Errata/Faq thread

Soviet Conscript

Re: Errata/Faq thread

Postby Soviet Conscript » Wed Nov 07, 2018 5:22 am

gribble wrote:Still, I don't see many squad leaders in modern military charging forward with swords...

And actually, going by the official WH40K lore (fluff) Imperial Guard's squad leaders aren't doing that most often either - they are going with the same lasguns as soldiers under their charge.
However, I should make one thing clear - we have lore (fluff) and we have the actual game mechanics (crunch). These are not the same thing, actually.
And going per Ulisses Spiele's staff official response, the weapons ranges were made as they were for gameplay reasons only. This was actually made to provide for specific, more dynamic, actually, gameplay. For most players, you know, wouldn't be much fond of ducking in some cover and exchanging lasgun fire with some Chaos-corrupted heretics dug up in a similar cover about 300-400 meters downrange and doing that for you know, an hour, or two, or maybe more. By the WH40K lore Imperial Guard does actually often do exactly that....but I don't think that would be very exciting for the players ;).
Also, to be frank, Ulisses Spiele are not the first to do that. In most 3D-action videogames a player won't actually be able to take out a bad guy 200 meters downrange with an AK47 or 500 meters downrange with a sniper rifle. For example, in Far Cry 4 game the maximum firing range for .50 BMG caliber sniper rifle was 150 meters. For the sniper rifle that is actually quite able (in real life) to take out a bad guy at a range of 1500 meters.

Soviet Conscript

Re: Errata/Faq thread

Postby Soviet Conscript » Wed Nov 07, 2018 5:27 am

gribble wrote: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.

Hmm... for example, it is portrayed as such in most BL's novels, centering on Imperial Guard characters.

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

Re: Errata/Faq thread

Postby gribble » Wed Nov 07, 2018 5:39 am

Aenno wrote:
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?

Yes? I never once said there was anything wrong with that. As I also noted, it was intended as a warmup and "get to know the rules" encounter for the players, and I expected the cultists to die in droves. Admittedly, I was a little shocked at how easily they accomplished it, but nonetheless, I wasn't complaining about the outcome at all. :)

My point was simply that the rules, as they are written, work exactly as I expect them to. Doubling weapon ranges, extrapolated from the experience I have had with the rules (not just this combat, also the quickstart with less capable and well armed inquisition agents vs poxwalkers), would break the game for melee oriented characters. As noted, the melee oriented characters had little or nothing to do in the combat with the rules as they are. Doubling weapon ranges would have made them even less effectual and more frustrated.
Last edited by gribble on Wed Nov 07, 2018 5:55 am, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Errata/Faq thread

Postby gribble » Wed Nov 07, 2018 5:46 am

Soviet Conscript wrote:However, I should make one thing clear - we have lore (fluff) and we have the actual game mechanics (crunch). These are not the same thing, actually.
And going per Ulisses Spiele's staff official response, the weapons ranges were made as they were for gameplay reasons only.

Well, yes. This is kind of exactly my point.
The game is the way it is to make it balanced and fun to play, and to make it feel like the majority of the lore.
By doubling weapon ranges, you're messing around with that balance, making it less fun to play, and taking it further away from the majority of the lore in order to more closely match minutae that really isn't that relevant to the overall theme and gameplay.
Go wild. I'm definitely not going to make a change like that in my games, and based on my play experience I wouldn't recommend anyone else do it either (at least not until you've got a couple of games under your belt and understand the dynamics of the game in play).
Weapon ranges is definitely not something that should be errated by the devs, and I would be very surprised if they did so. So that will be my last word in it - I think we've already derailed this thread enough.

Soviet Conscript wrote:For most players, you know, wouldn't be much fond of ducking in some cover and exchanging lasgun fire with some Chaos-corrupted heretics dug up in a similar cover about 300-400 meters downrange and doing that for you know, an hour, or two, or maybe more. By the WH40K lore Imperial Guard does actually often do exactly that....but I don't think that would be very exciting for the players

If this is the feel you're going for - that melee is not a valid choice - then doubling weapon ranges might have that effect. However, as you yourself noted, unless your players have bought into this style of campaign, don't expect the to enjoy it (and also expect that other rules weirdness will likely crop up).

Thendoctor
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2018 7:18 am

Re: Errata/Faq thread

Postby Thendoctor » Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:01 am

I don't see why people are up in arms about ranges anyways.

Most combats don't take place over extreme range regardless, unless you have a PC playing a sniper then short ranges are to combat the "I hit them from a literal mile away"...because that's not fun in general combat, only in assassination situations.

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

Re: Errata/Faq thread

Postby schnickers » Wed Nov 07, 2018 10:39 am

Please move the range discussion into a different Thread. This is a design question not a rules question.

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

Re: Errata/Faq thread

Postby Radwraith » Wed Nov 07, 2018 3:05 pm

schnickers wrote:Please move the range discussion into a different Thread. This is a design question not a rules question.


Uhm..no. This is the Errata Faq thread. Game design and Rules are inextricably linked. This being the Errata/Faq thread (Which suggests potential changes to said rules.) I believe we are in the correct place. You are free to participate or not as you choose but please don't seek to suppress others' participation.

Thanks 8-)

jack_px
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 8:49 pm

Re: Errata/Faq thread

Postby jack_px » Wed Nov 07, 2018 6:35 pm

Radwraith wrote:
schnickers wrote:Please move the range discussion into a different Thread. This is a design question not a rules question.


Uhm..no. This is the Errata Faq thread. Game design and Rules are inextricably linked. This being the Errata/Faq thread (Which suggests potential changes to said rules.) I believe we are in the correct place. You are free to participate or not as you choose but please don't seek to suppress others' participation.

Thanks 8-)


This forum is for questions about the rules and mechanics of Warhammer 40,000 Roleplay: Wrath & Glory. Please note that this is only for the new line of products.

Posted by Eric, and this thread is clearly not one about questions but a discussion about the design like schnickers said.

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

Re: Errata/Faq thread

Postby schnickers » Thu Nov 08, 2018 12:55 am

Ok, sorry if I misjudged then, my apologies and please proceed. see my response below.
Last edited by schnickers on Thu Nov 08, 2018 1:21 am, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Errata/Faq thread

Postby schnickers » Thu Nov 08, 2018 1:21 am

Radwraith wrote:
schnickers wrote:Please move the range discussion into a different Thread. This is a design question not a rules question.


Uhm..no. This is the Errata Faq thread. Game design and Rules are inextricably linked. This being the Errata/Faq thread (Which suggests potential changes to said rules.) I believe we are in the correct place. You are free to participate or not as you choose but please don't seek to suppress others' participation.

Thanks 8-)


Ok, sorry if I misjudged then, my apologies and please proceed.

Sorry, let me reword this:

To those discussing in length about the implemented range rule. Please consider moving this to a different thread within rules question Subforum. There it can (in my opinion) discussed better and will also increase readability of this Errata/Faq thread. Please do not consider this a suppression of participation, I want all players to participate. Sinking all (controversial?) topics into this single thread reduces participation (in my opinion).

Consider how this thread would look if reloads, assault weapons and psychic powers would be also discussed within this tread.


Return to “Rules Questions (W&G)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests