Damage 3d10+3 = I roll 2,5,8 - change 2 to 4, get 4,5,8 = 20 damage on normal setting. 22 damage and 3 pen on overcharge. A guardsmen with 12 wounds and TB3, with flak armour is on +6 critical after this shot.

...and that's not a death even in the head. To instagib the guardsman with an average roll you will need a normal sniper rifle with expender rounds and aim for the head. And PCs are usually tougher than a Guardsman...

Still a ridiculous amount in the crits which makes the rest of your session terrifying in combat. My rolled up guardsman started with 10 wounds, less then the example.

I maintain that the real problem is accurate, which needs a nerf like bracing

Damage 3d10+3 = I roll 2,5,8 - change 2 to 4, get 4,5,8 = 20 damage on normal setting. 22 damage and 3 pen on overcharge. A guardsmen with 12 wounds and TB3, with flak armour is on +6 critical after this shot.

...and that's not a death even in the head. To instagib the guardsman with an average roll you will need a normal sniper rifle with expender rounds and aim for the head. And PCs are usually tougher than a Guardsman...

Still a ridiculous amount in the crits which makes the rest of your session terrifying in combat. My rolled up guardsman started with 10 wounds, less then the example.

I maintain that the real problem is accurate, which needs a nerf like bracing

And the deleting of the pistol grip entry.

Actually, I like the updated pistol grip, it finally makes sense. However with accurate, it shouldn't work together. One of my favorite ways to "nerf" Accurate is require a called shot, but that means called shot has to be fixed (either as a half action or a plain modifier).

Actually, I like the updated pistol grip, it finally makes sense. However with accurate, it shouldn't work together. One of my favorite ways to "nerf" Accurate is require a called shot, but that means called shot has to be fixed (either as a half action or a plain modifier).

If you tie it to called shot, everyone will just buy the single talent ha negates the penalty, and keep enjoying no downsides. Accurate needs a time commitment beyond things you were going to do anyways

Not everyone can get that talent cheaply and if Called shot is a half action, that is still a +10 they are missing. While untrained folks trying to snipe get a -20 and still miss the +10, so penalizing "snipers" who just picked up the gun and try to shoot every round.

Another fix (which I am not a fan of particularly) is to require a full action to gain the benefit. Or you get +1 damage die per half action of aim, so fire every turn folks get +1d10 while snipers taking their time can get the full +2d10.

Bracing as a requirement isn't a favorite of mine, penalizing a sniper changing positions.

Not everyone can get that talent cheaply and if Called shot is a half action, that is still a +10 they are missing. While untrained folks trying to snipe get a -20 and still miss the +10, so penalizing "snipers" who just picked up the gun and try to shoot every round.

Another fix (which I am not a fan of particularly) is to require a full action to gain the benefit. Or you get +1 damage die per half action of aim, so fire every turn folks get +1d10 while snipers taking their time can get the full +2d10.

Bracing as a requirement isn't a favorite of mine, penalizing a sniper changing positions.

Thing is, being a sniper and being a combat marksman are two different things. The former is a matter of patience and preparation, and while it involves a gun, it isn't really a combat role (the ideal situation is attacking an unaware target from a secure position with plenty of time to prepare - maximised bonuses, no chance to dodge). The latter is what you're talking about doing - using a precision single-shot weapon in the midst of combat.

Bracing as a requirement actually makes bipods a viable tool for would-be snipers - as it is, they're essentially superfluous, because Bracing only actually effects heavy weapons (in spite of my suggestions from inside the development process during the creation of Black Crusade and Only War).

Not everyone can get that talent cheaply and if Called shot is a half action, that is still a +10 they are missing. While untrained folks trying to snipe get a -20 and still miss the +10, so penalizing "snipers" who just picked up the gun and try to shoot every round.

Another fix (which I am not a fan of particularly) is to require a full action to gain the benefit. Or you get +1 damage die per half action of aim, so fire every turn folks get +1d10 while snipers taking their time can get the full +2d10.

Bracing as a requirement isn't a favorite of mine, penalizing a sniper changing positions.

Thing is, being a sniper and being a combat marksman are two different things. The former is a matter of patience and preparation, and while it involves a gun, it isn't really a combat role (the ideal situation is attacking an unaware target from a secure position with plenty of time to prepare - maximised bonuses, no chance to dodge). The latter is what you're talking about doing - using a precision single-shot weapon in the midst of combat.

