Welcome
Welcome to nemeses

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. In addition, registered members also see less advertisements. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, join our community today!

From the Ashes (OOC)

OOC discussion of ongoing play

Moderator: ShadoWarrior

Re: From the Ashes (OOC)

Postby ShadoWarrior » Tue Apr 25, 2017 4:53 pm

RichardBuxton wrote:The FaD core book introduced the idea of "knight level" starting characters, basically characters starting with some adventuring under their belts. They gain 150xp as well as the choice between a Lightsaber and 9000cr. Since you had given the main pc's 150xp I was wondering if this was a "knight level" game. I don't care either way, more credits is more stuff but I suspect credits could be accessible here.

Actually, I think it was AoR that introduced it. The "major role" PCs are not limited to 9k. It's whatever you want to have in the way of gear that you can justify to me and that I find reasonable. For these leadership PCs, I can justify a lot. A fully cyborged character? Not bloody likely. Ditto Jedi artifacts. But a character coming from a corporate executive background can have pretty much anything "normal" that they want. Such positions in the Empire were about power, not wealth. Wealth is a mere byproduct of their position and influence. As long as the item in question is something that a character coming from whatever background might have acquired, then I'll likely approve it. Your industry minister wannabe owning a repeating blaster or powered armor? No, because it's atypical. But a fancy pistol or blade, or tailored armored business suit? Sure.

RichardBuxton wrote:For the Economics thing perhaps each "city" has the same value as a single building in Pathfinder. Set a maximum number of "cities" for each planet when they are made (small planet = low limit). Upgrades can increase the city rating. I don't know what the range would be, 0 (nomadic population of tribals up to 10? 100? (Coruscant). I don't know the expected range for a Pathfinder Kingdom, do you?

Can't work that way. A city can have a population varying from a low in the tens of thousands to a high in the tens of millions. And the tax income from a city comparable to LA or NYC is vastly different than the income from a city like Trenton (NJ). Worse, I don't want to deal with tracking how many cities are on each rock. As I mentioned in two earlier posts, the main issue is how to cope with planetary population scales ranging from millions to billions. 2-3+ orders of magnitude variance really screws up the math for the game.
User avatar
ShadoWarrior
Dark Lord of the Sith
 
Posts: 5932
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 6:56 pm
Location: Space Coast, FL

Re: From the Ashes (OOC)

Postby RichardBuxton » Tue Apr 25, 2017 5:31 pm

So in the SW version each hex is a planet, each planet (including its moons) is a limited space. Now one problem I can see is time. A single building in Pathfinder being built in a month or 3 is plausible, but a planet building an entire city in that time is absurd. Either the units of time need to be longer, even a Year, or the scope of the game needs limiting. It took the First Order 20 years to build up to what they are now, capable of invading the NR.

I think it would be simpler to make the game focused on a single sector, forget about galaxy dominance (unless the unit of measurement is 1 Hex = 1 Sector). Then start with the biggest things and figure out how to break those up to decide the size of the smallest things.

Let's be honest, Tax from a single planet for the empire is going to be fairly low, most needs spending on the planet itself.
User avatar
RichardBuxton
Level 1
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 6:15 pm

Re: From the Ashes (OOC)

Postby ShadoWarrior » Tue Apr 25, 2017 5:51 pm

Tax from a single planet can vary drastically. Some rocks have pops in the tens of millions. Some in the billions. And the players get to set the tax rate and what proportion is spent internally. So if you control a planet with 140 million people on it (not the highest pop in the cluster by far), there's a huge impact if you raise the Imperial tax rate from zero (no revenue going into Imperial coffers, which is where the game starts as none of the cluster's planets were paying their taxes) to 20, 30, 40%, or more. Even a trivial tax of 10% on a minimum income of 500 (=50 creds) on 70 million heads (assuming half the pop can work) = 3.5 billion a month. Further assume that only 10% of that tax income goes into your military (way less than the U.S. military gets percentage-wise) yields 350 million, or two new ISD's-worth plus change. (Yes, I know the limiting factor is going to be construction times for ships and buildings.) Vast sums of credits creates its own headaches. And the numbers I tossed out above are minimums. Tax at 20 or 30% and the income doubles or triples. And that's just from one planet.

