I Rather like that idea, I do not have a chaos force of any kind
but, have been reading the posts fervantly. I was going to suggest
something from a similar game *cough,Flames of war, cough cough*
where elite forces restrict their numbers by reducing the amount of
points. Basically if you use two forces you limit yourself in
points depending on certain factors,, but after reading this
statement by Peter.
i like this idea, makes it simple, and follows the K.i.s.s method,,,
keep it simple stupid. lol,,,,,,
So anybody with a chaos force , try this method out and see if it
works.
Brian
--- In netepic_at_yahoogroups.com, Peter Ramos <primarch_at_c...> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> As I read the messages and thought about the subject, I had this
idea I
> wanted to share regarding animosity.
>
> The goal is to give ONE rule that covers animosity and eliminate
the
> need to restrictions to allies.
>
> I thought we could use the existing animosity rule, but instead of
ally
> restriction we introduce a small table of "animosity check"
modifiers.
>
> They would be simple:
>
> Weak animosity, simply put it works with the rule as written, no
> modifiers. This implies the baseline animosity that all demons
have
> against each other.
>
> Strong animosity, this implies a greater hatred and thus much more
> difficult to control. This provokes the standard check, but with
a -2
> modifier (making checks successful on a roll of 6).
>
> This also sidesteps the arguments on who hates who more since we
can
> just lump catergories in the "strong" category.
>
> Example:
>
> Using Tzeentch, most would say that either Khorne or Nurgle are
the
> mainly hated powers. So we put those under "strong animosity" and
> slaanesh under "weak"
>
> Using Khorne, Tzeentch and slaanesh would be strong and nurgle
weak.
>
> ..and so forth.
>
> The strong animosity modifier makes cooperation between those that
hate
> each other more strongly harder to obtain. If the roll penalty is
too
> much in the opinion of some tthen we could increase the animosity
radius
> and leave die rolls the same (a higher radius provokes more
checks) and
> it obtains the same result.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Peter
Received on Wed Apr 06 2005 - 21:54:17 UTC