Or change the way Toughness "skin armour" works in terms of negating damage..

Or change the way Toughness "skin armour" works in terms of negating damage..

How do you mean? Specifically how would change this and implement the change in game?

Ah, that comment was primarily meant as a friendly jab against bogi_khaosa, who in other threads consistently claimed there's nothing wrong with TB, and that Righteous Fury would solve all problems.

... but at the same time, it's a long-standing opinion of mine that it is about time that such changes would be implemented, so a GM who finds the resilience of their opponents troublesome for the group may well experiment with houserules regarding this problem.

I recall several suggestions having been proposed, amongst them:

- Remove TB from wound calculation, raise Hitpoints

- Remove TB from wound calculation, instead have it perform as "buffer wounds" between Critical Injury levels (a la Inquisitor )

- Remove TB from wound calculation as long as enemy has Hitpoints, add TB back in once damage goes into Criticals with each successive hit (that penetrates armour) lowering TB by 1 regardless of whether or not it exceeds the remaining TB

- ...

Going by the tabletop stats as inspiration, a Tyranid Hive Guard has an armour save of 4+, so comparable to AP 8 power armour. Its Toughness of 6 means that both lasguns as well as boltguns both have a low yet existing chance to kill one, with the latter having an advantage due to its armour penetration.

Of course, the problem is in the TT being an abstraction where a single attack could, in narrative terms, mean several shots, and where injuries are not tracked (aside from those few creatures that have more than 1 Wound) - but that shouldn't be too tough to figure out, all depending on which of the aforementioned models you'd like to try out ... or if you'd prefer to come up with your own solution. Generally, I would represent this low kill chance with a load of Wounds (assuming you'd want to stick to this aspect of DW's core rules) so that it takes many shots to take one down, but that it ultimately still occurs.

For one who does not wish to go such a radical route, of course bogi_khaosa's idea of just lowering, but not completely removing the protection from TB, would also be a solution. To go back to the TT representation, this would mean a Toughness Bonus of 4 or 5.

Of course, the argument still stands that these creatures should, in fact, be nigh immune to small arms fire and require heavier machinery to take down.

I will see if this problem occurs in my game. If I run into big problems with it, I may look into Bogi's idea of simply lowering the TB.

Nigh immune, yes - but not entirely. Even lasguns should be able to take one down. And no, I'm not talking about the magic damage buff via Horde rules.

I think it depends a lot on how we all interpret the abstraction that takes place in the TT:

Does the 1-in-6 chance of a lasgun dropping a Hive Guard to 50% health (after armour penetration) represent a quick takedown (such as hitting a vulnerable spot) or rather continuous fire finally having an effect?

Or, to translate this to DW: what does it mean when a TT attack fails the Strength test against a target's toughness? Is the attack neutralised entirely ("caught by TB") or does it still take a couple Wounds, just not enough to outright slay it?

If the Inquisitor game or the description of Marine power armour in the 2E Codex: Angels of Death is any indication, the designers were thinking more in terms of the latter, interpreting Toughness more as a means of dealing with injuries still suffered , rather than a chance to prevent them entirely.

Provided of course one looks at the TT at all and does not simply prefer a narrative description that describes the creature as either tougher or weaker, depending on the source. I just think it's a fascinating topic to discuss - meaning both solutions to issues as the ones raised in this thread, as well as what people think about looking to other material.

It is really interesting and it definitely has my attention.

I feel silly for asking so late, but for the life of me I cannot figure out what TT is/means. Do you mind?

TT = the 40k T able t op wargame.

I for one am pretty glad that the RPG team doesn't remotely think that the TT mechanics need to inform the RPG mechanics. I don't think massed lasguns should do jack to Hive Guard. As a GM, I get bored enough by the straight slug-fests this game promotes. I like it if the players HAVE to think of another way, as opposed to simply being rewarded for doing so.

I for one am pretty glad that the RPG team doesn't remotely think that the TT mechanics need to inform the RPG mechanics. I don't think massed lasguns should do jack to Hive Guard. As a GM, I get bored enough by the straight slug-fests this game promotes. I like it if the players HAVE to think of another way, as opposed to simply being rewarded for doing so.

