Errata/Faq thread

gribble
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2018 8:55 pm

Re: Errata/Faq thread

Postby gribble » Tue Nov 06, 2018 10:05 am

Soviet Conscript wrote:For the humble Imperial Guard infantry troops - they are not actually meant to go into melee combat under normal battlefield condition. And if they found themselves into such - usually something go very wrong and they are about to get slaughtered to a man. That's how it is said as per Codex: Astra Militarum, 8-th edition.

Every standard IG infantry squad has bayonets and at least one sergeant armed with a pistol and chainsword (if not better cc weapons), so the idea they're not meant to get into melee combat is simply not true. It may not be their preferred style, but it is definitely expected, otherwise they would be armed like modern infantry (i.e. without bayonets and swords).
That's not counting the specialist units and characters, and let's face it, PCs aren't intended to be (and generally won't be interested in playing) bog standard IG line infantry - they'll be more akin to Schafer's last chancers. At least some of them will want to play close combat specialists, and this change will deny them this option. I'm not saying you can't do it - it's your game after all - I'm just pointing out the consequences, as much for anyone else reading as for your benefit. You already seem to have made up your mind.

Soviet Conscript wrote:Per example, an Ork boy per NPCs section of W&G rulebook has a total resilience of 10. A lasgun, laspistol and autogun have 7+1ED damage with AP0. Surely, some ork boyz would be gunned down, but, suprise, ork boyz usually come in great mobs, and often actually are way more numerous than Imperial guardsman opposing them.
A bolter with 10+1ED AP 0 Brutal is more likely to cut greenskins to ribbons, but hey, that gun shoots 20mm mass-reactive armour piercing shells that explode once pierced their targets (that means inside the target). Bolters are meant to cut orks to ribbons - and the "we are outnumbered" are WAY more prominent in such cases.

Have you actually played the game yet? Because if you're planning on putting standard IG infantry armed only with lasguns up against opponents with resilience 10... then I can save your players 6 rounds of pain. They will almost certainly all die without meaningfully harming the orks. You don't need to double the range on their guns, because that will save them 3 rounds of doing nothing in combat before they all die.

As for the boltguns, if you give the PCs armed with them 4-6 rounds to shoot at orks, you better be putting them up against at least 100, probably more. Otherwise there still won't be any melee. In last weeks game, 6 marines totally destroyed 60 cultists (4 mobs of 15) within 2 rounds - and that was with two of them doing nothing but moving closer to the mobs (because they were melee specialists). I.e. the melee specialists did absolutely nothing in that combat, while 4 ranged attackers managed to kill 60 opponents in 2 actions each. And that was with the ranges as per the rules... without breaking a sweat.

If they had 6 rounds of shooting they would have easily killed over 150 cultists between the 4 of them before the melee attackers got to do anything. Now admittedly, orks at resilience 10 would be a different proposition but 10+1ED (Brutal) averages 11 damage so would still take out an ork with a hit. So I'd expect that with double weapon ranges, 100 orks or so would still be a massacre with very little if any melee combat. If that's what you're wanting in your game, then doubling weapon ranges should achieve it. I know it's certainly not what I want in my game.

schnickers
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2018 5:35 am

Re: Errata/Faq thread

Postby schnickers » Tue Nov 06, 2018 3:07 pm

In last weeks game, 6 marines totally destroyed 60 cultists (4 mobs of 15) within 2 rounds


So 4 Range Marines killed 4 mobs (á 15 troops) in 2 rounds.
So 2 Range Marines killed 2 mobs (á 15 troops) in 2 rounds.
So 1 Range Marine killed 1 Mobs (á 15 troops) in 2 Rounds.

I'm intrigued, can you elaborate on their tier, pools and gear? Out of nowhere I would assume Tier 3, Pool 12, Bolter, Rank 1.

Due to the mob rule, shifts and called shots are not necessary (we just hit another trooper with 2 spare icons above the DN). Lets further assume we do not need shifts for damage. Do have Cultists Defense 3? Lets take this.

