In Development: Wrath & Glory for Warhammer 40,000 Roleplay
The time has come once again to step into the grim darkness of the 41st millennium!
Roleplaying game company Ulisses North America have acquired the Warhammer 40,000 Roleplay licence and would like to announce their first product line, Wrath & Glory.
Spoiler:
Ross Watson has been tapped to develop this new product line for Ulisses North America. Watson is best known for his role as lead developer for Rogue Trader and Deathwatch, as well as his numerous contributions to other Warhammer 40,000 Roleplay products. He is very experienced with the world and the game in all its incarnations.
Warhammer 40,000 Roleplay: Wrath & Glory is a roleplaying game set in the universe of Games Workshop’s Warhammer 40,000. The setting is a dark, Gothic future where the galaxy-spanning Imperium of Man is beset by horrific threats and endless war. In Wrath & Glory, players join to tell stories of mystery, action, and terror amongst the bloodstained stars. You may take on the roles of characters fighting against the tide of corruption sweeping the galaxy, struggling to keep alive a glimmer of hope as others revel in the consuming flames.
Wrath & Glory launches in 2018 with the Wrath & Glory Core Rulebook. Inside are rules for character creation, task resolution, combat, and other activities your character may employ as they explore the grim darkness of the far future. In Wrath & Glory, your characters glimpse the grime on the cherub’s wings, the hint of regret in the Radical’s eyes, and confront their own worst fears in the Harlequin’s mask.
Spoiler:
Ulisses North America will hold a seminar at Gen Con 2017, where Ross Watson will discuss further details about the game and the products that are in development. If you can’t make it to Indianapolis, there will be video of the seminar available afterwards.
In anticipation of this release, Ulisses North America have launched a teaser website that includes a few Frequently Asked Questions, as well as a link to the Gen Con seminar. You can also read the official press release here.
If you want all the details about these new RPG products as soon as they are available, you can sign up for a mailing list specifically for Warhammer 40,000 Roleplay.
In the meantime, if you are eager to revisit previous Warhammer 40,000 Roleplay products such as Rogue Trader, Dark Heresy, and Deathwatch, they will be available soon on DriveThruRPG!
Great news! I've really missed the FFG efforts along these lines. I didn't even play Dark Heresy, but I loved the periodic narrative infusions it injected into the setting. Hopefully Ulissis will feel and further these efforts.
Good news for 40k fans (and especially HBMC!). Ross Watson has worked on alot of things that I've appreciated over the years besides 40krpg like D&D and more recently Star Wars. The last time I heard his name was in relation to the Savage Worlds Rifts rpg. I wonder if he's going to continue his involvement with that last one as it's been kind of dead in the water for months with no news of upcoming products (similar to the 40krpgs before their cancellation).
HBMC, if you have any pull with the new ant overlords, please pass on my sincerest wishes that they NOT divide up the 40k universe into MSU (minimum sellable universes) rpg equivalents. I'd love to be able to cohesively play marines with normal humans (and maybe even a foul xenos occasionally) without compatibility issues. The biggest complaint that I had with the FFG games was the fracturing of the universe and playerbase into a half dozen different enough in practice to be difficult but not too different superficially to make you think you can't easily fix it games.
Crimson wrote: So will it use the same awful system as the previous 40KRPGs?
No! \o/
What system does Wrath & Glory use?
Wrath & Glory has a brand-new game system involving dice pools of d6s to represent your character’s abilities. The game focuses on highlighting brutal combat, fast action, and a deep immersion into the setting of the 41st Millennium.
Crimson wrote: So will it use the same awful system as the previous 40KRPGs?
No! \o/
What system does Wrath & Glory use?
Wrath & Glory has a brand-new game system involving dice pools of d6s to represent your character’s abilities. The game focuses on highlighting brutal combat, fast action, and a deep immersion into the setting of the 41st Millennium.
HBMC, if you have any pull with the new ant overlords, please pass on my sincerest wishes that they NOT divide up the 40k universe into MSU (minimum sellable universes) rpg equivalents. I'd love to be able to cohesively play marines with normal humans (and maybe even a foul xenos occasionally) without compatibility issues. The biggest complaint that I had with the FFG games was the fracturing of the universe and playerbase into a half dozen different enough in practice to be difficult but not too different superficially to make you think you can't easily fix it games.
Yes, please!
I'll be collecting all of these from the start - I made the 'mistake' of not doing it last time around, and regretted it...
HBMC, if you have any pull with the new ant overlords, please pass on my sincerest wishes that they NOT divide up the 40k universe into MSU (minimum sellable universes) rpg equivalents. I'd love to be able to cohesively play marines with normal humans (and maybe even a foul xenos occasionally) without compatibility issues. The biggest complaint that I had with the FFG games was the fracturing of the universe and playerbase into a half dozen different enough in practice to be difficult but not too different superficially to make you think you can't easily fix it games.
Yes, please!
I'll be collecting all of these from the start - I made the 'mistake' of not doing it last time around, and regretted it...
...but not this time!
