A house rule I'm consider and I'm wondering what the forum thinks of it...

I'm thinking of having any successful hit, even if it does no damage, cause a test for Pinning. The logic being that you're being shot at, you've been hit and even though your armor soaked it or it's just a graze, you're instinct is to dive for cover. I'd probably make it easier than the base Hard (-20) Pinning test from Suppressing Fire... I'm thinking an Ordinary (+10) or at worst Challenging (+0) WP test.

What do folks think?

LuciusT said:

I agree. Still thinking about the difficulty required, but overall, I'd say this is a good idea.

Sister Cat said:

One thought I have is to have the difficulty ultimately be situational... if you're a rank 6 Guardsman in Power Armor and a stub round just bounced off you, that an Easy (+30) test, if not better. OTOH, if you're a rank 1 Adept whose backstory is that he's never been out of the scriptorium and by the grace of the God-Emperor a stub round just bounced off your quilted vest, that might be a Hard (-20) test.

Sure, that puts the burden on the GM... but that's the GMs job.

I disagree. "Pinning" is about the fear of getting shot. Their should be no need to actually hit the target. You fear the dog for it´s bark, not for it´s actual bite.

Bullet shyness is a wonderful thing. I think you propose a reasonable house rule IF your group is looking for combat that need not be that fast-paced but evoke a more substantial feeling of danger.

Your proposal is realistic, with a solid basis in fact and sheer common sense. However, problems may arise from the perspective of game fluency. This rule makes combat slower (more pinning->less actions->longer conflict resolution), and can prove tedious. It is also another thing to roll for, and quite often at that.

It all depends on your style of play, your characters, etc. In cinematic or truly combat-heavy campaigns these pinning rules would probably steal momentum from the action, and thus lead to boredom, but in more investigative campaigns where combat occurs rarely and is meant to evoke feelings of desperation and fear, this rule would probably help people to get into the mood.

If you really want the pc to be "afraid of getting shot", how about inducing fright checks as a bullet hits home? You could ask for one as soon as someone got hit...

...but seriously, this will bog down the game AND will at a lot of realismen. Into 40K, the home of the chainsword. You get me

I'd say it should work like this:

• In Area of Effect of Suppressive Fire, but no one in it is hit: WP Test at -10
• In Area of Effect of Suppressive Fire, and someone in it is hit but not wounded: WP Test at -20
• In Area of Effect of Suppressive Fire, and someone in it is hit and wounded, or you are simply hit: WP Test at -30
• In Area of Effect of Suppressive Fire, you are hit and wounded: WP Test at -60

I argue that this more closely reflects the underlying psychology: seeing others get shot up adds to the terror, while getting shot up yourself compounds it exponentially.

Hi Lasers,

if you impose -60 for "being under fire and getting wounded"... what will be your modifier for the reality rips open before you and a charnel daemon shows up ? I don´t think that this is well balanced.

Granted. I felt it was wrong, but because this board is silly, I can't edit in something more reasonable.-30/ -40 is more appropriate. Reality tearing and charnel daemons appearing would probably be a -50/-60 for an unseasoned and tested group of acolytes.

I agree with Greg, these are not very good suggestions and will easily bog the game down. It's bad enough that Fear tests are very common and unlikely to succeed at the first ranks, but when normal combat makes the acolytes lie catatonic on the ground weeping for their mamas it's not 40k anymore.

Also, realizing that the enemy's attack simply bounces off should make you more sure of yourself, not take cover.

In fact I think the Pinning effect is a bit too strong as it is (-20 WP is the equivalent of seeing the most horrible alien in the universe or facing daemons.). Furthermore, it is something that 1 out of 10 normal soldiers will succeed on (giving them 25-35 WP, average human range). Also notice that being pinned both means your're unlikely to hit anything, but also limits you to half actions, which means you cannot fire full-auto over your head.

Even when not being fired at you still could risk spending several turns crawling or walking very slowly.

-50/-60 means that even the most strong willed humans (including hardened acolytes and even Inquisitors) will automatically fail. Seriously, you should never use worse than -30 just for seeing stuff, no matter how horrible.

