OK, our general feeling is the Suppressing Fire and Pinning are too powerful as they stand...

My thoughts to fix that without completely scraping and rewriting the rules are simply to make them less powerful.

First, on Suppressing Fire, remove the WP penalty to the Pinning test. Make it a straight WP roll. Comparing Suppressing Fire with other Fear based effects (and while not exactly the same, Pinning and Fear are close kin) being shot at is not "man next to you dies vomiting maggots."

Second, reduce the BS penalty for being Pinned from -20 to -10 and remove the "may only perform Half Actions" clause. This brings being Pinned into line with low level results on the Shock (Table 8-11) table. Leave in the "find/stay in cover or retreat" clause because it makes sense and is characterful.

Another option would be to just make Pinning and Fear the same thing. Suppressing Fire forces the targets to make a Fear test at (+0). If targets fail they need to roll on the Shock table (Table 8-11) which gives a range of effects, some significantly less serious than the current Pinning rules, others much worse depending on exactly how badly you roll. Personally, I'm leary of this idea because I'd prefer my characters not faint dead away during a firefight... but it's an option.

Just my thoughts...

I would comletely combine it with the fear rules to make things more easy.

Talents that help against fear, also help against pinning, suppressive fire creates a fear effect.

I think making it a Fear effect is a great idea if we go back to the original beta's fear rules. The shock table is way too unpredictable for my tastes.

yeah - again a chapter where beta1 was a leader.

They really should merge a lot of good thinks from Beta1 into Beta2. A lot of them are easy to integrate but with a great effect.

> Fear & Pinning

> Fatigue

> Ag Caps

> Cybernetic-Limits

> Psy

...

Yeah, I agree with nerfing Suppression. And I think removing the "only Half actions" clause and reducing the WP test modifiers to +0/-10 would fix the problems.

Failing a fear check is much worse than failing a pinning check. You can still do full auto etc with just a half action.

The biggest problem I have with suppressing fire is that although willpower seems the obvious choice, it really should be battle hardened acolytes that should be able to shrug of the horror of battle and not some academic or priest. On that note I would suggest that it got changed from willpower to a choice between weapon skill or ballistic skill. Having a -20 modifier is also too much I think.

I also think that immune to pinning should be pulled out of Adamantium faith and put into its own talent. Again not based on willpower but instead some characteristica suitable for a combat oriented acolyte.

I have always found it odd that an imperial guardsman who often has low willpower is so bad at handling suppressing fire, while the priest who might never have been in a real large battle shrugs it off as nothing.

I think that the Fear test to resist Pinning can be reduced to +0/-10 and the penalty to actions while pinned can be reduced to -10, but I am ok with limiting Pinned characters to a Half Action each turn. They can still fire full-auto (at reduced effectiveness) but it lets Pinning keep some teeth. If Supressing Fire does nothing but force a character to hide behind a wall and take a small penalty to actions, it just doesn't seem worth the bullets. I like the ability as a tactical tool, but it is frustrating for players in its current state because it is too hard to resist the effects.

I have always found it odd that an imperial guardsman who often has low willpower is so bad at handling suppressing fire, while the priest who might never have been in a real large battle shrugs it off as nothing.

I believe the expression is "My faith is my shield".

It seems perfectly thematically fitting

I have always found it odd that an imperial guardsman who often has low willpower is so bad at handling suppressing fire, while the priest who might never have been in a real large battle shrugs it off as nothing.

I believe the expression is "My faith is my shield".

It seems perfectly thematically fitting

It may be worth noting that Imperial Creed adherents are likely much more vehement in their confrontation of battle situations than perhaps more 'passive' doctrines-- this is 40k after all, and there is only war.

That said, they may wish to have a talent for combat specialists similar to Jaded that may make Pinning tests easier.

Though again, Imperial fanatics are probably not to be sneezed at in this regard.

I have always found it odd that an imperial guardsman who often has low willpower is so bad at handling suppressing fire, while the priest who might never have been in a real large battle shrugs it off as nothing.

I believe the expression is "My faith is my shield".

It seems perfectly thematically fitting

It may be worth noting that Imperial Creed adherents are likely much more vehement in their confrontation of battle situations than perhaps more 'passive' doctrines-- this is 40k after all, and there is only war.

That said, they may wish to have a talent for combat specialists similar to Jaded that may make Pinning tests easier.

Though again, Imperial fanatics are probably not to be sneezed at in this regard.

