Players and their armor.

[steve98052]

On the matter of personal appearances of emperors in battle, note that Arbellatra concluded the Emperors of the Flag era as Grand Admiral by leading defeat of Emperor Gustus, after which the Moot proclaimed her regent, and later Emperor.

She was great×9 grandmother of Strephon, or eleven generations earlier (and eleven emperors earlier, including one sibling succession and one grandchild succession).

Eleven generations (or five centuries) into our past takes us to sailing ships, but from the time of Arbellatra to the time to Strephon, the Imperium upgraded its Navy from Jump-3 to Jump-4. It's not clear what the Imperial maximum TL was while Arbellatra ruled; it may have had the ability to build beyond Jump-3 but didn't. The Strephon era Imperium can build Jump-6 ships, but Imperial Navy standard is Jump-4, presumably as a tradeoff of strategic mobility for firepower and tactical maneuver.

Additionally, during the Rebellion timeline, every person claiming to be Emperor personally led combat. In the Imperium, leading battles in person happens. They may not lead planetary invasions from horseback, but they lead fleets from flagships.

If Strephon never lead a fleet in person, it was not because he wasn't allowed. It was because the conflicts that were important enough to justify the attention of the Emperor were too far from Capitol to get to, and major subordinates stood in, such as then-Duke, later-Archduke Norris, who was in charge of the latter part of the Fifth Frontier War.

How did we get onto this tangent again?

 

[Saladman]

In great Cthulhu's unholy name, get it through your head: no modern chief executive, whatever his or her title, would be allowed to go into battle. They are simply too important to the state to be permitted to appear on a battlefield in person. Even President Trump, if he wanted to lead an MEU into Iran himself (and don't think that vainglorious, draft-dodging chickenhawk hasn't fantasized about it), would not be permitted to do so. By hook or by crook, by legislation or backroom maneuvering, his government would prevent him.

If you want to portray the Imperium's upper echelons as a pack of ass-grabbing incompetents and yes-men, I can't stop you. But if you brought this idea to my table, it would be my pleasure and my privilege to beat some sense into you with the core rulebook.

That's one way to run it, but the rest of us will be running in science fiction settings, rather than thinly disguised 21st century First World nations.

 

[Sigtrygg]

"Your Imperial Majesty, the Zhodani have invaded the Spinward Marches"
'Ready my personal gold encrusted battle shorts and mobilise my Sylea BatRon'
"At once your Imperial Majesty"...

Two years later...
'Hail Spinward Marches battlefleets, this is your Emperor, prepare to be lead to victory'

"Umm, the war ended last year numbnuts"

And a bit of Imperial history from MWM's novel, the Imperium had jump 5 cruisers and jump 6 couriers as far back as the 700s...

 

[Condottiere]

If you have a spare, you can send off the heir to acquire combat experience, and secure the respect and loyalty of the military.

 

[Hakkonen]

That's one way to run it, but the rest of us will be running in science fiction settings, rather than thinly disguised 21st century First World nations.

That thing that just flew over your head? That was my point.

 

[Linwood]

In the end it will all depend on how you view the Imperial culture. If you view it as militaristic then maybe the Emperor would feel obligated to show leadership on the battlefield. If Imperial culture is more bureaucratic (or business/corporate?) then leading the fleet is someone else’s problem and all the Emperor has to do is pick the right sophont for the job.

There’s also the Starship Troopers option - screw up as Emperor and you end up a grunt in the next ground assault....

 

[Sigtrygg]

Perhaps I made my earlier post too vague - how the f*&()k does the emperor lead from the front when the first he/she hears of the war it is already a year and a half to two years old and by the time he/she can get to the battle it is all over?

 

[Tom Kalbfus]

Perhaps I made my earlier post too vague - how the f*&()k does the emperor lead from the front when the first he/she hears of the war it is already a year and a half to two years old and by the time he/she can get to the battle it is all over?

There is nothing that says that all wars have to be short and over in a few months. When the Emperor finally does get to the front, he can lead from the front, and who's to say that the Emepror spends all his time at the Capitol , and he doesn't travel around his empire in a mobile palace (aka starship)? Emperor PAlpatine traveled around his Empire too, he didn't stay in Coruscant, and he didn't die there either!

