Peacekeeper_b said:

Don't even need that, really.

Average human (S 30, SB 3) trying to wrestle an Ogryn (S 45, SB 8)... assuming the human is the one being grappled, every turn, he needs to pass an opposed strength test against a creature that gets 2 bonus DoS, will pass more often, and which will win ties because it has a higher SB... (overall chance is about 17%) in order to escape the grapple. Even if the Ogryn fails, it's a stalemate, not a success for the human. If the Ogryn is the one attempting the test... then the human only really needs to roll if the Ogryn fails... because if the Ogryn passes, then the human's roll can't produce enough DoS to succeed.

Even making the human stronger can only help to a degree - a higher SB means the Ogryn will win ties, and +2 bonus DoS tips the balance in favour of the Ogryn every time.

Judicious application of the Unnatural Characteristic traits can allow for a much greater range of abilities than a scale theoretically capped at 100 might otherwise suggest.

verminspeaker? oooh sounds juicy. I wish i was a verminspeaker right now so i could clear the goddamn rats/mice out of my roof...

Idaan said:

Just remember it only says that genestealers and lictors are in then not other tyranid creatures, both of these are the vanguard organisms of the tyranids which the imperium didn't associate with the tyranids until after kraken and leviathan invaded. So it is possible that these creatures could be encoutered way out in the calixis sector.

My only question is when can I get my hands on the book? Although I am still waiting for DotDG to be delivered to me.

Im going to be setting a game out on the Eastern Fringe so the front cover of this book will be terrifying for my players. Can't wait to get a hold of it and I hope it will be as good as it looks.

Kaihlik

N0-1_H3r3 said:

And all for the minor cost of being more complex and less transparent than simply not capping it at 100, and meaning PCs fail tests 2-3rds of the time...

Wait, whats it for again?

I'm looking forward to the book. And I agree, you can run something anywhere in the Imperium. I'm sure plenty of people out there have been curious about the Eldar and maybe doing an Eldar campaign. I'm actually kinda of curious about the Orks. I remember playing Gorkamorka, so think about doing it through RP? Smacking around each other in an Ork campaign might be fun compared to the doom and gloom of the Humies.

Dezmond said:

Oh for an ignore function...

Or just to go back to the "Erik by proxy" system. That was great.

Peacekeeper_b said:

You should know how much we appreciate your being there. You and all the folks in Iraq as well! Heck... I just might buy CA and send it to you as an expression of America's debt to you guys. I may not agree with the war 100%, but I support the troops with every breath.

That said... BRING ON THE XENOS... my players' chainswords, powerblades and tox-flamers await!

Jephkay said:

I greatly apprecaite that Jephkay. I will pass the sentiment to my whole squad and team.

But dont worry, Ive already pre-ordered two copies of Creatures Anathema as I enjoy the race to see which company delivers first. I ordered them before I got put on this assignment. Fortunately its a short assignment and I have the best job in the Army.

We've had a recurring Eldar Pirate, Cael, in our game for some time. The players (especially my fiance) really seem to like him, but they are soon to be at odds over a missing Talisman of Vaul. I'm hoping CA boosts our knowledge of the more "intimate" details of the Eldar... as with everything else in 40K, the codices can only take you so far. CA should build on the framework that say, Codex Eldar provides and delve deep into the race.

I don't think that the stat cap is a problem. For starters, this game is supposed to be a power level that is relatively low. We'll probably see higher stats once Rogue Trader/ DeathWatch come out, if I had to guess. After playing around with various ideas for bigger characters/enemies and what not, the unnatural characteristics go a long way in this game for evening things up. I don't think it makes it complicated or difficult at all, and besides, what the hell are you throwing at your players that you need something more than a stat of 100? For there to be a character with a strength of 65 is going to be pretty **** rare, it would take a fair amount of lucky rolling/lots of xp to jack everything up that much, and that's still only 65. If your guardsmen wants to try and be Turok and wrestle a carnosaur, he better be pretty lucky, because he he doesn't win the dice roll every single round, you can bet that carnosaur is going to rip his head off. On top of that, he probably won't do any damage to the thing anyway. Now, if he's sacrificing himself and confusing/ occupying the thing while his friends escape, that's different. Even without going over 100 you could easily justify something like a daemon starting with a S of 80 with unnatural strength and warp weapons, and that would rip virtually anyone in half with probably one hit. If that's the kind of thing you play with regularly in this game, then you must be writing new characters after every session.