More to the point, Deathwatch is about the astartes; if anyone's using lasguns then either it's the players who've got desperate (but Righteous Fury, Mighty Shot and other shennanigans would come into play), or a horde (say a guard reserve company) or it's a narrative thing because it's NPCs doing it.

In which case, they should have virtually no effect but will wound and indeed may kill it with sufficiently concentrated fire if the GM decides the plot requires it.

Our house rule for Righteous Fury is that it auto-confirms (skills and talents which perform this function generally give a bonus to the second dice roll such as a re-roll) and can be used by everyone NPCs and PCs alike. I have found so far that combat is suitably deadly, somewhat quicker and the PCs know that even a lucky lasgun shot can cause wounds.

That brings up a good point: Does everyone allow enemies to get Righteous Fury rolls? I have been only allowing my Astartes to get the benefits of it, but I could see the game being much deadlier if NPCs were allowed them as well.

TT = the 40k T able t op wargame.

I for one am pretty glad that the RPG team doesn't remotely think that the TT mechanics need to inform the RPG mechanics. I don't think massed lasguns should do jack to Hive Guard. As a GM, I get bored enough by the straight slug-fests this game promotes. I like it if the players HAVE to think of another way, as opposed to simply being rewarded for doing so.

Actually massed lasguns will do a lot more than jack to a hive guard. Massed lasguns do 3d10+3 which is enough to penetrate a hive guard's defenses with some level of regularity.

That's true; having a horde of IG support also costs em requisition, which I am fine with. 5 space marines using normal IG lasguns won't do jack to the Hive Guard, as intended.

But overall I am very satisfied with using the Only War RF with a slight twist. The flat +damage thing is really boring; inflicting statuses can frequently be a lot more useful.

Also idk what all the hate is for Toughness. I see it as a balanced addition to absorptive defenses. The other options are increasing Armor (creating more of a Pen arms race) or flatly adding to Wounds (which, like, it's ok but the valuation of how much to add is a huge headache).

That's true; having a horde of IG support also costs em requisition, which I am fine with. 5 space marines using normal IG lasguns won't do jack to the Hive Guard, as intended.

But overall I am very satisfied with using the Only War RF with a slight twist. The flat +damage thing is really boring; inflicting statuses can frequently be a lot more useful.

Also idk what all the hate is for Toughness. I see it as a balanced addition to absorptive defenses. The other options are increasing Armor (creating more of a Pen arms race) or flatly adding to Wounds (which, like, it's ok but the valuation of how much to add is a huge headache).

Can you remind me what OW RF rules are and what your twist is?

Black Crusade RF is as follows:

"When rolling Damage after a successful attack, if any die rolled results in a natural 10 (rolling the 10 result on a 10-sided die), a particularly bloody and spectacular hit may be inflicted. (This also includes a result of 5 when rolling 1d5 for Damage.) After resolving the effects of the hit, one of two things may happen:

If the attack dealt damage after being reduced by armour and Toughness Bonus, then the shot becomes more severe. The attacker then rolls 1d5 and consults the Critical Hit Table appropriate to the Damage type and location of the original attack. The target suffers all effects listed. However the target does not count as having suffered a Critical Hit. In other words, if he takes Damage during later turns it will affect his Wounds, not directly stack onto worsening Critical effects. Talents that modify Critical Damage (such as Crack Shot and Crippling Strike) do not modify the critical effects generated by Righteous Fury, and these critical effects do not stack if a target suffers Righteous Fury multiple times. Each roll is applied as a separate effect.

However, if the attack does not do any damage once reduced by armour and Toughness Bonus, then the attack deals 1 point of damage, not reduced by armour or Toughness. This is the extent of the Righteous Fury effect for this attack, the victim does not suffer a roll on a Critical Hit Table. This represents some weapons simply not being potent enough to deal major damage, but still able to do harm through a "lucky hit.""