While this whole economy stuff percolates in the back of our minds, waiting for a sudden inspiration to strike, let's tackle Loyalty.
User avatar
ShadoWarrior
Dark Lord of the Sith
 
Posts: 5932
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 6:56 pm
Location: Space Coast, FL

Re: From the Ashes (OOC)

Postby RichardBuxton » Tue Apr 25, 2017 6:12 pm

A tax rate of 20 or 30% to the empire is ludicrous, it's more like 10-20% of the local governments collected taxes, so an absolute upper limit would be roughly 10% of the populations wages (population taxed at 40%, Empire takes 25% of that), which would have an enormous impact on Loyalty and Unrest.

The amount of book keeping needed should also be considered. If every planet is counted the galactic domination is unmanageable. If the unit area is a Sector then it's much easier. Upgrades change from "a shipyard" to "an entire planet building ships". Ships go from being purchased individually to entire fleets.

But personally I think that's too big, a more interesting game would come from conquering a sector in Unknown or Wild space. Each "Hex" is a System. With a monthly time unit then population can't grow uncontrollably. With a low tax rate then BP are not unrealistic, and big ships cost a decent amount. Time to build large structures and ships will also span many months


Anyway. Loyalty. I have no idea! How does it function in Pathfinder?
User avatar
RichardBuxton
Level 1
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 6:15 pm

Re: From the Ashes (OOC)

Postby ShadoWarrior » Tue Apr 25, 2017 6:45 pm

"Loyalty refers to the sense of goodwill among your people, their ability to live peaceably together even in times of crisis, and to fight for one another when needed." In PF, the only thing I am able to find for its use is that during the Upkeep phase, if you wish to reduce Unrest, you must pass a Loyalty check.

Regarding setting the game in Wild Space or the Unknown Region, that presents a problem in that few of those rocks will have humans on them. It's not the sort of place that an aspiring empire-building Imperial would wish to set up shop. Oh, and the problem isn't population growth. In the timescale of the game, pop growth is not really an issue. It's the pop that's already there that presents issues, and again, the issue is scale. The rules need to be able to deal with both a low end of millions and a high end of billions. Else the system breaks.

Regarding tax rates, please bear in mind that the Empire ruled by fear and force. But you're correct. The Imperial cut (assuming the Empire wasn't utterly looting a planet, which they did to many worlds, BTW) might be a quarter to half of the taxes collected. And of the amount that the Imperials collect in taxes, some chunk has to go to paying salaries (probably at least half), so not all is available for construction. Tax rates and usable tax portions are details that easily tweaked. What I'm having trouble wrapping my head around is how to cope with large differences in pops. If all the rocks had roughly similar pop sizes, or a cap of say a few tens of millions, it'd be a non-issue. But some planets have huge pops on them. Which mucks up simple math systems. Maybe I'm just overthinking this.
User avatar
ShadoWarrior
Dark Lord of the Sith
 
Posts: 5932
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 6:56 pm
Location: Space Coast, FL

Re: From the Ashes (OOC)

Postby RichardBuxton » Tue Apr 25, 2017 7:21 pm

The reason I suggest the unpopulated areas is that it removes the problem of large existing populations, therefore keeping the BP range of a planet or system within a much narrower range. It is where the FO went too.

Like I said, if planets are the unit of measurement then the Galaxy of billions of planets is outside the scope of the game. If Sectors are the unit of measurement then things get much easier, even if there are hundreds of sectors.

Like I said, I think the simplest method would be "trying to conquer a sector of unexplored space, where existing empires are tiny". From what I can tell with a quick Google that's the premise in Pathfinder Kingmaker too. The region the Kingdom is in is mostly un populated.
User avatar
RichardBuxton
Level 1
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 6:15 pm

Re: From the Ashes (OOC)

Postby ShadoWarrior » Tue Apr 25, 2017 7:38 pm

Well, since the Unknown Region (and Wild Space) are effectively an uncharted frontier, I can create sectors with whatever the hell I want in them. You've a good point. Thanks for beating it into me. :P

If there are no high-pop planets, the problem kind of solves itself. (In reality, the can just gets kicked down the road, but that's okay for now.) I can narratively force the squadron into the boonies via a misjump. That works better than deliberately deciding to head there, as I don't think any Imp leader would do so willingly. The FO went there because they're following a plan set in motion by Palpatine, so what the FO does isn't a good example to go by. The Legends history of what Imp admirals and moffs did is a much better guide. Which I'm going to bypass via misjump. Caused by a too-hurried calc forced by a superior Rebel fleet that was moments away from trapping the players' ships.