 

[Geir]

Perhaps I made my earlier post too vague - how the f*&()k does the emperor lead from the front when the first he/she hears of the war it is already a year and a half to two years old and by the time he/she can get to the battle it is all over?

Very true, but it helps differentiate when leading from the front is useful and it all comes down to communications.
In 21st Century Earth it makes zero sense to lead from the front, because the President can sit in the basement and watch a SEAL team take out bin Laden in real-time (okay, maybe a fraction of a second delay bouncing off a couple of satellites , but close enough for orders and information to pass even at the tactical level.)
In a frontier war in something the size of the Imperium, it also makes no sense since it would rightly be extremely unlikely that the Emperor's personal presence, even if he was a tactical or strategic genius, would be timely.

Where it might make sense is in a conflict within a sector's distance from the Emperor, like during the Civil War or Rebellion eras. Communications are limited to ship speed, so strategic and tactical decisions from a sector back might not be as useful as those a week or two behind the battle, and an Emperor as battle commander could make sense if that was his skill set. However, even then, he'd never leave his flagship unless he was evacuating from a burning wreck.

Which gets back to the original topic. In all those scenarios, the Emperor's armor is irrelevant. And I don't see the big deal about dealing with players that have Battledress. A gauss rifle firing APDS ammo has a penetration of 17, which can get through almost any armor, at least after damage is computed. I like the AP rules, as it does separate penetration and damage close enough to be reasonable. And a PGMP can do 60 points of damage on a good roll. A disposable plasma launcher or a fusion gun does 2DD, so 70 on average. That's what someone in Battledress should be up against in any balanced campaign. And even if you're just stealing chickens from peasants, a deep TL0 pit trap will get you if you don't have Grav Assist; only idiots and Ewoks would shoot at you with arrows.

 

[Condottiere]

You guys maybe thinking reactionary defensive war.

Then there's imperialistic campaigns designed to distract from problems at home.

 

[JMISBEST]

Perhaps I made my earlier post too vague - how the f*&()k does the emperor lead from the front when the first he/she hears of the war it is already a year and a half to two years old and by the time he/she can get to the battle it is all over?

There is nothing that says that all wars have to be short and over in a few months. When the Emperor finally does get to the front, he can lead from the front, and who's to say that the Emepror spends all his time at the Capitol , and he doesn't travel around his empire in a mobile palace (aka starship)? Emperor PAlpatine traveled around his Empire too, he didn't stay in Coruscant, and he didn't die there either!

True but he was very old even at the Time of Revenge of The Sith and Return of The Jedi was at least 21 years later. Maybe he was senile or had dementia or even both and that/those contributed in some way to him making the mistakes that cost him his life and set in motion the events that, in Canon, eventually caused The Empire to lose the war and later lose a lot of its world to The Alliances Version of A Second Republic?

 

[Marc]

Where is the chart?

I apologize if this has been asked already but...
In the Core rules, discussing armor, it says that a character who has been hit with 6+ damage will always take "at least 1 point of damage"

What I have not found is a chart stating how that increases

So, when a character:
Is hit with under 6 points ---- The armor can absorb everything
Is hit by 6 to X points ---- The character takes 1 pt
Is hit by X to Y points ---- The character takes 2 pts

Etc

Where is the chart?
What is the escalation pattern?

 

[AndrewW]

Where is the chart?

I apologize if this has been asked already but...
In the Core rules, discussing armor, it says that a character who has been hit with 6+ damage will always take "at least 1 point of damage"

What I have not found is a chart stating how that increases


Where is the chart?
What is the escalation pattern?

Says at least, I don't see that it says this increases. So the armour absorbs whatever it normally would but if the damage is 6 or more you still deduct the armour but even if the armour would normally absorb all the damage 1 point still gets through. Of course one is free to increase this for higher amounts of damage if so desired.

 

[Marc]

Says at least, I don't see that it says this increases. So the armour absorbs whatever it normally would but if the damage is 6 or more you still deduct the armour but even if the armour would normally absorb all the damage 1 point still gets through. Of course one is free to increase this for higher amounts of damage if so desired.

