Hello guys,

In our last game, we had some problems with said weapons (way too much damage in a way too flexible way).

Thats where the following idea came up:

> to get the bonus damage, you need to make a called shot, not a standard attack

> the "you need to aim" prerequisite is not needed (but it makes it much easier to hit)

> using a braced weapon gives +10 on Called Shots in general

What do you think ?

This would make bracing (incl. Tripods/Bipods) more valuable, would make Accurate a little less overpowered, and would give Called Shots some interesting use..

Accurate weapons have the downside that as single-shot only, they are relatively easy to Evade completely. A simple success on a Dodge is all you need. Regardless of the amount of DoS the Attacker scored.

And, Called Shots don't make any sense .

This was a change I was really hoping for from the beta. Too bad it didn't happen

So they didn't change Accurate weapons at all? That's disappointing.

IMO the best change is to simply require a full round of aiming to give the Accurate damage bonus. The telescopic sight already uses this convention, and it's a much easier fix than adding several new rules relating to Called Shots and bracing Basic weapons.

Or:

Only grant the bonus damage, if the weapon is fired braced (tripod/bipod). This would also give bipods/tripods more use.

What about reducing the Called Shot penalty to -10 and requiring a Called Shot to trigger the Accurate quality instead of Aim? That way, Called Shots might see a little more use and hopefully resolve some of the Accurate issues.

This change will still not make sense, imho.

In Dark Heresy 1.0 Called Shot was a simple -20 modifier to an Attack Action. You could combine with Aim and any other Actions, it simply meant that the difference in modifiers between "any regular" attack and a Called Shot was at 20.

As stated in the thread I linked to earlier, the problem is that the changes to the Standard Attack and Called Shot Actions don't fit. FFG changed Called Shot in Rogue Trader (and it didn't make sense), and then changed Standard Attacks in Black Crusade without changing Called Shots to reflect these changes.

1. A Standard Attack is now a +10 test. It used to be +0, so making a single shot is now easier than before.

Called Shot is still a single shot, but remains unchanged. This means that Called Shots are harder compared to other Single Shots than they used to be. The difference in modifiers went from 20 to 30.

Your proposed change would address this, so that's good

2. A Standard Attack is still a Half Action, but Called Shot was made a Full Action.

This means that you can spend a half action to Aim with your Standard Attack, and have +20 to your test.

The Called Shot remains at -20. The difference in modifiers is now 40.

If you have an Accurate Weapon, the Standard Attack is now at +30, so the difference in modifiers is now 50.

Using Called Shot, without Aiming, gives none of these modifiers, leaving the Called Shot dude out cold.

And if I can do an Aimed Standard Attack at a Miniscule Target in one Round, why should it take so much longer, or decrease my accuracy so much, if I decide to Aim for just "parts" of an Enourmous Target?

It makes no sense!

Shoot a Snotling: Aim (+10), Standard Attack (+10), Accurate Weapon (+10), Size (-20) = BS+10

Shoot a Lictor in the Body: Called Shot (-20), Size (+20) = BS+0

Even trying to hit a massive monstrosity in center-mass (ignoring the pincer limbs, tails and whatnot) is harder (by 1 level of Difficulty) than hitting a knee-high little grot. If using regular humans targets, the difference is even larger.

Shoot a Flying Head (Servoskull): Aim (+10), Standard Attack (+10), Accurate Weapon (+10), Size (-20) = BS+10

Shoot a Head attached to a Body: Called Shot (-20) = BS-20

This is now harder by 3 levels of Difficulty.

And why? Just because the Head is attached to a body? Meh.

1. A Standard Attack is now a +10 test. It used to be +0, so making a single shot is now easier than before.

Called Shot is still a single shot, but remains unchanged. This means that Called Shots are harder compared to other Single Shots than they used to be. The difference in modifiers went from 20 to 30.

Your proposed change would address this, so that's good

2. A Standard Attack is still a Half Action, but Called Shot was made a Full Action.

This means that you can spend a half action to Aim with your Standard Attack, and have +20 to your test.

The Called Shot remains at -20. The difference in modifiers is now 40.

If you have an Accurate Weapon, the Standard Attack is now at +30, so the difference in modifiers is now 50.

