ItsUncertainWho said:

I dont know, page 58 of PtU for some reason decides to go into a little detail on Agamorr's armour saying "Agamorr's black power armour is clearly ancient with carefully maintained ornately inlaid plates." Maybe they just got overly cared away with being description, or maybe he has special armour.

I dont know, just how I see it.

Peacekeeper_b said:

I believe that the author of that adventure has said that Agamorr's armour is Artificer Armour.

DW

Peacekeeper_b said:

It's difficult to include rules concerning the Hive Mind without rules for something to embody and/or focus it - no synapse creatures means that those Genestealers and Lictors are operating independently...

With Orks, "Waaagh" in the tabletop game has traditionally been represented in increased deadliness on the charge (in 3rd edition, they had a chance of doubling their initiative, making them more likely to strike first, in 4th edition, it's represented by furious charge and a once-per-game army-wide ability to use the Fleet special rule, letting them charge slightly further).

Not really a huge deal, overall... and something easily covered in the stats.

Peacekeeper_b said:

No offence, but read the book before you start making suggestions about how to improve it...

The 'average' Ork listed on page 98 of Creatures Anathema (remembering that Orks increase in size, strength and lethality when residing in areas of intense warfare and conflict, so this could be considered a 'baseline' creature) has Crushing Blow, Furious Assault and the trait Brutal Charge. In melee, contrary to the error ridden weapon summaries, a baseline Ork deals 1d10+7 R Tearing damage, Pen 2. On the charge, this increases to 1d10+10 R Tearing, due to Brutal Charge. When not charging, the Ork can use an all-out-attack, and thanks to Furious Assault, it gets two attacks (both at +20)...

I don't think they're lacking in ferocity at the moment...

Peacekeeper_b said:

As is only appropriate - Agamorr is a Deathwatch Veteran with 30 years of experience combating aliens of all kinds... he's not going to be a pushover, even by Marine standards.

Offense taken. I did read the book, but I did miss those two talents/traits.

Im just glad to see that the two i suggested (even if I missed them initially and titled them wrong) are there.

That is, as I mentioned before, one of the things I dislike about the game. Too many **** talents and traits!

Peacekeeper_b said:

[rant]

I'm right there with ya on that one, especially in regards to NPC's. In fact, I honestly don't see the point in the special traits that are for NPC's only (such as Touched by the Fates, Machine, etc). If you want to an NPC to have a certain score in something, or be able to do something, why can't it just be written into their stat line instead of writing out a trait that then has to be looked up to see what it dose to know what the NPC can do and then remember it has that trait when looking at their stats and altering the statline appropriately in-game and on the fly. It just seems to add an additional layer of needless complication and obfuscates the info the GM will need especially when he needs stats for an NPC that he didn't plan on mid-game.

When it comes to stats and items for a the GM's eyes only so to speak, it's really best to keep them as simple as possible. After all, a GM has a hell of a lot of tings he's got to keep in mind and adding more things for him to have to remember dose more harm then good in my opinion. While CA is a nice book, it really over complicates a lot of NPC's (like giving separate stats for an ork choppa when we already have stats for big blades attached to handles).

I don't mind all kinds of talents and big lists of stuff with only marginal differences in stats for PC's -they only have one character to keep in their head and it gives them plenty of carrots to chase. When it comes to NPC's for the GM, it really is best to keep things as simple as possible.

[/rant]

from france

could i have a little clarification? peackeepers says that natural weapons are not primitive but in the adventure dustdog mount have the primitive quality. so are they primitive or not? or is a typo?

thanks

In CA there is a new trait...

Improved Natural weapons: Natural Weapon are no longer Primitive

Peacekeeper_b said:

Apologies - a poor phrase to use, brought on by a stressful day at work...

Oh, and check your e-mail: I've sent you an updated version of Unearthed Apocrypha: The Great Devourer.

from france

i din't find the page for improved natural weapon in creature anathema and creature describ have the primitive quality so can you be more precise.