Never played the FFG version but the hairsplitting of the mythos really turned me off. So I hope it is all a solid whole for the chance to play what you want with whomever.
And of course, one just needs the Core Book to be solid, because that's how all the best RPGs roll! (though solid fare in the ancillary books is always welcome. It's just the core you really need though)
While I realize FFG's success was due to other IP, I will always be apprehensive of buying into a GW licensed (non-video) game because GW has shown it won't tolerate a partner being "too" successful.
aka_mythos wrote: While I realize FFG's success was due to other IP, I will always be apprehensive of buying into a GW licensed (non-video) game because GW has shown it won't tolerate a partner being "too" successful.
There is a story that FFG was originally going to be making a battlefleet gothic game for GW, but took the system and used it for Star Wars Armada. I would be pretty pissed as GW if this happened. Not to mention they went into direct competition with selling minatures now. They were also doing less and less with the license anyways and pumping everything into milking Star Wars. I'm glad they lost it they were getting really lazy with it.
As for the new rpg. So hyped. If this rpg is good it might get me to come out of GM retirement for a campaign. I want to see the madness that is a mixed race party.
aka_mythos wrote: While I realize FFG's success was due to other IP, I will always be apprehensive of buying into a GW licensed (non-video) game because GW has shown it won't tolerate a partner being "too" successful.
There is a story that FFG was originally going to be making a battlefleet gothic game for GW, but took the system and used it for Star Wars Armada. I would be pretty pissed as GW if this happened. Not to mention they went into direct competition with selling minatures now. They were also doing less and less with the license anyways and pumping everything into milking Star Wars. I'm glad they lost it they were getting really lazy with it.
As for the new rpg. So hyped. If this rpg is good it might get me to come out of GM retirement for a campaign. I want to see the madness that is a mixed race party.
The story is that FFG approached GW about making BFG and when GW said "NO!" that's when FFG reskinned their game to their other licenced IP to make Armada. As FFG became more successful GW was saying "no" more often than before.
aka_mythos wrote: While I realize FFG's success was due to other IP, I will always be apprehensive of buying into a GW licensed (non-video) game because GW has shown it won't tolerate a partner being "too" successful.
Not sure we ever good proof conclusive of who/why the FFG/GW relationship ended. All we know is that it did.
aka_mythos wrote: While I realize FFG's success was due to other IP, I will always be apprehensive of buying into a GW licensed (non-video) game because GW has shown it won't tolerate a partner being "too" successful.
There is a story that FFG was originally going to be making a battlefleet gothic game for GW, but took the system and used it for Star Wars Armada. I would be pretty pissed as GW if this happened. Not to mention they went into direct competition with selling minatures now. They were also doing less and less with the license anyways and pumping everything into milking Star Wars. I'm glad they lost it they were getting really lazy with it.
As for the new rpg. So hyped. If this rpg is good it might get me to come out of GM retirement for a campaign. I want to see the madness that is a mixed race party.
The Imperials kill the Xenos, that's what will happen because that's how the entire fluff works.
As for the new rpg. So hyped. If this rpg is good it might get me to come out of GM retirement for a campaign. I want to see the madness that is a mixed race party.
Mixed race could happen in RT, it just had to be ran effectively and everyone needed to be on the same page for it to not fall apart immediately.
As for the new rpg. So hyped. If this rpg is good it might get me to come out of GM retirement for a campaign. I want to see the madness that is a mixed race party.
Mixed race could happen in RT, it just had to be ran effectively and everyone needed to be on the same page for it to not fall apart immediately.
Yep I played mixed race once and it worked well enough. Heh it probably helped my Rogue Trader basically was so crazy he tracked down dark eldar and hired some on as mercenaries haha. Good times. We also had a kroot and a psychopath killer. Then your typical rogue trader characters.
tinfoil wrote: Great news! I've really missed the FFG efforts along these lines. I didn't even play Dark Heresy, but I loved the periodic narrative infusions it injected into the setting. Hopefully Ulissis will feel and further these efforts.
Agreed, I'm not a big P&P roleplayer, but I love they exist just for the sheer amount of background material they churn out. Hopefully the new team can continue to live up to the excellent FFG sourcebooks, having one of the previous bigwigs in charge is promising in that regard.
aka_mythos wrote: While I realize FFG's success was due to other IP, I will always be apprehensive of buying into a GW licensed (non-video) game because GW has shown it won't tolerate a partner being "too" successful.
There is a story that FFG was originally going to be making a battlefleet gothic game for GW, but took the system and used it for Star Wars Armada. I would be pretty pissed as GW if this happened. Not to mention they went into direct competition with selling minatures now. They were also doing less and less with the license anyways and pumping everything into milking Star Wars. I'm glad they lost it they were getting really lazy with it.
As for the new rpg. So hyped. If this rpg is good it might get me to come out of GM retirement for a campaign. I want to see the madness that is a mixed race party.
The Imperials kill the Xenos, that's what will happen because that's how the entire fluff works.
Unless you are a Rogue Trader. Or a Inquisitor with a Xenos Retinue. Or a independent party like a Planetary Governor that has pacts with Dark Eldar (Used normally as Mercenaries for Humans), with Orks or with the Tau.