Bracing as a requirement actually makes bipods a viable tool for would-be snipers - as it is, they're essentially superfluous, because Bracing only actually effects heavy weapons (in spite of my suggestions from inside the development process during the creation of Black Crusade and Only War).

Hey N O-1_H3r3 whatever happened to those extra supplements you used to have?

Not everyone can get that talent cheaply and if Called shot is a half action, that is still a +10 they are missing. While untrained folks trying to snipe get a -20 and still miss the +10, so penalizing "snipers" who just picked up the gun and try to shoot every round.

Another fix (which I am not a fan of particularly) is to require a full action to gain the benefit. Or you get +1 damage die per half action of aim, so fire every turn folks get +1d10 while snipers taking their time can get the full +2d10.

Bracing as a requirement isn't a favorite of mine, penalizing a sniper changing positions.

Thing is, being a sniper and being a combat marksman are two different things. The former is a matter of patience and preparation, and while it involves a gun, it isn't really a combat role (the ideal situation is attacking an unaware target from a secure position with plenty of time to prepare - maximised bonuses, no chance to dodge). The latter is what you're talking about doing - using a precision single-shot weapon in the midst of combat.

Bracing as a requirement actually makes bipods a viable tool for would-be snipers - as it is, they're essentially superfluous, because Bracing only actually effects heavy weapons (in spite of my suggestions from inside the development process during the creation of Black Crusade and Only War).

Hey N O-1_H3r3 whatever happened to those extra supplements you used to have?

To quote myself from elsewhere on these boards:

To provide clarification:

A little over a year ago (late 2012), FFG and I parted ways for reasons I prefer not to disclose, but which were utterly unrelated to my output as a fan of the games (indeed, it was that output that got me noticed by FFG in the first place). Independently of that, the servers hosting my webpage ceased functioning.

At present, I do not have access to the full and original versions of the files that were on my webpage - they're on my PC hard drive, rather than on my laptop, which I cannot presently use in my current situation (it takes up too much room). Consequently, I can't at this point replace my webpage or its contents. Further, I've been somewhat 'burnt out' on 40k in general (I'm even behind on the Horus Heresy novels, in spite of my best efforts) for the last year or so, meaning that I'm not likely to get back to completing various fan projects until I've cleared my head somewhat.

I thank everyone who has shown interest and enthusiasm for my work, both professional and personal, over the past few years.

That's too bad

I've enjoyed your contributions both official and otherwise, and I'm glad to see you posting on these boards again. Cheers!

The Aim requirement already penalizes a sniper for chaning positions (since he can't Aim while he's moving).

That said I like the Brace idea -- but it really doesn't penalize the sniper (OK combat marksman) much. It just adds a half action at the very beginning of initiating combat.

The Aim requirement already penalizes a sniper for chaning positions (since he can't Aim while he's moving).

That said I like the Brace idea -- but it really doesn't penalize the sniper (OK combat marksman) much. It just adds a half action at the very beginning of initiating combat.

But then he can't freely move around, and is a sitting duck. After the first shot goes off, enemies are gonna want to kill him first, and now he's tied to the floor.

I think it'll curb the stupid trend of the 10 meter sniper, which seems to be a problem a lot of people are suffering

Tenebrae: Yes, exactly. That's what I meant by saying that it (Proven) is better on multi-dice weapons. On something like a lasgun though? Nigh useless.

Look at the OW discussion of the Triplex: bogi_khaosa showed me the math there and, well, Proven really is quite worthless unless you have multiple dice or Proven(5+)...

In OW Proven is quite useful against formations as a wounding blow counts as a kill. (Houserule that for orks or it gets derpy). But yes, it's best for multidice things, like full auto pistols, rifles and grenades.

Edit: Should be mentioned that it will buff proven on a weapon if it already has it, which is quite neat.

The Aim requirement already penalizes a sniper for chaning positions (since he can't Aim while he's moving).

That said I like the Brace idea -- but it really doesn't penalize the sniper (OK combat marksman) much. It just adds a half action at the very beginning of initiating combat.

I've been suggesting for years that Bracing should provide a flat +10 or +20 on to-hit rolls - stability minimising recoil, etc, and reflecting the difference between spray-and-pray with an autopistol or similar, and sustained fire from an emplaced heavy stubber, etc. It means that emplaced autofire is appropriately deadly, but comes with an opportunity cost - you need to brace first - while not preventing inaccurate autfire with light weapons if you wish.

