Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
91
Painting and Modelling / Re: Marco does something
« Last post by MarcoSkoll on July 24, 2018, 12:15:38 PM »
My nostalgia tends to be mostly for models from the 1997-2003 era - the kind of stuff that was either released or commonly on tables in the early few years of my hobby.

As far as Belladonna, to the top of her head and counting her heels, about three quarters of a head taller than the couple of old Jes Goodwin Escher I have. The hairdo exaggerates that a lot, but she's not unthinkably tall alongside the older models.
I do actually have the plastic Escher box about, but I've not assembled anything yet, so I can't say definitively how those match up height-wise, but my instinct is that Belladonna, being somewhat slighter of figure than the new plastics, better matches the old metals stylistically.
92
Painting and Modelling / Re: Marco does something
« Last post by Van Helser on July 24, 2018, 07:28:21 AM »
The Juan Diaz daemonettes were always the best.  Though I do have a fondness for the older oven glove wearing ones from the early 90s.

How tall is the Belladonna model?  I've heard that the new Necromunda figures are a good bit larger than the metal stuff.
93
Community News and Announcements / Re: Salute - 6th April 2019 @ ExCeL
« Last post by Van Helser on July 24, 2018, 07:24:31 AM »
Tentatively interested.  I'll have one Inquisitor event to go to next year, so it could be this one.  I have always wanted to go to Salute, so hopefully gaming would be split morning/afternoon so there's opportunity to take in the show.

Ruaridh
94
Community News and Announcements / Re: Salute - 6th April 2019 @ ExCeL
« Last post by TheNephew on July 21, 2018, 11:06:37 PM »
I'm in.

I have essentially nothing to contribute to an exhibition table for the usual sidebar of pretty attention-grabbing models, but I'd be very happy to put time into a game.

I'm in favour of having two games to increase the likelihood of each of us having a bit of time to run around and look at the show, should we get the numbers.
95
Community News and Announcements / Re: Salute - 6th April 2019 @ ExCeL
« Last post by FreezyGeek on July 21, 2018, 04:46:27 PM »
I hope so. Alas, I won't be able to help but I may take a look, providing that I end up going to salute.
96
Community News and Announcements / Re: Salute - 6th April 2019 @ ExCeL
« Last post by MarcoSkoll on July 21, 2018, 03:47:35 PM »
The Warlords have formally opened game applications for Salute 2019, so I'm looking to get a concrete idea of whether we can do this.

I certainly think that we should - obviously, an exhibition game won't be one of our "normal" events, but it'll give people a chance to get involved in a slightly more planned game than usual, and being at Salute should be great for Inquisitor's profile - but there is the question of whether it's viable.

As far as what we need, I'd like to be looking at a team of five or ideally six people (myself included in that number) so that we have people spare either to stand in as reserve players (in case of absence or illness) or to wax lyrical about Inquisitor to passers-by (without the players/GM constantly having to interrupt the game) - as well as the possibility to split the day into morning/afternoon games with different players.
(I think it'll be best to not try to run one mega game over the entire day, as I'd like the game to actually appear to have some pace!)

I know that not everyone can verify their availability that far in advance, but if we can get some of that number, I'll be happy to chase this down.
In the event that we have a surplus of interest, we can theoretically take a team of up to ten (but while the first four wristbands are free, every one past that has to be paid for). In this case, I'd propose a secret ballot to decide who gets first call on the gaming.

We should be okay terrain wise; things like the rebuild of the old White Dwarf terrain articles that I did for the London GT should serve well, being both (fairly) portable and hopefully playing up the nostalgia to gamers of that era.

So, can we do this?
97
Painting and Modelling / Re: Marco does something
« Last post by MarcoSkoll on July 17, 2018, 01:48:27 AM »
Well, oops. Apparently it's been four weeks since I said I'd start this, and I've managed to let myself get repeatedly distracted by writing IRE rules.

However, I finally got the saw out this evening and did the basic posing on one of the daemonettes (bottom middle in the earlier picture).