There was a talent called "Last Man Standing" that allowed the character to obviate pinning, If my mind works properly. Maybe a low-level (Tier 1) version of this talent would be OK. Something like +20 to WP to the test (If we eliminate the -20 modifier) or +40 (If we mantain it).

yeah - again a chapter where beta1 was a leader.

They really should merge a lot of good thinks from Beta1 into Beta2. A lot of them are easy to integrate but with a great effect.

> Fear & Pinning

> Fatigue

> Ag Caps

> Cybernetic-Limits

> Psy

...

Yeah, Fatigue, Ag-Caps, Cybernetic-Limits are things I agree were objectively better in DH2 1.0, and I think it's odd that they just copy-pasted straight over them.

I keep getting this feeling that we've hurted someone's feelings at FFG and that they are angry at us for not liking his brainchild, making him go "Oh, so all you want is Only War? FINE!" and then proceed to just copy-paste Only War and add a coat of paint.

On the other hand, when they read this, I can understand if they're going "Aaauugh, these people are never satisfied!" .

In my opinion, they need to (once again) scrap DH2, and then start re-writing the entire Core Rulebook, putting up a list of design goals, and review each part of the book as they go, re-reading older iterations and deciding what fits into this and what doesn't, and then add it in piece by piece, modifying it as they go - instead of copy-pasting the previous iteration and then make changes to it, because it just gets increasingly jury-rigged and that's a problem when you want to create what is essentially a gestalt.

In my opinion, they need to (once again) scrap DH2, and then start re-writing the entire Core Rulebook, putting up a list of design goals, and review each part of the book as they go, re-reading older iterations and deciding what fits into this and what doesn't, and then add it in piece by piece, modifying it as they go - instead of copy-pasting the previous iteration and then make changes to it, because it just gets increasingly jury-rigged and that's a problem when you want to create what is essentially a gestalt.

I disagree with your method but I do agree that what they've given us needs to be scrapped and rebuilt from the ground up. In my perfect world they'll take their list of design goals and create a new system that satisfies them while completely ignoring the systems that have come before. Not coincidentally this was my main complaint with the original beta... that they took too much from past games.

Given that you an I are on pretty opposite ends of the spectrum regarding game design, what does that say about the intended audience of DH2? What segment of the RPG population will be interested in the beta we've been given? Honest question.

I'm playing you guys the tiniest fiddle in the world. Give it up already.

disagree with combining fear and anything.

agree pinning and suppression fire need a fix. talent that make you immune to this. and having aptitudes BS and general maybe. you decide on tier.

I don't like the idea of frail psykers having a greater chance of resisting the effects of pinning and suppression than the hardened Guardsman veteran of a hundred battles cowering beside him.

The argument of priests and psykers having more "faith" falls flat because there is more to pinning and suppression than just "fear". The real killer is the bombardment of your senses, the disorientation. Regardless of "faith", that's something that a soldier would have more experience dealing with than a scholar.

Suppression and pinning tests should just be toughness tests. Remove the -20 maybe. Boom, done.

I was originally against the original Beta's take on pinning, but the more I've come to think about it the more I've appreciated it.

Causing fear checks from normal shooting actions means that it's much less of an exception to the rest of the shooting rules - and I think that having to at least hit with the BS roll balances it a lot. You should have to get somewhere near your the target to put the fear into them..

Either way, I'm in agreement that the fear penalty for full auto is a bit much. I accept it's a way to make full auto more effective at suppressing (as you'd expect) but my experience from Only War is that it was much better to have multiple pinning checks and save the guy with a heavy weapon for the killing blow...

disagree with combining fear and anything.

agree pinning and suppression fire need a fix. talent that make you immune to this. and having aptitudes BS and general maybe. you decide on tier.

Fear should almost certainly be used to portray 'horror'-- as in 'horrifying' creatures and the standard terror of "he's coming to get me".

Pinning should be somewhat different, as it's comparatively less troubling than perhaps most of the things acolytes will encounter with a Fear rating. Not getting up and running through a hail of bullets is also a tactical decision as well: You could get shot.

I believe that's one thing missing from pinning: that you actually can get shot by suppressing fire .

Willpowering your way out of cover often results in you taking what you were hiding from in that cover.

I have a couple thoughts on Pinning I'd like to share:

-- I think Semi-automatic Supressive Fire is too effective in its current form. Instead of affecting a 45-degree arc like Full Auto supression, you should only be able to use it on a single target. How can three bullets possibly supress a treeline full of enemies?