This is what we added, and involves our house rules for Cohesion:

"SPECIAL: A character who rolls multiple 10s on a Damage roll MUST spend the first 10 as described above to impose a Critical Hit Effect. Subsequently-rolled 10s default to additional Critical Hit Effect rolls, but the character may spend 1 point of Fury to convert a subsequently-rolled 10 (which would default in a Critical Hit Effect roll) into an additional d10 of damage. If rolling this d10 results in a result of 10, the attacker may either roll on the Critical Effects table or spend another point of Fury to convert it to an additional d10 of damage, etc. The maximum amount of Fury that can be spent to convert Critical Hit Effects into extra d10s of damage is equal to the attacker’s (Rank/2) for PCs or its Maximum Fate Point score for NPCs. Characters in Solo Mode who wish to trigger this effect may instead spend 2 Fate Points to do so."

Also idk what all the hate is for Toughness. I see it as a balanced addition to absorptive defenses. The other options are increasing Armor (creating more of a Pen arms race) or flatly adding to Wounds (which, like, it's ok but the valuation of how much to add is a huge headache).

It is an addition to absorptive defenses, but I'd never call it balanced. It messes with the weaponry too much (by making it considerably less dangerous or even ineffective), and it's flat out superior to true armour.

I'd prefer going for one of the alternatives you did not list - such as using TB as a buffer between Criticals, like in Inquisitor - but if I'd have to choose between the options you presented, I would still much rather take hitpoints over persistent soak, because at least with them, an ongoing barrage will eventually take effect.

I find the exaggerated resilience of stuff in these RPGs highly anticlimatic, but I do understand it is a matter of personal preferences.

I hate to make this point again, but if you use the OW/BC rules set, an ongoing barrage will in fact have an effect. Just use the magic of math,

10 bog-standard Guardsmen (a squad with lasguns) shooting at bog-standard space marines firing semi-auto at short range. Assume they are firing on overload, as I would if I were shooting at a space marine. Statistically about 15 hits, I think. The Marine can dodge one of them half the time, so let's so say 14. One in 10 of those will ZH/RF. If it hits his body (60% chance) it will not penetrate TB+AP and will do 1 wound. If it hits another location it will do 1 Wound (15 - AP6 - TB8) = 1 Wound + a 1d5 Crit, which could range from anywhere from making him lose a half action, to blinding him, to making him lose lots of Fatigue). So you have 1.4 wound loss per round + a critical effect every other round, on average. If he has 20 wounds he will be down to 0 wounds after about 15 rounds = a bit over a minute and will have have taken 6 or 7 crits in that time, quite possibly unconscious.

A more fluffy situation would be 40 guardsmen shooting, in which case he would be down to 0 wounds in about 4 rounds.

This assumes though that their guns would not jam (which likely 1 would a turn), so it would take a bit longer in reality and the first case (10 guys probably would see all their guns jam before 15 rounds were up) would wind up with all the guardsmen with jammed guns and the marine pretty wounded. This wouldn't matter in the second case though because 4 rounds is not enough for it to have a statistcial effect.

That's why the Guard uses mass fire.

I hate to make this point again, but I'm not referring to Righteous Fury or Horde rules or any other mechanic that modifies how a given weapon works by removing its effects from the standard profile.

The solution you are proposing equates lasgun blasts to thrown rocks . That just doesn't fly in my interpretation of 40k. It is both unfair to lasguns if you insinuate they are this crappy, and it is unfair to the Space Marines if you insinuate they'd get killed in 4 rounds by a bunch of soldiers throwing bricks.

Also, this is the Deathwatch forum, not BC or OW.

I hate to make this point again, but I'm not referring to Righteous Fury or Horde rules or any other mechanic that modifies how a given weapon works by removing its effects from the standard profile.

The solution you are proposing equates lasgun blasts to thrown rocks . That just doesn't fly in my interpretation of 40k. It is both unfair to lasguns if you insinuate they are this crappy, and it is unfair to the Space Marines if you insinuate they'd get killed in 4 rounds by a bunch of soldiers throwing bricks.

Also, this is the Deathwatch forum, not BC or OW.

