[40K RPG] Combined news thread (UPDATE 30/01/16 Enemies Beyond is out!!!)

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**gigasnail**

No actual release date though? looking forward to this one.

**H.B.M.C.**

They never give a release date, just a quarter.

**gigasnail**

thanks for the clarification.

**Manchu**

Okay so -- Tome of Fate:

The first 37 pages of the book mostly recapitulates existing fluff. You already know my thoughts on the archetypes mechanically so I will not bother to repeat it. The fluff parts constitute an adequate restatement of "canon" but don't contain much in the way of novel exploration of existing ideas or inspiring images. This kind of thing is somewhat more important in BC than the other games because this is about Chaos, after all. And it's even more important in a book about Tzeentch, IMO. Still, it would be useful for folks who are new to the 40k universe.

Moving on, we have new items, powers, rites, etc. This is where the general system of these RPGs really drags BC down, particularly in a book about the patron of sorcery. This stuff is way too forumulaic for Chaos. A better, more ambitious product would have gotten into the nature of Warp magic. I was expecting an alternative psychic system replete with risks and uncertainties. DCC RPG has a much better understanding of Chaos than this book.

Next comes the investigation section. This is too rigid to be good GM advice for novices or experts and not extensive enough to be a real mechanic. I am indifferent to the monster entries throughout the book. I respect that statting adversaries out takes time, patience, and skill so I am wary of judging them without seeing them in action. Then we get new fluff invented for BC and expanding the Screaming Vortex. This is where the book shines IMO. Contrary to the beginning of the book, there are lots of very cool ideas in the back. Finally, the book rounds out with a mediocre short adventure that is really just a plot hook rather than a plot.

In summary, I give it 3/5. This was a missed opportunity to work outside the box mechanically but the setting ideas are generally cool and on-point thematically.

**ZebioLizard2**

Yes! Rules for possession and daemon engines! Something I've wanted since the beginning.

**H.B.M.C.**

Manchu wrote:
And it's even more important in a book about Tzeentch, IMO. Still, it would be useful for folks who are new to the 40k universe.

I often say the following:

You cannot criticise something for doing what it set out to do just as you cannot criticise something for not doing what it did not set out to do.

In the context of the above, you've actually pegged the reason for that fluff. It's not setting out to bring a grand new angle on Tzeentch (or whoever). It's there to present the fluff for Tzeentch as it already exists, and also through the lens of the Screaming Vortex. The main part to remember is that any 40K RPG supplement assumes that the person reading the book only owns two things:

1. The Core Rulebook (of that particular product line).
2. The book in their hands that they are reading right now.

This is why references to other supplements are rare, and why rules sections tend to come in discrete units (and not split across multiple books). You'll notice that, for example, the Daemon Engines in each of the existing three Tomes (and the upcoming one) all repeat the same rules. This isn't to fill space (believe me, we'd love that space back), and it isn't due to a lack of ideas or creativity or anything like that (not that you're accusing anything of that), but it's because we can't say "For the rules for these things, see book X" when you're reading book Y. By the same token introductory text for these Tomes assumes someone is unfamiliar with the Chaos Gods with the exception of what's in the core rulebook. One cannot take their audience for granted, and while I'd say that a lot of people come to the 40K RPG's with knowledge of 40K, quite a lot of them don't. It's not uncommon to see calls for help from GM's who know about 40K, but they have groups with very little information, and they're looking for ways of getting their group's interested. These sections are vital to that.

To put it a different way, the fluff at the start of Tome of Fate isn't for you, and it isn't for me. It's for those without encyclopaedic knowledge of 40k, and there's nothing really wrong with that. So, the introduction's aim is to introduce people to the concepts inherent with Tzeentch. It achieves that aim.

Manchu wrote:
Moving on, we have new items, powers, rites, etc. This is where the general system of these RPGs really drags BC down, particularly in a book about the patron of sorcery. This stuff is way too forumulaic for Chaos. A better, more ambitious product would have gotten into the nature of Warp magic. I was expecting an alternative psychic system replete with risks and uncertainties. DCC RPG has a much better understanding of Chaos than this book.