-- I like the idea of requiring a BS test of some sort to cause supression. Maybe it's opposed by the Willpower test of the target, or maybe you just need to place your shots relatively near the target to cause a Pinning test.

-- This is relatively minor, but I think it should be harder to supress a target with a silenced weapon. Bullets aren't as intimidating when you can't hear them being fired.

-- It is extremely frustrating to pass the WP check to unpin yourself at the end of your turn, only to be supressed again before you can act. I'm not sure exactly what can be done about this -- maybe characters can take their WP check to avoid pinning at the beginning of their turn instead of at the end of turn. This would be more consistent with similar pass-WP-check-to-act abilities (being on fire, Snapping Out of It) and PCs/NPCs would be less likely to be Supression-locked.

I have a couple thoughts on Pinning I'd like to share:

1 I think Semi-automatic Supressive Fire is too effective in its current form. Instead of affecting a 45-degree arc like Full Auto supression, you should only be able to use it on a single target. How can three bullets possibly supress a treeline full of enemies?

2 I like the idea of requiring a BS test of some sort to cause supression. Maybe it's opposed by the Willpower test of the target, or maybe you just need to place your shots relatively near the target to cause a Pinning test.

3 This is relatively minor, but I think it should be harder to supress a target with a silenced weapon. Bullets aren't as intimidating when you can't hear them being fired.

4 It is extremely frustrating to pass the WP check to unpin yourself at the end of your turn, only to be supressed again before you can act. I'm not sure exactly what can be done about this -- maybe characters can take their WP check to avoid pinning at the beginning of their turn instead of at the end of turn. This would be more consistent with similar pass-WP-check-to-act abilities (being on fire, Snapping Out of It) and PCs/NPCs would be less likely to be Supression-locked.

1 Agree, even if the Semi-Auto weapon in question possesses the Storm Quality.

2 I've rolled this back and forth- should Suppressing Fire just be an effect of Full Auto or not? I'm inclined to say yes...so, what if FA weapons had a Suppression (X) Quality? Nothing more than a scale of 1-3, maybe 4. Or tie it to the tens digit of the weapon's FA RoF? Add the total Suppression Rating of all weapons affecting the target(s) and if it exceeds their WPb they make a Pinning Test with a penalty equal to 10x the excess.

Next, what if Pinning Tests were made at the end of the Round? Everyone gets a chance to act before Tests are made. Could lead to both sides suppressing each other. Might make Nerves Of Steel more appealing.

3 I disagree here. If I don't know where the bullets are coming from because the weapon is silenced (not saying the shots and whizzing bullets are completely silent) I would feel more dread, not less.

4 See 2.

I like the Idea of removing the -20 for wp check. Wp is the appropriate stat though.

For the record; I do make my players roll a fear check (Disturbing) when they are unaware and take fire. Gives the "real" combat veterans good reason to purchase the jaded talent.

The biggest problem I have with suppressing fire is that although willpower seems the obvious choice, it really should be battle hardened acolytes that should be able to shrug of the horror of battle and not some academic or priest.

I have always found it odd that an imperial guardsman who often has low willpower is so bad at handling suppressing fire, while the priest who might never have been in a real large battle shrugs it off as nothing.

"Oh god, it's the guns again! This is landing day all over again!"

"GLORY TO THE FIRST MAN TO DIE!"

I think it's fine as it stands

The biggest problem I have with suppressing fire is that although willpower seems the obvious choice, it really should be battle hardened acolytes that should be able to shrug of the horror of battle and not some academic or priest.

I have always found it odd that an imperial guardsman who often has low willpower is so bad at handling suppressing fire, while the priest who might never have been in a real large battle shrugs it off as nothing.

"Oh god, it's the guns again! This is landing day all over again!"

"GLORY TO THE FIRST MAN TO DIE!"

I think it's fine as it stands

This actually touches upon another issue:

Why is the Willpower stat called Willpower? Very few of the uses we see actually relate to willpower, but rather to your degree of inductrination.

It kinda feels like 2 nebulous stats held together with duct tape "because that's how it was in the old WHFRPG."

It kinda feels... held together with duct tape "because that's how it was in the old WHFRPG."

WH40kRPG.txt

It kinda feels... held together with duct tape "because that's how it was in the old WHFRPG."

WH40kRPG.txt

Pardon?

It kinda feels... held together with duct tape "because that's how it was in the old WHFRPG."

WH40kRPG.txt

Pardon?

It's a play on http://shitthatdidnthappen.tumblr.com/