Rogue Trader 40k area effect

[Black Shuck (Ben)]

Good evening,
Im currently painting a load of Imperial Army miniatures and it has got me interested in Rogue Trader again, i say again, my last game was over 30 years ago.
I watched a really good YouTube battle, they did battle at the farm and some others.
I was really confused by how they were doing area effect weapons, I know for a fact that nobody round my way ever played it that way. So I checked the rulebook and it looks like the youtubers were right.
They rolled for deviation BEFORE rolling to hit, the flamer marine in the video was useless.
Im sure we all changed that to roll to hit and deviation on a miss

Can anyone clear this up, the rulebook supports deviation first, but I dont like it 😕

I wonder if it was changed later
Please put my mind at ease
I dont have my books on me as im away, this is bugging me

 

[orkwrangler]

The Rogue Trader era had at least three different rules for area affect weapons.

1. The rulebook
2. White Dwarf 99
3. Battle Manual

 

[Black Shuck (Ben)]

The Rogue Trader era had at least three different rules for area affect weapons.

1. The rulebook
2. White Dwarf 99
3. Battle Manual

Thank you, I might get hold of the battle manual.
I have the vehicle one with the crazy clear plastic targeting matrix, i thought that was amazing when I was younger (never got to use it sadly), but im aware it wasn't popular

 

[orkwrangler]

Priestly did not like what went into the Rogue Trader rulebook & tried to replace them almost immediately in a Chapter Approved article in WD99.

1. Place template over target
2. Use BS to see if shot lands on target (small chart)
3. Models under marker hit on D6 of 3+
4. Wound & save as normal

The Battle Manual rules were a prototype for the 2nd edition rules.

 

[Michael Stockin]

Matrix, i thought that was amazing when I was younger

Same. It was so sci-fi to me.

 

[orkwrangler]

I have the vehicle one with the crazy clear plastic targeting matrix, i thought that was amazing when I was younger (never got to use it sadly), but im aware it wasn't popular

Those were the sort of rules that were fascinating to read but I'm glad I never had to endure. Like the robots with their own game phase and programs. I think all the Rogue Trader vehicle rules were under-cooked.

 

[orkwrangler]

I watched a really good YouTube battle,

Care to share?

 

[Eric]

I loved drawing my own cross sections of my scratch built vehicles to use with the targeting grid. Totally appealed to my younger self.

I was actually reading issue #99 earlier. I had a couple of my WD boxes out and I've just been idly going through the ones that were out. So here is the page in question with Rick's revision:


I don't recall how we first played things. So it may just be that all the later games, be those 40k or WFB, did hit then deviation that it just seems like that was always the way it was done. Fascinating to be reminded that it wasn't actually!

 

[Brother Meredith]

I played using the Battle and Vehicle Manual rules, great fun (albeit rather slow!!). 😉
The move back to section damage effects in 2ed sped things up, but felt really simplistic afterwards! 😅

 

[Black Shuck (Ben)]

Care to share?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Black Shuck (Ben)]

I think its in their second battle report that the flamer is used, I think a template is how I would run a flamer

 

[Black Shuck (Ben)]

I played using the Battle and Vehicle Manual rules, great fun (albeit rather slow!!). 😉
The move back to section damage effects in 2ed sped things up, but felt really simplistic afterwards! 😅

Thats something I want to do one day, I see now that the Battle manual uses a much better area effect rule.
Case closed.....

 

[Eric]

I always thought of the Battle and Vehicle manuals as the 1½ edition, to be fair I think a lot of our games were that version. I'm never quite sure (it being so many years since I was intimately familiar with all the rules) which of the many bits of RT rules I'd use these days! Anyhow I think I shall make a cuppa and watch the battle report!

 

[Black Shuck (Ben)]

I always thought of the Battle and Vehicle manuals as the 1½ edition, to be fair I think a lot of our games were that version. I'm never quite sure (it being so many years since I was intimately familiar with all the rules) which of the many bits of RT rules I'd use these days! Anyhow I think I shall make a cuppa and watch the battle report!

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Black Shuck (Ben)]

These blokes are playing 1,5, the ork player has blatantly cheated on his kustom weapon rolls! I know, I did the same (I was young, I would never do that kind of thing nowerdays)

 

[orkwrangler]

These blokes are playing 1,5, the ork player has blatantly cheated on his kustom weapon rolls! I know, I did the same (I was young, I would never do that kind of thing nowerdays)

I suspect Andy Chambers did that in White Dwarf 133, so you are in good company.

We did not care for random rolls for equipment. They wouldn't match the cool models we'd just painted up. I think Rick Priestly said Bryan Ansell thought randomness built narrative & I can see the point, but doing it in the army lists was too much. It exceeded our purchasing power. The game designers were right to ditch it.

We were stricter about playing to the rules in 2nd edition where you had more freedom in list building.