The book sets out to expand upon and support items presented in the Core Rulebook, not offer up a complete change of system. A new psychic system wouldn't serve a purpose other than to clutter the game with an alternate way of achieving much the same results. You don't like the way Psychic Powers are handled in Black Crusade. That's cool. That's your opinion on the matter, it's something you don't like but not liking something and something being bad are not always the same thing.

Manchu wrote:
Next comes the investigation section. This is too rigid to be good GM advice for novices or experts and not extensive enough to be a real mechanic.

I don't necessarily disagree with the core of what you're saying, but here I am somewhat biased. That investigation section, in my mind, needed more page space dedicated to it. I didn't get that, and we go to battle with the army we have, not the army we want.

Manchu wrote:
I am indifferent to the monster entries throughout the book. I respect that statting adversaries out takes time, patience, and skill so I am wary of judging them without seeing them in action. Then we get new fluff invented for BC and expanding the Screaming Vortex. This is where the book shines IMO. Contrary to the beginning of the book, there are lots of very cool ideas in the back. Finally, the book rounds out with a mediocre short adventure that is really just a plot hook rather than a plot.

The new worlds are the things that interest me the most (more than archetypes or even armouries - I have more fun writing them than reading them!). The new worlds represent the most creative aspect of the books, so it's unsurprising you like them. They're where we get to delve deep into the setting and come up with (hopefully) new and interesting things that entice players and send GMs' heads spinning with ideas. As for the Adventure? The quality of the adventures I can't judge because I'm not a pre-written adventure kinda guy. I like making my own, so I'll leave that be.

In the end I judge a book on whether it achieves what it set out to do. I can look at a book like The Emperor's Chosen (for Deathwatch), and I can see what they were trying to do, and based upon playing that book I can see that - from my own and my entire group's perspective - that the book fell short of its goals. The Tome books on the other hand, I don't think any of them fell short of what they were trying to achieve. You wanted them to aim higher, and that's fine, but that doesn't make them bad. It just means you don't like them. Again, you can't criticise something for doing what it set out to do just as you cannot criticise something for not doing what it did not set out to do in the first place.

I hope some of that made sense!

**Backfire**

Manchu wrote:
I don't like the system generally and think it feels out of place for everything except DH, which is CoC in space so benefits from the CoC-like system.

I've played first three and the system got gradually worse as they kept piling more stuff on top of the basic system without any regard to playability or balance. DH was fine (not as smooth as WHFRP but good), RT got more complicated and annoying and on Deathwatch the system broke down under all the crap, second worst system I've played (worst is TW 2013, in case you're interested). I'm afraid to try subsesquent efforts since I fear they will be even worse. It doesn't help that the books are often somewhat poorly organized with almost useless indexes. Unfortunately, FFG tends to go for quantity instead of quality for their releases. It's a shame since they often write good lore and production values are great but it goes to waste as basics are messed up.

**warboss**

Any public word yet on Deathwatch 2nd edition? With a "new" rpg every year roughly for the 40k license and Dark Heresy 2e being last year's news, there should theoretically be another setting or redo in the works to be revealed soon. I'm hoping they skip Rogue Trader (and just incorporate that into Dark Heresy) and go right to Deathwatch.

**Miss Dee**

Have we seen Iron Warriors ???

**Manchu**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
Again, you can't criticise something for doing what it set out to do just as you cannot criticise something for not doing what it did not set out to do in the first place.

First, I think it's a great point to distinguish between not liking something and criticizing it as inadequate.

That said, the idea that a product is good simply because it achieved its designers' goals is problematic. For example, the new Knights Codex likely achieved everything it set out to do. But does that make it a good book? How about in the context of being 64 pages overall with only 3-4 pages of rules and costing 50 USD?

Sometimes the goals are simply not ambitious enough. Tome of Fate seems to fall into that category to me. This plays out in a practical sense: to whom could I recommend purchasing this book?

- The average GM or player interested in BC? No -- ToF does not meaningfully expand BC as far as casual RPGers are concerned.

- Someone who wants to learn more about the Warp generally or Tzeentch particularly? No -- all of this info is available on Lexicanum and ToF's presentation (art aside) is not significantly better.

- Someone who wants to know more info on the Screaming Void? This one is tricky. That info is here and its interesting but I don't think it justifies the price tag. It would depend on how much of a Screaming void fanatic the person is, which brings me to my next point ...

