At the moment i'm the GM in my group.

They are quite interessted in the old beta's system, and they love the few tweaks i have done to the system.

My tweaks is in the damage system mainly, making it far more deadly to the players and elites/masters.

And of course, the adventure is interessting for the team.

Anyone else playing it?

We do. With quite a few changes like simplified damage system, more detailed weapon statistics and slightly modified character attributes.

And so far we have a blast with it. Though I must add that we play a custom setting with a dominant post-cyberpunk theme instead of the gothic doom&gloom and in my experience some of the odd elements (like Remembrance) of the 1.0 Beta makes more sense in a modernistic "Grim Bright" environment.

That 's nice to hear AtoMaki.

Well, as said, my system is far more deadly, taking some few parts of the old damage system and tweaked it, so almost every weapon is good.

I have kept the classic 40k scene, with some "doomsday" like situation for the players, facing not only an Alpha psyker burning down some parts of the huge city of Damaris (Rogue trader scenario, but i like the picture of the city, making it easier to control where the players move around). The problem is not only the Alpha psyker, but a cult is running around, killing citizens, removing the eyeballs and drain 90%+ of their blood.

The Governor's son is a Pariah, been locked behind heavy security, but he has escaped the prison.

I fully intend on re-integrating some of the Beta 1 mechanics into my next game. I love the woundless system, it just needs a better crit chart so effects take hold almost immediately.

I fully intend on re-integrating some of the Beta 1 mechanics into my next game. I love the woundless system, it just needs a better crit chart so effects take hold almost immediately.

Well, i fixed that problem. It requires some math, but it's worth it . Ain't difficult to calculate it

tbh I'm just going to use the critical charts from WHFRP1. Easily the most dynamic I've seen from this games legacy. Each result actually DOES something.

Care to post up your amendments, conversions, new rules, revised tables etc?

Care to post up your amendments, conversions, new rules, revised tables etc?

Sure i can do that.

For the first, we use the old beta's latest eretta. I have increased the penetration on:

• Bolter, bolt pistol and storm bolter from 2 to 4. This make the appeal to that a guardsman's flak helmet will be ignored, instead of having the helmet protect with 2 armour value. This is supported by the thought of a Commissar making an execution shot to rally his men. The shot is supposed to kill the man, and therefore ignore the helmet.

Increased the difficulty of AVL for Plasma gun from -30 to -50, and the Plasma gun from -30 to -40. or vice versa.

This is to make it as difficult as the Melta version.

We use the updated (the latest eretta) critical tables. Our damage system is DEADLY, but worth it. I gave my players 5 fate points as a start threshold. It's high, but i want the players to use them wisely. Fate points will be awarded "sometimes" by killing some elite mobs and ALWAYS against Master mobs if they have lost atleast 1 fate point in the encounter.

• We use the weapons damage stats ect. from the updated eretta.
• All Daemons ignore any effect on the charts until they reach -30 or more, then they will perish.
• It's a bit difficult to understand my system, but it works like this:

We have this guardsman, named Bob. He has a flak armour (4 head, 5 on the rest of the body). He has a toughness bonus of 4.

He got struck by a bolt shell in the left leg. The bolter deals 1d10+5 pen 4. The bolt rolls a 9(+5), a total of 14.

He reduces the damage by 1 from the armour, and 4 from his TB. The new result is now 9 point of damage.

My system took an idea from the normal injuries and critical injuries.

Every time you reach the target's TB (4 in this case), you will give an additional +5 damage to the hit location. In this situation, we have reached Bob's TB twice! Giving a whole +10 extra damage to the hit location. Now the damage Bob's leg receives is 19! Now we look at chart and figure out what the damage have of effect.

IF he receives another shot in the same leg, you just add the new damage to the his current value (19+x).

• All body parts have their own values. You can easily have 14 damage on the Head, another 4 on the left Arm, and 19 on Left Leg.

Understandable ?

I'm also trying to develop some extra equipment (weapons, ammo, armour ect) over the time.

Only a few weapons and special ammo has been made atm.

