I was wondering if anyone has written rules for the huge selection of dishonerable,cowardly and downright evil ways of winning/surviving a fight. eg: executing a K.O'd opponent, hiding behing an ally, playing dead,throwing dirt in the eyes of bad guys etc. if not dous anyone have any suggestions or house rules for this?
Executing a KO'd opponent is in the rulebook (automatic critical hit to a location of your choice - presumably the head).
Hiding behind an ally - I'd rule varying chances of it hitting the ally or the hider depending on the angle the attack is coming from.
Playing dead - there is a brief note on this in the hallucinogens section, where the individual thinks the gas is toxic and collapses "dead". Characters viewing must pass an Sg test or believe it as well. I'd go with the same thing, but obviously, with the generally reasonable Sg values of most characters, this could be risky.
Throwing dirt in the eyes of enemies - I'd adapt the photon flash rules. First the character would have to roll a WS test to actually hit the eyes. His target would then get a I test to try and avoid it getting in their eyes (which would stun for D3 turns).
However, if the target has bionic eyes (regardless of quality*), is wearing goggles, etc, the test automatically fails. Although, if they've only got one bionic eye (and one real one), then they get a "cyclopean" penalty (doubled reach penalties in combat) for D3 turns if they fail.
I think Marco has covered everything, but it's an interesting question. There's probably potential for more things like this - the tactics and methods of those who play dirty; not necessary new rules but ways to use those rules to represent a particular type of character. Maybe even a DM article if you can think of enough...
A friend suggested using a K.O'd opponent as a meatshield in a Gears of War esque style.
you could modify an unarmed close combat attack to represent eye gouging, headbutting and going for the groin.
and introduce rules for stealing weapns/ammo/money from downed bad/good guys
Quote from: GAZKUL on September 09, 2010, 07:00:59 PMand introduce rules for stealing weapns/ammo/money from downed bad/good guys
Heh. Try that at one of my games, and you'd start running into some interesting problems.
I'd give most characters a WS/BS penalty for using a weapon they weren't familiar with. With guns, I'd probably also increase the risk of jams (and make them harder to clear), and give the character a chance of failing to turn the safety off properly, messed up or slower reloads, etc.
And the old favourite "Your character is a total monkey who failed to realise that the ammo he stole is in fact the wrong size to use in his gun."
GMs are allowed to play dirty too... ;D
going for the groin is one of my favourites (boxing being a pastime of mine...) and ive used a few times..most successfully when Inquisitor Dire picked up Interrogator Carver onto his shoulder but doing so meant waking him up...Carver decided to then ram his knee into Dires groin at full speed....and then fell on the floor crying like a little girl as his knee shattered due to Dires Power Armoured Crotch....as Marco says use a WS test to see if the shot hits and then calculate damage based off unarmed attack+x2 Strength Bonus (trust me you get some serious power from your legs, especially if youve done it before ;-)
kerby
This being the distopia of the 41st Millenium I'm afraid I take dirty tactics as read.
I simply assume that a portion of the character's weapon skill is taken up with going for the groin, the hamstrings or that awkward scalp cut which won't stop bleeding into your eyes. Taken up with flinging a handful of sand (or chemical deposits) at your opponent to give them room to breath.
Learning to fight after all is not the same as learning to fence, anything that might save your life is fair tactic in that situation.
As to meatshields, apply an armour value of the victim's toughness over 10 (20 if they're already out of action) plus the victim's armour to the shielded individual's torso, abdomen, groin and off-leg. They can move at no more than a walk (in general, a Space Marine using cultist can probably sprint, a cultist using a Space Marine can probably do no more than cower).
come on guys what would you consider a dirty tactic? its those things which appear every so often and cause all present to stand up and say in aggrevated tones "that's not a very nice thing to do". lets hear some ploys of the underdogs, scum, traitors and eldar and find some rules for them. its the things you've always wanted to do in a game but your sense of honour and kindness has always prevented you doing so, let the not very nice guy inside you out to air his views on shooting hostages, backstabbing, etc.
How about tripping people up as they run/sprint past?
Another dirty tactic that there are rules for is having someone that has the 'Persuade' skill to get someone to join their team then backstabbing them.
Or maybe a type of persuade that uses bribery?