As for the bugs, BRING IT! Remember Van Vuygens is convinced that the Tyrant Star has something to do with the Tyranid menace, and believes that their next attack will come from an unexpected quarter, believing the previous Tyranid incursions to have been "feeling out" the defenses. Also, a lone 'stealer or lictor would not be out of the question to encounter, whereas a lone carnifex or zoanthrope would most likely not be seen except in the event of a full on invasion.

Peacekeeper_b said:

Yes but what would be the POINT? Of course you can add extra rules and convoluted explanations ad naseum and make strength 3 behave identical to strenght 500, but what would you get for the added complexity?

Tell me which takes less time to decipher in your head. Strenght 50 normal human vs. strenght 95 ogryn or strenght 50 human vs strenght 65 ogryn, unnatural (x2) hulking size.

Can someone who thinks the unnatural trait and scores below 100 is a good idea tell me a single thing it does better than scores above 100? For once, Dezmond has a point. Adding complexity and reducing transparancy as a tradeoff for NOTHING can never be a good idea. And I've never seen any suggestion as to what it might add.

NiallNai said:

I'm very curious about this, as well. I want to bring some Orks into my game ASAP!

Because characteristics are not that cut and dry. Unnatural Characteristics do not mean "perfect specimen", which a stat of 95 would pretty much guarantee.

A S95 Ogryn would always wrestly anything to the ground in one round. A S65 Unnatural Strength (x2) Ogryn with Hulking has an amazing advantage when applying muscle power against a normal man. But do you really think a ogryn's strength is represented in swimming? climbing? Intimidation? everytime?

Strength is a broad category that covers all of those aspects of physical ability. Unnatural Characteristics imply that the natural aptitude/force/grace is there, but not necessarily the coordination or ability to use it effectively.

Ogryns should be dealing out a SB of 10 or so for damage and lifting and faitigue and wrestling and Unnatural Characteristics influence that. But they should not be gods when it comes to every strength use.

I agree, Peacekeeper.

Now take that, and add in the fact that any characteristic above 100 would essentially disrupt the entire system of using a percentile based characteristic format. When you need to roll equal or under a 120% when you can only roll a max of 100%, there's not really any point.

Jephkay said:

Could someone please give some fluff or source about these necromundan beastmasters? I tried googling them and I just got a vague idea about them being "wyrds" who (I assume) control underhive monsters and pictures of their lead miniatures...

I love beastiaries (sp?). Absolutely love everyone one I read. This doesn't look like it will dissapoint.. it just needs to come out on Amazon!

Ah told em a % system would do nothing but cause problems...

A stength 50 man wrestles a strength 120 ogryn.

Man rolls 15, ogryn rolls 95.

Man beats his score by 35. Ogryn beats his target by 25. Man wins.

Man tries to open a strong door - must succeed with -50. He cant open it.

Ogryn must open same. Rolls 95. He can't open it either.

Ripper.McGuirl said:

There's no mention at all in the rules of a percentile system. There is however two mentions of percentage rolls, which is in the same sentance defined as a roll producing a number between 1 and 100. Even with a characteristic over 100 modifiers can bring you down below again, the same way that characteristics below 100 can still be an automatic success with modifiers. Chance to succeed can be expressed in %, but only after modifiers. Some things are routinely to easy to miss while others might require special circumstances

As for a % system making scores above 100 impossible: 1% only means one hundreth of something, what you define this one whole strenght to be is up to you, if it is like in dh where normal humans can get close to 100 it's a reasonable assumption that this one whole strenght is something like the strongest man in the world. Ok, so we measure strenght in parts of Mariusz Pudzianowski's strenght, if his title stands into the 41st millenium.

For cases when you have more than one full unit of whatever you are measuring it's fine to go above 100. Two apples, measured in units of one apple is 200%. One warlord titans strenght measured in units of maximum human strenght is plenty more than 100%. I mean, there are plenty of cars around that have more than one horsepower, right? So why not orks that have more than one manpower.

