PDA

View Full Version : Your ][ rules



Decius
28-07-2007, 04:15
Maybe it's just me, but I like rules. Making them and breaking them. Never have I had more fun doing this than with Inquisitor. I've got scores of text files filled with alternate rules and weapons for my games. Some I spend hours working on, some I made up on the fly when I forgot the rules I spend hours working on.

My point is: what are some of the custom rules you folks use in your games of Inquisitor? Any custom weapons? I can't remember all of mine right now, but I'll try to get the ball rolling.

I for one have the action rolls succeed on 3+ rather than 4+. Makes my players more creative about their decisions. What else... um... oh, all of the rare and ultra-dangerous weapons (plasma, melta, so on) do at least an extra 20 damage (I never liked how a plasma pistol does the same damage as a bolt pistol). There's other stuff, such as my rules for hero fodder, but I can't be bothered to recall them right now.

So, what are your rules?

(I really hope this doesn't get sentenced to death by "Rules Development Forum".)

Sabbad
28-07-2007, 10:17
Usually, any new rules we create are made up as we play. The only rule I can think of that we always use is that when you hit an arm or a leg there is a 50% of you hitting each arm/leg. Ie. 1-3 hits right leg, 4-6 hits left leg.

In the case of placed shots, this becomes a two-thirds chance in the favour of whatever limb the attacker wants to target. Ie. 1-4 hits the injured right leg, 5-6 hits the armoured bionic leg.

Hun
28-07-2007, 11:57
We've changed the psychic power nullification rules so that some of the danger is placed on the character doing the nullification rather than the one doing the casting; who we thought had enough modifiers to their willpower as it is, in addition to the danger of a risky action.

For example: Psyker Tim casts Mesmerism and has to roll under or equal to a 60, he rolls a 35. Psyker Steve decides to nullfy the power the difficulty is 60-35=25, Steve's willpower is 70,so he must roll under or equal to 45 to nullify the power.

We're still testing this, but it definitely results in more successful casts. I am thinking of adding a +20% for having line of sight to the caster to restore a bit of balance, but we'll see.

Decius
30-07-2007, 02:10
I have so many that are really just personal preference, especially for close combat. Successive parries are not halved because I felt that hitting became to easy. However, a critical hit will halve the parry/dodge chance, as will circling around the opponent. This has made for more interesting sword play I found.

Another one I use for shooting is allowing consecutive semi-auto actions to be conducted as if they were one full-auto action (with at least 8 shots in total). For example, two Semi(4) attacks and one Semi(2) attack can combine to become one Full(10) attack at the cost of the three actions. This would represent some one shooting madly at a group of oncoming foes, focusing on pulling the trigger rather than accuracy.

However, perhaps the most valuable rules I have ever used in Inquisitor are my “goon” rules. Basically, rules for using henchmen, thugs, and other assorted nobodies in inquisitor. Every time a goon is hit they make a Toughness test with a penalty equal to the damage they took. If they pass they live, if they fail they're wounded/dead. Also, they don't roll for their actions, they just get 2 automatically, 3 if their fast. These goon rules have allowed us to play with up to 15 NPC's with little to no slowdown. It also makes adding an NPC on the fly quite easy as you don't need to bother remembering anything. Need two big thugs to guard that door? Give them pistols and 60's for all their stats and your good to go.

Oddly, most of the rules I make for Inquisitor are used to allow for more stuff to happen, be it goons, car chases, or gun fire.

Edit: Also, I do like the Hun's idea for nulification. Makes it more proactive rather than passive.

Kegluneq
30-07-2007, 10:24
I have so many that are really just personal preference, especially for close combat. Successive parries are not halved because I felt that hitting became to easy. However, a critical hit will halve the parry/dodge chance, as will circling around the opponent. This has made for more interesting sword play I found.
I like the sound of this, but couldn't it make close combat a little more protracted? And a character with very high WS would be pretty much untouchable.

