Well, actually, rolling maximum damage (a natural 10) against a Novice or Elite NPC kills or incapacitates them (as long as the damage is enough to bypass their Defence), regardless of the weapon used. Unlike in first edition, there is no test to confirm Righteous Fury, so it's actually easier to one-shot mooks. Also, Novice NPCs don't use hit locations, although a GM could of course describe it as a bolt round blowing apart the NPC's head, or whatever.

Edit: And with Tearing, Bolt Pistols are going to one-shot their fair share of NPCs.

As it's a new system, and this is just my understanding of it, a single hit only translates in a single wound, then you roll on the correct wound effect table.

Mooks have 2.wounds.

As Manchu pointed out earlier,the max you can roll on the correct table is a stun, and this is taking tearing into account.

That does rather cover a multitude of sins. I find myself wanting a Horus Heresy RPG.

My point being that this is 40k, where there's no kill other than overkill.

Well, actually, rolling maximum damage (a natural 10) against a Novice or Elite NPC kills or incapacitates them (as long as the damage is enough to bypass their Defence), regardless of the weapon used. Unlike in first edition, there is no test to confirm Righteous Fury, so it's actually easier to one-shot mooks. Also, Novice NPCs don't use hit locations, although a GM could of course describe it as a bolt round blowing apart the NPC's head, or whatever.

Edit: And with Tearing, Bolt Pistols are going to one-shot their fair share of NPCs.

As it's a new system, and this is just my understanding of it, a single hit only translates in a single wound, then you roll on the correct wound effect table.

Mooks have 2.wounds.

As Manchu pointed out earlier,the max you can roll on the correct table is a stun, and this is taking tearing into account.

A roll of a natural 10 on any damage die causes Righteous Fury, which results in a Critical Wound so long as any Damage gets past Defence. Novice and Elite NPCs are instantly killed or incapacitated if they receive a Critical Wound. The third category, Master, follows the same rules as PCs. Novices also do not use the Wound Effect tables, but simply die or become incapacitated after receiving two normal Wounds (and again, after receiving a single Critical Wound). Novices also cannot cause Righteous Fury.

So, any time a PC rolls a 10 on a damage die (a requisite for maximum damage) when attacking a mook (including both Novices and the more dangerous Elites), it instantly kills/incapacitates the target. If you don't cause Righteous Fury against a Novice, it means a glancing hit, flesh wound, etc., and a second successful hit is necessary to put them down.

I think what he meant to say is that a roll of maximum damage is actually a fury,and kills automatically.

So people are going to kill mooks more often because furies are now guaranteed to one shot mooks.

Well, the thing is, back in the old system- rolling a furyoften one shot a mook as well, seeing as people didn't go into the critical table for mooks.

Heck, rolling 8-10 damage often one shot a mook, if you took into account str bonus. At around 10 hit points, 3 toughness and 2 armor points, Pen easily took care of it, and a Str bonus of of 3-5 negated the TB. not to mention added weapon damage, so a roll of 7 to 10 either left the mook with one hit point [and not really worth the effort of keeping alive and delaying the combat because of it] or dead.

I'd rather like to see some testing on accuracy increasing the damage result on the table. If the sniper gets 4 degrees of success, then the damage table should reflect that. Failing that, make every so many DoS add an extra damage point.

If this would create a situation where autofire weapons have too much of an advantage, then add one of the above rules to the accurate rules.

I'd rather like to see some testing on accuracy increasing the damage result on the table. If the sniper gets 4 degrees of success, then the damage table should reflect that. Failing that, make every so many DoS add an extra damage point.

Agreed -- but make it an aspect of the character not the weapon. Anybody can fire a sniper rifle but not everyone is a sniper.

As far as the Guardsman thing goes, I think the real issue here is that the current rules don't seem to let you do a lot more damage for point blank range.

Good idera, maybe something in the ranged talent tree.

Yeah, I forgot that a natural 10 now is an auto crit.

The real issue is that range and level of success at one's ballistic test have no influence on where or how effectivly you hit the target, jsut how many times you hit. Every hit is instead handled by a random table, so that making X DoS has no effect on your shot. This means that every shot is effecitlvy random, reguardless of the skill of the shooter or ease of the shot. Being hit at point blank range standing still by a sniper rifle does exactly the same damage as at range and trying to avoid being hit.

One of the things i've heard almost universally derided about the lat several releases was the hoards of random tables rather than actual game mechanics. It seems that this new release is no better.

It's not really random. Maybe half-random at most thanks to the wound modifier.