"I agree with Greg, these are not very good suggestions and will easily bog the game down. It's bad enough that Fear tests are very common and unlikely to succeed at the first ranks, but when normal combat makes the acolytes lie catatonic on the ground weeping for their mamas it's not 40k anymore."

Greg didn't out and say they weren't very good suggestions first off. Second, how do they bog the game down? You don't even have to perform an additional role so much as consider what factors are at play before making the WP test.

"Also, realizing that the enemy's attack simply bounces off should make you more sure of yourself, not take cover."

Strongly disagree. Even if the bullet doesn't penetrate your armour _this time_, it certainly could the next, and getting hit most assuredly reminds you of the precariousness of your situation. Seriously, you put on a kevlar vest, go in the middle of a field of machine gun fire, have one impact you hard in the gut without penetrating, and tell me you aren't any more afraid for your life.

"In fact I think the Pinning effect is a bit too strong as it is (-20 WP is the equivalent of seeing the most horrible alien in the universe or facing daemons.)."

Where does it say anywhere that -20 = exposure to the most horrible alien being in the universe? You think the Nightbringer as an example, warrants a mere -20?

"Furthermore, it is something that 1 out of 10 normal soldiers will succeed on (giving them 25-35 WP, average human range)."

How do you figure?

"Also notice that being pinned both means your're unlikely to hit anything, but also limits you to half actions, which means you cannot fire full-auto over your head."

I agree the Half Action limitation is basically nonsensical. Hefty penalties to any task that involves concentration and higher thinking or coordination should probably be penalized, though Half Action limitations are silly. Disagree with you being 'unlikely to hit anything'. At the beginining of your career? Yeah. Mid/Late game? Not so much.

"-50/-60 means that even the most strong willed humans (including hardened acolytes and even Inquisitors) will automatically fail. Seriously, you should never use worse than -30 just for seeing stuff, no matter how horrible. "

Part of the penalty should obviously take into account how familiar you are with the thing compelling the fear test. Obviously if you're a hardened acolyte or an Inquisitor who has seen this sort of thing before, what would be -50/-60 to a greenhorn acolyte would not be the same to such a jaded and experienced witness.

"Furthermore, it is something that 1 out of 10 normal soldiers will succeed on (giving them 25-35 WP, average human range)."

How do you figure?

Nevermind this, I misread.

Lasers said:

Gregorius said: ."but seriously, this will bog down the game AND will at a lot of realismen. Into 40K, the home of the chainsword. You get me"

A machinegun will easily penetrate kevlar vest so walking through it is suicide. As far as I know there is no completely safe armor in RL against machineguns, the closest is the ballistic ceramic inserts, which will not cover the whole body anyway.

Give me a 40K power armor and I'll walk through heavy stubber fire no problem. It's all situational so ruling that it is always demoralizing wouldn't be right. For comparison, you think a knight in full plate armor would flee just because some peasant stuck him with a pitchfork? Clonk! If you know that you have good armor and you can see it working that should be good for morale. If the armor is barely reducing the force of impact and you think it can give way any moment, then obviously it will not be good for morale.

-20 WP= Fear rating 3, something the Slaught have, which is one of the more horrific aliens in the universe. Other examples are Incarnate Daemon.

-30 WP (fear rating 4) is the very top of the list, and example listed is "King in Rags and Tatters", possibly a Nyarlathotep-like being. .Other example is: "Experiencing a full-scale daemonic incursion".

See the chapter on Fear in DH book for details.

And yes, most people and normal soldiers will be hard pressed to hit anything at a -20. Experienced Acolytes is another matter, but the rules should make sense for normal people and starting acolytes too.

No the penalty should remain the same regardless of who is seeing it, it's the person's ability (WP, Talents such as Fearless, Insanity Point total etc.).

A greenhorn acolyte will be very likely to fail at -30 (only very strong willed ones will have a chance, and even they will likely fail), while people with lots of insanity points will not have to roll at all. As said, check the chapter of Fear it is obvious you haven't read it very well.

Gregorius said: ."but seriously, this will bog down the game AND will at a lot of realismen. Into 40K, the home of the chainsword. You get me"

That criticism wasn't leveled at my suggestions, which again does not bog down the game in that it does not add any additional steps whatsoever.