I have no problem with the use of unnatural characteristics being added to gain nuance the way peacekeeper described. But that's not the way it's been used so far and one could think of better ways to do it.

Dezmond said:

Sorry to continue this tangent, but I have to address this issue:

Something like an arm wrestling match SHOULD be an extended opposed roll, tallying up the number of degrees of success. The winner is the one who has the greater number of those degrees.

Opening a door at -50? That's a hell of a tough door. Anyway:

There's a chart in the Core Rulebook outlining how much a character can carry, push and lift, based on their combined strength bonus and toughness bonus. That there should be a good indicator of what an individual is capable of.

As a GM, I usually refer to this chart, then assign what would be an appropriate score (of combined strength and toughness bonuses) to do a certain task. Works pretty well.

Not EVERYTHING in the system is a percentile dice roll.

</DERAIL>

+++++Opening a door at -50? That's a hell of a tough door.+++++

Not for a strength 300 space marine it ain't. He can manage doors up to -250 with better than even chances of pushing it open.

--

+++++As for a % system making scores above 100 impossible: 1% only means one hundreth of something, what you define this one whole strenght to be is up to you, if it is like in dh where normal humans can get close to 100 it's a reasonable assumption that this one whole strenght is something like the strongest man in the world. Ok, so we measure strenght in parts of Mariusz Pudzianowski's strenght, if his title stands into the 41st millenium.

For cases when you have more than one full unit of whatever you are measuring it's fine to go above 100. Two apples, measured in units of one apple is 200%. One warlord titans strenght measured in units of maximum human strenght is plenty more than 100%. I mean, there are plenty of cars around that have more than one horsepower, right? So why not orks that have more than one manpower.+++++

Sadly, as both this thread and the rules for DH show, people do have problems with this.

As such, they really should have droped any pretence at % for something where it wouldn't be an issue.

Roll on v2.0

Dezmond said:

Well, like I mentioned, if you have a quick glance at Table 7-31: Carrying, Lifting & Pushing (page 215 of the Core Rulebook), a creature with Unnatural Strength and/or Toughness can perform feats of strength that quite surpass anything a regular human go do.

Example:

Joe has a Strength bonus of 5 and a Toughness bonus of 4. Pretty strong guy, I'd say. Added together, they make 9 on the before mentioned chart, which means that he can carry 67kg, lift 135kg and puch 270kg.

Brother-Sergeant Agamorr (page 86 of Purge the Unclean) has a Strength bonus of 10 and a Tougness bonus of 8 (Unnatural Strength and Toughness). Added together, they make 18 on this chart. He can carry 1,350 kg, lift 2,700kg and push 5,400kg.

There's no way in hell that a GM who knows this would allow Joe the PC to beat this Space Marine in an arm wrestling match.

Oh and look: no dice rolling. Wow. What a concept.

Necrozius said:

So you propose that this extended opposed roll should always be fudged? I mean, that's what your post amounts to.

Anyway, what exactly in your post is an argument for or against either system? A worthwhile argument should contain something to separate the alternatives from each other, I can't find anything in your post that can't be equally applied to either interpretation.

But come on, give me some advantages of using the unnatural system instead of scores above 100. Not stuff like "Percentile system" or something else that should this even be stated in any of the books (and I dare you to find one quote that say it does), can, and should, be erratad if something else works better. I understand that redesigning a car while driving it might be hard, but so far I've been able to play DH just fine with the simple assumption that scores go as high as they need to and that it's not in fact a percentile system so clearly this is a minor change, should it even be one.

Stuff like "It gives X result instead of Y result and that is good" or "It's simpler" would work. So far peacekeeper made a pretty good argument that the system of unnatural characteristics gives nuance to the characteristics, a way to posess brute strength without swimming good or jumping high for example. But that does not prohibit also using scores above 100, could be done much better, was clearly not the intent when designing the rules and has not been used that way so far.

Page 9 refers to the D100 roll as a "percentage roll".

Page 22 states (sic) "Characteristics ahve a value of 0 to 100."

Thats all I really have for now.