Brother Nicodemus said:

Of course not (at least, it would be an extremely rare occurrence). It was just an example of how even under optimal conditions the Dev would be ineffective using the BC rules compared to the base DW rules.

Personally, I like the change to SA/LA to bring them more in line with Semi/Full Auto. It makes things more even across the board. As long as the changes are consistent over the entire system, I think it's a good thing.

I don't intend to just import rules from one system to another without consideration for the current ones, that would be foolish.

I quite like the new rules for SA/LA as well, however one thing I think i may not be considering is how these new rules will affect the various enemies my kill-team will encounter... a genestealer can generate 4 attacks a round under current rules i believe, but when we take into account to new SA/LA rules how does multiple arms work along side this?

Brother Nicodemus said:

I haven't heard anything about it. There are a lot of little details like that that will need to be taken into consideration; that's why it'll be nice to see just what the full ruleset looks like. Hopefully all of the little details like this will be fleshed out, though it wouldn't surprise me if there's still some stuff lacking. Heck, there is still debate in one of the other subforums about how the Vindicare's ability to dodge everything meshes with unavoidable attacks.

any suggestions on how the new SA/LA would work with the multiple arms trait?

Brother Nicodemus said:

If anyone here managed to get a copy, hopefully they'll chime in on the subject. Purely speculating, I could see it giving an extra hit on a successful melee attack (possibly with some condition like having at least 2 degrees or success) or possibly lowering the base difficulty of the attack roll by one step because of the extra arms swinging at the target. That would keep it roughly in line with what we have in DW.

My guess would be that it works similar to two weapon wielder in that you need a full attack action to do it.
But as I said, that is just a guess.

So at least no more feinting 'stealers I hope.

What I really like about the new melee rules is that it brings two-handed weapons more in line with dual wielding. LA with on twohander is a half action, attacking with dual wield is a full action, seemingly regardless of the kind of attack you use. Finally a drawback to balance out all the advantages dual wield has.

Umbranus said:

That sounds really cool.

It is quite slick, it has the added advantages of fewer rolls, parrying melee being more in line with dodging ballistic attacks, and encouraging increased mobility. Since Preternatural Speed shows up late in the AM tree my AM has instead chosen to make half move half action LAs quite often, it makes a nice compromise between the closing capability of charge and the multiple attacks of being in melee.

Some people are getting really butt-hurt in this thread.

Deathwatch is about playing an elite commando unit essentially so yes, the system is going to allow you to just mow down huge groups of hostiles and be all victorious and win lots of renown.

Black Crusade is about clambering your way to the top of the chaos-pile in a no-holds barred deathmatch so no, it's no longer about the players beating down all comers, it becomes more about the long term goals and agendas of each player and how they interact with each other. As such combat has been balanced to be fairer to all parties.

So if you don't like the new rules-set, don't use it. I don't see FFG releasing DH/RT/DW errata with BC rules in it all over the place... they've not done it previously and won't start now.

so i ran a slightly modified final sanction (using non pre made characters and the full rule-set) yesterday for my 4 rank 1 pcs, and the rules changes went over pretty smoothly, and my players all seemed to like the changes once they actually got into the combat, the only bad thing is that the dark angels librarian blew himself up with a pushed smite which kind of made the session take a bit of extra time than it should have.

One thing i ran into however was how new SA/LA function against hordes, any suggestions here?

N0-1_H3r3 said:

Bad example. Which other combat option does a Heavy Bolter have? It's made for automatic firing. Also Deathwatch is supposed to be action-oriented. Fluffy or not, Bolters should fire Full Auto. Lots of it. Which means in turn Full Auto should be effective. Switching around +10/20 bonuses between Full and Semi-Auto would have sufficed. If you think it doesn't, you can consider making Semi-Auto a Half-Action on top of it. Now that would make Semi > Single Shot, no? Well, it is unless you happen to care about collateral damages.