Using Called Shot, without Aiming, gives none of these modifiers, leaving the Called Shot dude out cold.

And if I can do an Aimed Standard Attack at a Miniscule Target in one Round, why should it take so much longer, or decrease my accuracy so much, if I decide to Aim for just "parts" of an Enourmous Target?

It makes no sense!

Shoot a Snotling: Aim (+10), Standard Attack (+10), Accurate Weapon (+10), Size (-20) = BS+10

Shoot a Lictor in the Body: Called Shot (-20), Size (+20) = BS+0

Even trying to hit a massive monstrosity in center-mass (ignoring the pincer limbs, tails and whatnot) is harder (by 1 level of Difficulty) than hitting a knee-high little grot. If using regular humans targets, the difference is even larger.

Shoot a Flying Head (Servoskull): Aim (+10), Standard Attack (+10), Accurate Weapon (+10), Size (-20) = BS+10

Shoot a Head attached to a Body: Called Shot (-20) = BS-20

This is now harder by 3 levels of Difficulty.

And why? Just because the Head is attached to a body? Meh.

Also, keep in mind that Melee weapons cannot benefit in the same way from the Accurate quality, but can still use Called Shot.

I entirely agree with the idea that Called Shot is a mechanically inferior option (because, in the end, it'll only get you a few armor points shaved off the Defence value, which a weapon or ammunition with Pen can do anyways- not worth a -40 penalty) while Accurate is a mechanically superior option (even if it can be easily evaded). That was mainly why I wanted to link them together, with an inherent Aim action to smooth them out. Terminology checks out too. Although I probably should find a more mathematical way to handle these mechanics, I can't say I'm terribly interested in DH2e's mechanics.

What if we allowed Called Shot actions to be any Half Action attack? That way, the snazzy new Multiple Hits chart would see some use and it would effectively double the benefit from making a Called Shot action without benefiting Accurate weapons? Another option would be to make Precision Killer give the character a +30 bonus to called shot action of the appropriate designation.

And realistically speaking, you're entirely right about the relationship between Size and Called Shot modifiers. That being said, I've never seen a player make a Called Shot at the body, since the critical charts are worse, there's usually thicker armor, and you have the highest natural chance of hitting it.

Edit: So then maybe Called Shot as a supplemental Half Action like Aim imposing a -10 penalty that could be negated by the Precision Killer talent? It could also be used with attacks with a higher RoF than single shot. I think it all comes down to the balance of penalty vs. reward of making a Called Shot, which comes down to avg. armor rating - weakest armor rating (+1 if target is Elite because of Critical Effects), which is usually 1-3, something that slapping Mono or special ammunition on a weapon can mostly remedy just as well.

I imagine this'll be addressed in the Eratta- I'm curious to see FFG's conclusion.

I agree, and there were Talents in V1 which reduced and then eliminated the penalties for Called Shots as well.

Your proposal to reduce Called Shots to a Half Action, and with a -10 penalty will work, but will also (ironically?) bring it back in line with V1s handling of it

Should have remained as a -20 modifier, but only possible with Single Shot.

I totally agree. Making Called SHot a half action, keeping the -20 would be perfect and easy.

I totally agree. Making Called SHot a half action, keeping the -20 would be perfect and easy.

One nitpicky rules correction: to make this work as intended, you'd have to take away the Concentration tag from Called Shot. Aiming is a Concentration action, so unless this is addressed you couldn't do both in the same turn. I mention this because if it isn't fixed the rules won't work as intended.

I agree, and there were Talents in V1 which reduced and then eliminated the penalties for Called Shots as well.

Your proposal to reduce Called Shots to a Half Action, and with a -10 penalty will work, but will also (ironically?) bring it back in line with V1s handling of it

Thanks for your input on this, you're very knowledgeable about the rules.

I still like keeping it as a Full Action, so I'll toy around with trying to make that work.

Just remember what you're taking away by making it a Full Action: The time/ability to Aim for a 10 (or 20 with Accurate) bonus.

The "Aim" action says: " The active character takes extra time to make a more precise attack." (Beta v2, p 176)

And your reasoning for making Called Shots a Full Action is precisely that it takes extra time to make a more precise (hitlocation-wise) attack.