40K is a very big galaxy. Don't put it black or white.
I don't disagree that for the big part is a very radical galaxy, and is what is make the universe so interesting. But theres still room for more gray areas, and subtle plots.
aka_mythos wrote: While I realize FFG's success was due to other IP, I will always be apprehensive of buying into a GW licensed (non-video) game because GW has shown it won't tolerate a partner being "too" successful.
Not sure we ever good proof conclusive of who/why the FFG/GW relationship ended. All we know is that it did.
Indeed. I'm sure there was more to the story than "FFG good, GW bad". It probably had just as much to do with the fact that with X-Wing and Armada, and the then-in-development Rune Wars, FFG was starting to become a direct competitor to GW. If Naughty Dog Studios started developing their own console, I bet things would get a little awkward between them and Sony as well.
Wrath & Glory allows players to take on the roles of characters from the Warhammer 40,000 setting, including intrepid agents of the Imperium of Man and even some of the classic alien races that populate the galaxy.
That from their website. This strongly suggests that players will be able to make alien characters. I suspect the likely suspects might be Eldar (of some form, like Corsair or Ranger) and Tau. Both are races that have had some degree of non-violent interactions with some parts of the Imperium (despite the official Imperial propaganda line).
BrianDavion wrote: of intreast is the fact that the old FFG stuff will be avaliable as PDF again. thats good news for people who decide they prefer the old system.
also the fact that the game is set in "modern times" for 40k is intreasting. this would REALLY flesh out some things.
Oh I didn't spot that, my interest just went way way down in that case.
BrianDavion wrote: of intreast is the fact that the old FFG stuff will be avaliable as PDF again. thats good news for people who decide they prefer the old system.
also the fact that the game is set in "modern times" for 40k is intreasting. this would REALLY flesh out some things.
Oh I didn't spot that, my interest just went way way down in that case.
it's actually an intreasting thing as this'd allow us to very likely get a good "ground level view" of what the galaxy is like right now. GW's just MASSIVLY shaken up the setting, and I think RPG material is more likely to give us a better view of "now vs then" then a codex could
I am very excited with the possibilities of this new game, and my biggest hope is that they allow us to play chaos characters ala Black Crusade.
I am curious what they will do about the advancement system as well. The only game I played enough of to worry about advancements was Black Crusade, and I feel like there were not enough options to allow characters to really diversify except along the lines of the different gods, with pretty much all characters who were devoted to a certain god looking roughly the same.
BrianDavion wrote: of intreast is the fact that the old FFG stuff will be avaliable as PDF again. thats good news for people who decide they prefer the old system.
also the fact that the game is set in "modern times" for 40k is intreasting. this would REALLY flesh out some things.
Oh I didn't spot that, my interest just went way way down in that case.
it's actually an intreasting thing as this'd allow us to very likely get a good "ground level view" of what the galaxy is like right now. GW's just MASSIVLY shaken up the setting, and I think RPG material is more likely to give us a better view of "now vs then" then a codex could
Well, yes, you've just spelled out why I'm less interested - I liked 40K, I didn't need it to be "shaken up", and I don't really care about the new state of affairs.
I wonder if it will share core game mechanics with the relaunched Torg RPG. IT would be great if they do, since TORG has always been a solid RPG, and it invovles faction from across the multiverse.
Being able to play a Power Armroed Space Marine in TORG would be sweet, and not out of line with that games mythos.
it's actually an intreasting thing as this'd allow us to very likely get a good "ground level view" of what the galaxy is like right now. GW's just MASSIVLY shaken up the setting, and I think RPG material is more likely to give us a better view of "now vs then" then a codex could
I hadn't thought of that. The setting is likely to be a post RobbyG and Adeptus Restartes era setting as opposed to "classic" 40k in the FFG stuff.
I hope they explore Dark Imperium era fluff for all races and not just the IoM though obviously I am very keen to see what happened to the IoM in this timeline form a civilian side as well as what happened tot he Deathwatch. Specifically the Jericho reach which is now a giant warp storm.
Gamgee wrote: I hope they explore Dark Imperium era fluff for all races and not just the IoM though obviously I am very keen to see what happened to the IoM in this timeline form a civilian side as well as what happened tot he Deathwatch. Specifically the Jericho reach which is now a giant warp storm.
Given the guy behind this was apparently deeply involved with death watch I can't imagine he'll not eventually slide in some stuff if at all possiable. I'm now tempted to though to run a death watch adventure where the FINAL door to the Omega vault opens and inside is so dohickey that they end up having to go on a long ass mission that ends in them delivering it to Cawl to incorperate into his armor design.
H.B.M.C. wrote: It's back under the stalwart command of Ross Watson, the man who first got the 40KRPGs going when they moved from Black Industries to FFG.
He's also the guy who brought me on board as a play-tester and later writer.
This is good news overall. I'm very excited.
Same here. I enjoyed working with Ross back then, and look forward to doing so again. He cares deeply about the IP, and has a solid handle on game theory.