I've done a repose to go for an angle more of arrogant confidence, as vanity and pride are certainly Slaaneshii traits (although not exclusively).
I've also taken her down from four breasts to two, and will extend up the armoured corset to fill in the gap. The six breasted daemonette works for me as Slaanesh's number of power, but four felt more out of place.

~~~~~

I'm seeing these six as a specific covey of daemons rather than just nameless threats, in order that hopefully a narrative/reputation can build up around them over the various plots they're involved in.

Although I've not filled in every specific detail and I wouldn't be staggeringly surprised if someone's written something similar before, I'm thinking that...

The six were once human sisters, a set of sextuplets born to a noble line otherwise dying out through infertility. Naturally, this was the deep resentment of their father, who against all odds had been given six children, but not one male heir to continue his line. He was never again gifted children, and he came to drown out the shame of being the last of his line in a haze of alcohol and narcotics, with occasional bursts of violence towards his unwanted daughters. His final fall was literal - thrown by his daughters from his palace's thirty metre high grand balcony in response to his latest drunken abuse.

Claiming his position in unison, their rule was magnanimous, but with time, ever more advisers and political rivals would disappear after speaking out against them -  becoming increasingly unwilling to accept anything but their own superiority.

It is not clear exactly when Slaanesh took them. It might have always been his/her plan - drinking in the cruel torment of granting an impotent noble a family but no successor, and then eradicating his legacy entirely by corrupting each and every one of his children.

However, take them he/she did. When the Inquisition came and their palace was burnt to the ground, they laughed in unison from the balcony, welcoming the ecstasy of the rising flames.
98
Community News and Announcements / Re: Dark Heresy VOIP Campaign
« Last post by Heroka Vendile on July 15, 2018, 11:42:29 PM »
Upcoming sessions:
22nd July: yup
29th July: nope
5th Aug: 50/50 will know nearer the time
12th Aug: yup
19th Aug: nope
26th Aug: yup
99
Inquisitor Game Discussion / Re: IRE - Inquisitor Revised Edition project
« Last post by MarcoSkoll on July 15, 2018, 04:41:07 PM »
I agree failing the perils of the warp test should cancel the power. Makes things a bit riskier. I really don't like the loss of 3D10 willpower though especially as you're planning to use the same difficulty modifiers as for the psychic test. That puts us back to the situation where one failed test means no more psychic powers for that game, thus discouraging purely psychic characters.
The thing to consider about this is that this is the only way in IRE that characters are commonly likely to lose Willpower, characters can recover Willpower, and generally Perils are massively less likely than in the LRB.

A character has to be doing things like throwing around Psy Rating 5 powers at around a ~30% chance before they're in the same ballpark for a chance to trigger Perils of the Warp as fail a risky action.
And this is still assuming that the Psyker doesn't have the new "Favoured by the Warp" trait, which is intended to help protect characters that really have very little in their arsenal but Psychic powers (such as my own Maya Avens, who other than having about thirty psychic powers to choose from has a compact laspistol and BS 47).

In this case (assuming no Favoured trait), the expected Willpower loss for attempting a Psy Rating 5 power at 30% chance is 5.8 Wp. (Averaging all possible outcomes, both successful and failed).
Trying it under the LRB, (for which we have to assume a Speed 4 character, because Risky chances vary with speed) and that expected loss is 11.4 More or less double, which comes from possibilities like a ~7% chance of passing the risky action, but then failing the test by 60 points or more and thus losing 6D10 Willpower.

As Perils is now the only one common source of Wp loss, I thought I had to turn it up a bit, because to be honest, even rolling badly on 2D10 Wp loss isn't that disastrous to many psykers.

Quote
Not a fan of persistent powers being hazardous. It might only be a low chance but it will penalise any pure psychers who are heavily reliant on psychic defences to stay alive (such as the old Isabella, before she was warped in the recent campaign).
I'm not absolutely certain about it myself (so perhaps it should be in orange text), but IRE is still an work-in-progress project being written primarily by a single person - the only large playtesting team I have is the community. Otherwise it's just me with spreadsheets, and occasionally playing against myself.

While the theory and spreadsheets are often effective, they don't give an exhaustive sense of how something feels on the table - never more so than with IRE's close combat rules, where somehow I ended up being surprised when the rules did exactly what I'd designed them to.

This means that some of the rules that make it into the release versions are experimental - things that might work. If they don't, then the hope/expectation is that players will give feedback and then house rule them until the next version.

The thing is, it does feel "realistic" that maintaining a power while under the stress of a combat situation has some risk (beyond simply failing to maintain said power), and now that borrowing the Psychic Phenomena system from Dark Heresy offers a mid ground between "Nothing" and "Your brain explodes"