That said, I like tables. I used to hate the idea of them but then I got into games like the DCC RPG.

I will mention this in any point I comment on the DH2 combat system: I think FFG should stick with the mechanics of the existing 40k RPGs like OW and BC (I mentioned why in the "Word of caution" thread).

That being said, If we are going to propose a fix for the current system I would point out that actual sniping includes very little luck when used. I would instead suggest a damage modifier based on DoS of the sniper. Perhaps +4 or +5 for each degree of success when firing a weapon with the "Accurate" quality (Single shot only!) while using the aim action. To use Plushy's example: A Sniper lines up on a target with his Sniper rifle (The Ganger leader). The Target is unaware of his presence and is thus surprised (+30?). The Sniper uses 2 action points to Aim (+20); 1 for called shot (Head) and 1 to fire (Bang! ) His BS is 35 so his total modified shot (Assuming short to medium range) is 85. He rolls a 42 which is 4 degrees of success. The ganger is surprised so he cannot evade and is hit! Our sniper rolls a 7 on damage (Again, luck not a factor) giving a respectable 15 + 12 (or 20)= 27 (or 35). Our critical now reads:

I'd say our Gang leader's in trouble!

The Idea is to make the Sniper as devastating as they are under the right circumstances! Bearing in mind that without the "Accurate" weapon or the surprised target this becomes just another ranged attack.

Consensus I'm seeing across this thread and some sporadic posts elsewhere is that Accurate really needs to go back to granting a significant bit of extra damage, otherwise single shots will remain totally unappealing in the face of burst fire. I find it hard to disagree.

Radwraith's suggestion has potential, it may just need to be scaled back a little. It's hard to judge these things in a vacuum, thought.

It's not really random. Maybe half-random at most thanks to the wound modifier.

That said, I like tables. I used to hate the idea of them but then I got into games like the DCC RPG.

Random tables are a sign of lazy and or sloppy game design, usually. They typically are a result of a game designer who couldn't come up with a working mechanic or was trying to emulate the feel of 'classic' 1980's game design (such as your DCC example) without really understanding how it actually worked.

This isn't the 1980's, RPGs have evolved since then. And Thank the Emperor for that.

I'd recommend that you actually read both DH2E and the DCC RPG.

Radwraith's suggestion has potential, it may just need to be scaled back a little. It's hard to judge these things in a vacuum, thought.

Thank you! I'm curious though: Scaled back how? My example was with a surprised unarmored target and a respectable (Though intentionally not critical) damage roll. A flak helmet would have reduced the damage to a serious but survivable condition. If the target were aware of the sniper's presence it would have reduced the degrees of success to 1 (and the resultant damage bonus by 9). My intent was to present a sniper that under the right conditions was extremely lethal (As they are in reality) but not so much in a running combat. Not meaning to sound snarky btw (Apologies if I do), what would you suggest?

I'd recommend that you actually read both DH2E and the DCC RPG.

Not only have I read it, I have actually played Dungeon Crawl Classic.I really didn't like it. That sort of thing has never really appealed to me, but I have played it.

Thank you! I'm curious though: Scaled back how? My example was with a surprised unarmored target and a respectable (Though intentionally not critical) damage roll. A flak helmet would have reduced the damage to a serious but survivable condition. If the target were aware of the sniper's presence it would have reduced the degrees of success to 1 (and the resultant damage bonus by 9). My intent was to present a sniper that under the right conditions was extremely lethal (As they are in reality) but not so much in a running combat. Not meaning to sound snarky btw (Apologies if I do), what would you suggest?

Adding a what is effectively a whole extra wound worth of modifiers for each DoS looked extreme, but honestly, reading over it, I think I was getting a bit ahead of myself. Blame the fact I was posting at 6AM, I guess! It seems fine, really.

Thank you! I'm curious though: Scaled back how? My example was with a surprised unarmored target and a respectable (Though intentionally not critical) damage roll. A flak helmet would have reduced the damage to a serious but survivable condition. If the target were aware of the sniper's presence it would have reduced the degrees of success to 1 (and the resultant damage bonus by 9). My intent was to present a sniper that under the right conditions was extremely lethal (As they are in reality) but not so much in a running combat. Not meaning to sound snarky btw (Apologies if I do), what would you suggest?

Adding a what is effectively a whole extra wound worth of modifiers for each DoS looked extreme, but honestly, reading over it, I think I was getting a bit ahead of myself. Blame the fact I was posting at 6AM, I guess! It seems fine, really.

Okay cool! Thanks again! Let's hope FFG likes it.