Very happy that it will be set in the new Dark Age of the Imperium as I really like the new setting so my interest has gone up!, I'll probably get the books just for the fluff.
Platuan4th wrote: Yeah, it's more likely a more open style ala D&D than the concentrated styles the BI/FFG ones had.
yeah the impression I get from the limited info is the core rules is gonna be a big dump of "here are the rules do what you will" and the future supplemnents will be campaign guides.
So to make a comparison, it would be like if FFG published one single rules book for dark heresy death watch rogue trader etc, and that death watch rogue trader etc where all an add on explaining how to use the rules to make "X type of game"
IMO that would have been significantly more preferable so I hope that'll be the case here even if the different campaigns are at different xp levels (I.e. A rogue tradrr style campaign is at d&d style level 5 but a marine one is at 15) as long as they use the same core rules. The 80% the same rules in the ffg continuum was much more troublesome than I initially thought they'd be to convert.
I don't know, I don't particulary enjoy D&D.
It is the rpg I play I like the least.
I enjoy the «specialisation» given by DH, RT, etc.
But I'm glad to see 40krpg back, I'm looking forward new news !
warboss wrote: IMO that would have been significantly more preferable so I hope that'll be the case here even if the different campaigns are at different xp levels (I.e. A rogue tradrr style campaign is at d&d style level 5 but a marine one is at 15) as long as they use the same core rules. The 80% the same rules in the ffg continuum was much more troublesome than I initially thought they'd be to convert.
but then they worked better in their own 'genres' than being a generic all round system
Sorta. I'd argue the differences between some were fairly token, and often done just to shake things up. I think black crusade actually worked well for being the general all rounder of the systems. The only thing that really was missing was the ship combat from rogue trader, and even that could've just been an extra supplement.
godardc wrote: I don't know, I don't particulary enjoy D&D.
It is the rpg I play I like the least.
I enjoy the «specialisation» given by DH, RT, etc.
But I'm glad to see 40krpg back, I'm looking forward new news !
keep in mind the D&D caomparison is just one he's using for ease of referance. eveyrone knows what D&D is character levels are etc.
MECHANICLY the game looks to have more in common with say... shadowrun then D&D
warboss wrote: IMO that would have been significantly more preferable so I hope that'll be the case here even if the different campaigns are at different xp levels (I.e. A rogue tradrr style campaign is at d&d style level 5 but a marine one is at 15) as long as they use the same core rules. The 80% the same rules in the ffg continuum was much more troublesome than I initially thought they'd be to convert.
but then they worked better in their own 'genres' than being a generic all round system
I'd agree with you with the important caveat that your original purpose was specifically to ONLY play marines... or ONLY entry level humans... or ONLY experienced and well equipped humans... or ONLY Imperial Guard... or ONLY a bad guy traitor campaign. If you wanted some combination of any of the preceeding settings for your campaign, you would have been better off with a single cohesive core system with multiple setting books. YMMV.
SilverAlien wrote:Sorta. I'd argue the differences between some were fairly token, and often done just to shake things up. I think black crusade actually worked well for being the general all rounder of the systems. The only thing that really was missing was the ship combat from rogue trader, and even that could've just been an extra supplement.
I actually bought Black Crusade exclusively because of that reason as it's easier to plug and play that into an inclusive Imperial campaign by changing various names of abilities/items than it is trying to reconcile multiple different horde systems, enemy power rankings, psychic power systems, etc. While I can see spinning off an all marine setting to properly have them reflect their fluff without having to balance in squishy normal humans or chaos just because of the diametrically opposed setting and inherent rules, I can't really justify the splits between dark heresy, rogue trader, and only war. The decision to split those was made by a company that didn't care about fragmenting the customer base that instead prioritized a quick buck and multiple sales of mostly (but not completely... just different enough to be a PITA) same thing to the same crowd. They easily could have been a level continuation of each other with a single book for instance with =I= specific rules, another with IG specific rules, and another with a focus on exploration and space combat but all using the same core characters and rules.
BrianDavion wrote:
godardc wrote: I don't know, I don't particulary enjoy D&D. It is the rpg I play I like the least. I enjoy the «specialisation» given by DH, RT, etc. But I'm glad to see 40krpg back, I'm looking forward new news !
keep in mind the D&D caomparison is just one he's using for ease of referance. eveyrone knows what D&D is character levels are etc.
MECHANICLY the game looks to have more in common with say... shadowrun then D&D
Spot on. I only was using it as a reference since it is the prototypical and most famous class based system for the purposes of my example.
warboss wrote: The decision to split those was made by a company that didn't care about fragmenting the customer base that instead prioritized a quick buck and multiple sales of mostly (but not completely... just different enough to be a PITA) same thing to the same crowd.
Before they went to FFG, Black Industries always planned to make 3 games (DH, RT and DW).
warboss wrote: The decision to split those was made by a company that didn't care about fragmenting the customer base that instead prioritized a quick buck and multiple sales of mostly (but not completely... just different enough to be a PITA) same thing to the same crowd.
Before they went to FFG, Black Industries always planned to make 3 games (DH, RT and DW).