... that the only person I could really recommend this book to is a completest, someone who wants all of the BC books for all of the stats and powers, etc, i.e., someone who will buy it regardless of my recommendation. Not coincidentally, the fact that I am one such person is why I bought ToF in the first place, and why I bought ToE, and why I will buy ToD.

So this really isn't a case of me not liking a solid product. If anything, it's closer to the reverse.

Backfire wrote:
I'm afraid to try subsesquent efforts since I fear they will be even worse.

I pretty much agree that RT is worse than DH and DW is worse than both. OTOH, things actually got better after DW.

**ZebioLizard2**

Miss Dee wrote:
Have we seen Iron Warriors ???

Being represented by the 'Warpsmith' introduced in ToN, something akin to Dark Apostle in ToE

Alongside the Veteran of the Long Wars, which I assume can be something akin to it (I think)

Honestly, I still dislike DH the most out of them all, I started after and the rules feel quite OP at times compared to the straighter edge (If only firing full auto wasn't the best option always)

**H.B.M.C.**

Fancy new cover...

FFG wrote:Innocence Proves Nothing
Announcing Dark Heresy Second Edition for Warhammer 40,000 Roleplaying

— — Begin Transmission — —

Brave Acolytes:

Fantasy Flight Games is proud to announce the upcoming release of Dark Heresy Second Edition!

Dark Heresy Second Edition is a roleplaying game of danger, mystery, and brutal violence set in the decaying far future of Warhammer 40,000. Players take on the role of defenders of humanity and embark on hazardous adventures into the dark heart of the 41st millennium. As an Acolyte of an Inquisitor, you’ll serve at the front line of a great and secret war to root out dangers that imperil all of humanity.

The Acolytes of Dark Heresy shepherd Mankind from the manifold paths of damnation, with smoking boltguns or world-burning virus bombs if necessary. Acolytes cannot shirk from their noble calling, harsh as it might be, for the only thing worse than the lengths to which they may go to eradicate heresy is what might occur if they fail to act.

Their investigations take them into deadly combat against twisted mutants, powerful psykers, and other abominations. They must face the horrors of Daemons and ancient aliens dedicated to the eradication of Mankind as a species, and battle for survival amidst webs of conspiracy and betrayal. Perhaps the greatest threat they’ll face, however, is that of their fellow man, for the human soul is such fertile ground for corruption. Foul cults and insane heresies permeate all areas of the Imperium, and no
one is beyond suspicion.

What’s New in the Second Edition?

This new edition updates the original Dark Heresy roleplay game while retaining the core mechanics—such as skills, talents, weapons, and combat—familiar to veteran players.

Revised from over six years of player feedback, it also includes new rules for investigation, social interaction, vehicle combat, and more including a brand new setting for players to experience. As it shares many of the rules from the previous edition, earlier supplements and adventures can be adapted for use with minor effort.

To learn more about the changes made in the Second Edition please see the game’s description page.

The Dark Heresy Second Edition Core Rulebook

The 448-page, full-color Dark Heresy Second Edition Core Rulebook contains everything Game Masters and players will need to serve the Emperor in the Askellon Sector. With rules for quick and easy character creation, combat, and all of the source material necessary for GM’s to bring the Askellon Sector and its horrors to life, the Dark Heresy Second Edition Core Rulebook can be used to run both standalone adventures and ongoing campaigns. Dark Heresy Second Edition includes new material such as rules for Subtlety, which we’ll cover in greater detail in our upcoming series of previews. The included adventure, Dark Pursuits will have players immediately embroiled in a web of intrigue and heresy.

Into the Dark…

Dan Abnett, the bestselling author of numerous Warhammer 40,000 novels such as the Gaunt’s Ghost series, and the Eisenhorn and Ravenor trilogies, has written a short story about Acolytes in the Askellon sector specifically for Dark Heresy Second Edition! The story, Into the Dark… opens the Dark Heresy Second Edition Core Rulebook, and provides a glimpse into the life of an Acolyte, and the mysterious darkness that surrounds the Askellon Sector.

Presenting the Askellon Sector

Dark Heresy Second Edition introduces a new sector for Acolytes to explore, and even more vile and insidious heresies to discover and destroy.