I forgot some few more rules:

• As the Beta 1 states, that fatigue point cap. is TB + WpB. Instead of every Fatique point over a statistic's Bonus makes a test take 1 more action point to do in structured time, i give -10 to that action per point over the Bonus. This gives a strong presence of fatigue makes it more difficult to do, not necessary more time comsuming.
• Weapon skill and Ballistic skill have a stronger presence in the game, mostly for combat oriented characters. Both of the Stats now have Bonus, just like any other stat. This bonus calculates the chance of making a Righteous Fury. Guardsman Bob will have 4% chance of RF with his 47 BS, while the Vindicare Assassin will most likely have 9%+ chance with BS 90+. This gives the combat oriented players a feel of more "use" in combat. Personaly i disliked the damage roll determine the chance of a lucky shot or strike.
• Vengeful (weapon special rule) makes a weapon's chance of RF double the normal value. The Sniper Rifle (SP weapon, updated*) gives Bob a chance of 8% instead of 4% to score RF. We haven't tested it's impact on the game yet, cause of unskilled acolytes (they only have 1k xp atm).
• Although the game has not implemented Unnatural Characteristics, I would prefer some few creatures have it. Orks would have it, maybe a value of +2 TB. A weapon with the Felling* quality would normally decrease the target's toughness to the half, but this Unn. Char. would increase the TB after reduction [(toughness / 2) +2]. Orks are really tough, and this may be the only "unique" rule they may have, just like 90% of the creatures there is listed in the Beta.

Every time you reach the target's TB (4 in this case), you will give an additional +5 damage to the hit location. In this situation, we have reached Bob's TB twice! Giving a whole +10 extra damage to the hit location. Now the damage Bob's leg receives is 19! Now we look at chart and figure out what the damage have of effect.

Wouldn't it be more simple if you simply increased the damage of the weapons across the board? My gaming group has chosen that route and it works just fine.

Every time you reach the target's TB (4 in this case), you will give an additional +5 damage to the hit location. In this situation, we have reached Bob's TB twice! Giving a whole +10 extra damage to the hit location. Now the damage Bob's leg receives is 19! Now we look at chart and figure out what the damage have of effect.

Wouldn't it be more simple if you simply increased the damage of the weapons across the board? My gaming group has chosen that route and it works just fine.

As said, I picked a small part of the original system from the beta. I liked this way, because it made more of the weapons variable, instead of flat rate damage increase on weapons, which I alone had to work out.

Plus, my system makes tough creatures difficult to kill with "small arms", like las pistols and autoguns have a special purpose for light geared enemies, and letting plasma weapons have an edge against really tough enemies that would normally ignore the small arms.

Every time you reach the target's TB (4 in this case), you will give an additional +5 damage to the hit location. In this situation, we have reached Bob's TB twice! Giving a whole +10 extra damage to the hit location. Now the damage Bob's leg receives is 19! Now we look at chart and figure out what the damage have of effect.

Wouldn't it be more simple if you simply increased the damage of the weapons across the board? My gaming group has chosen that route and it works just fine.

As said, I picked a small part of the original system from the beta. I liked this way, because it made more of the weapons variable, instead of flat rate damage increase on weapons, which I alone had to work out.

You don't have to make a flat damage increase. For example, our Autogun does 2D10+8 damage while the Lasgun does 1D10+17. Roughly the same damage but still vastly different damage model.

And what about armour, minions (whom only have 2 wounds)? Overall damage reduction?

With your damage, i see elites getting killed by 2 shots.. that is 1 action point to kill an enemy whom is supposed to be a challenge.

And what about armour, minions (whom only have 2 wounds)? Overall damage reduction?

With your damage, i see elites getting killed by 2 shots.. that is 1 action point to kill an enemy whom is supposed to be a challenge.

Damage reduction was increased too, but not that much and it mostly comes from armor. With the right gear you can still turn yourself immune to small arms fire and even survive one or two shots from a special/heavy weapon. But the emphasis is clearly on avoiding straight combat whenever it is possible .

