Well opposed evade vs attack tests are only relevant on single shot weapons anyways. It already works like that on multiple attacks, and it doesn't make sense for blast or explosives or even flame in a way.

And I like talents. So there.

Actually, it does effect multiple attacks differently to the current system. In the current system, 1 DoS = 1 hit negated, no matter what. Subtracting your dodge DoS from the attack's DoS is different.

Say someone manages to score 6 DoS on an attack that can achieve a maximum of three hits.

Under the current system if you scored 3 DoS, nothing hits you.

On the other hand, under the old system, the firer is still left with 3 DoS after subtracting your Dodge, meaning all his shots hit home.

Assuming he fired full auto. On semi-auto that'd be 2 hits.

I think subtracting DoS makes more sense - it effects full and semi auto actions differently, which further differentiates them. Hopefully FFG will do the math on how these two methods actually work out.

Perception does need some love ;-)

We've actually been playing the beta with AG swapped for PER on dodge and it works really well. We kind of look at it about being aware of someone trying to kill you, rather than literally matrixing a bullet

Perception does need some love ;-)

We've actually been playing the beta with AG swapped for PER on dodge and it works really well. We kind of look at it about being aware of someone trying to kill you, rather than literally matrixing a bullet

Makes sense.

I think dodging melee attacks can stay at Agility, but dodging ranged attacks should rathger be Perception.

Reason is, melee movements are not too fast to react to with pure agility, but bullets are.

Against bullets, you rather need to be awre when who wants to shoot you and which direction he is aiming at.

Can you actually dodge melee attacks? I thought that is what parry was for?

Or did that change in the new beta?

I think dodging melee attacks can stay at Agility, but dodging ranged attacks should rathger be Perception.

Reason is, melee movements are not too fast to react to with pure agility, but bullets are.

Against bullets, you rather need to be awre when who wants to shoot you and which direction he is aiming at.

As someone who has been through a few firefights, I disagree. Good reflexes are much more important to avoid shots than perception. If you have a good idea on the location of your attacker (represented by the Awareness test pre-combat to determine if the character is surprised or not) then it is all about being **** fast with your reactions.

Perception does need some love ;-)

We've actually been playing the beta with AG swapped for PER on dodge and it works really well. We kind of look at it about being aware of someone trying to kill you, rather than literally matrixing a bullet

I don't like this at all, while knowing an attack is coming allows you to dodge, amazingly high awareness doesn't make you better at dodging that chainsword coming at you, it makes you more appreciative of the craftsmanship of the chainsword right before it cuts your head off.

Atomaki, I can understand your experience, but within this game it does agility is suddenly being related to fleetness, balance, flexibility, and speed. Those are all physical characteristics. Should reaction time/reflexes be counted in with this as well, or is it stretching the definition of Agility too far?

Atomaki, I can understand your experience, but within this game it does agility is suddenly being related to fleetness, balance, flexibility, and speed. Those are all physical characteristics. Should reaction time/reflexes be counted in with this as well, or is it stretching the definition of Agility too far?

Since Agility governs initiative too I guess it isn't that far fetched to think that Agility=reflexes.

I agree with Cail.

I think Agility should represent a PC's ability to effectively and efficiently move their body, but without being aware of potential threats ducking and weaving is, at best, a precautionary (and hopeful) hindrance to one's opponent. We've been using Per (Awareness) for Dodge- Dodging attacks that originate 180-degrees to the front are +/-0 Tests, Dodging attacks originating outside of that area or from short Range are -20.

Now, I'm not saying this is meant to reflect combat as it occurs in real life.

There are thousands of permutations of the way any game is run. This game is no different. GMs and Players find what works best for them and they go with it. People like Cail and myself, people who share the alternatives they have used, provide the basis for thought and discussion. We're just trying to help.

By the way...is there any reason to prefer parry over dodge ?

Isnt dodge always better as it is more universal ?

Ok - if my aptitudes are towards WS, parry is cheaper...but against ranged I need dodge anyway...or not ?

If your aptitudes are towards WS and WS is higher than Agility and you're getting that +10 from a sword then get parry.

Let's just merge them.

I liked the idea to have 1 Evade skill, because it made parrying more viable (not to be paid extra).

It could be at aptitude Defence Perception to offer some more neutral ground and make the Perception Aptitude more viable.

And stay in cover type defence could test on perception.

It could be at aptitude Defence Perception to offer some more neutral ground and make the Perception Aptitude more viable.

In my opinion, it should be General/Defense, so even if your character lacks defensive Aptitudes (Agility, Perception, Defense) he can still take the most basic defensive skill at an OK cost.

Good idea.

I agree with Cail.