"A machinegun will easily penetrate kevlar vest so walking through it is suicide. As far as I know there is no completely safe armor in RL against machineguns, the closest is the ballistic ceramic inserts, which will not cover the whole body anyway."

You're attempting to dance around the point, which is that if there is a possibility that your armour can be penetrated, and you are hit despite that impact not penetrating, there is definitely a heightened level of fear involved.

"Give me a 40K power armor and I'll walk through heavy stubber fire no problem. It's all situational so ruling that it is always demoralizing wouldn't be right. For comparison, you think a knight in full plate armor would flee just because some peasant stuck him with a pitchfork? Clonk! If you know that you have good armor and you can see it working that should be good for morale. If the armor is barely reducing the force of impact and you think it can give way any moment, then obviously it will not be good for morale."

Despite the fact that a Heavy Stubber both in DH and Tabletop can penetrate power armour and inflict damage, and in DH is actually likely to, assuming TB 3? I agree with reducing the WP penalty if there's basically no chance barring Righteous Fury of damage being dealt, but otherwise, the penalty should be magnified, not reduced.

"-20 WP= Fear rating 3, something the Slaught have, which is one of the more horrific aliens in the universe. Other examples are Incarnate Daemon."

Slaught are far from the most horrific alien in the universe/galaxy I'm afraid.

"-30 WP (fear rating 4) is the very top of the list, and example listed is "King in Rags and Tatters", possibly a Nyarlathotep-like being. .Other example is: "Experiencing a full-scale daemonic incursion".

See the chapter on Fear in DH book for details."

This is probably due to the fact that -30 was the most severe modifier at the time. Ascension and RT then 'raised the roof' to -60, allowing for more gradation.

"And yes, most people and normal soldiers will be hard pressed to hit anything at a -20. Experienced Acolytes is another matter, but the rules should make sense for normal people and starting acolytes too."

Realistically? I'd say they do, barring the Half Action limitation.

"No the penalty should remain the same regardless of who is seeing it, it's the person's ability (WP, Talents such as Fearless, Insanity Point total etc.).

A greenhorn acolyte will be very likely to fail at -30 (only very strong willed ones will have a chance, and even they will likely fail), while people with lots of insanity points will not have to roll at all. As said, check the chapter of Fear it is obvious you haven't read it very well."

That's just silly. I'm sorry, but there are no mechanics that account for a player becoming effectively acclimatized to certain horrors as a consequence of exposure (barring Insanity desensitization which is not the same thing), which would most definitely adjust the difficulty of a Test downwards. The closest the game gets to this is the Jaded talent, but that is woefully incomplete. Compare and contrast two otherwise identical characters, one who is experienced and acquainted with daemonic threats, and the other who is completely unexposed to them. Do you really think the former should test at the same difficulty versus the sight of a Bloodletter, given the absence of mechanics that model acclimatization? Any assertion in the affirmative would be patently absurd.

Further, I have read the material concerning Fear in its entirety. As stated before, the examples listed there are based on an outmoded gradation which had only 4 levels of 'fear' to work with (+0/-10/-20/-30) due to individual penalties being capped at -30 as opposed to the current 7, with a maximum individual penalty of -60.

Laser: Seriously you seem to want to get me wrong here, my response was directed at the OP not so much you (I just skimmed your first post and noticed the abhorrant penalties).

My main disagreement lies in that a hit that fails to penetrate the armor should not be much scarier that a hit that actually DOES penetrate. And even so I'd imagine near-hits to have a better supression effect that hits that bounces off armor.

In the case of hits that actually does damage but reduced by armor (such as a bullet hitting a kevlar vest), that is something completely different from mere pinning/suppression. It could cause a man to fall down thinking he's been killed, or could potentially be even more painful than a bullet that just penetrates the body entirely. Don't believe me? There are enough reports of people being shot my low-mid caliber bullets and not noticing it at all right away.

Now if you want to make special rules about blunt trauma and normal battefield fear of being shot, or nearly shot, etc. feel free but I think it will bog down the game which is fairly abstract to begin with and not al all realistic.

Not to mention the fact that any Acolyte without 40 WP will be completely unplayable.