I appreciate the behind the scenes info as I didn't know that. My statement stands although it now applies to two companies. I doubt FFG were contractually obligated to continue that plan let alone add two more self contained RPGs on top of the original three for a total of one universe and playerbase split into/amongst 5 product lines. I *really* hope the new guys and gals don't do that.
I wouldn't even call it "behind the scenes" knowledge. BI talked about it when DH was first announced, and the forewords to all the core rulebooks talk about the original plan.
Black Crusade and Only War were the things that went beyond the original plan. Hell, Only War was originally a Dark Heresy supplement that grew so large they spun it out into its own game.
keep in mind that splitting it wasn't a bad thing anyway. as a GM it was kinda nice in that if I wanted to run dark heresy I didn't have to deal with someone insisting on playing a space marine
That's interesting, but I too wonder about how the setting will be explored and which character we will be able to play. It's not like the Imperium is a place where "adventurers" can freely go around as they wish, nor that every faction works while holding hands with the others. To me, the Inquisition or Rogue Traders are those that can touch a large variety of possibilities.
Ulisses other RPG is TORG, which is skill and attribute based, not level based. I'm really hoping that is the direction they take with the new 40KRPG. Other than D&D, I've never found level based RPGs to my liking.
As long as its not like the FFG Star Wars rpg's I'm good. I'm a veteran rpgGM for like 15 years and of the dozens or more of systems I own and have run games in. That is the one I hate the most.
I also don't think it would be good with a cypher system. While I love Numenera it's simply a little too rules light for 40k (as I imagine it).
One thing I hope returns in some way. Crit charts. I also want to see new and crazy crit charts in every supplement lol. I always felt FFG was really missing out on not adding to the crit chart over time or expanding on it.
Wrath & Glory allows players to take on the roles of characters from the Warhammer 40,000 setting, including intrepid agents of the Imperium of Man and even some of the classic alien races that populate the galaxy.
That from their website. This strongly suggests that players will be able to make alien characters. I suspect the likely suspects might be Eldar (of some form, like Corsair or Ranger) and Tau. Both are races that have had some degree of non-violent interactions with some parts of the Imperium (despite the official Imperial propaganda line).
adamsouza wrote: Ulisses other RPG is TORG, which is skill and attribute based, not level based. I'm really hoping that is the direction they take with the new 40KRPG. Other than D&D, I've never found level based RPGs to my liking.
they mentioned a D6 system with a Dicepool etc. so it won't be level absed.
adamsouza wrote: Ulisses other RPG is TORG, which is skill and attribute based, not level based. I'm really hoping that is the direction they take with the new 40KRPG. Other than D&D, I've never found level based RPGs to my liking.
they mentioned a D6 system with a Dicepool etc. so it won't be level absed.
if yoiu've played it think shadowrun
That's good news.
TORG was made by West End Games, makers of the original Star Wars RPG, and used something like 2d10, but it had rules in the core book to convert it to WEGs D6 rules. Star Wars D6 by WEG is my all time favorite. It actually still has an active player base after 25+ years. Ulisses mentioned when they got the TORG rights that they were also interested in putting out new WEG D6 based RPG material.
If the 40KRPG is based on the similar core rules to Star Wars, D6 Fantasy, D6 Space, or D6 Fantasy, it would be very easy to create all the 40K player races. If you've ever played the WEG Star Wars game, it had hundred of playable races.
Spoiler:
Space Marine
DEX 2D-4D
STR 3D-5D
PER 2D-4D
KNO 1D-4D
MEC 1D-4D
TEC 1D-4D
MK VII Powered Armor +2D to resist Physical +1D to Resist Energy -1D to DEX
Mars Pattern Bolter 5/30/200 5D Physical Damage
Eldar
DEX 3D-5D
STR 1D-3D+2
PER 2D-4D
KNO 2D-5D
MEC 2D-4D
TEC 2D-4D
I love WEG's D6 system, and while I think it would work for street level DH type stuff, I don't think it's suited to Space Marines and the like.
I get the sense that apart from a couple of posters here, I'm in the minority in really liking the fact the previous 40K games were all split into different lines:
BrianDavion wrote: keep in mind that splitting it wasn't a bad thing anyway. as a GM it was kinda nice in that if I wanted to run dark heresy I didn't have to deal with someone insisting on playing a space marine
This. I only ever ran DH1, DW and BC - it was easy to set the narrative based on cohesive parties. Yes the systems were broken - BC was the best and was easily adaptable. The rules were many but they were simple, so it was easy to houserule anything you wanted.
A more pressing issue is that "Wrath & Glory" is a terrible title.
Caliginous wrote: I love WEG's D6 system, and while I think it would work for street level DH type stuff, I don't think it's suited to Space Marines and the like.
May I ask why you would think that ?
Having played several heavily armed and armored Bounty Hunters over the years, I think Adeptus Astartes would work well.