Okay, back to Loyalty.
User avatar
ShadoWarrior
Dark Lord of the Sith
 
Posts: 5932
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 6:56 pm
Location: Space Coast, FL

Re: From the Ashes (OOC)

Postby RichardBuxton » Tue Apr 25, 2017 8:08 pm

Prices of everything in te game should increase significantly too, the rarity modifier should be +3 or +4 at least, which means everything is 3x to 4x more expensive.

How does the Loyalty check work in Pathfinder? What sets the Difficulty? What modifies the roll?
User avatar
RichardBuxton
Level 1
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 6:15 pm

Re: From the Ashes (OOC)

Postby RichardBuxton » Tue Apr 25, 2017 8:17 pm

Oh, the scales applied to the Stability checks probably should be scaled down too. The biggest Empire should still be a DDDDDD check, but instead of Galactic it could be Sector which equates to the entire "map"
User avatar
RichardBuxton
Level 1
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 6:15 pm

Re: From the Ashes (OOC)

Postby ShadoWarrior » Wed Apr 26, 2017 7:19 am

RichardBuxton wrote:Prices of everything in te game should increase significantly too, the rarity modifier should be +3 or +4 at least, which means everything is 3x to 4x more expensive.

This is already in the RAW. The rarity mod for Wild Space is +3 and "uncivilized planet" is +4. What is "uncivilized" is not defined by FFG, and left to GMs to decide (as usual).

RichardBuxton wrote:How does the Loyalty check work in Pathfinder? What sets the Difficulty? What modifies the roll?

It's a d20 + Loyalty score versus the Control DC. "The base DC for a control check is equal to 20 + the kingdom’s Size in hexes + the total number of districts in all your settlements + any other modifiers from special circumstances or effects. Unless otherwise stated, the DC of a kingdom check is the Control DC." It's modified by all those buildings and persons that add (or subtract) Loyalty, which is already included in the Loyalty score.

We may not be able to do a straight conversion because PF assumes that the loyalty check will be more difficult the larger the empire becomes and I'm not so certain that logic applies in Star Wars. It certainly applies to Stability, since larger groups of people are inherently less stable. But while exercising control of larger groups or a larger economy is more difficult, I don't necessarily agree that size should dictate the difficulty of Loyalty and Economics checks in our game. Sure, controlling a company that has operations scattered across the galaxy is harder than one concentrated in just one planet or sector. But this is offset by economies of scale, the influence/power that ever-larger companies can wield, and advanced tech. The question is which is dominant, the scale difficulty or the offsets? If it's scale, then we can use the same table for Economy (and probably Loyalty) that we use for Stability (but changing what modifies the check). But if scale isn't the major factor making things harder, what is?


RichardBuxton wrote:Oh, the scales applied to the Stability checks probably should be scaled down too. The biggest Empire should still be a DDDDDD check, but instead of Galactic it could be Sector which equates to the entire "map"

I'm keeping the scale as is, for two reasons. (1) I am not going to limit the scope of the game to a single sector, and (2) I really like the current scale (which you devised and I tweaked slightly).
User avatar
ShadoWarrior
Dark Lord of the Sith
 
Posts: 5932
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 6:56 pm
Location: Space Coast, FL

Re: From the Ashes (OOC)

Postby RichardBuxton » Wed Apr 26, 2017 5:19 pm

For Loyalty perhaps a list of contributing factors would work. Each item adds or upgrades dice in a predetermined way. I think a Figurehead and Propagandist would be best at improving Loyalty, so we should look at their abilities for inspiration.

Eg:
Currently engaged in military conflict: +1 Difficulty
Military is a Superior force: +1 to +3 Ability
Tax Rate is below 5%: +1 Ability
Tax Rate 6% or higher: +1 Difficulty
Unrest above a certain number: Upgrade Difficulty by 1
Recently lost a large battle: +1 Setback
Recently won a large battle: +1 Boost
Won new territory: +1 Ability +1 Setback
Lost a territory: +1Difficulty
All territory held for more than 3 months: +1 Boost
All territory held for 12 months or more: +1 Ability
User avatar
RichardBuxton
Level 1
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 6:15 pm

Re: From the Ashes (OOC)

Postby ShadoWarrior » Wed Apr 26, 2017 7:22 pm

RichardBuxton wrote:For Loyalty perhaps a list of contributing factors would work. Each item adds or upgrades dice in a predetermined way. I think a Figurehead and Propagandist would be best at improving Loyalty, so we should look at their abilities for inspiration.