Recently purchased the beta rules and hoping to get the first session in about 3 weeks so i'm currently feverishly trying to learn them at the moment!!

The first two points i'd make are general reminders:

1. These are Beta test rules and i expect there to be problems.

2. I'm generally liking what i'm reading, having given up on 1st ed as an unplayable mess.

Onto the evident issues with the random nature of the wound tables. Firstly, while apparently true, more damage rolled doesn't seem to necessarily equate to automatically more damage. However, in general more damage rolled is better.

It seems to me that the problems with the two scenarios could be fixed with Wound Effect modifiers couldn't they?

If a point blank shot to the back of the head granted a +30 wound effect wouldn't this achieve the desired result?

The sniper situation could be addressed by amending the called shot action?

Instead of this:

It could be:

If this action is used multiple times before an attack is made, each extra use adds +5 to Wound Effect .

Thus a sniper with 4 actions could:

Aim (+10 to hit)

Called shot Head

Called shot +5 Wound effect

Called shot +5 Wound effect (for total +10)

Would that work?

No, because that leaves you no AP to fire the rifle, which costs 3 AP.

@Luddite

Actions can be used by any character. Similarly, a given weapon can be used by any character.

Trying to address this at either of those points would therefore allow any character with a high BS to reliably make one-shot sniper kills. I don't think high having a high BS in this game is supposed to allow a character to do that. For one thing, being a good shot generally is not the same as having the training, experience, and aptitude to make one-shot sniper kills.

i agree that running a sniper is a valid playstyle. I think the best way to simulate this given the other rules in the beta is to create a sniper elite advance or talent tree. I would not be surprised if something like that didn't make it into the core rulebook -- but I would be grateful if it did.

For one thing, being a good shot generally is not the same as having the training, experience, and aptitude to make one-shot sniper kills.

I'm sure the victims of any number of tower snipers and spree shooters will be happy to know that they were not one shot killed because people need training, experience, and aptitude to do that.

I'll further point out that my aptitude and experience must be off the charts, because with just some practice, I can do it with open sights at about 100 yards.

No, because that leaves you no AP to fire the rifle, which costs 3 AP.

Good point i forgot the actual shot!

So:

1st A = Aim

2nd A = Called shot head

3rd A = Called shot +5WE

4th A = Attack (Single shot)

Why do you say it costs 3AP to make an attack?

What have i missed there?

Good point i forgot the actual shot!

So:

1st A = Aim

2nd A = Called shot head

3rd A = Called shot +5WE

4th A = Attack (Single shot)

Why do you say it costs 3AP to make an attack?

What have i missed there?

Sniper rifle's RoF stat is 1/3 meaning it takes 3 action points to make one shot

Good point i forgot the actual shot!

So:

1st A = Aim

2nd A = Called shot head

3rd A = Called shot +5WE

4th A = Attack (Single shot)

Why do you say it costs 3AP to make an attack?

What have i missed there?

Sniper rifle's RoF stat is 1/3 meaning it takes 3 action points to make one shot

Just got to this bit of the rules! Cheers for the advice.

Aye that does make my scenario basically impossible. Ah well...back to the drawing board.

Just got to this bit of the rules! Cheers for the advice.

Aye that does make my scenario basically impossible. Ah well...back to the drawing board.

Yeah, the Combat system has two glaring flaws: Not dying in a single shot from a hit that should, and dying from a hit that shouldn't cause any real damage. Don't get hit and step on any nails before Narrative Time resumes or you detonate like you ate a frag grenade.

Why not just add a coup-de-grace action? This could either be in the form of a purchasable talent, or an action available to everyone. Something like this:

Coup-de-Grace

4 Action Points

This attack represents a character spending his entire turn delivering a single finishing or crippling blow to his or her target. The player declares how this attack will be able to down a character in one blow (e.g. sniper shot to the heart, or chopping off a target's head). The character makes an attack with a penalty equaling twice the target's summed Toughness bonus and Armor at the targeted area (e.g. A target with a 42 Toughness and a Helmet with 4 Armor poses a -16 penalty to the attack). This attack's Rate of Attack is 1. If this attack succeeds, weapon damage is rolled as normal. Take the number rolled for damage and add 1 to it for each degree of success on the attack roll. If this summed total is greater than or equal to 10, count this attack as having achieved Righteous Fury. The degrees of success added do not add to actual damage inflicted.

Accurate weapons add 1 to the degrees of success being added to determine Righteous Fury.

What does everyone think of this? I think with some reworking this could either be made more powerful to make it a purchasable talent, or maybe weakened a bit to make it just be a new action.