I get the sense that apart from a couple of posters here, I'm in the minority in really liking the fact the previous 40K games were all split into different lines:
That was a decision that infuriated my gaming group. It was akin to D&D saying we know how much you love our setting, so here is our first game where you can only play Thieves, Wizards, and Clerics. If you want to play Barbarians, fighters, and monks wait a year for our next RpG. Warlocks you say ? 2-3 years from now, if we're still making money, we'll include them in a third game.
Give us the ability to play what we want, and let the Game Master and players decide who to play.
Don't get me wrong, an Ork, Space Marines from 2 different chapters, an Eldar, and an Inquisitor in the same group would be bizzare, or even heretical, but it should be up to the Game Master to say what's a good fit.
The gunfights in SWD6 were like the films and very cinematic - short, sharp, brutal. If you got hit, you got hit bad. half of combat was spent picking up your fallen party members and shoving their incapacitated bodies into cover, using med-packs and praying that that wild die wasn't going to come up with a 1 right now as you finally have a free action to fire off a shot at the bastard behind the cantina booth...doesn't seem very space mariney to me, but I've never tried mixing the systems. Also, as much as I love the system, it's hand to hand rules were flawed - light sabre combat was kinda stupid, but I haven't read D6 Space or Fantasy, the rules might have been revised.
As for the seperate lines thing, all I can do is reiterate - as a GM I loved the party coherency it created. I think there was easily enough variety to appease everyone, but Only War did seem a little restrictive to me. I bought the book but it just didn't strike me as very fun, but others swear by it. DW was designed to be a power-game, which made sense to me.
BrianDavion wrote: TORG was made by West End Games, makers of the original Star Wars RPG, and used something like 2d10, but it had rules in the core book to convert it to WEGs D6 rules.
BrianDavion wrote: TORG was made by West End Games, makers of the original Star Wars RPG, and used something like 2d10, but it had rules in the core book to convert it to WEGs D6 rules.
Caliginous wrote: I love WEG's D6 system, and while I think it would work for street level DH type stuff, I don't think it's suited to Space Marines and the like.
I get the sense that apart from a couple of posters here, I'm in the minority in really liking the fact the previous 40K games were all split into different lines:
I liked the focus as well. Less dealing with that one special snowflake who will ramble on until your ears drop off about how yes, it's a low-key inquisitorial acolyte game that's about espionage and socialising, but his Plague Marine could totally work if you were a GOOD GM.
The other thing is that having a single game that covers a wide range of power levels is damn hard. Many systems have tried and failed. Either the low-powered characters feel bland and samey for a lack of options, or something breaks at higher levels.
I liked the focus as well. Less dealing with that one special snowflake who will ramble on until your ears drop off about how yes, it's a low-key inquisitorial acolyte game that's about espionage and socialising, but his Plague Marine could totally work if you were a GOOD GM.
Haha, oh gawd yes, a million times yes.
The other thing is that having a single game that covers a wide range of power levels is damn hard. Many systems have tried and failed. Either the low-powered characters feel bland and samey for a lack of options, or something breaks at higher levels.
Hmmm. Hopefully the switch to a die pool system means we'll see a radical change from the old "start at a 30-40% chance to hit then start tallying the bonuses and penalties" style of the old system. The WHFRP system backbone the old games were built on was good for dark, hardscrabble fantasy in not-Late-Medieval-Europe, but not so good for grimdark adventuring in a sci-fi Medieval society with plasma pistols and chainswords.
I also hope there will be a better, simplified system for statting and running NPCs. When your published adventure stat blocs for NPCs contain 4-8 lines of Talents the GM is expected to just know what they do, you're at the cutting edge of 1998 RPG design.
I really hope this has full miniature based combat support like D&D. I am under the impression that the Dark Heresy roleplay books was soley focused on "theatre of mind" play? Correct me if I am wrong. :-)
Bottle wrote: I really hope this has full miniature based combat support like D&D. I am under the impression that the Dark Heresy roleplay books was soley focused on "theatre of mind" play? Correct me if I am wrong. :-)
Soley? No, not in my experience. We always used minis but using the movement stats exactly translated into inches or squares/hexes wasn't great either. We ended up going with a mix where the distances between models wasn't exact but rather just a relative comparison.
"If you are coming to Gen Con, make sure to stop at one of our booths! We will be distributing a free preview pamphlet for Wrath & Glory that goes into a little more detail about our plans for the product line. You may also want to attend our seminar at noon on Saturday."
I have the opposite hopes; miniatures-based games are quite difficult to use unless you're face to face. Most of my current roleplay partners are far enough away that the only reasonable way to get face to face is to take a flight, which is itself unreasonable for a night of roleplaying especially for my British friends.
Which is the problem I had with DnD 4th before fantasy grounds came out and made it easier.
Melissia wrote: I have the opposite hopes; miniatures-based games are quite difficult to use unless you're face to face. Most of my current roleplay partners are far enough away that the only reasonable way to get face to face is to take a flight, which is itself unreasonable for a night of roleplaying especially for my British friends.
I've played both with and without miniatures. There're pros and cons to both. In my mind a good RPG should be able to support both styles of play.
keep in mind the D&D caomparison is just one he's using for ease of referance. eveyrone knows what D&D is character levels are etc.