RichardBuxton wrote:Currently engaged in military conflict: +1 Difficulty

Yep.

RichardBuxton wrote:Military is a Superior force: +1 to +3 Ability

"Superior" to what?

RichardBuxton wrote:Tax Rate is below 5%: +1 Ability
Tax Rate 6% or higher: +1 Difficulty
Unrest above a certain number: Upgrade Difficulty by 1

Diff should upgrade per point of Unrest. Unrest is a very serious problem.

RichardBuxton wrote:Recently lost a large battle: +1 Setback
Recently won a large battle: +1 Boost

Sure. We just need to define "recent". In the previous month?

RichardBuxton wrote:Won new territory: +1 Ability +1 Setback
Lost a territory: +1 Difficulty

Gaining and losing systems has an immediate impact on all three empire attributes by virtue of losing the improvements in that system. Having it also set the dice pools is double-dipping. Also, losing a system increases Unrest (damages morale). OTOH, gaining a new system should have a positive morale effect, much like the Nazi conquests in WW2 had on the German people in the first couple of years of the war. Yet the conquered are going to have lousy loyalty. I'm inclined to have gaining a system also incur +1 Unrest and +1 Boost. (Yes, gaining and losing turf both increase Unrest!)

RichardBuxton wrote:All territory held for more than 3 months: +1 Boost
All territory held for 12 months or more: +1 Ability

"All"? As in one die per system?!
User avatar
ShadoWarrior
Dark Lord of the Sith
 
Posts: 5932
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 6:56 pm
Location: Space Coast, FL

Re: From the Ashes (OOC)

Postby RichardBuxton » Wed Apr 26, 2017 7:32 pm

Superior military = more powerful than "the enemy"... or at least more powerful in the eyes of the citizens ;)


Recent is that month, short memories and all that

I like your gaining/loosing idea

By "All territory" what I mean is that if every single territory (or perhaps 90-95%) has been held for more than 3 months you gain a single boost to the roll. More than 12 months and it's +1 Ability. Long term stability should have an impact on Loyalty.

Crime should come into all this as well, although I'm unsure how to measure that, it's not Unrest but what is it?
User avatar
RichardBuxton
Level 1
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 6:15 pm

Re: From the Ashes (OOC)

Postby ShadoWarrior » Wed Apr 26, 2017 7:56 pm

RichardBuxton wrote:Superior military = more powerful than "the enemy"... or at least more powerful in the eyes of the citizens ;)

Since the only known enemy at the game start is the New Republic, and they'll be superior pretty much forever, this probably isn't a viable modifier. Now if we're talking about other threats, then perhaps yes.

RichardBuxton wrote:Recent is that month, short memories and all that

Agreed.

RichardBuxton wrote:I like your gaining/losing idea

Thank you.

RichardBuxton wrote:Crime should come into all this as well, although I'm unsure how to measure that, it's not Unrest but what is it?

I've included crime in Unrest. In PF there's a specific role that handles it, but I subsumed that into a different role. PF deals with what happens in individual cities, but we only care about planetary scale matters and crime just isn't a factor at that scale, though on a smaller scale it impacts people's happiness (loyalty). Corruption is a factor at a global scale, but that's a different discussion (applies to Economics). BTW, improvements are going to be planetary-scale things. They certainly won't be called "Inn" or "Cantina". I need to revamp the whole improvement thing.

In my last reply I hit send before commenting on two things that I quoted from you. The first is that, yes, those two specializations should be important to Loyalty. I'll be looking at them tomorrow. The other item that I skipped was taxes. Increasing/decreasing taxes has an immediate impact on Loyalty. That is set in the taxation Edict. (See Edicts in the House Rules topic.)
User avatar
ShadoWarrior
Dark Lord of the Sith
 
Posts: 5932
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 6:56 pm
Location: Space Coast, FL

Re: From the Ashes (OOC)

Postby RichardBuxton » Wed Apr 26, 2017 8:25 pm

Cool to all of that.