If it proves too problematic, it might be tweaked - possibly into a "Mini-hazard", possibly by making it so that it's automatically Phenomena rather than Perils, or whatever - or removed, but one of the problems with IRE so far has been that psychic powers can become quite dominant.

Quote
Nullifying a persistant power is a good idea, although I think it should need line of sight.
Nullification has a 5 yard range and characters will still need to be aware of their target, so I don't imagine that's a major issue.

Quote
Not sure about resist for non psychers. Most of the powers that target people have some sort of resist built into the power. Will this be as well as that or a universal rule instead of power specific ones?
This is a universal rule (and actually existed in the last version of IRE). The issue is that without something, psychic powers become largely exempt from the Reaction system, exacerbating the fact they're already fairly formidable in IRE.

I may need to fine tune the balance (it occurs that "half willpower" may be better than -20, so that high Wp characters don't have a really easy time of it, but it's also not impossible for low Wp characters to resist).

Short of completely redressing the balance of psychic power difficulties in IRE (and therefore causing back compatibility issues with the original rules) or slapping a broad -20 penalty across all psychic powers, it's proving quite a challenge to have hit the mid-ground where psykers aren't penalised for even thinking about using their powers but where they aren't completely overpowered gods.

Quote
For demonic possession Wp -30 is too high for the recovery test.
Possssssibly, but the problem for me is that almost all of the rare few times I've seen daemonic possession occur in a game it usually goes...

1) Daemon possesses character.
2) Daemon gets one or two actions of moving into position to try to do some damage
3) Daemon gets expelled at the start of the next turn
4) Character drops the daemon weapon.

... which isn't exactly thrilling.

Maybe things will be a bit different with IRE making possession both a bit more likely and less predictable (between Perils and the adjusted daemon weapons, it's now a case that it can happen at any time rather than just when the character already has reduced Wp, so avoiding it isn't just a case of dropping a daemon weapon), but I would like to see it as a bit more of a threat, where other characters actually have time to worry about it before it's over.

Possibly it should be -20 rather than -30, but I do think the roll should be somewhat penalised so that it's not always completely transient.

Quote
Psychic nulls look interesting. Not completely effective but pretty nasty.
It's experimental right now, but they did need a large overhaul to bring them into line with the updated psychic rules having split psychic prowess into both Psy Rating and Willpower.
100
Inquisitor Game Discussion / Re: IRE - Inquisitor Revised Edition project
« Last post by Cortez on July 15, 2018, 10:21:55 AM »
Quote
Psychic Powers:
- Failing the Perils of the Warp test if a power is fumbled now cancels the power, to compensate somewhat for the number of powers that now don't automatically fail because of a Risky Action.
- The Perils of the Warp test now uses the same modifiers as the original psychic test (making using complete long shot powers a bit more risky).
- Maintaining Persistent Powers is now Hazardous (although only one level of Hazardous), and hence has a slight possibility of causing psychic phenomena or Perils of the Warp.
- The Nullification rules have been extended to allow Nullification of existing Persistent Powers.
- The chance of a non-psyker resisting a Psychic powers is now slightly higher so that it's not a complete shot in the dark for characters to try it.
- Some rules for Daemonic Possession, Sorcerers, and Psychic Nulls.

I agree failing the perils of the warp test should cancel the power. Makes things a bit riskier. I really don't like the loss of 3D10 willpower though especially as you're planning to use the same difficulty modifiers as for the psychic test. That puts us back to the situation where one failed test means no more psychic powers for that game, thus discouraging purely psychic characters.

Making long shot or high difficulty powers more risky could also have a negative effect on the game especially for ranged powers which in the original rulebook quickly become unusable. One thing I liked about IRE was it allowed for the 'Hail Mary' power without having a ridiculous risk of your psycher being turned into a vegetable.

Not a fan of persistent powers being hazardous. It might only be a low chance but it will penalise any pure psychers who are heavily reliant on psychic defences to stay alive (such as the old Isabella, before she was warped in the recent campaign).

Nullifying a persistant power is a good idea, although I think it should need line of sight.

Not sure about resist for non psychers. Most of the powers that target people have some sort of resist built into the power. Will this be as well as that or a universal rule instead of power specific ones?

For demonic possession Wp -30 is too high for the recovery test. Even very powerful pschers (80wp or higher) will have only slightly better than 50% chance of escaping possession and probably worse especially considering the -3D10 wp you're proposing for failing the perils test. I'm assuming this also covers possession by other means than just the perils table (Daemon swords etc.)

Sorcery rules look good.

Psychic nulls look interesting. Not completely effective but pretty nasty.

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]