However, perhaps the most valuable rules I have ever used in Inquisitor are my “goon” rules. Basically, rules for using henchmen, thugs, and other assorted nobodies in inquisitor. Every time a goon is hit they make a Toughness test with a penalty equal to the damage they took. If they pass they live, if they fail they're wounded/dead. Also, they don't roll for their actions, they just get 2 automatically, 3 if their fast. These goon rules have allowed us to play with up to 15 NPC's with little to no slowdown. It also makes adding an NPC on the fly quite easy as you don't need to bother remembering anything. Need two big thugs to guard that door? Give them pistols and 60's for all their stats and your good to go.
This does sound like a much better system than the alternative NPC rules on the Inquisitor main page, but couldn't this also make NPCs a little too weak? Even a test at 60 is easy to fail on the first try. Perhaps if it was only after a few consecutive hits, or based on Nerve/Leadership as well? NPCs could also recieve a bonus to a test based on how central they are in the mission as well.

One thing we've tried using in a recent game is NPC 'snipers' - represented by empty bases placed on top of towers or buildings (or other inaccessible location), they get a single shooting action per turn, but don't need to have fully worked out stats to play. A character can choose to shoot at a sniper, but will only hit at a small percentage of their ballistic skill - if they hit, it's assumed to be fatal, but even a miss can cause the sniper to fail a nerve test and be stunned for a turn. In an ambush scenario, sniper locations can be used as an entry point for more worked out NPCs as well. It seemed to work pretty well, and is a good way to introduce a large number of NPCs without having to have a physical representation of them on the table also.

precinctomega
30-07-2007, 11:49
Well, I wrote the NPC rules in the Architecture of Hate. I'm rather fond of them.

I'm also trialling a rule I discussed with Charax - changing risky Actions so that, rather than an Action just being "risky" or not, you define the level of risk inherent in the Action between 2 (not very risky at all) and 9 (really very risky indeed). Then, before performing the action, you roll a D10 and have to roll over the Action's risk value. So a character attempting to sprint 20 yards over difficult terrain (risk value 4) rolls a D10 for the first 10 yards and then, as long as he rolls a 5+ he then rolls for the second 10 yards.

If a character fails the risky Action roll, his turn ends immediately.

I find that this encourages players to take more risks. The GM defines the level of risk immediately before they roll for it (not when they nominate the Action). This means that whilst players can usually have a rough guess at how risky something's going to be (just like their characters), they won't know for sure until they try it. And it lets the GM include things like hidden minefields (risky 8).

R.

inq.serge
30-07-2007, 12:12
Well, I've made rules for the incarcerator, different rules for tank movement and a lot of mini-rules for some few characters. I'm writing rules for flyers and for more vehicles now.

Kegluneq
30-07-2007, 14:43
Well, I wrote the NPC rules in the Architecture of Hate. I'm rather fond of them.
We did try a battle with those, but we may have been misinterpreting the way NPCs took damage - we simply couldn't drop any for good; they just got knocked back a lot. Characters who mostly did lower amounts of damage also had a very difficult time. They do simplify how they can be used a lot though.

Breaking down risky actions is a very good idea as well (throwing a grenade isn't that difficult). Sprinting is always best left restricted though - the less distance they can travel, the longer, and more interesting the scenario is.

precinctomega
30-07-2007, 15:32
throwing a grenade isn't that difficult
Totally agree. Grenades in my games only blow up in your hand on a 6. Other results are either "dud" (on a 1) or an additional amount of scatter (on a 2-5).

we simply couldn't drop any for good; they just got knocked back a lot.

That can happen if your players only ever take snap shots. Encourage them to aim more often and then they're more likely to get a placed shot (and, hence, will be more likely to hit the target in the chest or head).


Sprinting is always best left restricted though

What do you mean "restricted"? Another optional rule I often use is to limit the numer of consecutive Actions a character can sprint for. Usually equal to their Strength divided by 20 (plus 1 if I feel nice or it's a big board).

