[NetEpic ML] Re: heresy fan club

From: Peter Ramos <pramos_at_...>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 08:57:50 +0000


Andrea Pieretti wrote:

> Hi
> I've got some questions for you concerning Heresy.
> I feel this should be a very good game for 6mm sci-fi
> I'll try your game as soon as possible.
> (actually I have only IG & eldar army ready for battle,
> but there are no stats for the eldar sigh!)
> Nonetheless there are some things i would like to pone to your attention

Actually the eldar and chaos lists are ready, I'm just waiting to finish them
all before ai release them, but if you want to try them out I can send them to

> 1) I believe that some guidelines must be present in any game
> (and you did it for example asking a system with ten-sided dice) but
> why if for the shooting and close combat, the highest rolls
> means good results , for morale this is exactly inverted, i.e.
> the lower the roll the best the result ?.

We talked this over and it was because to do what you ask then good morale
values need to be low number and that contrasts with the rest of the system
where good stats are always high numbers, then again there will be the
exception of the accuracy stat where high is not good. There is no feasable
and simple manner to make all stats with high numbers be good and need to roll
high for a good result. Some compromise neded to be made. But thats not to bad
since all games out there need to do this.

> (in D&D and AD&D there is the same controversy for hit rolls & save
> rolls)
> I think for example, that a morale value of 4
> (save 1,2,3,4 i.e. 4/10) can be changed to 7
> (7,8,9,10 i.e. 4/10), obviously this is not a real change.
> Also all positive modifiers will be good and all negative will be bad.

Hmmm.. I think you have an older version of the rules, morale values are high
numbers now a marine for example has a morale value of 7/6/5. So I guess I
changed things to reflect what you are stating anyway!

> 2) I'haven't found a specific rules concerning the fractions,
> I think that should be explicit written that all fractions must be rounded
> up (for example).
> (this is vacant for movement restrictions)

True, I have added this to specific rules where fractions may be involved
stating round up or round down, since a universal rounding up or down may not
be appropriate in all circumstances.

> 3) For initiative rolls in a case of a tie ?
> I think it's possible to use the epic rule that says :
> "the previous turn loser, in a case of a tie will be the winner".

As it stands its re-roll until there is a winner, but this could work too.

> 4) In the explample of aerial combat the marines receiveid
> a +1 for their hit rolls but you wrote that they obtained 1,2,4,5,6,6 and
> 8
> this should be translated as 2,3,5,6,7,7 and 9 ?

I'll recheck but you may have an older incorrect version, but yes your
assumption is correct.

> 5) Why if you stated that the "the role of the ground troop
> commander is more concerned about the
> targets the thrusters shuold be attacking than the method
> they should be using to do the job and the orders reflect that."
> you apply the highest-ranking leader's leadership bonus
> for initiative rolls ?

I recheck the rules and cant find it, it must have been changed since major
editing was done not too long ago. Onverall you add the highest ranking
leaders bonus to all initiative checks during the game phases, in aerial
combat having the initiative gives you combat bonuses. All is explained step
by step now in the rules since they were unclear or had errors/omissions.

Once I release everything there will be an extensive explanation of what went
on and what changed, suffice to say when you get the newer rules I urge you to
carefully re-read everything since playtesting and troubleshooting has
modified the rules substancially in some areas.

Overall the game has maintained a high degree or lethality and decisiveness
which is very pleasing.

Received on Thu Nov 18 1999 - 08:57:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 10:58:47 UTC