from france

waow night... can't you wright in a any post without an agressive stand? i agree that the system here don't work (well it is not the only problematic rule) . i just finish ravenor  3 and the death of lucius worna puzzle me. he survives a shot from a grenades but not lightning ( yes i know in this case it was special) so my question is ? whats saves him his armor or his touhgness.

i don't know who is right because for simplicity sake we just add and substract bonnus, but thybias as here pointed out a good question.

from france

oh i forgot this one gfto? what that mean? also what the expression take a bow mean? thanks

considering how the RAW is structured and integrated as it is, you have a tough task ahead of you if your are looking for a balanced outcome. with any such decision you will have to accomodate a series of new house rules. i DO see the point you are trying to make, however. i've done a rewrite of  a number of things and quite frankly, i cast the idea of game balance aside and looked towards what made sense to me. i am in no way beholden to FFG and their ruleset, nor are you.

the RAW as written eases gameplay and speeds things up. the approach i have taken is a 40K one to an extent. weapons have an inherent AP that automatically penetrates armour with an equal or lesser AP. the TB acts as a damage reduction from the damage rolled. to factor in the chance of a lucky hit that finds a chink, connective equipment, crap manufacturing, whatever. i use a rule similar to  Righteous Fury. if while rolling to hit the Acolyte lands a 10 on any dice your shot or blow has penetrated the armour. done this way took some rejigging of weapon AP values and Armour values. but it has worked out well enough throughout gameplay.

as far as the particular issues that you have with the TB itself, not sure about that one. the Characteristics Benchmark chart in the DHRC has always seemed to me to be a wonky. i've always questioned why someone with Feeble, Poor, or Inferior stat classifications should recieve a bonus...a small child recieving a bonus? anyway i digress. you can always try limiting the maximum human threshold to say a score of 40 or 50. this keeps them well within the realm of human frailty and fearful enough of the big bads out there.

the 8 spider said:

Well I can tell you that it is an acronym for Get The Feck Out.

the liegekiller said:

Interesting idea! Is the fallowing close to what you did?

Give each weapon an AP value equal to it's current PEN value + Average Damage. Adjust all armour AP's up to exceed the adjusted weapon's AP that it is supposed to be able to stop while keeping it under the AP of weapons it can't stop. In order for the weapon to do any damage at all, it's new adjusted PEN must equil or exceed the Armours new adjusted AP, unless either attack dice come up 0.

If so, that's quite intriguing and cuts down on the amount of math done in combat...

Graver said:

This makes certain weapons obsolete.

Why would anyone bother to carry a weapon if you knew you couldn't do any damage to certain enemies?

Why wouldn't you just load up on extra ammo for a bigger gun instead?

Are you adding an additional mechanic for Primitive and Unarmed combat?

Why not go the route of 40k TT and just have armour giving you a save against damage

ie if the armour saves you take no damage but if it doesnt you take whatever is rolled minus your toughness?

Graver

i was more abstract, basing my values on what I saw fit (i've been around 40K since the original Rogue Trader days) trying to keep in line with the spirit of the values in DHRC. your more mathematical approach can work also. it doesn't make a difference how you scale the values,ultimately its the principal that matters if you wish to utilize this within ur games.

basically yes, that is the idea. other expanded rules follow below if you are interested further.

ItsUncertainWho:

it doesn't make any weapon obsolete what it does is make it harder for them to be able to score wounds for those that fall under the Armour Value. one would carry a weapon because that is what Acolytes do. you make do with what you have. 

the ability to target Armour weakpoints via the Aim action seeking out helmet faceplates, knee/elbow joints, whatever, was enhanced to accomodate an additional AP commensurate to the bonus (half action +10 +1AP; full action +10 +2AP) in exchange for the additional bonus to hit. so for example a lasgun has an AP 3 and hits carapace armour AV 5  with an Aimed shot +20. this will reduce the AP for the location by 2 points. making it equal to the carapace value of 5. therefore causing damage.

another option that i have manipulated are the Burst attack options. Acolytes have 2 choices upon usage 1. to use as is if they have scored a10 on an attack roll, or 2. they can roll for all shots expended hoping to score a 10 on one of them. the control over shots expended gives the players more control and choice although slowing the game abit..it does ratchet up the tension.

pertaining to your questions about  Primitive and Unarmed combat. there needs be no mechanic.  no extra calculations nor doubling of numbers. if it can't hit. it can't hit. but like anything else it has a CHANCE to nonetheless. within my game i use much more expanded rules for unarmed combat than offered in the RAW. unarmed combat is not just a series of strikes but also joint manipulations and throws.

i play with a mature crowd of gamers we're all in our mid to late 30's (yes old fraggers), we all believe strongly in the investigation and the roleplay..but when combat shines we like some grit...the enemy moving in heavily armoured and shots spinging off of them and the elation that is felt when one goes down. but this also calls into play MUCH more usage of cover and concealed positions. thinking tactically. setting up deliberate and hasty ambushes and lethal crossfires.

also my players didn't start off as gimps. my inquisitor didn't want new jacks and those looking to get their 1st blood on his watch , he wanted experienced Acolytes. as GM you control what ur players get access to and when. sometimes the PCs have to have the good sense to perform a tactical withdraw and regroup or just RUN. the items i have given have been granted when i felt it was appropriate.

cheers
 

the liegekiller said:

I just wanted to say I appreciate what you write. Combat is all about creating meaningful choices for the players (and using lots of gory special effects of course). I'm going to nick some of your ideas.

Cheers!

Well you could have Pen values work against TB as well. Then TB doesn't become so amazing. A max human in BQ power armour has 15 damage reduction (6 for TB and 9 for armour). But if Pen worked against that then a bolter would reduce that 4 and then add 1D10+5 Tearing damage as well.

Perhaps called shots also halve TB on the location being struck? Representative of the weak points being targetted.

Hellebore

Hellebore said:

I like that rule, makes Called Shots much more tempting (and adds some benefits for Snipers)

Hellebore said:

Yep that's the easy fix for the OP's problem.  I was about to post it myself.  Great minds think alike.

It's also pretty fluffy.  Plasma guns and melta weapons are pretty much always portrayed as doing horrific damage to living tissue.

I can see the problem.

If your PC is using a bolter (fairly standard by about rank 4 or 5 i've found) against two guys, one toughness 30 with a suit of full guard flak armour and one toughness 40 wearing nothing but his speedos, the half naked guy is harder to kill than the fully armoured guy.

Given the way a bolter works, it does indeed shred armour like paper, but this kind of discrepancy is jarring.

Now lets ramp it up.

An Ork, tough bonus 4, doubled to 8 due to his unnatural toughness buck naked (yuck). And a human in power armour, toughness bonus 3, armour value 8.

The ork is harder to kill with a bolter. Tough as Orks are, that just seems weird.

Gribble_the_Munchkin said:

Not really. Human being takes a bolter shell in the face, he dies pretty swiftly. An Ork does likewise, he loses a chunk of brain and a chunk of skull, but that might well only slow him down (and in one case, ends up becoming the singe most infamous Ork known to the Imperium and leader of the largest WAAAGH ever seen by contemporary humanity).

Orks survive decapitation with little difficulty, and can happily have their heads stapled onto a convenient headless body (doesn't even have to be theirs) with essentially no chance of rejection or complication. Their bodies are insanely durable, capable of withstanding and recovering from crippling injuries or even those that should be fatal for anything that isn't an Ork.

Why not allow armor pen reduce toughness?

Taking the naked ork and power armor human example, the human comes out ahead for having more damage reduction. (7 compared to the orks 4) when shot by a bolter.

I think it would work pretty well.