R.

Kegluneq
30-07-2007, 19:23
That can happen if your players only ever take snap shots. Encourage them to aim more often and then they're more likely to get a placed shot (and, hence, will be more likely to hit the target in the chest or head).Hmm, I suppose. Snap shots do have an appeal of their own though, especially when every seems to be doomed to single action turns... :cries:

What do you mean "restricted"?Well, when a character sprints 40 inches on the first turn away from a CQC enemy, or engages a remote sniper in combat, it lessens the fun of setting up missions somewhat (shooting immediately after a sprint action with no penalty is also rather odd). Of course, setting up obstacles like blind alleys and ladders helps reduce this as well.

Lord Inquisitor
31-07-2007, 01:52
Personally, I link the Risky Action rule to the actual action test. Since a very low score tends to result in an extra-special action (critical, placed shot, etc), it makes sense that a very high roll tends to result in a disaster. I play that a roll of 96%+ results in something untoward happening (dropping the weapon in combat, weapon jam, hitting friendly models in the line of fire, etc), and with Risky Actions they go wrong on a 91%+

That said, these are a list of my house rules (http://www.geocities.com/lordinquisitor/house.htm). It's pretty old, but it covers the majority of the major house rules I use.

precinctomega
31-07-2007, 09:58
The problem with that course of action, LI, is that you get character with very high stats who only fail on a roll of 96+. Thus, every time they fail, they also blow up (or whatever).

I also like the rules that Charax came up with (I just tweaked them very slightly), because they offer the GM the flexibility to determine what's only slightly risky and what's very risky indeed.

R.

Lord Inquisitor
31-07-2007, 20:29
Actually, if you click on that link, it has the full rule I use, which does take that into account. If you would actually only fail on a 96% anyway, actions only go risky on a natural 100. Anyone that insanely proficient just isn't going to screw up something basic like throwing a grenade.

While I'd like Charax's rule in preference to the blatantly broken Risky Action rules that exist now, I dislike several aspects of it. a) It introduces another roll, and b) it is rather too arbitrary, some players will inevitably be unhappy with this. A set of guidelines would help (i.e. grenade = 4, etc), but since critical hits and placed shots are very precisely defined, I think Risky Actions should also be.

I really think it needs to be tied to the action roll. The way the system works, a low score (10% of required roll) represents a "critical hit". It would have a pleasing symmetry to make a very high score represent a "fumble" (in much the same way as Necromunda or 2nd ed 40K in fact).

This can be taken a little further and simplified (let's forget about any mention of 91%+ for the moment).
Normal actions - simply auto-fail on a 96%+
Risky actions - go "risky" on a 96%+

Then you can make shooting and attacking in close combat risky actions. A risky could then represent a fumble in combat (the character drops the weapon he was attacking with), or a jam or friendly-fire incident when shooting.

That way, if you are throwing a grenade, only on a roll of 96%+ would you actually fumble it (which would correspond exactly to a fumble in combat) and the risks of dropping the grenade as per the table do not seem out of line.

Charax
31-07-2007, 21:05
Just FYI, my version of the rule would have involved various pre-defined difficulty values for common actions, so the players would be somewhat forewarned about the danger of what they're doing. I don't especially like the idea of the GM going "ok, you're performing that action..HAHA! It's difficulty 9!" - so for certain actions the difficulty would be known, for others they could ask the GM roughly how dangerous it would be, and others (as always) GMs could spring the riskyness on them or change it without notice.

As for weapons...yes, you could say I've had a hand in making some custom weapons for Inquisitor...

inq.serge
31-07-2007, 22:19
How does your cooperation with the other guy about bionics go? Will we see different bionic rules?

Charax
31-07-2007, 22:24
I'm not cooperating with anyone on the bionics rules, and work on that's kind of stalled.

precinctomega
01-08-2007, 10:26
I dislike several aspects of it. a) It introduces another roll, and b) it is rather too arbitrary, some players will inevitably be unhappy with this. A set of guidelines would help (i.e. grenade = 4, etc), but since critical hits and placed shots are very precisely defined, I think Risky Actions should also be.

