Two quick ones, as I'd rather like to not have any argument over them at the Spring Conclave. I know how I normally handle them, but we all know there are differences in interpretation...
1) If a Wyrd attempts to resist a psychic power, how is it handled? Their normal Wp and with the risks, or with their Wyrd Wp and no risks?
Personally, I take the following passage:
"Wyrd powers function just as normal psychic powers except that the Wyrd always counts as having a Willpower of 100. Using a Wyrd power is not a Risky action and the Wyrd cannot suffer psychic overloads."
... as reasonably interpreted as their Wyrd ability applying to nullifications as well. Also, I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that their innate protections from the warp would also help them against hostile psychic attack.
2) A trickier one this one. Parrying with two weapons when one of the weapons has a special parrying rule (such as a buckler or shield).
The first parry is easy enough to resolve, but what about subsequent parries? If you have a buckler and short sword, then use both to parry, do you use the half WS of the sword's second parry, or the 3/4 WS of the buckler's second parry?
I don't really have a great answer for this one.
The rules say "both weapons count as being used the same number of times that turn, using the highest number of times", but at the same time, you "use the best reach and parry penalty for determining the parry chance" (and the reach and parry penalty don't even have to be from the same weapon).
My group has never really reached a consensus on which is the right solution, so we've played it both ways, depending on who's GMing this week.
Personally, I say "use highest number of parries, but take the best weapon rules", but I haven't got much of a case against "highest penalty for subsequent parries, but best reach and parry penalty".
Anyway - your thoughts, gentlemen?
hello,
1) in our group, we use the wyrd ability only for the psychic power it is related to. so a wyrd has to resist another psychic power at his normal Wp.
2) we would use the 3/4 Ws of the buckler`s second parry. this is based on personal experience ( i practice swordfighting since 2007 and one of my friends/players since 1999). my prefered weapons are a scotish claybeg and a buckler. parrying with both weapons is much easier than with just one.
hope this would help
phil
Without reading through the letter of the rules;
1) Intuitively, I don't see why a Wyrd would be particularly good at nullifying enemy powers. I would make him use his own willpower, applying the wyrd rule only where the associated powers are used.
2) Since the two weapon parry includes using the buckler to parry, I would allow the bonus (i.e. 3/4 rather than 1/2 WS) for using the buckler to parry to be used.
I'm with Myriad and Phil-o-mat. This seems like a common sense approach if it is not clear in the rulebook.
Is there anything in the FAQ/Errata?
To make a hollow laughing!
No, it's not in the FAQ.
INQ both benefits and suffers from the fact that so much is left to player/GM interpretation. In both cases, I'd say that there are a lot of situational modifiers that will affect the rules used, depending upon, for example, the character, the circumstances and the opposition.
In Question 1, some Wyrds are pretty dumb characters who simply are cursed with an intuitive ability to tap the Warp to perform certain effects: in this case, I would say that they should use their own WP to resist powers and/or nullify powers - they aren't trained to understand what they're doing, so they should struggle to do anything other than the particular abilities for which they have an intuitive understanding. In other cases, Wyrds have acquired the power through foul pacts and long, deep study or, being Wyrds, have received significant training to refine their abilities. In this case, a Wyrd might be able to use his Wyrd WP of 100 even to resist other powers and nullify - however, I'd also say that, in this case, the character should be seen as a truly terrifying threat to humanity, targeted for death by all sane men and women.
In Question 2, the parrying rules using two weapons often throws up points of confusion. I would say: always count the total number of parrying efforts. So an effort using two weapons is one parry, an effort using one weapon is one parry. In either case, divide the WS by the number of parries made so far this turn. If two weapons are used, always apply the best modifiers. As to shields and bucklers, I have a simple rule: parrying with a shield or buckler cannot be combined with parrying with another weapon in the same Action.
R.
On the first, his own WP and risk.
Wyrds are not better psykers than the trained and sanctioned psykers.
The reason the Wyrd ability comes with inate WP and lack of risk is simply that it wyrds do survive more than ten seconds despite a distinct lack of self discipline, conception of the threats to body and soul inherant in what he's doing...etc. The odd behaviour of Wyrd abilities explain why.
I have used Wyrd to represent particular psychic talents, an astropath for example with a few psychic abilities and Wyrd Telepathy, a specialist healer with psychic powers and Wyrd Regenerate. In this case the Wyrd abilities represent the practice and familiarity... but all other abilities are done on the normal WP of the character.
Sorry it's taken me a while to get back this, but here we go...
#1) Right. I see people have some very different interpretations of Wyrd psykers to me then.
I guess I can live with having to play with that interpretation at Conclave events, although it's certainly not how I had defined Marco's power in his background.
#2) Well, I'm agreeing with most of you. However, a couple of points I need to bring up against PO's interpretation.