An aimed attack within close range (20m) would result in a pool of 12 +1 (aim) +1 (close) +2 (rapid fire) = 16 dice

I just assume that halve the dice rolled show an icon, thus 8 icons +1 for angle of death => 9 icons. Those are 6 spare icons, resulting in 4 dead cultists.

So quite possible.

Ok assessment finished, I'm out.

schnickers
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2018 5:35 am

Re: Errata/Faq thread

Postby schnickers » Tue Nov 06, 2018 4:18 pm

When attacking 2 mobs with a multi-attack (one attack against each mob) with Defense 3 and I roll 9 icons in total, what are my options?

Assumption:

* DN is 5 to hit each target, thus hitting one trooper in each mob (2 troopers total)
* The mob rule allow me to hit an additional target for each 2 icons rolled, so do I hit:

(a) one additional trooper overall (thus 3 troopers total)

or

(b) one additional trooper PER TARGET => 2 additional troopers (thus 4 troopers total)

I assume (b)

Ilias Bethomael
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2018 6:30 am

Re: Errata/Faq thread

Postby Ilias Bethomael » Tue Nov 06, 2018 5:32 pm

schnickers wrote:When attacking 2 mobs with a multi-attack (one attack against each mob) with Defense 3 and I roll 9 icons in total, what are my options?

Assumption:

* DN is 5 to hit each target, thus hitting one trooper in each mob (2 troopers total)
* The mob rule allow me to hit an additional target for each 2 icons rolled, so do I hit:

(a) one additional trooper overall (thus 3 troopers total)

or

(b) one additional trooper PER TARGET => 2 additional troopers (thus 4 troopers total)

I assume (b)


good question :)

well, for simplicities sake i would say you cannot use multi-attack on two mobs, because attacking a mob and hitting more than one member of the mob already is some sort of multi-attack as per page 209 (there is a box "attacking mobs", which I find utterly confusing if you compare it to what is written on page 215 about attacking mobs)... as per RAW you still could, of course...
Courage and Honour!

Radwraith
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 1:03 pm

Re: Errata/Faq thread

Postby Radwraith » Tue Nov 06, 2018 9:31 pm

Soviet Conscript wrote:
gribble wrote:will result in pretty much zero effective melee combat, and that to me isn't true to the lore of 40k

And than I'll point out again - under what circumstances and with what parties present. For the humble Imperial Guard infantry troops - they are not actually meant to go into melee combat under normal battlefield condition. And if they found themselves into such - usually something go very wrong and they are about to get slaughtered to a man. That's how it is said as per Codex: Astra Militarum, 8-th edition.
However, that's with the normal battlefield conditions. But than we go into city fighting and find out that "getting close and personal" with the enemy becomes much more likely.
There are also melee-oriented specialists that are delibaretely equipped with armour strong enough to resist regular small-arms fire and with means to actually traverse the battlefield very quickly. One moment these Space marine assault squad/Chaos raptors/Ork storm boyz are couple of hundred meters down range - the next they are descending right onto your trenches with their weapons ready for combat. Not to mention assault terminators just teleporting right to your trenches and starting their gruesome "handiwork"....
PS: And yes - you mentioned Sly Marbo. Well - another possibility for melee combat specialists - using covert tactics and stealth, working behind enemy lines to sabotage their war effort.
They will be cut to ribbons before they *ever* reach melee, unless the opponents are all but immune to the PCs weapons (in which case, you'll have 4-6 rounds of pointless combat, instead of 2-3, before the PCs die).

Per example, an Ork boy per NPCs section of W&G rulebook has a total resilience of 10. A lasgun, laspistol and autogun have 7+1ED damage with AP0. Surely, some ork boyz would be gunned down, but, suprise, ork boyz usually come in great mobs, and often actually are way more numerous than Imperial guardsman opposing them.
A bolter with 10+1ED AP 0 Brutal is more likely to cut greenskins to ribbons, but hey, that gun shoots 20mm mass-reactive armour piercing shells that explode once pierced their targets (that means inside the target). Bolters are meant to cut orks to ribbons - and the "we are outnumbered" are WAY more prominent in such cases.

