I personally never had a problem with the old dodge system (ridiculousness like Ascension Assasins aside). I didn't like the change to opposed checks for it, as it messed with the way the system was designed to work. High levels were meant to be about how many attacks you had (which is why every class in DH 1 has access to multiple attacks). Combat classes were meant to have about one more attack than the number of reactions of a similar level character.

And you don't question this at all? It's a pretty ******* ridiculous, absurdly limiting system, that promotes one style of combat and one style only. Changing the way the system is designed to work isn't a bad thing , if it's done well. Which it really was in terms of Evasions, honestly.

Yeah, borithan's position is a little ridiculous. The beta Evasion changes were pretty awesome because it solved the annoying problem where some dumb mook gets lucky and barely passes his dodge check against a combat monster that hit with 7-8 DoS. Under the new system the combat monster still hits, which I think is an improvement.

But it's different and different is bad, so...

How does opposed checks work with Full Auto and Lightning Attack, would that not double up the effectiveness of those weapons? Same with Semi and Swift but with less of an effect. Making it opposed also means that the Warrior ability as it stands is immensely powerful especially early game as he would become impossible for low level opponents to dodge.

I do agree that Evade could do with looking at but I don't think opposed checks work considering the combat system as it stands. I think dodge could do with some limitations like forcing people into cover or to go prone as well as some more modifiers like -10 for being attacked from above but I don't know how you would change parry.

Actually, opposed checks make single shot weapons less impotent. DoS of the evasion reduce DoS of the attack. Considering you only need one DoS to hit with a single shot, you're very likely to not be evaded if you hit well with one good shot. But bursts quickly get reduced in effectiveness.

At least the new beta has a few talents that address this but personally I think opposing the roll would feel more natural as it would apply to everyone.

You're right that the warrior ability would need to be changed (personal I think it should be anyway) and there are questions about low level characters because dodges become harder when they are opposed (something like making all dodges +10 checks would help, but that's a pretty clunky fix).

Other effects on dodge would certainly be helpful to make combat more cinematic.

The warrior ability could easily afford to be a fate point thing, honestly.

Hmm... not keen on my position being described as "ridiculous". I can understand people not agreeing, and I can see why they might not agree with me, but "ridiculous"?

No, I didn't really question it (ok, I wasn't massively keen on it's 3.5 D&D style thing of it limiting the ability to move so heavily). If a system is designed a certain way, and works that way, I'm fine with it. I felt it worked fine until FFG started regarding multiple attacks as a special ability which only combat characters got. Then the mechanic started crumbling, as only combat characters would have enough attacks to be likely to wear through reactions.

I don't actually see your "problem" as a problem. So, a lucky sod gets a lucky roll and avoids getting minced by the combat monster. The Combat Monster can attack again next turn (or next attack, if using the older system) and probably just mince him then. I would actually find it more frustrating that it didn't dodge, as I personally find outlier small chances being denied a hell of a lot more irritating than mundane, expected results being nullified.

Binary evasion rolls utterly disregard the result of the original attack. Have an effective BS score of 85 after modifiers, and roll a three? That dude you shot still has the same chance to dodge your attack as if you rolled 35 with an effective BS of 36. It really destroys any feeling of triumph players might experience when getting a good attack roll. And it's a goddamn boring mechanic.

For me the problem doesn't manifest as much at lower levels (like you said borithan, if a low level mook gets it's 30% dodge off or the adept in the group does, then fair enough), it's more as the system scales it gets more and more time consuming and grindy to run combats.

You can end up with characters on both sides with 3 80%+ reactions + 50% fields making the combats take a long time to resolve and focused very much on the single tactic of stripping dodges (or grapple fights, which can also be a pain).

It's not to say that this isn't fun (dark heresy 1 combat still is), just that it might be worth looking at an alternate way of running them that allows the quick combat and importance of the characters skill to stay relevant through the life of the game (as well as opening up new options like snipers working at high levels).

It also makes late-game advances in WS and especially BS not worthwhile, while Agility upgrades continue to be King forever and ever.

It was a terrible system, whether it was "meant" to be used or not. Being intentional does not excuse poor design.

Maybe it might be a good idea to move this discussion across to a specific thread rather than clogging up the main Beta 2 thread.

There is one already running here - http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/94181-opposed-evasion-tests/

I'd argue a 'main' Beta 2 thread is utterly useless and directionless anyway, but yeah, that might be a decent idea.

I'd argue a 'main' Beta 2 thread is utterly useless and directionless anyway, but yeah, that might be a decent idea.

As the original author of this thread I agree. It did in fact have a point but it was completely ignored by some people deciding this was the best place to ***** and whine even after I asked them to stop.

I'm not saying the topic didn't need to be made, considering some place for initial discussion is useful, but now that people know the new beta is out and have said how much they hate/love it, a 'general' thread really has no aim, so I don't see the harm in derailment.

It's less the derailment more that if other people have a view on it they're more likely to see that people are talking about it and comment on a dedicated thread than in the middle of a general one.

Plus in a general thread if the topic moves onto something else it can be hard to come back to the subject.

I'd argue a 'main' Beta 2 thread is utterly useless and directionless anyway, but yeah, that might be a decent idea.

Yeah well, I argue.. that.. you're a poopyhead....... or something.

Christ, I really need to sleep.

Edit: whoops- I replied to a post on Evasion, and then I read down further and saw the 'moritorium' on Evasion talk, so... my bad.

Things that I miss...

- I miss the old Imperial Guard benefit. I find the new one too narrow. At minimum, I think, it should apply to all basic ranged weapons rather than just lasguns.

- I know it's a small point, but I really liked having five separate Perils of the Warp tables for the five different categories of psyker powers.

- I thought having the penetration values of sniper rifles and long-lases derive from the shooter's Perception bonus was a very cool idea. So I miss that.

- And though I can learn to live with the half-action / full action thing; I did really like AP.

Seriously the only bad thing about action points where in fact the horrible rate of fire rules that came with it. Now they fix rate of fire they should just bring action points back.

I've always wondered, what were people's biggest greivances with the RoF system? Was it the dumb fractional values, or the system as a whole?

I'm working on my own rewrite of DH2, and I want to keep in AP, which is making me need to evaluate RoF pretty closely.

The whole. It took me a hour long discussion with the people at my table to get it figured out. Look BC and OW had it right. +10 single shot, 0 semi shot, and -10 for full auto. Swift attack and lightning attack followed the same rules. It was simple and directly to the point.

The whole.

+1. We dropped it after the first session and replaced it with a 1AP - Single Fire / 2AP - Burst Fire / 3AP - Auto Fire.

That works just as well AtoMaki.

Maybe my players are just incredibly intelligent, but they picked up on the AP system and RoF pretty much immediately.

Maybe my players are just incredibly intelligent, but they picked up on the AP system and RoF pretty much immediately.

I'm terribly sorry to say it, but your argument in invalid.

your players can't be incredibly intelligent, as that would unavoidably turn them into GMs.

Pft, the nerve of some people...

I've always wondered, what were people's biggest greivances with the RoF system? Was it the dumb fractional values, or the system as a whole?

I'm working on my own rewrite of DH2, and I want to keep in AP, which is making me need to evaluate RoF pretty closely.

Just the whole system was a bit of a mess.The Eviscerator was unusable as an example and the differences between 0.5/1/2/3 ROF were pretty massive, with a high ROF weapon you almost never needed to spend your AP on it and it made weapons with high ROF just much much better than other alternatives especially combined with the way multiple hits stacked.

It wasn't complicated just bad numbers and bad design.