I don't believe that is the case.
If it was, why would the rule include the words "at least"?
Logic dictates that you use phrases like "at least" when an increase is either possible or expected.

In addition, having been in armed combat and wounded myself, Logic dictates that the more significant the damage, the larger the "pass through".
I accept that simply because I experienced it, does not mean it will be reflected in the rules.
But, I have to assume Mongoose did some level of investigation before codifying their rules.

 

[gamesmeister]

I don't believe that is the case.
If it was, why would the rule include the words "at least"?
Logic dictates that you use phrases like "at least" when an increase is either possible or expected.

In addition, having been in armed combat and wounded myself, Logic dictates that the more significant the damage, the larger the "pass through".
I accept that simply because I experienced it, does not mean it will be reflected in the rules.
But, I have to assume Mongoose did some level of investigation before codifying their rules.

It says "at least" because a player could take more than 1 point of damage if his armour doesn't absorb all 6 points.

 

[Marc]

It says "at least" because a player could take more than 1 point of damage if his armour doesn't absorb all 6 points.

Thank you for clarifying that

 

[Geir]

Where is the chart?

I apologize if this has been asked already but...
In the Core rules, discussing armor, it says that a character who has been hit with 6+ damage will always take "at least 1 point of damage"

It doesn't say that. It says nothing about the damage, just about the roll to hit.
At least in the updated rules and probably before it says:
An attack with Effect 6+ always inflicts at least one point of damage, regardless of the actual damage rolled or the Protection score.
(2022 core, page 77)
Meaning, it's a Critical Hit: Something gets through even if the damage doesn't normally add up to the Protection.
So if you needed a 6+ to hit and you rolled a 12, then it does exactly one point of damage even if you hit someone in Battle Dress with an air rifle. But only one point of damage; there is no escalation, no charts, just the acknowledgement that a critical hit does something. The bullet hit an armor weak spot, or triggered an internal suit component to pop, or some other 'critical hit' effect...

Could that be made clearer? Probably. But that's the intent. Throw enough Ewoks with sticks and stones against Imperial Stormtroopers and eventually, with enough lucky shots, the Stormtroopers will fall down from all the papercut-level critical hit wounds. (Or just throw Ewoks directly at the Stormtroopers, that seems more fun).

 

[Marc]

It doesn't say that. It says nothing about the damage, just about the roll to hit.
At least in the updated rules and probably before it says:
An attack with Effect 6+ always inflicts at least one point of damage, regardless of the actual damage rolled or the Protection score.
(2022 core, page 77)

Respectfully,
In 2E Core Rulebook, on page 74, in the left column under the heading "Armour", the paragraph states:

"Armour reduces the damage sustained in an attack by the
value of its Armour score. An attack with an Effect of 6 or
more always inflicts at least one point of damage, regardless <===Note the word "DAMAGE", which I have highlighted in red
of the actual damage rolled for or the Armour score."

So, Sir, I am sorry but it does speak of damage

In fact, if you look at your own quote from 2022 Core, Pg 77, that also includes the statement "always inflicts at least one point of damage"

So, thank you for your interest but you should read what is present, not only in my quotes but in your own

 

[Nelphine]

Effect is not damage.

Effect is a result of the attack roll, and an effect 6+ is this systems equivalent to a critical hit.

So you roll to hit. If you roll 6 or higher than the needed value, than you have hit with an effect of 6+.

You then roll damage as normal. You then subtract armour from the damage as normal. Normally this can result in 0 damage (for instance, when you try to punch a tank.)

However, because you rolled to hit with an effect of 6, then the minimum value for the damage, after subtracting armour, is 1.

This means, your fist can inflict 1 damage on a tank.


As a comparison, if you rolled a 3 effect to hit, and were shooting a rifle that rolled a total of 30 damage, but your target was a tank with 120 armour, the rifle still does 0 damage.

 

[ottarrus]

And there is always the 'crunch gun solution'... a 20mm long-barrelled LAG with HEAP ammo specifically designed to make battle dress troops start to use cover again. It won't always penetrate, but it will penetrate enough times to matter.
PROTIP: Hunting battle dressed troops is like hunting armored vehicles. Use an HK team of 4... two guns and two spotters. Random mines in their zone is also useful.