For "the enemy" I was considering it as any forces directly and actively opposed to this small Empire. Say if the NR sent a fleet out to find and squash us, or some isolated group who controls a nearby sector finds a way to jump to our sector and invade... or even the locals form their own Rebellion.
User avatar
RichardBuxton
Level 1
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 6:15 pm

Re: From the Ashes (OOC)

Postby ShadoWarrior » Sat May 06, 2017 3:39 pm

Just thought that I should mention, long overdue, that I haven't forgotten about or abandoned this project. I'm letting it percolate in the back of my mind in the hope that I'll get some insight / inspiration that'll allow me to make some progress on developing the rules. Truth be told, I seriously underestimated the amount of work that would be required to put a cohesive system in place. Every time I think I have a handle on some aspect I find that I've overlooked things that are going to bite us. Fix something, break something else. Star Wars RPGs have always had scaling problems going all the way back to WEG d6. What works fine for a small group breaks once you move from the personal scale (hand weapons and whatever you can carry) to small ships to capital ships. If players can afford to buy, equip, and maintain a starship, personal stuff becomes trivial. It's impossible to keep a player group "hungry", as the books recommend when for much less than the cost of one small ship a player group can fully outfit itself with the best in personal gear. Same problem crops up when scale shifts up a notch. If you can afford a corvette then light freighters become trivial. Move up from corvettes to frigates. Ditto. Frigates to cruisers, ditto. Cruisers to battleship (SDs), ditto. I ran into this twenty years ago with WEG, and it hasn't gotten any better since.

FFG is actually the worst of the three systems as far as this goes, because a cheap swarm of Sil-5 ships retrofitted with TLs and ion cannons can lay waste to a big bad ISD. The ISD costs 150 megacreds and requires a crew of 30-some-odd thousand. A Gozanti needs 10 (sans loadmasters) and costs 200k (say 300k fully retrofitted). So picture an armada of 500 Gozantis (same price as 1 ISD, and less than a sixth the number of bodies) cutting loose with thousands of TLs. Poof, ISD is now space dust. Now in practical terms, you would never see 500 of anything, nor would the Empire allow so many ships not under their control to gather in one spot. But in a game you can do that (until the GM just nixes it by fiat, applying common sense). My point? Where am I trying to go with this? When developing the system for this particular game, matters of scale matter, both in terms of economics and the consequences for combat.

Defining player roles? Check (done). Defining time scale? Check. Modifying talents to apply to a new scale? WIP but no real problem. Determining starting resources? Check (more or less). Determining operational scale, and associated economics? Fumbling about.

Anyway, since Richard has been very conscientious about checking in to this board at least once a day, every day, I felt that I owed him (and anyone else lurking) some sort of explanation for not having done anything with this in almost two weeks.
User avatar
ShadoWarrior
Dark Lord of the Sith
 
Posts: 5932
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 6:56 pm
Location: Space Coast, FL

Re: From the Ashes (OOC)

Postby RichardBuxton » Sat May 06, 2017 4:07 pm

All good, thanks for the post. I have been letting it cook in the back of my mind too, but without much progress. One thing to remember is that an ISD doesn't exist in a vacuum, it has a plethora of ties, lambda's and other landing craft inside it, and will often be escorted by other smaller craft. Just getting in range is going to be challenging.

Now as far as scale of economy the basic problem is that the entire system assumes there is limited funds for the PC's. They have a modest wage... these characters do not, these guys have a ridiculous amount of potential earnings.

I think the balance won't come from the BP economy but rather by coming up with new ways to spend money. These lords of the kingdom have high expectations on their daily comforts, huge personal retinues to upkeep, personal luxury vessels, holiday homes, weekend retreats.... the simple thing to say is that all of it is covered in the background.

Perhaps some kind of mechanic could be developed, a "leaders luxury" rating that's set each month just like tax. High luxury gives more to the PC's, but impacts Loyalty and Stability and BP. The thing is a leader with more to splash around can negotiate with other kingdoms far easier.
User avatar
RichardBuxton
Level 1
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 6:15 pm

Re: From the Ashes (OOC)

Postby ShadoWarrior » Sat May 06, 2017 5:00 pm

I'm not at all concerned with the PC's economics. It simply doesn't matter given the scope of this game. Unless we really care about whether grand high poobah has some toy or not. What concerns me is the economics of the empire itself. Using the example above, why would the players build an ISD rather than 100 CR90s for roughly the same cost (and way less crew need)? I assure you that 100 CR90s are both more useful, more flexible, and pack a bigger punch in aggregate. Some of that can be handled by limitations of shipyard slips. But the underlying issue remains untouched. And that's just one facet of my concerns. We still haven't addressed the fundamental issue of where the player empire's income is coming from. In PF it's from structures. If we adapt the PF system (which is what I was trying at first) we ignore the elephant in the room: population. In SW, just as in RL, the bulk of taxes comes from people, not corporations (in PF terms, structures). If our system taxes people (and trade, to be fair and logical), then we run into that scale problem I posted about several weeks ago: the vast amount of money generated by millions upon millions of people.