Or putting someone to sleep, then carrying them to somewhere else, and removing all their weapons...
These are all I can think of off the top of my head at the moment...
Quote from: InquisitorHeidfeld on September 10, 2010, 01:45:14 PMThis being the distopia of the 41st Millenium I'm afraid I take dirty tactics as read.
Nah. Many of the characters in Inquisitor have a certain degree of honour to them.
Anyway, let's look at two possible GM responses to
"Can I try throwing sand in his eyes?" - which is the more interesting?
a) "Sure. Make a WS test to see if you hit."
b) "No, I've assumed you're already doing that".
We had a situation in our last Inquisitor confrontation where one character took an opponent hostage at gunpoint.
And I have seen all too many misuses of krak grenades and demo charges. Yes it's fair, but also as dishonourable as possible.
And there is the tried and true tactic of shooting someone locked in combat with a less-than-valued ally (or a less-hittable ally). We have a player whose lead character specialises in that kind of thing (and the aforementioned grenade business). To hear him describe it, his character (a techno-heretic) is "moral, but not honourable".
Quote
Or maybe a type of persuade that uses bribery?
So wait, you've *not* ever used bribery in campaign scenarios?'
-A.
I've found some tactics can compensate for being outclassed and seem like a realistic reaction, especially for some characters.
Inquisitor Haast often uses a tactic of setting his opponents on fire before charging them with his chainsword. For a man who fight's genestealers and such he needs all the help he can get.
Also using explosives to take hostages is a good tactic, but using 'fake'explosives is even more satisfying.
Hehe, getting ideas for a bounty hunter character who specialises in these tactics now . . .
Things like holding on to his target with a pistol to his head to stop the target's friends shooting him, then walking out and killing him anyway.
heh heh, stuff like in the movie S.W.A.T when Jeremy Renner's character shoots a terrorist through a hostage.
Quote from: Swarbie on September 12, 2010, 08:15:20 AM
Hehe, getting ideas for a bounty hunter character who specialises in these tactics now . . .
Things like holding on to his target with a pistol to his head to stop the target's friends shooting him, then walking out and killing him anyway.
Well, after a little contemplation, I give you the beginnings of a character: http://www.the-conclave.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=1058.new#new
Quote from: MarcoSkoll on September 10, 2010, 10:47:29 PMAnyway, let's look at two possible GM responses to "Can I try throwing sand in his eyes?" - which is the more interesting?
a) "Sure. Make a WS test to see if you hit."
b) "No, I've assumed you're already doing that".
That arguement has value, certainly...
But do you really know any character who wouldn't knee their opponent in the groin, bite their ear/arm/other extraneous body part, stamp on their hand as they reach for a dropped weapon...etc. if they were losing the fight where death is certainly on the line?
Especially if it's a Xenos scum/foul Heretic/vile Kinslayer/<Insert hostile of choice>...
Which do you prefer?
a,) Inquisitor Ecks is being beaten six ways from Tuesday, his opponent is better than him and he's rarely getting a hit through.
"Can I throw Sand in his eyes?" "Sure, +5 WS for this attack" "Hit."b,) Inquisitor Ecks is being beaten six ways from Tuesday, his opponent is better than him and he's rarely getting a hit through.
"Hit!" "Ecks dives under the powerful backswing, landing on his shoulder and rolling to his feet, killing the impact. Almost before his opponent can react the plucky young Ordo Hereticus' hand flashes out, a cascade of lime rich dust from the floor of the hive, scooped as he rolled, leaps from his outstreched fingers. Ecks follows it in and, with a double handed grip on his shock maul, swings the weapon in hard under the other man's solar plexus..."
Why not the GM imposed test/bonus of the first with the narrative description of the second? I see no reason for them to be exclusive. As a GM I much prefer it when players ask to do something not explictly covered by the rules - it shows they're paying attention and are involved in making the story interesting and cool. More fun to reward their thinking with an appropriate test or bonus than to tell them it's already included in their WS.
Quote from: InquisitorHeidfeld on September 13, 2010, 01:31:39 PMBut do you really know any character who wouldn't if they were losing the fight where death is certainly on the line?
Most characters would, but would resort to it at different stages. Some people would use it even if "winning" the fight. Some when things started to go downhill. Some only as a last resort.