I personally don't think requiring Bracing for extra damage on Accurate weapons is a good way to handle the 10m sniper problem. As mentioned before, it discourages snipers from moving and makes for very static combat. That disadvantage can also be negated completely at higher levels by attaching suspensors to the weapon.

I prefer to require a Full Action Aim to gain extra damage dice. This prevents snipers from point-blank headshotting enemies while not encouraging them to stay in one position. Telescopic sights already require a Full Aim to use, so this kind of limitation is already built into the rules. I'm testing this option with my group and it seems to work well so far -- the Assassin actually pulled out a shotgun when some enemies closed to short range instead of just blasting them with a sniper

I also think, Proven should get some kind of buff.

It either should be increased by 1 point in each instant it currently exists, or it should get another bonus.

What, if a proven weapons damage is the minimum damage it inflicts on targets ? I.e. the enemies defence cannot reduce it below the given value.

If that is too much, maybe half the proven value (rounded up) ?

Tenebrae: Yes, exactly. That's what I meant by saying that it (Proven) is better on multi-dice weapons. On something like a lasgun though? Nigh useless.

Look at the OW discussion of the Triplex: bogi_khaosa showed me the math there and, well, Proven really is quite worthless unless you have multiple dice or Proven(5+)...

In OW Proven is quite useful against formations as a wounding blow counts as a kill. (Houserule that for orks or it gets derpy). But yes, it's best for multidice things, like full auto pistols, rifles and grenades.

Edit: Should be mentioned that it will buff proven on a weapon if it already has it, which is quite neat.

Apart from the grenades, those aren't multidice weapons, though (well, autopistols and -rifles aren't, other rifles are).

They can generate multiple hits, which are a) technically separate and thus b) ALL have Proven(DoS).

Frag grenades really need Proven(3? 5?) because now they are way too swingy and go from "it goes off in your hand and doesn't manage to hurt you at all" to it blows up 2m away, now you're in crits. (And suffer 2xRF)

I'm pretty sure you only get to DoS one die per attack, even if that attack generates multiple hits.

I like Tearing better Frag Grenades personally

Yes, you're right. I read 'per damage roll' instead of 'per attack roll'. That's less crazy.

Tenebrae: Yes, exactly. That's what I meant by saying that it (Proven) is better on multi-dice weapons. On something like a lasgun though? Nigh useless.

Look at the OW discussion of the Triplex: bogi_khaosa showed me the math there and, well, Proven really is quite worthless unless you have multiple dice or Proven(5+)...

In OW Proven is quite useful against formations as a wounding blow counts as a kill. (Houserule that for orks or it gets derpy). But yes, it's best for multidice things, like full auto pistols, rifles and grenades.

Edit: Should be mentioned that it will buff proven on a weapon if it already has it, which is quite neat.

Apart from the grenades, those aren't multidice weapons, though (well, autopistols and -rifles aren't, other rifles are).

They can generate multiple hits, which are a) technically separate and thus b) ALL have Proven(DoS).

Frag grenades really need Proven(3? 5?) because now they are way too swingy and go from "it goes off in your hand and doesn't manage to hurt you at all" to it blows up 2m away, now you're in crits. (And suffer 2xRF)

Sorry sorry, HORRIBLE wording by myself. Meant multidice and/or mutlihit. Frags are VERY unreliable as is, this does give them a minium of 6 damage from the dice. Not sure what you're expecting from the background talent but I'm not expecting gamebreaking stuff when it doesn't cost fate points.

Not sure what you mean with b) ALL have Proven(DoS). Last I checked the rules you could replace ONE die with the number of DOS.

See above; I misread the rule.

Alrighty, then at least that's settled. Proven 3 might not be a huge bonus and may restrict which weapons an imperial guard player would like to use I find the latter more problematic then the first, but who knows. I don't see it as a huge problem and the guardsman player in the group liked the idea so we're going with it for now.

Frag grenades are a whopping S3 AP -- in TT, so they are not meant to be very powerful.

That's why I like tearing, it increases the chances of stronger damage, while still allowing a lower level of damage (while minimizing the chances).

Proven changes the weapon's range, instead of changing the chances (6-20 vs 2-20). Has anyone done some playtesting with both ideas?

Like i've said before, why not make them 2d10 + 5 damage? This solves the whole issue in a very simple way.