BFG:R Book I The Core Rules: Updates, Feedback & Comments Thread

[afterimagedan]

So what will Offensive and Defensive native function do? Will we potentially0 have modified leadership tests for every ship?

[Plaxor]

Roll an extra die for the test, then remove one before adding the result together. Like 'cold blooded' from fantasy.

So a ship with Native Function (Navigation) would roll 3 dice when making an All Ahead Full test, then remove the highest of the 3 die.

For example, a player rolls 3 dice getting the results of 2, 5 and 3. He would remove the 5 from the result before adding the other two dice together, and comparing them to the Vessel's LD stat. In this case the result would be a total of 5 (2+3).

[afterimagedan]

I see how it works but will all ships have some type of native function?

[Seahawk]

Egh...I'm not a fan of any of this. As Horizon said, the straight-forward application of rules to gameplay has always been a high-quality aspect of the game. This kind of "native/aberrant" junk just seems to make a mess of things.

[Jimmy Zimms]

conceptually here I see what is being attempted and I like the idea however as others have said I think it fails the old engineering maxim, the 2 beers test:
"if I can pound two beers and it still makes sense when explained, it is probably simple / well thought out enough"

perhaps it is just the wording that makes it hard to swallow. maybe something more like "able" instead of "native" works better but IANAWS (I am not a wordsmith

[afterimagedan]

I think the Native and Aberrant (maybe a different word could be used) function is a great idea, I just worry about it being cumbersome if every type of ship has some form of it.

[Plaxor]

You would only have these abilities when squadroned. So they would rarely come up, outside of escort squadrons.

This seems complicated because it is new, it is actually quite simple. I think Horizon was referring to the numerous ship types, really this chart just writes everything down.

[Seahawk]

I always play with squadrons, so these rules would always come up

[Dan_Lee]

I've finally got around to looking at BFG:R. For some reason I've avoided it - I think I was under the impression the R stood for "role-play".

I've skimmed through your (Plaxor's) posts in this thread (sorry couldn't read everything) and I've skimmed the PDF's. I think you're doing a great job.

I'd like to help out so if you want to delegate me a task or two feel free.

On what I've seen so far:

Introducing the special qualities was a brilliant idea.

Where are the tyranids? Their weapons are defined in book 1 I believe but that's it.

Your native and abberant mechanic sounds good in principle, but I fear it is over-complicating things. I'd drop it, but if you insist at least drop the type and super-type stuff. If necessary just give the rule twice (once for each check that applies). It will be less elegant but easier to remember.

What I'm about to say will sound bossy and/or arrogant and that's not my intention (I just can't find a better way of putting it), but here goes: I think the project should be broken down into the following steps, both to make it easier on you and to ensure the community gets the best benefits from it sooner rather than later:

1) Produce a core rule book which is just the rules you need to play a game that incorporates the old rules and the latest FAQ.
2) Produce a separate document for each race (makes it easier for future updates) that again is just the rules you need to play a game.
3) Produce other books (campaign rules, how to paint/model, etc.) only once the rules are done.
4) Go back and add in or make major changes to the core rulebook and races as needed.

I in no way want to hijack or interfere with your project - just offer constructive criticism and my help.

[Plaxor]

Hrmmmm... I was considering listing it out multiple times. The mechanic already exists, but it seemed redundant to say multiple checks....

Perhaps the easier thing to do would be: Native (Disengage, Asteroid Fields, etc.)

Dan Lee, I know what you are getting at, I don't plan on working on the campaign or construction rules until everything else is done. My plan is to finish the core rulebook in the next two weeks, then continue on to the fleets thereafter.

[Plaxor]

A bit of commentary on Native/Aberrant functions:

The reason why I chose to add this mechanic wasn't to add some new element to the game. In fact I added it to simplify and group several similar mechanics, eliminating the need for 'situational' and explanatory text for each. The main instances were racial special rules, see here:

Demiurg and Tyranids have a special rule for LD tests when navigating Celestial Phenomena.

Eldar have a rule for Ramming, and one for Warp Rifts.

Orks have a rule for All Ahead Full.

Dark Eldar have a rule for Come to New Heading.


Other than that, there was a rule for escort squadrons and Celestial Phenomena (which we changed to a type bonus).


To simplify all these rules, I use the Native/Aberrant mechanic, forcing them to all work the same. There is further benefit from this rule as well, particularly for slow fleets, and to squadroning Capital Ships (most don't like to).

Orks: Native (All Ahead Full, Come to New Heading, Ram, Asteroid Fields)

There are a few reasons for this, mainly the loss of 'auto-pass All Ahead Full' orders, but also their 'slow to turn' nature and weak side weapons. Also, Orks are a pirate fleet (in most circumstance), but most players fear going through Asteroid Fields due to poor leadership and few shields.  Generally, you could assume that Orks would be fans of crazy maneuvers at high speeds.

Eldar: Native (Asteroid Fields) Aberrant (Warp Rifts, Ram)

CWE: Abberant (Warp Rifts, Ram)

Dark Eldar: Native (CTNH, AAF, Asteroid Fields), Aberrant (Warp Rifts, Ram)

Demiurg: Native (Disengage, Asteroid Fields, Warp Rifts)

Necrons: Native (Disengage)

Tyranids: Native (Asteroid Fields, Warp Rifts)

[afterimagedan]

In that sense, Native and Aberrant Function is a great way to make it part of the BFG:R special qualities type thing. Great idea. I was just worried when I saw the chart and most ship types had a native function. I personally am always squadroning cruisers and almost feel naked NOT doing it. I am just worried about the "offensive" and "defensive" ones on the google doc you uploaded.

Would two Lunars are squadroned, would the get bonuses to BFI? Is that what you are going for?

[Plaxor]

Yes.

Another option is to drop its connection to squadrons, and not give it to Capital ships.

Instead, 'Native/Aberrant Function' would only apply to the three escort types. The ability would be ignored if not everyone in the squadron had the ability. No need to clarify about squadrons having all the same vessels and such. This works fine since Escorts must be squadroned, and you would only gain the benefit from squadrons of all the same type.

How do you feel about that?

Perhaps we could mix the two effects, or give something to characters. A character option would be a selection of one quality, or just automatically gives the vessel one depending on its type.

This could be seen as; secondary commander on a CL gains a bonus to all navigation type tests. One on a Battlecruiser gains it to offensive tests (etc.)

[afterimagedan]

BAH. There is the killer idea right there. Not on capital ships unless you have a special character type that can provide that bonus. Would it be a character idea you would buy on top of an admiral kind of like Eldar (MMS) buy Farseers which give them a reroll?

[Plaxor]

Likely. Orks already have Looted Torpedoes. Why not something like:

After assigning characters to your ships, each selects a Native Function which applies to his ship/squadron (so long as he is alive).

Could be free or for a cost, or be predetermined depending on placement.