Brother Praetus said:

the very question is: Do I get +1SB for my meele weapon?Because i wield it in my good bionic hand, and if I get +10 to str tests, then I should also get +1sb (in combat), since hitting someone is also kind of a str test

on the other hand would that make a bionic limb quite "overpowered", since you allready get +2 Toughness in that bodypart...

Levyten said:

I can't agree on it being overpowered. A +1 to melee weapon damage is something you can count on since you choose which limb to employ the weapon with, but the +2 TB is only going to come up if that limb is struck, and that's not really something that's going to be under your control. Even with all of these going for it, a bionic limb is way down on my list of overpowered items.

Luthor Harkon said:

Playing a Seneschal regularly, its basically the ultimate acquisition character (I regularly add an average of 16 to our profit factor for an acquisition)- if anyone's going to have something that awesome it will be the guy who probably acquired and traded for half the group starting gear in the first place!

This is incorrect within the context of the particular subject matter. The bonuses from bionics in no way effect the values of, nor the bonuses derived from, a particular attribute. This is stated specifically in the rules for bionic replacements.

Pg. 147-148; Bionic Replacement Limbs and Body Parts - Beginning of the last paragraph, "Note that bonuses and penalties relate only to Tests made using the bionic limb..."

Pg. 148; Bionic Arm - "Good bionic arms provide a +10 bonus on Agility Tests requiring fine manipulation (such as Sleight of Hand) and add a +10 bonus to Strength Tests using the arm."

-=Brother Praetus=-

I think the emphasis is on "only [...] using the bionic limb", not "only to tests [...]". Bonuses and penalties in DH and RT are almost always written as "+X to y tests" when they mean "raise/lower the ability".

aramis said:

You are essentially right, but I'll indulge in some nitpicking anyway... mostly beacuse I like to hear my own voice etc... This is generally Rules As Written, maybe with some clever interpretations and paralells constructed by my gaming group. You can read a few interesting bits in the RT book, p 246.

If you are armed with one pistol, or two pistols and the appropriate talents, you can use the Full Auto Burst and the Semi Auto Burst, or a combination, against targets you are engaged in melee with. All normal limits apply. If you move as part of this action your opponents will gain a free attack at you.

If you are armed with one pistol and a melee weapon, and both the talents Dual wielding melee and Dual wielding ranged (or our houseruled Dual wielding gunblade, made for just this situation) you can do the Multiple Attacks action. Then you will get full use of Swift attacks, Lightning attacks and similar with your melee weapon, and you will be allowed to fire any mode of fire your pistol can handle. All of these attacks must be directed towards targets you are engaged in melee with.

You will never get +30% to hit for Point Blank Range when shooting inside a melee, but weapons that do different damage due to range, will count as being at point blank. For example hack shotguns with the Scatter ability are pretty nasty.

A handflamer that is used in melee will not make a 10m cone, the effect will be contained to one melee target. This is a rule imported from 2nd edition wh40k, (and maybe it was found in the old Inquisitor 54mm table top game) where hand flamers worked in this way.

Cifer said:

Okay, then. From a different direction, sighting a similar rule and device.

Power Armor; RT pg. 139: "Power armor adds +20 to the wearer's Strength Characteristic ." Seems to me that if they had intended Bionic limbs to effect the characteristic scores, they would have used that word, rather than Tests . But, hey, after all, it's just my interpretation of how the RAW are intended, I suppose. Far be it for me to tell you or Happy or Levy that any of you are wrong. If that's how you want to go with it, then by all means; it's not my game.

-=Brother Praetus=-

Thanks for answering all my questions so far !

Quote: "You will never get +30% to hit for Point Blank Range when shooting inside a melee"

Do you get a +10 for short range when fireing a pistol in meele ?

An other question: Do you only use the critical dmg effects if someone runs out of Wounds? The critical effects are very nice and bloody, but it just doest make much sence to me that a single awesome hit will "just" remove Wounds...thinking about making house rules to for that. Just want to know the RAW about that

And one more question about Bording :1. can you board a ship just after you rammed it?

2. How do Boarding actions look like: Do they send massive amounts of shuttles to the other ship or do the two ships "dock on" together?

3. We had a situation that looked quite odd: Our ship borded a raider after ramming it for 10dmg. So we had the following stats: PC ship(awesome crew=50)+20 (for turrets)+20(barracs)+5 (for the command bridge)+10(because the other ship was smaller size)+10(because they had 10 less crew than our ship)+10(for all 5player raiding the other ship (houserule) ) = total of 125 for the command test. the opposed raider had only 30(crew)+10 (turrets)

Did i miss something? because that was kind of imballenced the opposed raider had no chance at all. The fight took on for 2 hours and ended with a total victory due to moral dmg

4. If you combine 2 macro batteries you add the dmg of both of them and substact the opposed armour only once, right? this leads to really bigger dmg. Our ship dealt very lucky 45dmg(after substracting the armour) with one hit to thr other raider...I just want to know if we played it right.

Levyten

Levyten said:

1: You get no range bonuses what so ever when using your BS skill to attack a target which is engaged in melee combat with you

2: Yes, according to the Rules As written, a character will almost only* take Critical Damage and it's effects after they have lost every wound point they have. Though, to fallow your question to the word, no, I use critical damage and it's effects throughout a characters wound track, but we don't play by the rules ;-)

*there may be an exception to this some where, a special weapon or some such, but I'm not aware of it.

Levyten said:

1: I may be completely wrong here, but I do not believe so. To Ram a ship, your ships prow must be facing the opposing ship and you accelerate into it with the intent of causing mass damage. With the boarding action, while it sounds similar, it simply states that the two ships "crash" into one another, not ram. The goal here is not to cause mass damage but to get your ship close enough to the enemy ship so mass amounts of men can flow from your ship to theirs. This is illustrated in the difficulty modifier to the two tests for the helmsmen. To ram, its a simple test at +0 but crashing into the other ship in a way that would enable a boarding action is a -20, probably because you're doing a more controlled thrust and maneuver and not just plowing into them. As such, no damage for ramming.