As for fear penalties: I don't have Ascension or RT, I'm playing straight up Dark Heresy and not RT (which is another game) and not Ascension (which is optinal "epic level"). In DH -30 is scary enough (can be -40 with Daemonic Aura). There MIGHT be scarer things in the universe but -30 is bad enough and should not be used in mundane combat.

And having 20-30 insanity points means you are immune to low levels of fear because you've seen enough - most of the acolytes in my group has 21 or more IPs and thus ignores Fear 1 for example. Some are also Jaded, but they still have to test against horrible aliens like Slaught (which are described to be pretty **** horrible), Pinning etc. but their high WPs lets them get a chance to resist.

-50 for being hit by suppressive fire is still WAY to high, and pretty much impossible to resist for most Acolytes. I think even the Psyker in my group at rank 8 will auto fail it. How exactly will this make the game more fun?

Not only that it is even unrealistic as people have rushed into suppressive fire before even while hit and kept running. Remember Guadacanal? Japanese soldiers, mostly average farmers stormed into heavy MG fire in a crazy bayonet charge. They ran until they died. Sure they were "conditioned" into believeing in dying for their Emperor, but so are Guardsmen in 40k to some degree. These men were not Fearless even if they were ready to die.

The only mitigating factor here is that during Suppressive Fire you have very little chance at hitting anything, getting an effective -40 BS compared to normal full-auto. I'm guessing this is just to balance the horrible standard -20 pinning test, as by RAW spraying an area full of people you will need to be lucky to hit a single one. I'd much rather have suppressive fire retain the normal +20 to hit, but hits in the area of effect must be spread out as much as possible, also it should require at least 20 bullets spent (not just 10 or 6) to get this effect.

You could make a system for light suppression using Semi-Auto or aimed single shots on a small area to keep one or two people suppressed - the effect would be much weaker than normal, maybe a Routine WP test (+20). Anyone with Nerves of Steel should be immune to this effect.

How is desensitization from insanity not the same as acclimitization to the horrors of the universe? Anyone going up against daemons on a routinely basis is either desensitized, Fearless or outright mad. It may not be the best mechanics but it works somewhat. Acolytes will normally get alot of insanity points in their career and it takes 100 to make the unplayable. Double digit is a bit steep though so not it's not perfect.

In any case it is not good to base a system on extreme "epic" characters. Ascended Acolytes could and should be able to ignore alot of the Fear and Horror in WH40k. They won't be immune to corruption though, which is the greatest danger, if not even more dangerous than before. Power Corrupts.

"My main disagreement lies in that a hit that fails to penetrate the armor should not be much scarier that a hit that actually DOES penetrate. And even so I'd imagine near-hits to have a better supression effect that hits that bounces off armor.

In the case of hits that actually does damage but reduced by armor (such as a bullet hitting a kevlar vest), that is something completely different from mere pinning/suppression. It could cause a man to fall down thinking he's been killed, or could potentially be even more painful than a bullet that just penetrates the body entirely. Don't believe me? There are enough reports of people being shot my low-mid caliber bullets and not noticing it at all right away.

Now if you want to make special rules about blunt trauma and normal battefield fear of being shot, or nearly shot, etc. feel free but I think it will bog down the game which is fairly abstract to begin with and not al all realistic.

Not to mention the fact that any Acolyte without 40 WP will be completely unplayable."

First off, Suppressive Fire, like Fear, is a situational mechanic that doesn't always come up, so arguing that an Acolyte without 40 WP would be unplayable is probably wrong (depends on the campaign, but on average this is probably incorrect).

Second, I _agree_ that a penetrating hit from Suppressive Fire should be scarier; that's exactly why I allotted it a more severe penalty. Further, while I also agree that the effects of actually getting hit and taking damage may well be different from simply being pinned, I do not wish to bog the game down in additional mechanics, hence merely applying a greater penalty to the WP Test.

"As for fear penalties: I don't have Ascension or RT, I'm playing straight up Dark Heresy and not RT (which is another game) and not Ascension (which is optinal "epic level"). In DH -30 is scary enough (can be -40 with Daemonic Aura). There MIGHT be scarer things in the universe but -30 is bad enough and should not be used in mundane combat."