MECHANICLY the game looks to have more in common with say... shadowrun then D&D
Actually, Class and Level suits 40K very well. And unlike D&D saying you're a 7th Level Assassin wouldn't sound weird in game. That said...
The mention of Shadowrun makes me think of trolls. Marines aren't that physically different to trolls from SR, so it shouldn't be impossible to have a Marine stand next to an Eldar and rage against the dying of the light. (This assumes you don't believe the Imperial hype about Marines that has never been supported in the tabletop game. TL;DR: Don't believe the Marine hype.)
Dice pool could also mean 3d6 and add. Just saying'.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: If as speculated, Necromunda comes with floorplans, sounds like a good way to help people visualise their environment during combat?
Not some unholy RPG/TTWG hybrid, just 'right, corridors look like this on your dataslate map. You're here. Off you pop'.
Would work well with the index card method. Throw down room tile and link it to other tiles with a Close/Short/Long range bands.
The mention of Shadowrun makes me think of trolls. Marines aren't that physically different to trolls from SR, so it shouldn't be impossible to have a Marine stand next to an Eldar and rage against the dying of the light. (This assumes you don't believe the Imperial hype about Marines that has never been supported in the tabletop game. TL;DR: Don't believe the Marine hype.)
Yeah, that would be a big assumption given it's an RPG and based on the background supported in the novels and codex entries. The problem isn't so much marines and eldar as it is marines and humans. Marines are obviously bigger, tougher, quicker, and stronger than any human could ever hope to be without serious mutation or mechanical augmentation. They're also much smarter and mentally more resilent than the average human (although still in those stats within possible parameters) due to the weeding out process in selecting marine aspirants. In effect, they have no RPG "dump stats" to allow them to easily incorporate into a game with "normal" humans.
The mention of Shadowrun makes me think of trolls. Marines aren't that physically different to trolls from SR, so it shouldn't be impossible to have a Marine stand next to an Eldar and rage against the dying of the light. (This assumes you don't believe the Imperial hype about Marines that has never been supported in the tabletop game. TL;DR: Don't believe the Marine hype.)
Yeah, that would be a big assumption given it's an RPG and based on the background supported in the novels and codex entries. The problem isn't so much marines and eldar as it is marines and humans. Marines are obviously bigger, tougher, quicker, and stronger than any human could ever hope to be without serious mutation or mechanical augmentation. They're also much smarter and mentally more resilent than the average human (although still in those stats within possible parameters) due to the weeding out process in selecting marine aspirants. In effect, they have no RPG "dump stats" to allow them to easily incorporate into a game with "normal" humans.
The balancing wouldn't and shouldn't be in raw stats. A Marine is less suitable for an investigative type campaign because their stats and skills are combat orientated. If the solution is NOT to go in blasting, then the Marine is not more overpowered, and if the Marine lacks those political and investigative skills that the normal humans have, they may even be at a disadvantage. Marines are like the archetypal D&D paladin class. A Marine deviating too sharply from their Chapter's ideals is basically at risk of turning renegade (even if they justify it to themselves). A Marine that just goes around clobbering everyone in human society that gets in their way may attract the rest of the Imperium's unwelcome attention.
The problem is the GM enforcing these "softer" restrictions. Too much and it becomes a form of straitjacket or railroading. Too little and the restrictions are not really restrictions and the Marine is overpowered.
The mention of Shadowrun makes me think of trolls. Marines aren't that physically different to trolls from SR, so it shouldn't be impossible to have a Marine stand next to an Eldar and rage against the dying of the light. (This assumes you don't believe the Imperial hype about Marines that has never been supported in the tabletop game. TL;DR: Don't believe the Marine hype.)
Yeah, that would be a big assumption given it's an RPG and based on the background supported in the novels and codex entries. The problem isn't so much marines and eldar as it is marines and humans. Marines are obviously bigger, tougher, quicker, and stronger than any human could ever hope to be without serious mutation or mechanical augmentation. They're also much smarter and mentally more resilent than the average human (although still in those stats within possible parameters) due to the weeding out process in selecting marine aspirants. In effect, they have no RPG "dump stats" to allow them to easily incorporate into a game with "normal" humans.
The balancing wouldn't and shouldn't be in raw stats. A Marine is less suitable for an investigative type campaign because their stats and skills are combat orientated. If the solution is NOT to go in blasting, then the Marine is not more overpowered, and if the Marine lacks those political and investigative skills that the normal humans have, they may even be at a disadvantage. Marines are like the archetypal D&D paladin class. A Marine deviating too sharply from their Chapter's ideals is basically at risk of turning renegade (even if they justify it to themselves). A Marine that just goes around clobbering everyone in human society that gets in their way may attract the rest of the Imperium's unwelcome attention.
The problem is the GM enforcing these "softer" restrictions. Too much and it becomes a form of straitjacket or railroading. Too little and the restrictions are not really restrictions and the Marine is overpowered.
And also, as Gunner Jurgen has adequately shown multiple times throughout Ciaphas Cain's career, an astartes dies just as much to a meltagun to the chest as anyone else.