You came up with a partial solution by saying that most of the income has to remain local. In theory that makes some sense. Until we look at the Empire's history, which is replete with instances where it raped planets, enslaving and killing off pops, rendering some barren and/or too polluted to live on. That should be an option for ruthless players. It has consequences, of course, but it should nonetheless be accounted for. Setting that particular option aside for the nonce, and even assuming that players can only touch a fraction of the tax income, it still doesn't resolve the scale issue. It only shifts it by whatever factor is used by the tax budget. If taxes are a paltry 10%, and players only get to use 5-10% of the taxes for building up the empire, half a percent of 70 million people (the working population of one potential planet the PCs might quickly take over) leaves 350,000 x 500 (assumes all 70m are unskilled workers) = 175,000,000 credits a month for the players to spend on ships or whatever. Without even considering taxes on trade (corporate taxes). Even if I start the players in some total shithole sector with almost no population (say, planets with populations in the single millions at most), sooner or later the game will progress and the empire will expand to planets that do have decent populations. The rules have to be able to cope with changes in scale. Anything else is a band-aid and the game will eventually break.

If I ignore population to "simplify" economics, then I break something else (as I alluded to in my prior post). The game becomes all about city building, rather than empire management and conquest. Players will focus on whatever it takes to maximize structures, since that's what's driving the economy. Don't forget that building structures in a high-tech setting like SW doesn't take remotely as long as it does in RL (due to repulsor tech and droid labor), and you can "grow" objects much faster than you can grow & train people (clones excluded). The fricking Empire can build multiple city-sized SSDs in a year or two, or a moon-sized weapon in twice that (provided that the resources are available). Even with no shipyards to start with (which is the baseline that I'm working with) the players will be able to have new corvettes and frigates in commission in under a year. A bit longer for cruisers and SDs. Building new asteroid mines is only a matter of weeks, and small cities from scratch a matter of months.

I don't want this to be a city-building game. That's boring.
User avatar
ShadoWarrior
Dark Lord of the Sith
 
Posts: 5932
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 6:56 pm
Location: Space Coast, FL

Re: From the Ashes (OOC)

Postby swrider » Wed May 10, 2017 8:03 am

I just remembered quicksilver's game. It used the dark heresy system iirc which was built for large scale. She had some good things in her house rules for the economy.
Machitis Pugnator, Orys Nor, Jan Brenko Orokos
FoF Destiny Pool 4 Dark 3 Light, Op.S Destiny Pool 4 Dark 3 Light

Days I will have limited Access to Post: TBD
Rider's Guild
swrider
Level 20
 
Posts: 3133
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2015 2:23 pm

Re: From the Ashes (OOC)

Postby ShadoWarrior » Wed May 10, 2017 8:09 am

I've never looked at DH. I'll check it out. Thanks! As for Quick's game, are you referring to her RT game?
User avatar
ShadoWarrior
Dark Lord of the Sith
 
Posts: 5932
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 6:56 pm
Location: Space Coast, FL

Re: From the Ashes (OOC)

Postby swrider » Wed May 10, 2017 9:10 am

Yes.. The game was rogue trader not dark herasy... My bad.
Machitis Pugnator, Orys Nor, Jan Brenko Orokos
FoF Destiny Pool 4 Dark 3 Light, Op.S Destiny Pool 4 Dark 3 Light

Days I will have limited Access to Post: TBD
Rider's Guild
swrider
Level 20
 
Posts: 3133
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2015 2:23 pm

Re: From the Ashes (OOC)

Postby ShadoWarrior » Wed May 10, 2017 9:14 am

RT, DH, it's all WH40k. meh :P

But I'll look at it when I'm not here at the library, with its strict and very annoying site blocking.
User avatar
ShadoWarrior
Dark Lord of the Sith
 
Posts: 5932
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 6:56 pm
Location: Space Coast, FL

Previous

Return to Out of Context

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

suspicion-preferred