And what about armour, minions (whom only have 2 wounds)? Overall damage reduction?

With your damage, i see elites getting killed by 2 shots.. that is 1 action point to kill an enemy whom is supposed to be a challenge.

Damage reduction was increased too, but not that much and it mostly comes from armor. With the right gear you can still turn yourself immune to small arms fire and even survive one or two shots from a special/heavy weapon. But the emphasis is clearly on avoiding straight combat whenever it is possible .

I still find it far out of the scale. It's a total rework of the armory ect.

But that's my opinion, and i may find my own group have the same opinion.

And what about armour, minions (whom only have 2 wounds)? Overall damage reduction?

With your damage, i see elites getting killed by 2 shots.. that is 1 action point to kill an enemy whom is supposed to be a challenge.

Damage reduction was increased too, but not that much and it mostly comes from armor. With the right gear you can still turn yourself immune to small arms fire and even survive one or two shots from a special/heavy weapon. But the emphasis is clearly on avoiding straight combat whenever it is possible .

I still find it far out of the scale. It's a total rework of the armory ect.

It is a total rework of the armory . Here, have a look:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_YUlI4RPylqSU5fZE4zdHlrUUE/edit?usp=sharing

Stuff with no values/description is under construction/revaluation or hasn't find its way into my characters' hands yet.

And a few notes:

- Explanation on new weapon stats is here:

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/95962-proposed-ranged-weapon-changes-because-diversity-is-fun/#entry941039

- The Protection Rating of the armors is a multiplier. The overall defense value of an armor is Armor Value (after reduced by Pen) x Protection Rating. Protection Rating is only decreased by the Armor Piercing weapon quality.

Hey, let me point you over to Dark Reign's sub-forum for the first Beta: http://darkreign.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=177

I've actually composed an 80 page revision of the rules that I would love to hear some feedback on.

Your content would be more than welcome there!

You don't have to make a flat damage increase. For example, our Autogun does 2D10+8 damage while the Lasgun does 1D10+17. Roughly the same damage but still vastly different damage model.

That isn't roughly the same.

a d10 will do 5.5 pts on average, so 2d10 will score about 11pts. So your Autogun will do from 10 to 28 pts, with an average of 19, while your Lasgun will do from 18 to 27 pts of damage, with an average of 23.

I youd MUCH rather have the Lasgun with it's HUGE bonus to minimum damage, and a whopping 4 better average. The autogun will score MAX damage only 1% of the time, but the Lasgun will do so 10% of the time.

If you're gonna mess with dice, know your statistics

And what about armour, minions (whom only have 2 wounds)? Overall damage reduction?

With your damage, i see elites getting killed by 2 shots.. that is 1 action point to kill an enemy whom is supposed to be a challenge.

Damage reduction was increased too, but not that much and it mostly comes from armor. With the right gear you can still turn yourself immune to small arms fire and even survive one or two shots from a special/heavy weapon. But the emphasis is clearly on avoiding straight combat whenever it is possible .

I still find it far out of the scale. It's a total rework of the armory ect.

It is a total rework of the armory . Here, have a look:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_YUlI4RPylqSU5fZE4zdHlrUUE/edit?usp=sharing

Stuff with no values/description is under construction/revaluation or hasn't find its way into my characters' hands yet.

And a few notes:

- Explanation on new weapon stats is here:

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/95962-proposed-ranged-weapon-changes-because-diversity-is-fun/#entry941039

- The Protection Rating of the armors is a multiplier. The overall defense value of an armor is Armor Value (after reduced by Pen) x Protection Rating. Protection Rating is only decreased by the Armor Piercing weapon quality.

I dislike most of your remake, i have to say. Most of my group are strong dedicated people, for both boardgame (warhammer 40k) and the different systems that FFG has released. We always try to balance the things that needs it.