Actually it doesn't equate lasguns and thrown rocks, because the thrown rocks can't exceed TB8 + AP6 (and so can't do Crits) and can't fire semi-auto. So it would take considerably longer. About.... two minutes.

Horde mechanics are an integral part of the system and are how barrage fire works, unless you want to roll for each of 50 attacks individually. (As you could do and would have about the same effect, only with no RF crits since Hordes don't get them).

And people were asking about BC/OW as well, somewhere, I think.

Anyway the point is that in both DW (with Hordes) and BC (with Hordes and ZH) and OW (with RF but no Hordes) sustained fire will in fact take down, say, a Hive Guard, which was the original point.

Whereas my objection was that in DW + post-errata weapons damage a boltgun cannot hurt a hive guard, unless it is a PC shooting it. A different issue.

I'm not sure how this relates to Toughness though. Surely the solution would be to either increase the damage of lasguns or to change the Primitive quality.

Amusingly one of the main complaints when the variable setting rule was introduced was that it made lasguns do to much damage, as much as a boltgun. Though it really doesn't.

Actually it doesn't equate lasguns and thrown rocks, because the thrown rocks can't exceed TB8 + AP6 (and so can't do Crits) and can't fire semi-auto. So it would take considerably longer. About.... two minutes.

Technically, you could have a stone in each hand and then perform a double-attack.

But ... I am referring to a lasgun shot and a thrown rock having the exact same chance to cause 1 Wound. Does this seem remotely right to you?

Horde mechanics are an integral part of the system and are how barrage fire works, unless you want to roll for each of 50 attacks individually. (As you could do and would have about the same effect, only with no RF crits since Hordes don't get them).

I'm not advocating rolling for 50 attacks individually, but for 50 attacks that wouldn't damage the target if rolled normally also not damaging it if rolled as a group. Because guns don't magically increase in potency if fired in volleys. And neither do rocks.

Alternatively, as I can already see you raising your finger and the words "but RF..." forming on your virtual lips, I daresay that in this case, 50 individual lasgun attacks would cause way more harm than the Horde rules let them.

Horde rules are a neat narrative tool, so they serve their purpose even though anything put into a Horde gets ridiculously gimped - but in terms of realism, they are far from what ought to happen in a battle. So it comes down to whether you want to play something epic, or something lethal and gritty. Horde rules just don't work in every game. And that is a bit sad, though it probably cannot be helped as I don't have a better idea myself (I actually have something for small squads, but nothing to simulate entire companies of mooks).

And people were asking about BC/OW as well, somewhere, I think.

They did? Alright then, I'll take that back.

I'm not sure how this relates to Toughness though. Surely the solution would be to either increase the damage of lasguns or to change the Primitive quality.

In your example, lasguns would have to be raised to a damage level even above that of Astartes bolters to avoid having to rely on Righteous Fury. That is really supposed to be a solution? Why do you like Toughness so much, considering the extreme effect it has on combat mechanics? It makes entire groups of weapons look like childrens' toys and is utterly surreal in its better-than-armour permasoak role.

People port BC/OW rules to DW and earlier games simply because the later mechanics are much better.

In some cases, undoubtedly...

I'll never cease preferring a unified ruleset, but I have to admit that the ability to "steal" mechanics from one game and import them into another is one of the good things that came from there being so many rulebooks.

True, such updates could also be released as part of a preceding edition (like with DH2), but it certainly would not happen as often.

Quick question: If a character with TWW (melee) makes a successful charge attack, does he get two attacks at the end of the charge or does TWW (melee) not stack with charge.

I want to say that making two attacks is a full action and charging is a separate full action and that the two dont stack.

By DW CRB p. 238: "The Character rushes at his target and delivers a single melee attack."

So you only get one Attack after Charge. Both Charge and Multiple Attacks is Full action so you cant combine them.

Same thing if you are using BC/OW rules.

When they published BC they had option that you could decide, when making Charge, to make standard attack (melee), swift attack or all out attack. They Errated that.

That is what I thought. Thanks, Routa.