With the Rogue Trader Errata released, I am 'unsticking' this. Thanks to everyone for taking part!

Concerning STOWAGE BAYS in the core rules (page 209)

Before I make something up can I receive a clarification

Do all vessels without proper cargo holds possess stowage bays, considering their enormous size, that are zero power, space and SP$?

If not, then it is a discrete component and we can either engage in conjecture or ask FFG (please ) to provide us with some stats.

Lure of the Expanse Question: Is it going to be the case that no non-player vessels have Machine Spirit Oddities or Past Histories? I've been looking over the ships stats in the back of the book and I see no MSO/PH.

Please explicitly state whether or not Dual Shot Talent is used with single shot ONLY.

Dual shot with twin storm bolters on full auto produces excessively high damage.

The description and the errata for Dark Heresy strongly imply (with the inclusion of red-dot sight clause) that single shot is the standard but it is never explicitly stated.

It has been stated multiple times by FFG staff that Dual shot can only be used with single shot and the entry states specifically that the talent is for PISTOLS only. Stormbolters are not pistols, they are basic. Firing a basic weapon one handed does not change them to a pistol class weapon, they remain basic. As a side note, stormbolters weilded in one hand may not be used in melee since they are basic.

First, sorry for re-awakening a sleeping thread.

On page 117 in the Rogue Trader Core Rulebook, there is a weapon quality called Twin-linked. However, after searching through the book a few times, I have yet to find a singe weapon wich has this quality (except some vehicle mounted weapons in Into the Storm). Is this supposed to be a weapon uppgrade?

Nope. It was probably put in because they knew they were going to have some weapons in future supplements (and in Deathwatch) which would use it, in a similar manner to the Unstable quality back when Dark Heresy was released.

Into the Storm question now- if a ship is fitted with both Extended Supply Vaults (RT p205) and an Arboretum (ItS p160), both of which (among other effects) double the time it can spend at void before suffering Population or Morale loss, does that mean it can spend 4x the normal period without resupply (ie 2 years), or are the doubles intended to be treated in a similar manner to Unnatural characteristics, and have each level of doubling merely adding +1 to the multiplier (so an 18 month period before needing to resupply to prevent Morale loss and scurvy etc)?

I'd say they work in the same way as Unnatural Characteristics, since the Extended Supply Vault doesn't get bigger just because you have a bigger greenhouse on the ship. It makes sense that they'd both just add +6 months to the length of time you can go without resupplying.

MILLANDSON said:

Not necessarily. It's quite possible that the Vault contains extra materials to keep the gardens going strong for longer too.

Spent some this evening looking through the Starships section of the core rulebook, and found something that for me makes no sense.

I have always assumed that the usefullnes of the 1 Strength (as in max 1 hit) Lance weapons is that you use a macrobattery, or another lance, to take out the enemies void shield(s), and then fire the lance. However, the void shields are counted against every "salvo", and, if I am reading it correctly, only Macrobatteries can be combined. So, as long as a ship has a functioning void shield, a Lance weapon, not a battery, cant hurt it, no matter how many lance weapons the ship has, or if it has support from a Macrocannon battery. (Though the macrobattery can still hurt the enemy on its own.)

Am I reading something wrong? The way our group has played it, you can combine a Lance strike with a macrocannon salvo, thus taking out the voidshield with the macrocannon, and ripping through the armor with the lance weapon. Or you combine several lances, though I have yet to face a ship that has several lances in the same firing arc.

Any clarification on this would be greatly appreciated.

It is my understanding that void shields apply once against all fire from any given vessel. A "salvo" in this context is thus all fire originating from a given ship.

SableWyvern said:

Yes, that is close to how we have played it so far, but, read this part, it is the last part on the "Weapons and Shooting" part, on page 22:

"Unless multiple macrobatteries are being combined in a salvo, each Weapon Component should be resolved against the target seperatly, not simultaneously. (This is important due to the manner in wich Void Shields work)"

This is annoying me, becuse it can be read as we have played it, you fire with each weapon, lets say a macrobattery an a single lance, and the macrobattery takes out the shield, scratches the paint, and then the Lance rips through the ship. This seems most logical, since otherwise a single Lanceturret would be useless, except against a eldar ship, or a ship with a "ghost field" (forgot the name, whatever they usually use instead of void shields).

Or, it can be read as the void shields being used on every Weapon Component, except when multiple Macrobatteries are combined in a single salvo.

Though I suppose, the word "seperatly" is used to give an advantage to the attacker, as in, shooting with the macrocannons first, and then the Lance. Instead of resolving everything at once, and allowing the attacked ship choose to use the Void Shield against the most powerfull weapon component, the Lance.

I think I have read to much in to this, and I see now that the example supports the latest theory, which does seem logical.

According to BFG strategem, the macrobatteries were first used to bring down the shields, then lances tore the ship up. I would imagine that's the same in RT.