Alex

ak-73 said:

And Black Crusade isn't?

ak-73 said:

It is. Perhaps not as effective as some people may like, but it's effective. But now it's one option amongst many rather than being the go-to choice in virtually every situation, which increases the diversity of viable choices within a combat, which in turn makes combat more varied and dynamic... rather than just standing at the back and firing on full-auto until A) the enemy is dead or B) you need to reload, whichever comes first.

Under the previous rules (and pre-errata stats), it basically didn't matter that a bolter had a single shot or semi-auto mode, because those were never used. A single action and a single tactic being better in all situations than all the other options does not make for an exciting game. I want to see players running, jumping, ducking from cover to cover, and generally fighting like characters do in computer games and movies, etc. Not just standing around with a Storm Bolter in each fist laying waste to everything because there's no point attempting anything else. Perhaps you have a different idea as to what "action-oriented" is meant to mean, though.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

I didn't say that, I was were going to highlight why I like to see Full-Auto.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

That may be a fallacy. I have run multiple choose between Single Shot/Semi-Auto/Full-Auto systems over the years, the last one I believe was a heavily house rules Rifts game. A tactical no-brainer choice is sometimes preferable to a strategic one (like which oath to choose and which heavy weapon to requisition). Lots of players will calculate through various options and that can drag down the game. Not to mention that no-brainer choices give players the feeling of "beating the game".

I guess all I am saying this: I have extensive experience with balanced out fire modes and while it is superior on paper and in game design theory, I do not think those systems have translated into more fun than the system used in DH/RT/DW. As you can see by my above arguments (which are admittedly rather weak), it's one of those things that is hard to put your fingers on.

Maybe it's that from a game designs POV Semi-Auto isn't really needed except to give a pseudo-simulationist feel. Many players are of the simple type when they enjoy combat - maybe it's just that from a game design POV it's better to make the player choose between two alternatives: do I blow away the enemy's head with an aimed shot (or for those with low ranged coimbat skills: do I try to just hit him with an aimed shot and hope it takes him down?)? Or do I try to turn him into swiss cheese by emptying my mag?

Again, it's probably not the most compelling argument more the result of gut feeling based on extensive experience. I used to be a huge fan of multiple fire modes, especially so called short, controlled bursts. It depends how tactical you want combat in your game world to be, I guess.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

In DH it is often preferrable to do aimed shots to the head because your weapons are often not that penetrating (especially at low ranks) and you don't hit all that often either (at low ranks). DW? Plenty of xenos with all around natural armour + your Kraken rounds = no need to aim.

Otherwise you always have the question of: melee or not? Giving the deadliness of many xenos in melee and the broken charge mechanics, that question is likewise rhetoric.

(While typing this, I realize that DW needs more xeno specimen that require aiming at body locations and xenos who are much more deadly ranged than in melee.)

But do not forget that Deathwatch already offers such a wealth of things you can do (from plenty of talents over solo/squad mode abilities to special gear... and throwing stones, lol). DW is a complex game, even in PbP I need to at times go over my character for some time to contemplate what he can do (especially as I play a BA Librarian).

N0-1_H3r3 said:

I know all of that. I'm just not sold on having an additional fire mode is the solution. Have a look at your own words:

"I want to see players running, jumping, ducking from cover to cover, and generally fighting like characters do in computer games and movies, etc."

You didn't highlight firing mode but choices that are already in-game (and I totally agree with your quote here). From a pure gaming standpoint, if I was trying to streamline/simplify 40K RP, I would do away with Semi-Auto. I'd simply have SS and Automatic (with different ROFs). Taking commercial constraints into account, I might keep it because it might turn simulationist inclined gamers off. Perhaps I might include Semi-Auto stats and rules in an Appendix.

Simple hard and fast choices: "Do you run? do you take an aimed shot? Do you go full auto? Do you Tactical Advance? Do you charge into melee?" BAM! It's less complex and allows for easier access to the game.

Anyway the system is as it is right now. Since I do not intend on buying BC nor on revamping the system to do away with Semi-Auto, I'll consider switching to-hit bonuses between semi- and full-auto.

Alex