I think Agility should represent a PC's ability to effectively and efficiently move their body, but without being aware of potential threats ducking and weaving is, at best, a precautionary (and hopeful) hindrance to one's opponent. We've been using Per (Awareness) for Dodge- Dodging attacks that originate 180-degrees to the front are +/-0 Tests, Dodging attacks originating outside of that area or from short Range are -20.

Now, I'm not saying this is meant to reflect combat as it occurs in real life.

There are thousands of permutations of the way any game is run. This game is no different. GMs and Players find what works best for them and they go with it. People like Cail and myself, people who share the alternatives they have used, provide the basis for thought and discussion. We're just trying to help.

To be fair this wasn't my suggestion but our GMs house ruling. I was sceptical at first, but its actually been a really good experience.

Just saw the Talent Devastating Assault.

Thats a poor version of opposed evading for a high cost. Ridiculous.

Really - just bring back opposed evading in general and use this talents slot for something useful.

I was amazed they changed it back. My gaming group has been arguing it should be opposed since around 2006. It just makes so much more sense.

Why don't we make a new Perception talent, called like "Perfect Blows" (crap name, I know)

Tier 2, Perception, Finesse

When you make Standard Attacks and Single Shots against an enemy, they must beat your DoS on their evade roll to succeed

Perception gets a little buff, dedicated snipers and single shot specialists get a buff, and a good rule returns.

Plus we can always use more talents. More more more.

I know a lot of you didn't agree with it, but I must say I am super happy this actually made it into Beta #2, even if it's just because I posted it

I believe you guys may be missing an important aspect of the nullification dodge system, timing:

You're at base only permitted one dodge per round. This allows the use of many alternate tactics for mitigating the dodge of an opponent, like the use of delayed actions. (Layered grenades, volleys, firing on the target's turn, etc.)

Similarly, I tend to allow the use of Sleight of Hand and Concealment actions opposed against a target's perception (or intelligence) to impose a penalty on dodging ranged attacks.

As a note on 40k lore however, you are actually 'matrixing' the bullet many times. It's a Dune-style setting of superhuman reactions: This is why firing into melee imposes a penalty. The combat is happening at lightning pace, whereas normally shooting someone in a swordfight can be much easier since he's distracted and not in cover.

Perhaps a useful boon to the game would be including a brief section on tactics and sample usage of the combat actions for the GM, like 'how to pin down slippery targets' or the like.

As well, for single shots, I believe that rather than being an opposed degrees of success test, that DoS on an attack merely impose a penalty to the dodge roll-- this allows 'heroic' dodges.

Actions similar to Aim that impose dodge penalties (like 'Lead the Target' or 'Planned Shot') based upon DoS of them may be helpful, too.

Firing into melee is difficult because the system assumes you're trying to not hit your ally, the rules are pretty clear about that.

There's nothing in the text that leads me to believe that the writers intend to imply that your rank 1 acolyte has superhuman reflexes, the mechanics of dodging are a gaming mechanic to keep the attacker/defender engaged in the game play.

I'm fine with the binary system but if we absolutely must have an opposed roll system then there needs to be a cumulative penalty to the defender's roll for each successive attack defended against in a single round.

Firing into melee is difficult because the system assumes you're trying to not hit your ally, the rules are pretty clear about that.

You are of course trying not to hit your ally. The -20 is because the fight is happening at a lightning pace. It is a fairly common lore element throughout the tabletop, novels, and these RPGs.

As opposed to a normal human swordfight on earth, where shooting one of the fighters would probably be at +20 because it's rather difficult to be zig-zagging or ducking into cover while trying to stab someone with a sword.

Bear in mind that to dodge an AoE for example, you are leaping around four meters on average (sometimes backwards), coming up on your feet and ready to fire again in under five seconds-- no fatigue. Inquisitorial Acolytes are no slouches.

Although speaking of fatigue, it might be worthwhile to rework those rules a bit so that say dodging attacks with high DoS imposes fatigue or the like. (While still negating the attack.)

Firing into melee is difficult because the system assumes you're trying to not hit your ally, the rules are pretty clear about that.

There's nothing in the text that leads me to believe that the writers intend to imply that your rank 1 acolyte has superhuman reflexes, the mechanics of dodging are a gaming mechanic to keep the attacker/defender engaged in the game play.

I'm fine with the binary system but if we absolutely must have an opposed roll system then there needs to be a cumulative penalty to the defender's roll for each successive attack defended against in a single round.

Since most characters can only Evade once per round (twice with Step Aside), I don't think this change to the rules is necessary.

As opposed to a normal human swordfight on earth, where shooting one of the fighters would probably be at +20 because it's rather difficult to be zig-zagging or ducking into cover while trying to stab someone with a sword.

I have never read anything to support this view, and in fact the -20 penalty to hit targets in melee was present in Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay (v2). The whole "going on at lightning pace" is just hyperbole, and is used in Black Librarys WH Fantasy line as well (just read a Gotrex and Felix book).