat.

While it can take a bit more thought to think about why non-Inquisitorial characters are getting involved in a story, there's usually the potential.
9
Having not attended a Conclave event before, I'd appreciate a bit of guidance on the appropriate sort of character to bring as my principal protagonist for this event. 

My fall-back plan is my Rogue Trader, who I can easily see getting mixed up in this sort of shenanigans, however, I used her in my last Inquisitor campaign and quite fancy a change.  My 2 options (without re-purposing an existing model as a new character - which just wouldn't feel right) are a space mobster boss and an ex-guardsman preacher/cult leader (worships the Emperor, but not sanctioned by the Ecclesiarchy).  I see them both as relatively minor characters on a planetary scale - they're key players in their city, but have minimal wider importance.

Without knowing exactly how the campaign is planned, would such figures find themselves working with the Inquisition to find the Guardian?  Or could it be that an actual Inquisitor has leant on one or other of them (made them an offer they couldn't refuse) and set them on the trail, thus keeping that particular Inquisitor (or other interested party) at arms reach?
10
Conclave News and Announcements / Re: Conclave ownership
« Last post by Heroka Vendile on June 16, 2018, 04:04:42 PM »
I think the only really important thing is that there isn't a single point of failure. i.e. it's not just one person with all the passwords. It's when a single point of failure disappears from a community for benign or tragic reasons that issues occur. So ensuring that we are not vulnerable to that is the only core tennant I think needs to be upheld in whatever setup is actually arranged in the same way that while I setup and initially run the Conclave's facebook page, MarcoSkoll is also now a full admin as he was running most events it made sense and removed the single-point failure issue.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10