This.

As discussed earlier, certainly not all or even most combats will take place at battlefield ranges. But some might! I'm not comfortable with artificially shortening the combat ranges to make it easier for Melee characters. That renders characters designed for ranged combat much weaker than they should be! Also, as mentioned earlier, most 40k close combat types often have numerous methods to rapidly close range with their enemies. I might also add that any battlefield encounter I ran would likely involve weapons MUCH more powerful than the small arms carried by individual soldiers! Think artillery and tanks and such!

Btw: modern combat infantry still carry bayonets or combat knives! Just sayin...

Soviet Conscript

Re: Errata/Faq thread

Postby Soviet Conscript » Wed Nov 07, 2018 3:47 am

gribble wrote:Every standard IG infantry squad has bayonets and at least one sergeant armed with a pistol and chainsword (if not better cc weapons), so the idea they're not meant to get into melee combat is simply not true. It may not be their preferred style, but it is definitely expected, otherwise they would be armed like modern infantry (i.e. without bayonets and swords).

Well, actually fluff(lore)-wise most Imperial Guards's sergeants and officers (the ones expected to actually fight in the field) are arming themselves with the same lasguns as rank-and-file soldiers do.
As considering the bayonets - these are detachable knife-bayonets, mostly used as a tool and only in unfavorable circumstances - as a weapon of last resort. Modern armies infantry actually uses these too (for example - early 2000s-era US Army soldiers armed with M16A2 assault rifles with bayonets attached
6 marines totally destroyed 60 cultists (4 mobs of 15)

And than again, according to the lore this is what should have actually happened.
However, the issue migh also be that cultists, according to your own words, were advancing in 4 groups of only 15 members each instead of forming one big crowd and using sheer weight of numbers to get through the field of fire.
So I'd expect that with double weapon ranges, 100 orks or so would still be a massacre with very little if any melee combat. If that's what you're wanting in your game, then doubling weapon ranges should achieve it. I know it's certainly not what I want in my game.

Hmm... and how did you come to this conclusion,actually? Since it would be about 1 dead ork boy per 1 Space Marine each round, it would take 10 full rounds to actually decimate the ork horde using the 10-men strong tactical squad with bolters. And that's counting that attack successfully find it's home, that... would certainly be not the case.

gribble
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2018 8:55 pm

Re: Errata/Faq thread

Postby gribble » Wed Nov 07, 2018 4:34 am

schnickers wrote:
I'm intrigued, can you elaborate on their tier, pools and gear? Out of nowhere I would assume Tier 3, Pool 12, Bolter, Rank 1.

So quite possible.

Ok assessment finished, I'm out.

Ha ha ha, yes, basically, though your numbers are actually a little low. It's a Deathwatch game, so I started them at tier 4 (rank 1). I'm not sure what you mean by "Pool", but if you mean attack/dice pool size, then yes, most of the pools were in the 12-16 dice range.

It was surprisingly easy for them... I mean, I intended it to be a warm up to get used to the rules, but I didn't expect them to finish them off so quickly without taking any damage at all.

gribble
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2018 8:55 pm

Re: Errata/Faq thread

Postby gribble » Wed Nov 07, 2018 4:42 am

Radwraith wrote:I'm not comfortable with artificially shortening the combat ranges to make it easier for Melee characters. That renders characters designed for ranged combat much weaker than they should be!

Actually, it doesn't. With the rules as they stand, ranged and melee characters are balanced. By doubling the ranges, you're shifting that balance away from melee oriented characters and towards ranged characters. If that is what you want in your games, then go ahead, just pointing out that it messes with the balance of the rules (on which all the supplements will be based).

BTW: It sounds like no one who is arguing for doubling the ranges has actually played the game yet. I suggest (like I would with any game), that you get at least a couple of sessions under your belt to properly understand the game as it is, before you start to houserule things like weapon ranges.

Radwraith wrote:Btw: modern combat infantry still carry bayonets or combat knives! Just sayin...