As Charax has already mentioned, naturally there are guidelines for certain common risky Actions. As he suggested, throwing a grenade is Risk 4 (so you have to roll a 5+ to be successful) - although this takes into account the reduced likelihood of it going off in ones hand, as well. Firing a plasma gun is Risk 3 (I've also reduced the chances of a plasma weapon blowing up somewhat). Most other common risks are either Risk 3 or Risk 4.

However, GMs shouldn't assume that these values are set in stone in the same way as the chances of a placed shot or critical hit. Risk is, after all, risky. And there are many variables that a GM should take into account. Sprinting over difficult terrain may usually be Risk 5, but if it's raining then this could become Risk 6 or even 7. On an iceworld, it might be as risky as Risk 9.

As for introducing "another roll", well, yes it does and actually I resisted the idea for a long time for this very reason. But after a little playtesting, I concluded that the extra roll took very little time: pass/fail was immediately clear and required very little in the way of GM calculation, plus it introduced an element of suspense.

In addition, placing the risk in a D100 roll means that it's difficult to assess risk in Actions that don't require a D100 roll (like sprinting, jumping, swinging from a chandelier etc).

All I can say is that I've tried both methods on the tabletop and I found introducing a "risk roll" was clear, flexible and simple enough to be, IMO, a keeper. Try it out and you'll see. Or perhaps you'll find a flaw I hadn't considered.

R.

inq.serge
01-08-2007, 17:15
Will you make a "Fanatic" submission with those "Risky" rules?

Charax
01-08-2007, 17:18
I certainly won't, and I doubt PO will

precinctomega
01-08-2007, 19:42
No, we have other plans for them... [;)]

Seriously, though, whilst Fanatic are quite open about publishing alternatives to the peripheral rules (campaign rules, experience, weapons etc), they don't, as a rule, publish alternatives to core rules.

R.

MindSlave
02-08-2007, 14:06
I've got plenty around, mostly weapons and psychic powers. Tend to make them up as I go along and check with my opponent ubtil it seems fair! much more fun that way...

sagittar slaith
16-02-2008, 10:26
i have written more advanced combat rules, such as choking your foe, disarming them and throwing them. if you google pangolin saloon you get a good =][= site. i urge all who have written new rules to post them on this thread!

edit.
hello mindlave. next time my techpriest will crush you!

Ynek
25-02-2008, 18:32
I read through this discussion, and learned a lot!

There are some really good ideas in here, and I promise you – I will be stealing most of them…



But in the spirit of reciprocation, here are the “amendments” my gaming circle have added to our games of inquisitor.

Perhaps I should explain, first of all, that most of these rules are aimed at speeding up the pace of the game rather than allowing it to become bogged down by numerous unnecessary dice rolls.



Risky action-

When performing a risky action, roll a D6. On a result of a 1, the character screws it up. Perhaps some other players would rather use a D10.



NPCs-

Our rules for NPCs vary depending on the number of NPCs in the game.

If there is only a single NPC, such as an informant or another inquisitor, we usually just let the GM use him as if he were a PC under the control of the GM. So this means that he will have a full statline, character sheet etc.



In some of our games, we might include numerous NPCs, (such as a squad of arbites arriving to quell the fight going on between the two PCs, civilians walking around their daily business, and then finding themselves caught up in a firefight etc.)

In these situations, we say that the NPCs have a simplified statline, which helps to speed up the game, and stops the players having to wait around whilst the GM does his business.



NPC STATLINE

All NPCs will have an initiative of zero, so they take their actions after all other characters have taken theirs. Despite their speed of zero, NPCs will always make two actions. They do not need to roll for them.