Not all of my characters are equally noble. While some of my characters like to see themselves as being morally above their opponents, I've also written characters who'll break arms if they find the owner too annoying (and that's what they do to
allies).
QuoteWhich do you prefer?
I don't see that I have to - as Kaled says, a rules bonus and a narrative description can be easily combined. They're independent variables. One, the other, neither, both... doesn't matter.
Such things will be a common part of a fight in Inquisitor and
may be part of regular attack actions, but I don't see that should mean a player should be prohibited from specifically attempting them as dedicated actions.
The Narrative description is there to obfusctate the game mechanics, if a lucky hit arises then (from my perspective) dirty tactics are one of the means by which the GM can explain away the vagueries of the dice - that lucky hit is not purely down to luck but to choosing that moment to do something beyond the taught forms.
Meanwhile the deliberate intention will generally disappear in the laws of probability, the sand in the face trick from Ecks is ignored by his (superior) opponent simply because 5% isn't enough to bring them to a level... So Ecks either wastes a good cinematic or does it constantly in the hope of a lucky roll and overuses it to the point of wastage.
Some characters may have trouble with dishonourable conduct - but in general that will have been discussed with the GM anyway...
Clever plans (bursting into a room, festooned with what look like explosives, yelling "Swiss Sniper! Everybody down!" for example) are different from the more basic sand in the eyes, knee to the groin sort of tactics. The former are the domain of the players, the latter (again, from my perspective YMMV) are tools with which the GM can tell the story... That is, after all his job.
Quote from: InquisitorHeidfeld on September 14, 2010, 01:44:10 PMThat lucky hit is not purely down to luck but to choosing that moment to do something beyond the taught forms.
Perhaps. But then again, maybe it is just a lucky hit. And I wouldn't necessarily say it's a waste of a good cinematic. Somewhat subject to the caveats I talk about below, it is however possible to turn a "hit" into a cinematic where a tactic that failed earlier goes right this time.
And anyway, sometimes really cinematic things go wrong. It's not like I expect to automatically pass the rolls needed to sprint along the walkway, vault over the end rail onto the roof of the Valkyrie taking off, roll spectacularly to dissipate the impact, then fire through the canopy killing the pilot. Cool, possibly. Automatic pass, no.
QuoteMeanwhile the deliberate intention will generally disappear in the laws of probability
Personally, I wouldn't write it as a +5% WS bonus. Like I said, I'd make it a disadvantage to the opponent, not a bonus to Ecks.
I'd also punish a player for unimaginative repetition. After all, after you've tried sand in the face once, your opponent is going to have wised up to it, and it's thus unlikely to work if you try it again.
After too many repetitions (which would often be the second or third attempt), I'd probably give their opponent such things as an increased chance of avoiding the hit, and perhaps an automatic counter attack if they do avoid it.
If at any point, a player does something completely repetitive - be it throwing dozens of photon flash grenades to keep everyone on the table perma-stunned, or uses "Covering fire" repeatedly to pin down a character turn after turn - then they will find it will stop working very well at all, or I'll find a way to turn it horribly against them.
Basically, if it would be dull in a movie, then I'll make it undesirable to do on the table.
QuoteSome characters may have trouble with dishonourable conduct - but in general that will have been discussed with the GM anyway...
Depends on the game. At Conclave events, there's not enough time to describe each character beforehand, so it doesn't happen.
Most GMs at these events wouldn't necessarily know- unless they're one of the people who's had the persistence to read
and remember my character sheets on the forum - which of my characters would happily systematically cripple their opponents in a fight and who would play somewhat by the rules.
i quite like the idea of using IEDs as booby traps, there are many weapons not covered by the rules for this sort of occasion. notaby hiding weapons from opponents and then drawing them at the oppertune moment eg negotioations for a peace treaty, but also things like mines, punch daggers, trip wires with grenades, poisened blades etc.
Hiding weapons is covered in the "Packing Heat" article. Punch daggers can be made with the Custom Close Combat Weapon rules that are somewhere on the internet, or if not, in badly formatted PDFs on my harddrive. Poisoned blades are in the rulebook. The Pathfinders article includes the Booby Traps rule.
;D
cheers, i've actually already got the link to the custom cc weapon rules.