On thing i got my eye on, after just a few minutes of scheming, is the Bolter and Pulse Rifle. As you said, your group may not have gathered some of the weapons, so you may lack the experience of the weapon use. But having the Pulse rifle dealing 2d10+40 pen 14, and the Bolter dealing 2d10+22 pen 4 and tearing. This is a huge imbalance.. On the boardgame, the Pulse Rifle has superior strength and range, but the same penetration. The Bolter has has tearing instead, increasing the overall damage from the 2d10s, but only has pen 4.. Only enough to penetrate a flak armour. On the boardfield, both the weapons ignores 5+ armour saves, which will be excatly like a guardsman flak armour,.

The armory is for sure under development, but something like that has to be completed before gaming imo.. Balancing is something you can do as you see some rules being to strong ect.

My 2 cents

You don't have to make a flat damage increase. For example, our Autogun does 2D10+8 damage while the Lasgun does 1D10+17. Roughly the same damage but still vastly different damage model.

That isn't roughly the same.

a d10 will do 5.5 pts on average, so 2d10 will score about 11pts. So your Autogun will do from 10 to 28 pts, with an average of 19, while your Lasgun will do from 18 to 27 pts of damage, with an average of 23.

I youd MUCH rather have the Lasgun with it's HUGE bonus to minimum damage, and a whopping 4 better average. The autogun will score MAX damage only 1% of the time, but the Lasgun will do so 10% of the time.

If you're gonna mess with dice, know your statistics

Totally agree here. I made some rolls at home, already knowing that it would be inbalanced and my theory were correct.

And you should remember, the Lasgun would have Overcharge (3) in the Beta, making it far stronger most of the time, compared to an autogun that would need special ammo. to reach the lasgun's normal setting.

Actually, the maximum damage of the weapons equal to their tabletop Strength x 10 (+/- a few points). With energy weapons dealing more "fixed" damage and solid projectile weapons having more D10s in the damage roll (thus having a bigger chance for RF).

The damage output is the same as both weapons can dish out 28/27 points of damage at the "most optimal" level (so when you roll 2 0-s).

It is absolutely not the same.

One has a 1% chance of scoring 28, a 2% chance of scoring 27, a 3% chance of scoring 26, etc.

The other has a 10% chance of scoring 27, 10% chance of Scoring 26, 10% of scoring 25, and so forth.

The first has a Normal (bell-curve) distribution, clumped around 19.

The second has a linear distribution, all results occurring with same frequency, stretching from 18-27. (Note that this linear stretch STARTS at the AVERAGE value of the other. IE, half the results from the other will be less that the minimum value of the first)

The first will score AT LEAST 20 only 45% of the time, and AT LEAST only 25 10% of the times.

The second will score AT LEAST 20 a massive 80% of the time, and AT LEAST 25 a respectable 30% of the times.

More academically, the first has an average of 19, with a standard deviation of 4,while the second has an average of 22,5 with a standard deviation of 2,87

Study the results over at anydice.com for some quick numbers.

One has a 1% chance of scoring 28, a 2% chance of scoring 27, a 3% chance of scoring 26, etc.

The other has a 10% chance of scoring 27, 10% chance of Scoring 26, 10% of scoring 25, and so forth.

The first has a Normal (bell-curve) distribution, clumped around 19.

The second has a linear distribution, all results occurring with same frequency, stretching from 18-27. (Note that this linear stretch STARTS at the AVERAGE value of the other. IE, half the results from the other will be less that the minimum value of the first)

The first will score AT LEAST 20 only 45% of the time, and AT LEAST only 25 10% of the times.

The second will score AT LEAST 20 a massive 80% of the time, and AT LEAST 25 a respectable 30% of the times.

More academically, the first has an average of 19, with a standard deviation of 4,while the second has an average of 22,5 with a standard deviation of 2,87

This is the damage models of the weapons. But they can't outperform the other as their maximum damage is the same. Both weapons are stuck in the same 27> damage but the lasgun has a more reliable way to reach the optimal result (the maximum damage) because of its better damage model. It is like two cars with the same top speed but different acceleration.

They have the same top-value, but the similarity ends there. There is no way you can describe these models as "roughly the same".

It would be more fair to say that these models may produce similar results in extreme cases, but will most likely not be comparable.