I disagree. The Nightbringer as an example is more than a -30. He is death incarnate beheld. Further, not all of Ascension's material is truly optional; its constant properties, like the new penalty/bonus caps certainly are not, though granted, a GM can rule whatever he wants.

"And having 20-30 insanity points means you are immune to low levels of fear because you've seen enough - most of the acolytes in my group has 21 or more IPs and thus ignores Fear 1 for example. Some are also Jaded, but they still have to test against horrible aliens like Slaught (which are described to be pretty **** horrible), Pinning etc. but their high WPs lets them get a chance to resist."

"How is desensitization from insanity not the same as acclimitization to the horrors of the universe? Anyone going up against daemons on a routinely basis is either desensitized, Fearless or outright mad. It may not be the best mechanics but it works somewhat. Acolytes will normally get alot of insanity points in their career and it takes 100 to make the unplayable. Double digit is a bit steep though so not it's not perfect."

Again, desensitization via Insanity, and desensitization via familiarity are not one and the same. The former means you are less sensitive to fear _in general_ due to the fact that you are losing touch with reality. The latter means you are less sensitive to fear _in particular_ with respect to a certain threat due to the fact that you've grown accustomed to it.

-50 for being hit by suppressive fire is still WAY to high, and pretty much impossible to resist for most Acolytes. I think even the Psyker in my group at rank 8 will auto fail it. How exactly will this make the game more fun?

I don't think the penalty should be -50. As stated earlier, it is impossible to edit after a certain point.

"Not only that it is even unrealistic as people have rushed into suppressive fire before even while hit and kept running. Remember Guadacanal? Japanese soldiers, mostly average farmers stormed into heavy MG fire in a crazy bayonet charge. They ran until they died. Sure they were "conditioned" into believeing in dying for their Emperor, but so are Guardsmen in 40k to some degree. These men were not Fearless even if they were ready to die."

Exceptions do not prove the rule; the vast majority of soldiers in the same situation would be scared still. Also, it's possible these soldiers were drugged.

"The only mitigating factor here is that during Suppressive Fire you have very little chance at hitting anything, getting an effective -40 BS compared to normal full-auto. I'm guessing this is just to balance the horrible standard -20 pinning test, as by RAW spraying an area full of people you will need to be lucky to hit a single one. I'd much rather have suppressive fire retain the normal +20 to hit, but hits in the area of effect must be spread out as much as possible, also it should require at least 20 bullets spent (not just 10 or 6) to get this effect. "

I disagree with this because it is unrealistic (you are spraying wildly in a general cone, so the penalty makes sense) unduly weakens the Suppressive Fire mechanic, and erodes the differentiation between it and Full Auto.

"In any case it is not good to base a system on extreme "epic" characters. Ascended Acolytes could and should be able to ignore alot of the Fear and Horror in WH40k. They won't be immune to corruption though, which is the greatest danger, if not even more dangerous than before. Power Corrupts. "

No one is suggesting a system be based around epic characters; certainly not me at least.

Of course Ascension is optional, just like IH. I have the option not to buy the book. Now if they make an errata and cange the penalties and bonuses again for normal DH book, then I'll probably use that, but until then, Fear rating 4 is pretty much the worst the Acolytes will ever meet.

Suppressive Fire is something that comes up once in awhile in most games, and at -20 most starting acolytes will fail this. Even experienced Psykers with 50 WP has a good chance at failure, even with reroll. This is why I don't want a more severe penalty as I think it is bad enough as it is.

Having Suppressive Fire retain a +20 BS will nerf it, in fact it probably makes it too powerful, even with expending double ammo. In fact considering how quickly a fully automatic weapon cycles, 20 rounds is not much, maybe a second or two. How's that for your spraying wildly?

You can't really spray wildly 10 rounds, as you don't have time to wave the weapon around enough. And no I don't think suppressive fire is spraing wildly, I think it is firing for effect against an enemy you know is there with the attempt to force him down and make him risk being hit. At BS -20 it's not much of a risk though, the Fear effect is the only real advantage to SF. "Oh no my enemy is firing at me with inaccurate fire! That's SO much scarier than accurate automatic fire that actually wounds me!"

But balance-wise Full Auto and SF is good enough as it is so I'm not proposing a new house rule here.