While we're at it: Orkish group mentality is already being represented by the Mob Rule. Considering they'll be trying to get into melee as fast as possible and Pinning is probably the best tool to keep someone out of melee as long as possible, it's a pretty good trait...

personnaly i have a probleme with the orks mélée weapon. in the previous 40.000k their choppa can cut through a lot of armour. the terminator have their amour reduce to a "comon" astartes armor. now in the new army book it less powerful but it still powerfull enough to be a danger even to an astartes power amor.

so i 'am surprise that for such crud design they don't have the primitive quality, weigth just 5kg and still be so unipressive 1d10+1 r pen 2 is not something that can be a danger to a marine. the description says it can describe a power sword. a power sword? welle it doesn't appear in the description.

my opinions it to give an ork a human equivalent weapons with the bonnus of the ork an call it choppa and not use this one.

A choppa is and always has been a sharpened piece of metal. The only thing that makes it dangerous is the ork swinging it - which, as has been shown, is duly represented in the rules as written.

and their range weapon? well an ork shoul have bulging biceps in his base stats. i have never seen an ork with a heavy flamer or hevay bolter using brace tool. moreover evrytime they can get their hand on bolter they use it.

You don't need anything for bracing - it can simply represent carefully planting your feet and, well, bracing yourself. And correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK orks have to stand still to use their heavy weapons like everyone else, don't they?

Cifer said:

And, well, looking at the entry for the Ork in Creatures Anathema, they do have Bulging Biceps, so if they want to run around and blaze away innacurately with big shootas and similar, then they're quite welcome to...

the 8 spider said:

In the introduction, page 4.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

Which they do.

I had a look again last night and yes Stealers and Orks both have crushing blow that isn't included in their weapon damage (at least it's doesn't look like it for the ork and it's not included in the Dire Avengers stats).

from france

thank you peacekeepers. after reading it carefully and compare every entry on this book i can say tha this new trait is not automatic or if it is it needs another erratta. for example the ambull does have this quality but not the curorian war beast.

so if it is not automatic than natural weapon are primitive in most case. witch leads be to another question already ask before but i ask it again in the light of this one does natural armour count as primitive?

i have trouble with the game masterkit about creating alliens inteligent one i means. the two columns seems to be too narow for me . i remenber the saruthy from eseinhorn first book and they have multiple legs they are not quadrupped but for the sake of simplicity let' s say they are. so if i look on the table the trait quadruped apply only to beast and saruthy aren't beast.

does someone have a better collumns for creating aliens species?

thank you peacekeepers. after reading it carefully and compare every entry on this book i can say tha this new trait is not automatic or if it is it needs another erratta. for example the ambull does have this quality but not the curorian war beast.

so if it is not automatic than natural weapon are primitive in most case.

It's quite simple, really: Anything with "Traits: Improved Natural Weapons" inflicts non-primitive damage, anything with "Traits: Natural Weapons" has primitive damage.

witch leads be to another question already ask before but i ask it again in the light of this one does natural armour count as primitive?

It doesn't say it's primitive - that means it isn't. There's also no example of a creature with Natural Armour having that armour listed as primitive.

the 8 spider said:

If you have an idea as to what kind of xenos you want to make or what traits it should have, then forget the random roll tables and just give the xenos the traits you think it ought to have. The random roll tables exist in case you have no idea what kind of xenos you want to make or to give you some ideas and inspiration. The tables are just a suggestion and by no means mandatory ;-)

they need to bring back the old Hatred(everything) rule for Orks

Not so much on the question end other than I FINALLY got my hands on the book and HOLY CRAP!!! This book is gorgeous and gives a nice lot of critters to toss at my players. Big fan of the Genestealers and the Orks making it into the book. And the Eldar will make for a nice switch up from time to time. Just want to thank all involved! Excellent work folks!