2: The short answer: what ever would look most awesome. The long answer: I imagine piles of massive harpoons lined up on the gun decks with ratings in void suits being hooked to the links of chain the shot at the other ship and using melta bombs and gel to blast their way through the hull; swarms of guncutters and lighters swarming the other ship like flies on a massive dead metal beast, and impossibly large grapnel lines shooting out to secure the enemy ship in place and help bring the two leviathans into kissing distance.

3: some fights are just strait up unfair. A pro boxer vs a 90 year old lady would be strait up unfair as is a wolf vs a rabbit in an enclosed arena. Life and war is never fair and all that. That raider was doomed from the git-go unless it's captain was particularly brilliant (which i reckon he wasn't for getting hit by your ship in the first place). If you want a challenge, look for bigger prey ;-)

Levyten said:

4: from the way i understand things, i believe you did it correctly. Again, life just ain't fair to the little guy sometimes. Be careful that a fully tricked out Lunar Cusser with a crack crew doesn't do this to you guys some day ;-)

Edit: in the above, i'm assuming you did overload it's sheilds with anouther weapon or took them off line some how before fiering the salvo else only one of the macrobatteries would have made it through...

it was a very lucky shot from 2 sunsear batteries with max DoS and 4 tens in the dmg roll...it was just the biggest hit possible

i just wanted to know if we played it correctly, because the ships hull points were reduced to -15 in one hit.

Levyten said:

Levyten,

I think you're right; this is unbalanced. Here are my thoughts:

1. Your crew doesn't count as a bonus for your tests. They have a skill of 50 if they're making a test, but since your Rogue Trader is probably the one making the command test, that 50 isn't factored in.

2. Your house rule for all of them boarding the other ship is fine, but I'd rule that they can't get the bridge bonus at the same time. They aren't on the bridge, after all.

So, in my GMing universe, your command test would be +20 for turrets, +20 for barracks, +10 for smaller ship, +10 for smaller crew, +10 house rule. +70 vs. their +10 is still tilted pretty heavily towards you, but your ship is well-equipped for this sort of thing.

It's worth noting that the barracks text says that it only provides its bonus if you're transporting troops. If a party wanted to make that bonus permanent, I would make them acquire some soldiers.

I think, also, that ramming and boarding are separate things, and that you'd have to take a separate action to board a ship after ramming it, and that it would have to be in the following turn.

The 'Turrets' bonus does not apply to the attackers. The box explaining turrets is quite clear that they are defensive - not offensive. They are designed to shoot at/destroy attackers not to shoot defenders.

Beeble said:

Beeble,

This is true for Hit and Run attacks, but in the Ramming and Boarding Actions box, it says that in a boarding action, each ship's turret rating also provides a bonus. My guess is that since each ship is sending boarding parties across at the other, both side's turrets can come into play, as they're shooting at the opposing side's boarding craft.

exseraph said:

Or the other guy's turrets to prevent those turrets from hitting the boarders... or just laying into the other ship...

In regards to the Inferno pistol, that MAY be a misprint in the book, they may mean Bolt Pistol since the line states "BC Hellgun or BC Boltgun" on the second line, so I'd say to keep some sort of balance I'd say they should get a Common Craftsmanship Bolt Pistol to choose from instead.

With the Hunting Rifle, I dont own the DH books so I don't have the stats for it, does anyone have the stats for it? right now I just use the Long Las stats with impact damage and a smaller clip.

Toofy said:

Type: basic, rng: 150m, RoF: S/-/-, Dmg: 1d10+3 I, Pen: 0, Clip: 5, Rld: Full, Special: Accurate, Wt: 5kg, Avl: Scarce

Exseraph

I think the way the 'turrets' box is written is a bit ambiguous.

In the first paragraph is says "turrets...help defend the ship in the event of a boarding action" (my italics)

The 2nd paragraph says "Each point...imposes a -10% penalty on tests of any Hit and RunAttack directed against IT." (my capitals) "Additionally each point adds +10% to IT'S sides Command test during a Boarding Action."

To my mind the IT and IT's refers only to the defending ship.

And I can't find any reference anywhere that implies turrets can ever have any offensive capability.

So while it may be a possible interpretation (due to the ambiguity of the writing) to assume a bonus to the attacker for his turrets I do believe that is not what is intended.

BTW Do you ever get the feeling that there are game designers looking over our shoulders as we discuss these things? Possibly thinking "THAT's how I should have written that rule!"

So while it may be a possible interpretation (due to the ambiguity of the writing) to assume a bonus to the attacker for his turrets I do believe that is not what is intended.

As soon as the boarding is underway, there isn't a clearly distinguishable attacker or defender anymore - whoever wins the Command check gets to inflict damage.

Beeble,

The Boarding Actions box says that "Each ship's turret rating also provides a bonus." In addition, the Turrets sidebar ends with "each point of a starship's turret rating adds +10 to its side's Command Test during a boarding action." Hit and Run attacks are different; in that case only the defender gets a bonus, due to the section you quoted.

So, the way I interpret this is that, for Hit and Run attacks only the defender's turrets matter, but for Boarding Actions both sides' turrets come into play.

Oh, and regarding the game designers, I dunno. I think the game is brilliant, but by its nature it depends pretty heavily on being open-ended, and so the rules can be very open to interpretation. Like Dark Heresy, it can be rules-lawyered in some ways if the GM isn't willing to make up stuff that makes sense to them. I do suspect that FFG's copy-editing staff was stretched too thin, though.