All NPCs of the same “type” (such as Arbites officers) will have the same, simplified statline. Basically, all of their stats will be between one and six. But rather than rolling with a D100, they will roll on a D6. So, for example, an NPC character with a BS of 3 who fires a ranged weapon shooting requires 3 or less on a D6 to hit. Or a character with Nerve of 2 will have to roll a 2 or less on a D6 to pass a nerve test.



NPC SHOOTING

When an NPC shoots a weapon, the only modifier that is used is range. However, we use a simplified version of the range table, which is much faster to use. For every 12 yards the NPC is from its target, it deducts one from it’s BS. (For more accurate NPCs, you might want to extend this to 18 or 24 yards.)

EG – An NPC arbites officer shoots at a kroot mercenary, who is 24 inches away. The Arbites officer has a BS of 3. The arbites officer rolls a 2, and misses. (3-(24/12 = 2) = required roll to hit of a 1.)

To make this process go by quickly, the GM keeps a 12 inch ruler or 12 inch measuring stick in his pocket. When an NPC fires, the GM simply adds the number of ruler-lengths-to-target to the result of his dice roll.

The main advantage to this shooting system is that you don’t need to roll every shot that an NPC makes individually, as you would when rolling D100s. you can roll all of a character – or group of character’s shots at the same time.

NPCs cannot make placed shots.



NPC HAND TO HAND COMBAT

When an NPC is in close combat, it works very similarly to NPC shooting. Again, modifiers are discarded. An NPC must roll less than his weapon skill on a D6 when attacking or parrying. For each additional parry, his WS is halved. With NPCs, it is possible to be reduced to WS 0, and being unable to parry incoming attacks. (This saves time that would normally be used rolling for parries that there isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell they’ll pass.)

The only modifier used in close combat with an NPC is reach. For every point of difference in Reach, the NPC deducts 1 point from his WS.

NPCs do not have a Strength bonus. (It’s pretty ineffectual anyway with bog-standard NPCs. Maybe you might want to add one if your NPCs happen to be genestealers or something extra-gribbly.)



NPCS AND INJURY

An NPC has a fixed unconsciousness value (we normally use between 15 and 20, but you may wish to alter this), written on its character sheet. NPCs do not have any “locations” for injury, but have a very generalised version of injury. If an NPC takes damage, but is not taken out of action by it, roll a D6 on the table below.

1 – Stunned for one turn.

2 – WS + BS halved

3 – Nv halved

4 – Movement speed halved.

5 – Bleeding.

6 – Dead.

To help the GM to remember which NPCs are suffering what effects, lay a dice on the NPC’s base, with the number relating to the NPC’s injury face-up. The exception of this, of course, is the “dead” category, in which the “dead” NPC is simply removed from play.

Because this system uses a single D6 per hit, this allows all the NPC’s injuries to be rolled at the same time. (For example, if an NPC takes three semi-auto shots from a Player character, you can roll for location and injury simultaneously, as described above, with three D6es rolled together. However, using the full rules, each one of those hits would require a D100 roll for location, and then for any effects of their injuries (such as strength tests, system shock tests etc.)

An NPC can only suffer from one “ailment” at a time. If the NPC takes any subsequent injuries, the “injury effects” of that hit are waived. (This saves the GM from having to “trip over” several things at once. When an NPC with only 15-injury-points gets wounded, he’s probably going to die the next time he’s hit, anyway.)

NPCs cannot heal themselves during the recovery phase. (Saves another dice roll.)

NPCs are not affected by system shock. (let’s face it… They don’t live long after being shot anyway, and a system shock roll is just one more unnecessary dice roll.)



NPCS AND EQUIPMENT

To simplify things, we usually kit out all our NPCs on the board with the same weapons.

But, we simplify it further than that. All weapons will have a flat-rate damage roll, of a single dice. (Usually a D10 for us). This means that several damage rolls can be made at once, and speeds up the game a little. (We usually roll damage before rolling for location.)

NPC close combat weapons will all have the same Reach value. (we usually use Reach 2.)