But if taking that extra time confers a bonus to "normal" single shots, why does it not also do so for Called Shots?

Sure, they will be more difficult, as you're aiming for a smaller location, so a penalty to the test makes sense.

But you're spending the whole round making that one, single shot in both cases, so the "Aiming" bonus should come into the equation in both cases.

And then there is the "other" case, where you're not talking "sniper shots":

Why couldn't you make a snap-shot from the hip, aiming for a specific hitlocation? Imagine the Ace Gunfighter who draws his revolver with lightning speed, and shoots the gun out of his opponents hand before he has the chance to do anything. That is not a case of "taking extra time to make a more precise attack", but a Called Shot if ever there was one. Making that a Full Action does not make a lot of sense, I think.

There's many impressive videos on youtube of speed-draw gunslingers who hip-shoot with incredible accuracy, hitting the 10-point circle in the chest of their human-sized target boards, within a fraction of a second. Difficult, absolutely. It requires great (ballistic) skill. But it's possible, and it's quick.

I guess my argument boils down to "yes, it' more difficult, but it doesn't HAVE to take longer time".

Most shooters would choose to spend the full round aiming before such a shot, but not always, and not everyone.

Or:

Only grant the bonus damage, if the weapon is fired braced (tripod/bipod). This would also give bipods/tripods more use.

This is exactly the rule we use to balance accurate weapons, and it seems to work nicely.

I think I will also go with it.

You get the +10 on aiming, but the bonus damage only is used, if you use the weapon braced. This also makes it impossible to sniper within 1 turn, as both bracing and aiming takes a half action.

Are Accurate weapons really that game-breaking? I mean, if the shooter racks up all the DoS needed to get the extra damage, I imagine he would be racking up quite a number of hits if he instead chose to go Full Auto.

Sure, an extra D10 or 2 will rack up the pain, but so will 5 hits from an automatic weapon, no?

The problem we had, was that a sniper that manages to shoot first, almost gets a sure kill (and usually takes out the GM's favourite NPC).

Lets say he has (as a skilled sniper) a BS of 50 (not that unrealistic). He aims a half action (+10 and again +10 for accurate) and then makes the standard shot (+10 and often +10 for short range due to the high basic range of the weapon). Using a red-dot laser increases it by +10 again.

That mean 50+50 = 100.

If you roll an average 50, thats 6 DoS, which means 3W10+5, Pen 4 with the Sniper Rifle using expander rounds.

This usually negates the armour of a target completely, and leaves the target with 3d10+5 damage only to soak with its toughness (~4). Of this 3d10 you may exchange the lowest with the 6 from your 6 DoS...great.

So lets say you roll 4,6 and 8, thats 6,6 and 8 (not an unusual roll), which means 21 damage after soaking for a regular hit.

Thats enough to kill a lot.

If you have further talents that increase damage...well...it diesnt make things better.

Are Accurate weapons really that game-breaking? I mean, if the shooter racks up all the DoS needed to get the extra damage, I imagine he would be racking up quite a number of hits if he instead chose to go Full Auto.

Sure, an extra D10 or 2 will rack up the pain, but so will 5 hits from an automatic weapon, no?

Our group's issue with Accurate weapons came about after the Assassin acquired a shotgun. He wanted to use the shotgun in a short-range firefight until he realized that his sniper rifle was a much better weapon for the job. A sniper shot at point-blank range will kill most enemies in a single shot, which seemed incredibly wrong for something meant to be a precision long-ranged weapon. We instituted the full-round aim rule to keep the satisfying power of accurate weapons while preventing them from being used as close-quarters death machines.

Snipers are also fantastic for obliterating strong NPCs. A character I had planned to use as a minor recurring villain rounded the corner and came face-to-face with the PCs, and combat began. The Assassin won initiative, Quick Drew his sniper, aimed, and fired, reducing the NPC to around -11 HP through carapace armor. Before he could even speak a word of introduction, the NPC's head was vaporized. His Toughness and Armor were high enough that an automatic weapon wouldn't have done nearly enough damage to kill him, even with multiple hits. That's another reason we added the full-round Aim rule.