I stand (partially corrected). Still, I don't see many squad leaders in modern military charging forward with swords...

gribble
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2018 8:55 pm

Re: Errata/Faq thread

Postby gribble » Wed Nov 07, 2018 5:08 am

Soviet Conscript wrote:Well, actually fluff(lore)-wise most Imperial Guards's sergeants and officers (the ones expected to actually fight in the field) are arming themselves with the same lasguns as rank-and-file soldiers do.

I have never seen this portrayed in the lore. It's certainly possible there are some cases, but in every depiction I've seen, the squad leader is invariably armed with some combination of CC weapons.

Soviet Conscript wrote:
6 marines totally destroyed 60 cultists (4 mobs of 15)

And than again, according to the lore this is what should have actually happened.

Yes? I never said otherwise... just that doubling the weapon ranges was unnecessary. So you concede that you don't need to double weapon ranges to get an accurate depiction of the lore?
The melee oriented characters were already frustrated with the rules as written - it would have been much worse for them (and very different from the lore) had the ranged oriented characters had even longer to shoot before the melee characters got to engage.

Soviet Conscript wrote:However, the issue migh also be that cultists, according to your own words, were advancing in 4 groups of only 15 members each instead of forming one big crowd and using sheer weight of numbers to get through the field of fire.

Again, have you played the game yet? Because this is the ideal formation for the cultists. It maximised their number of attacks / dice pools (due to tier limit of 7 bonus dice), while minimising the number of casualties they would take from a particularly good attack. Lumping them all into a mob of 60 would have been much worse for them - they would have been less effectual and would have just died even sooner.

Soviet Conscript wrote:
So I'd expect that with double weapon ranges, 100 orks or so would still be a massacre with very little if any melee combat. If that's what you're wanting in your game, then doubling weapon ranges should achieve it. I know it's certainly not what I want in my game.

Hmm... and how did you come to this conclusion,actually?

I didn't calculate it out, I extrapolated based on what I saw in actual play. But if you want the numbers:
Let's assume a dice pool of 14 dice (about the average I saw, when aiming and other factors are included), shooting a mob of orks. That will easily hit an ork, with enough exalted icons left over to hit an additional 1-2 orks, for a total of 2-3 hit. We've already established that on average, a boltgun will deal one wound to an ork, enough to take him out. So with 4 people attacking, that is 10 orks dead each round. Multiply that by 6 rounds, and that is 60 dead orks. On average, and not including anything like wrath points, glory points, salvo fire, grenades or other weapons, etc. Just 4 marines firing standard boltguns. Plus, assume they start at maximum base range, they'll actually be getting rapid fire bonuses for half of those rounds, so it could easily be more than 60 killed. Given the numbers I saw in actual play, I'd expect the number of dead orks to be much greater than 60... so I stand by needing more than 100 to have a melee presence that isn't anything beyond "mopping up the stragglers".

Or are you assuming individual orks? They're not really intended for that role in any tier, but even then with multi-attack actions I'd assume that a single marine could probably take out 1-2 orks a round, which over 6 rounds still results in around 40 orks killed (and good luck running that many individual opponents as a GM).

User avatar
Aenno
Posts: 317
Joined: Thu May 03, 2018 3:59 am
Location: Moscow, Russia

Re: Errata/Faq thread

Postby Aenno » Wed Nov 07, 2018 5:17 am

gribble wrote:Ha ha ha, yes, basically, though your numbers are actually a little low. It's a Deathwatch game, so I started them at tier 4 (rank 1). I'm not sure what you mean by "Pool", but if you mean attack/dice pool size, then yes, most of the pools were in the 12-16 dice range.

Ahm... So you attacked an elite squad of the best infantry ever been in Humanity disposal (because that's what's Tier 4 is - it's even higher then "common" SMs are), with exceptional equipment and great experience, by lowly cultists who can't shoot or fight straight, and... suddenly... cultists died like paper?
I argue fiercely, but I never believed disagreement should be capital offence.

I'm editing my posts often. English isn't my native language, and I'm doing a lot of mistakes; that, with thoughtful rereading, I often found and want to edit.


Return to “Rules Questions (W&G)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 42 guests