All NPCs on the table should have a singular armour value. (We usually use 2 or 3.)



ONE FINAL THOUGHT

The main reason why I suggest making all your NPCs the same, is that it means that the GM only has to worry about a singular character sheet. He doesn’t need to waste time going “Okay, which model is that? NPC 132? Okay, let me just find his character sheet.” *rummages through several papers*

Sometimes, you may wish to have one or two types of NPCs in a game (for example, arbites officers and civilians seems to be one of our more popular choices…) but it’s advised that you don’t go overboard. One or two is probably enough to make the game interesting without bogging it down.



Our favourite mission using NPCs is the “chaos insurgency mission.”, which was inspired by Dan Abnett’s book - “Malleus” (second book of the fantastic Eisenhorn trilogy)

In the book, there is a military parade (Dan Abnett calls it a “Triumph”. It included battle-titans, entire regiments of guard and whole companies of space marines) which is attacked by chaos. Hundreds of thousands are killed in the violent crossfire...



Our mission, of course, is on a much smaller scale. It basically follows an Inquisitor (or other “good guy”) who is trying to stop the chaos (or other “bad guy”) character from killing all the civilians. The civilians have no equipment, and will basically run around in a panic for most of the game. (We did have a rather interesting and fun game where a rogue psyker took control of several civilians using the power: “puppet master”… Basically forcing the inquisitor to kill those he had been sent to protect.)

For every civlian saved, the inquisitor and his warband will earn a predetermined number of experience points (this will be dependant on how many civilians are on the board). For every civilian killed, the chaos player’s warband will gain a certain number of experience points.



Another mission we enjoy to play from time to time, using these NPC rules is the “Bughunt”, in which, one or more player’s warbands are sweeping the area for Genestealers. We even added some blip markers, left over from our old “space hulk” game. Some of them turned out to be little more than rats (from the skaven range), but others turned out to be something much gribblier. This mission was included in one of our campaign weekends as a “warm up game” to gain some Experience points and get into the right frame of mind for playing Inquisitor.

inq.serge
27-02-2008, 18:59
I use the RINPC (Random Idiot Non Player Character) rule.

All RINPCs that are more then X yards from PCs are controlled by the GM, he chooses how many actions they get, and what they roll. If affected by something caused by a PC, do as normal, if affecting something other then a RINPC/Obstacle in some way, do as normal. Otherwise the GM decides when and what and how they do/roll. The GM doesn't need to bother to measure how far they moved. He moves them as he wants.


@Ynek: Inquisitor sent to protect civilians? An Inq is not sent, they just chose to do it, and no inquisitor would doubt in killing civilians who are controlled by "Puppet Master". If they would, they wouldn't become Inquisitors in the the first place.

precinctomega
27-02-2008, 19:27
Not entirely true, Serge. Some inquisitors voluntarily place themselves subordinate to more experienced inquisitors for a period. In these circumstances, an inquisitor could be given a mission by his superior.

R.

Ynek
27-02-2008, 22:22
Truth be told, it wasn't really an "Inquisitor."
It was an interrogator... We deemed that an "inquisitor" and his cronies would be too powerful to go up against what was basically just a bunch of cultists.
So Inquisitor Evad got demoted for that game. :D

I agree with you that many inquisitors probably wouldn't give a damn how many innocent people they killed, so long as they kill the heretics. I can just imagine an inquisitor sitting in his chair at dinner and purring softly: "Those civilians died in the service of the Emperor, and the Emperor will be grateful for their sacrifice. Now be quiet. My soup's getting cold."

But we assumed that an interrogator, unlike a seasoned Inquisitor would still be quite idealistic in his views. He won't yet understand the whole "shades of grey" thing, or the true meaning of sacrifice. Perhaps that's the entire reason why his master sent him on this mission... To teach him that lesson? Really, we didn't bog ourselves down with the background... We just thought that it would be a fun mission to play, and so we played it.

And it was great.