The Glen said:

That is almost exactly how it works with Rogue Trader , t main difference being the voidshields apply against each ship which fires on the target, but not against each weapon battery in the attack.

Example: A Lunar -class cruiser with Broadside Macrobatteries and Titanforge Lance Battery (1 each port and starboard) opens up on a raider on its port side. The player chooses to resolve the Macrobattery attack first, netting 3 DoS for three hits. The raiders void shield absorbs 1 hit, and the player rolls 2d10+4 which will be reduced by the raider's armor.

The cruiser then proceeds to open up with the Lance Battery, scoring 4 DoS, and thus generating 2 hits and scoring a critical on the raider. The Lance battery hits will inflict 2d10+8 damage which will not be reduced by the raider's armor, and a critical will be rolled.

Of course, I used a one-on-one example for brevity's sake.

-=Brother Praetus=-

an issue that should be brought up is that there is no chart for xeno names. are we supposed to roll on the standard names table and pick the primitive names or are we required to be creative. also do the xeno classes lv up the same way as the other RT classes. Also i personally believe that the character playing the rogue trader should have the say on weither a xeno should be in the group, if not that why would the warrent of trade allow him to do so.other than what is listed every thing looks good.

Void_onion213 said:

1) Yes, be creative. I don't know anyone who uses the names tables anyway.

2) Yes, it states that the xenos careers work in the same levelling manner as other careers.

3) That's entirely up to your group to decide. There shouldn't be a hard rule for such things.

Also i personally believe that the character playing the rogue trader should have the say on weither a xeno should be in the group, if not that why would the warrent of trade allow him to do so.

This straddles the line between OOC and IC imo. Yes, the RT is the de facto boss of the group, in character. Out of character he shouldn't be. If someone wants to play a class like RT (or inquisitor in ascension) that comes with the responsibility to make that a good character, one who will not spoil the fun for the rest of the group by laying down the law with a heavy hand unless everyone will enjoy that.

If your character concept or general idea of how the game should be played conflicts with someone elses, work it out OOC and adjust your respective characters accordingly.

Nightsorrow said:

imho it's just an unfortunate wording to try and ensure that each weapon component is treated independently prior to the application of void shields (otherwise it could be possible to negate a macrobatteries salvo with a single void shield). As the "Damage and Defencs" section makes clearer the attacker chooses which hits are negated by the shields even if multiple batteries are combined.

As mentioned, the example explicitly allows a macrobattery to the void shield for the lance hit. In the case of a combined macrobattery salvo hitting the ship the attacker would choose which of the hits would be negated.

In the core books it gives Peer(Mercantile) as an option for a Noble's bonus Peer. The official listing under the Peer talent doesn't mention Mercantile. One or the other should probably be corrected. Also, does Peer(Mercantile) give a bonus on commerce rolls.

just a quick note to say that the talent polyglot has 2 different Int prequisite values, depending on where you look, from the entry in the talent description section:

polyglot
Prerequisites: Intelligence 40, Fel 30

and from table 4-1: Talents

Talent Name Prerequisite

Polyglot Int 30, Fel 30

just suggesting that there should be a correction to Int 30 as this is what appears as a prerequisite every other time it appears

Several things that need clarifying:

• Is there a definite limit to the number of objects Precision Telekinesis can manipulate besides weight?
• Do Psychic Techniques that involve a Ballistic Skill Test (such as Force Bolt) receive bonuses and penalties as normal from things such as distance/range to the target?
• Does the Telekinetic Crush Technique use the Psyker's Strength or Willpower Characteristic for the Opposed Strength Test (he uses his Willpower _Bonus_ in lieu of his Strength Bonus only as per the RAW) when using it to Grapple an opponent? If he Grapples an opponent with this power, does the power count as being sustained? Is the Psyker's Willpower Bonus used to determine the Half Move distance of the active character for the 'Push Opponent' option? Lastly, while it may seem common sense, you should probably specify that things such as 'Taking Control' of a Telekinetic Crush Grapple are impossible, that the Psyker does not need to move with a Grappled Opponent in order to maintain the grapple (unless of course, it would move that opponent out of the Technique's Range), and various other exceptions appropriate to this use of the Technique.
• Should the difficulty of Psychic Scream's Shocking Quality Toughness Test (or its damage for that matter) really be subject to non-psychically warded/hexagrammatic armour reduction, being that its stunning qualities are psychically based? Also, is the Difficulty penalty to this Toughness Test, and the duration of any resultant stunning based on the user's Psy Rating, or the effective Psy Rating of the Technique? Currently the RAW suggests that it's based on the latter. Lastly, does the Technique's stun duration supersecede or stack with the typical stun duration for a Shocking attack?
• Speaking of the Shocking Quality, when halving the damage dealt by a weapon with this property to determine the stun duration, do we round up or down, or should we always assume one of the two unless otherwise noted?

Were these answered in the Errata? I didn't see any answer anywhere, if not what did you decide on going with?

The lax grapple information for telekinetic crush a non-sustained power seems pretty crazy especially.