QuoteI would say: always count the total number of parrying efforts. So an effort using two weapons is one parry, an effort using one weapon is one parry.
That would defeat the point in using two weapons to parry separately, if the parries of the weapon in one hand were to count towards the parries of the weapon in the other.
If that were the rule, you might as well parry every attack with both weapons.
QuoteIn either case, divide the WS by the number of parries made so far this turn.
... Well, that's not the normal rule either. :-\
QuoteAs to shields and bucklers, I have a simple rule: parrying with a shield or buckler cannot be combined with parrying with another weapon in the same Action.
A shield maybe, but a buckler is actually designed to be used fluidly in combination with another weapon. Refer to the Royal Armouries "Tower Manuscript" I.33 - it moves with the hilt, and provides protection for the sword hand. It may separate off to parry a blow (or land one of its own), but it can certainly be used in combination with a sword in order to parry.
It'd probably be more true to say that the buckler didn't get its bonus if used without another weapon. Of course, that's not a rules interpretation, but one from the real world.
Thinking about it fully from that perspective, I think I'd say two weapon parrying is acceptable for bucklers, but not shields. Represents the style of bucklers quite well, so I think I might go that way in future.
Here's another one.
Stacking persistent abilities - is it acceptable to "double up" on the same power (at least where reasonably viable).
I could see something like Warp Strength could be used to channel progressively more power, and thus further strength increases, but at the same time, it's something that people could quite obviously get shirty about.
Also, the same question, but from the (admittedly improbable) perspective of two different psykers bolstering the same target with the same power.
I would say that from a fluff perspective, the same power could not easily be 'doubled up on' by the same psyker, simply because I imagine with persistent abilities, the psyker is constantly having to focus on that one effect to keep it going. To then shift focus to try and up the ability again while still holding focus on keeping the level of ability being maintained seems improbable to me, even for a trained psyker. (E.g with warp strength they must focus on keeping the strength in place but must then try and up it further, thus dividing concentration).
I may, however, suggest a house rule that you could perhaps double the difficulty rating of the ability to cast it a second time, triple it for a third time, etc... To represent that you are having to hold the concentration of the first effect, while upping it further.
I do however, think it nwould make sense for multiple psyker's abilities to stack, as each psyker is focusing on causeing that particular effect to occur (e.g. warp strength, both are focusing on raising the strength level by a bit).
Just my own interpretation.
Quote from: Brother_Brimstone on May 03, 2010, 01:16:02 PMSimply because I imagine with persistent abilities, the psyker is constantly having to focus on that one effect to keep it going.
Well, I suppose the question there is what about multiple (different) persistent abilities at the same time? Or indeed, casting any new ability while a persistent one is going.
There's nothing that specifically says an active persistent power ends when a new power is cast, and indeed, the plural in the following...
QuoteAs soon as a psyker is taken out of action, any persistent powers which he currently has in effect are automatically ended immediately.
... supports the interpretation that multiple powers are allowed. From there, my reckoning would be that it was probably easier to channel more energy into an existent power than divert concentration into another.
I'm not necessarily saying that its something that I intend to do (very often, at least), it's just a question that came to me.
Quote from: Brother_Brimstone on May 03, 2010, 01:16:02 PM...
I do however, think it would make sense for multiple psyker's abilities to stack, as each psyker is focusing on causeing that particular effect to occur (e.g. warp strength, both are focusing on raising the strength level by a bit).
Just my own interpretation.
I like this. I can imagine some Chaos Lord having a slew of psykers in the background, all invoking the Ruinous Powers to bestow upon him even more strength than any one of them might convey.
Perhaps a limit to the stacking though (2nd psyker makes for a 150% increase, 3 psykers 175%, 4 -> 187%) or an increased risk of things, quite literally, going to hell, as the denizens of the Warp become keenly aware of the tap that's been placed in the Ether.
Stacking sounds like fun! As the psyker channels more and more warp energy, his clothes burst and his muscles bulge as he takes on a Hulk-like posture! All the while, the risk of a fatal mistake grows and grows...
R.
Quote from: precinctomega on May 05, 2010, 10:03:34 AMStacking sounds like fun! All the while, the risk of a fatal mistake grows and grows...
Ah, now THAT sounds like an interesting way of controlling it.
Rather than necessary stacking up the difficulty (which doesn't really work in the case of some powers), a second "level" of a power runs the risk of double Wp damage if it goes wrong, a third triple, and so on and so forth.
Or this one might be appropriate in some cases - the "Quicksilver" power (which can explicitly be stacked) from the Chaos Powers article results in D6 injury total for every prior level of the power if a stacking attempt fails.
I was going to suggest a single test, with a -10% modifer to the test for each additional power being maintained, but I'll concede that simply increasing the penalty might be more fun, not least because it makes people more likely to try stacking.