Askellon is an ancient region, pre-dating the Imperium itself, and its history is filled with secrets and lies that have stained every generation. As if to compound its woes, the sector is cursed with a seemingly unending Warp storm known as the Pandaemonium that has waxed and waned across the millennia. Now, it grows ever more intense and dangerous with each passing century, raging like a hungry beast that seeks to devour the entire sector and heralding the prophesied Time of Ending, close to the culmination of the 41st millennium.

On its many worlds, from the strange lands of Hive Desoleum to the lawless asteroids of Port Aquila, from the devout population of Thaur to the red forges of Cerix Magnus, all watch in fear as the Pandaemonium’s rising ferocity heralds the sector’s fall. It will take the mightiest deeds of the Acolytes to forestall this terrible doom, if only for one day.

Askellon is a major part of this new edition, as it lets us explore entirely new cultures and peoples, and also introduce new adversaries. Within the sector, players will see a host of new characters, organisations, and cults. Their Acolytes will have no shortage of heresies to investigate and eradicate.

While Askellon is the setting for Dark Heresy Second Edition, fans of the Calixis Sector can rest assured that all of the background and source material created for that sector can still be utilized to run campaigns set there using the Dark Heresy Second Edition ruleset with minor effort. The addition of the Askellon Sector does not invalidate the Calixis Sector material. Rather, the creation of Askellon simply gives players a whole new sector to explore, and new heresies to eliminate.

Fight for the Imperium In His Name

For more information on Dark Heresy Second Edition, including the dark and deadly Askellon Sector and the role of the Inquisition within the Askellon please see the game’s description page. Then, in the coming weeks, we’ll explore what Dark Heresy Second Edtion is bringing to your gaming table in a series of in-depth previews!

Dark Heresy Second Edition will arrive in the third quarter of 2014. In the meantime, keep your boltguns at the ready. The fate of all of mankind rests with you, Acolyte. Serve your Emperor, and prepare to destroy heresy wherever you may find it. Never forget, innocence proves nothing.

— — End Transmission — —

So there we go. It's (officially) announced.

**gigasnail**

Baller. Cover is indeed snazzy.

**Zond**

Not a fan of the cover, but I'll be interested to read about the new sector. The background areas tend to be FFGs strong point.

**livanbard**

then what will happens to the old sector?

**Palindrome**

livanbard wrote:
then what will happens to the old sector?

What ever you want to do with it.

**streetsamurai**

Nice. Eager to pick this one up, as it's the most interesting 40k rpg by far for me.

**BlaxicanX**

I'd be tempted to pick up Dark Heresy 2.0 if not for the fact that I already own it.

I bought Only War like about a year ago.

**warboss**

BlaxicanX wrote:
I'd be tempted to pick up Dark Heresy 2.0 if not for the fact that I already own it.

I bought Only War like about a year ago.

I figured they'd stop at Deathwatch but they kept going. Although the slow breakup of my group was the main reason, the constant creep of "new" games that really shouldn't have been separate games was part of why I sold off almost all of my complete collection of Deathwatch books.

**Zond**

This is why I get the core and setting books and then use different rules to play the games. Slaving everything to d10 rolls stops working after a point.

**H.B.M.C.**

BlaxicanX wrote:
I'd be tempted to pick up Dark Heresy 2.0 if not for the fact that I already own it.

I bought Only War like about a year ago.

How droll.

**BlaxicanX**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
BlaxicanX wrote:
I'd be tempted to pick up Dark Heresy 2.0 if not for the fact that I already own it.

I bought Only War like about a year ago.

How droll.

I'll never understand why FFG gave in to the fools in the beta forum and got rid of all the new mechanics they'd come up with for DH2.0 in favor of blandly giving it the ho-hum rules from the other games.

"waaah, I can't use my Black Crusade Heretek for Dark Heresy under these new rules!!"

Droll, indeed.

**H.B.M.C.**

FFG asked for feedback.
FFG received feedback.
FFG acted on the feedback.

That was the objective of the beta. That was the outcome of the beta. You not liking the outcome doesn't really change the fact that they had a stated aim and completed that aim. Call them "fools" all you like, but all they are are people who had a differing viewpoint on the rules to you, and there were enough of them that FFG took notice.