Are Accurate weapons really that game-breaking? I mean, if the shooter racks up all the DoS needed to get the extra damage, I imagine he would be racking up quite a number of hits if he instead chose to go Full Auto.

Sure, an extra D10 or 2 will rack up the pain, but so will 5 hits from an automatic weapon, no?

Our group's issue with Accurate weapons came about after the Assassin acquired a shotgun. He wanted to use the shotgun in a short-range firefight until he realized that his sniper rifle was a much better weapon for the job. A sniper shot at point-blank range will kill most enemies in a single shot, which seemed incredibly wrong for something meant to be a precision long-ranged weapon. We instituted the full-round aim rule to keep the satisfying power of accurate weapons while preventing them from being used as close-quarters death machines.

Snipers are also fantastic for obliterating strong NPCs. A character I had planned to use as a minor recurring villain rounded the corner and came face-to-face with the PCs, and combat began. The Assassin won initiative, Quick Drew his sniper, aimed, and fired, reducing the NPC to around -11 HP through carapace armor. Before he could even speak a word of introduction, the NPC's head was vaporized. His Toughness and Armor were high enough that an automatic weapon wouldn't have done nearly enough damage to kill him, even with multiple hits. That's another reason we added the full-round Aim rule.

But also here, a bracing requirement for bonus damage would solve the job.

IIRC the first beta set Sniper Rifles as Heavy weapons which has a similar effect (but other problems coming with it).

Well, there is the Dodge skill modifier that reads: "+30: Character can easily detect the attack and has at least a Round to avoid it." (p75)

If a guy right in front of you spends his entire round aiming a large rifle at you, it should be pretty easy to Dodge. Remember, a round is about 5 seconds, and that's quite a long time.

Well, there is the Dodge skill modifier that reads: "+30: Character can easily detect the attack and has at least a Round to avoid it." (p75)

If a guy right in front of you spends his entire round aiming a large rifle at you, it should be pretty easy to Dodge. Remember, a round is about 5 seconds, and that's quite a long time.

And thats why the bracing requirement is a great thing.

If you make an ambush, you get a lethal hit. If not, he is likely to doge your first shot while you stil prepare your weapon, but your second one still is very dangerous.

I don't really see the issue with Accurate weapoons. They give snipers a viable weapon to snipe with, other than the terribly unrealistic "I spam Storm Bolter rounds at your head!!!!" While a low-level Accurate weapon may have better average damage with the +10 bonus than a semi-auto weapon, higher levels ones are rather nasty and will outshine them. Snipers need talents to be awesome.

I agree that a sniper using an Accurate weapon can take out an NPC in the first round of combat - but, they're a sniper . That's sort of their job. It's a bit like saying that the flamer-wielding priest can hold back the insane cultists. Accurate's aim bonus isn't massively overpowered, and the bonus damage only working with single-shot means that it rewards sniper rifle/long las users.

The argument that this will give more use for bipods/tripods... well, yes it will, but why is that a good thing? We could insist all snipers must have a spotter using a handheld targeter - that would increase the uptake of that item, because what party has a mortar to hand?

'Nother issue, of course, is that while a sniper with a high BS and a red-dot long las making a Standard Attack can reach 90-100, that's before any penalties are brought into effect - smoke, haze, wind for SP weapons, any protective gear the NPC might be carrying - it's swerving a little into metagaming, but if you as the GM have a single valuable NPC that the party want to kill and they have an ace sniper, maybe you should kit the NPC out with some kind of force field or something. Or give him a boost to Dodge. It is only a single shot, after all.

The other problem with this is that it will eliminate the possibility of sniping taking one turn. And that is a problem, because even the best sniper is only killing one target per turn. Which, if you've only got one NPC on the enemy side, is an issue. But if there's two dozen axe-wielding cultists charging round a corner, making the sniper take one shot every two turns is going to render him worthless, especially when he has to take a talent or suffer penalties for firing into melee.

TL:DR: Accurate isn't that bad.

The sniper is not even getting close to the damage output of a melee guy with two lightning strike power swords. Let the sniper have some fun in the early-mid game...