I sat mostly on the outside of the whole affair, and basically I saw a lot of people complain about the beta, and I saw a lot of people telling those people to shut up and accept the new rules. Then I saw the overwhelming negativity towards the new rules acted upon by FFG to the point where they made the rules compatible with the other RPGs, and after that happened I saw the same people who were telling people to stop complaining start complaining about the rules.

More to the point, I saw people calling Only War "just Black Crusade again", just like people called Black Crusade "just Deathwatch again". None of them are the last game again. They share the same rules base. All have different methods of character creation (appropriate to the game), a different focus, and different styles of play.

**BlaxicanX**

I participated in the beta and was an active contributor in the forum discussions. The "feedback" was pretty much split 50/50 on whether to refine the new and improved system or to roll it back to the Only War/BC style system so that the games would all be compatible. So let's not insult intelligence by pretending that FFG was merely listening to the majority. They weren't. They had a decision to make, and imo they chose the worse one of the two.

Nah. The new system FFG created had a lot of flaws, but it was something fresh and relatively innovative (for the 40K RPG's), and it just needed refining. Anyone who advocated replacing that system with the tired system we've been having for no reason other than "waaah I can't play my Rogue Trader in DH now!" is a fool. And don't get me wrong, I actually love the old rules; I think Black Crusade especially is an excellent game with an excellent system. I'm just disappointed that a real opportunity for innovation in the franchise was squandered because some people have the dumbest complaints.

The differences between DH1.0, OW, DW and BC are mostly arbitrary (DH less so compared to the other 3, due to how old it was). If you wanted to play Dark Heresy like it was Death Watch or Only War, there is literally nothing in the rules that would prevent you from doing so. That is in fact what my first DH experience was... and it was very dull.

There's only a real difference in the "play-styles" of the games if the players and the GM make a conscious effort to pretend that there are.

**H.B.M.C.**

Why was their decision the "worse one of the two"?

**Bronzefists42**

People Complain GW doesn't listen to their customers.

"DAMN FFG FOR LISTENING TO THEIR CUSTOMERS!"

**BlaxicanX**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
Why was their decision the "worse one of the two"?

For the reasons stated above.

Bronzefists42 wrote:
People Complain GW doesn't listen to their customers.

"DAMN FFG FOR LISTENING TO THEIR CUSTOMERS!"

It's almost as if... you haven't followed the discussion at all.

**Bronzefists42**

BlaxicanX wrote:
H.B.M.C. wrote:
Why was their decision the "worse one of the two"?
For the reasons stated above.

Bronzefists42 wrote:
People Complain GW doesn't listen to their customers.

"DAMN FFG FOR LISTENING TO THEIR CUSTOMERS!"
It's almost as if... you haven't followed the discussion at all.

Oh sorry posted int he wrong place. Please ignore my previous statements.

**H.B.M.C.**

Bronzefists42 wrote:
"DAMN FFG FOR LISTENING TO THEIR CUSTOMERS!"

Pretty much this. What was saddening though was all the people complaining about the changes FFG made, when they themselves were the ones telling everyone to just shut up and accept the new rules when the beta first came out.

**Ehsteve**

Some of the beta systems put forward were interesting and I did enjoy them to an extent. They were very raw though, but nonetheless I did like them.

The swap to Only War/BC rules felt like it was just a way to shift the project into production faster to meet the deadline, which is understandable from their point of view.

Personally, I'm stuck between indifference and distaste for DH2.0 as it stands. Then again I think that DW/BC/OW/DH should all be on different systems because they function on entirely different scales and with entirely different focuses:

- Bash-em-up spess mahreenz for fun based on DH1.0 rules [DW],
- Investigative and low-powered henchmen work [DH1.0 pre-ascension],
- Streamlined hybrid of DH and DW (which in my opinion is still a bit of a failure in terms of the core mechanics) [BC],
- and one is a horde-based combat system which high content but less depth than DH and patches up the issues with BC essentially being BC1.5 [OW].

As said, the issue with making them compatible is that they are of different scales and focuses. These assertions are generalist and do not include expansion books, focusing instead on the core rules.

So summary: I didn't really like how OW/BC mechanics were slotted into DH2.0, but I can't really go into details therein due to a non-disclosure agreement.