Normal humans can have easier access to heavy firepower than marine characters as they don't need to find marine specific versions. A marine couldn't even fit their fingers into the trigger guard of a weapon designed for normal human hands and if they are operating away from an easy source of space marine supplies then finding weapons designed for them will be tricky.
While commenting this news with a friend, he raised a valid point: now that the company working on it is German, we might see meters, kilos and celsius! yay!
Vector Strike wrote: While commenting this news with a friend, he raised a valid point: now that the company working on it is German, we might see meters, kilos and celsius! yay!
Vector Strike wrote: While commenting this news with a friend, he raised a valid point: now that the company working on it is German, we might see meters, kilos and celsius! yay!
Vector Strike wrote: While commenting this news with a friend, he raised a valid point: now that the company working on it is German, we might see meters, kilos and celsius! yay!
The 40KRPGs already had metres and kilograms.
Oh yes, forgot about that (almost 2 years without playing that system :( ). Anyway, I hope they keep this.
Vector Strike wrote: Oh yes, forgot about that (almost 2 years without playing that system :( ). Anyway, I hope they keep this.
Despite the RPGs being made by a US company, 40K comes from an British company, so everything in those books was in the Queen's English. You won't find 'color' in those books, only 'colour' (unless the proof readers missed any!).
In addition to the general seminar at GenCon this Saturday, Ross will also be giving a Wrath & Glory specific seminar at Rat Con (Ulisses in-house con) in Germany the following weekend.
This one will also be posted to YouTube after the fact.
Vector Strike wrote: Oh yes, forgot about that (almost 2 years without playing that system :( ). Anyway, I hope they keep this.
Despite the RPGs being made by a US company, 40K comes from an British company, so everything in those books was in the Queen's English. You won't find 'color' in those books, only 'colour' (unless the proof readers missed any!).
Indeed. I can attest to the preponderence of armour and the lack of armor. I have yet to fully confirm the English Extraneous Vowel theory though due to a complete lack of references to a foetus or an oesophagus even in the Nurgle themed book.
Vector Strike wrote: Oh yes, forgot about that (almost 2 years without playing that system :( ). Anyway, I hope they keep this.
Despite the RPGs being made by a US company, 40K comes from an British company, so everything in those books was in the Queen's English. You won't find 'color' in those books, only 'colour' (unless the proof readers missed any!).
I've always liked it when US companies doing stuff lisenced from the British pay attention to that kinda thing. LOTRO was the same way, despite being a american company that programmed it everything was British spelling, it really added to it
Melissia wrote: Since it's a pool of D6s, does that kinda make the game like shadowrun, mechanically? Hrm.
Potentially. There are some other ways of doing dice pools, which are... not so good (to horrifyingly bad).
And several of the Shadowrun editions ran the basic mechanics straight into a swamp, with some subsystems better or worse than others (burned down, fell over, then sank into the swamp).
Melissia wrote: Since it's a pool of D6s, does that kinda make the game like shadowrun, mechanically? Hrm.
Potentially. There are some other ways of doing dice pools, which are... not so good (to horrifyingly bad).
And several of the Shadowrun editions ran the basic mechanics straight into a swamp, with some subsystems better or worse than others (burned down, fell over, then sank into the swamp).
Most of the bad shadowrun mechanics in the past where IIRC matrix combat though weren't they?
Voss wrote: Potentially. There are some other ways of doing dice pools, which are... not so good (to horrifyingly bad).
Basic shadowrun in the latest edition is actually not all that bad. Basic attributes (strength, agility, charisma, etc) are one pool, while skills (weapons, sneaking, bluffing, etc) are another. You add the two pools together and roll that many d6s, with each 5 or 6 being a success. Number of successes determines the result, with harder feats requiring more successes.
Could see it being done. Roll Strength + Weapon Skill to determine if you hit and if so how hard you hit (number of successes over one). Roll weapons damage stat + Strength to determine amount of damage done.
As noted, it's mostly magic and matrix BS that makes shadowrun's system break.
Amusingly, this is similar to White Wolf's system, but WW's system uses D10s (7+ is standard success) with different abilities modifying it. But that really doesn't work for 40k I feel ,and certainly doesn't work as well for a d6 system.
Iracundus wrote: The balancing wouldn't and shouldn't be in raw stats. A Marine is less suitable for an investigative type campaign because their stats and skills are combat orientated. If the solution is NOT to go in blasting, then the Marine is not more overpowered, and if the Marine lacks those political and investigative skills that the normal humans have, they may even be at a disadvantage. Marines are like the archetypal D&D paladin class. A Marine deviating too sharply from their Chapter's ideals is basically at risk of turning renegade (even if they justify it to themselves). A Marine that just goes around clobbering everyone in human society that gets in their way may attract the rest of the Imperium's unwelcome attention.
The problem is the GM enforcing these "softer" restrictions. Too much and it becomes a form of straitjacket or railroading. Too little and the restrictions are not really restrictions and the Marine is overpowered.
Eh, that's never worked out in practice for me. It's very well to say "One character will be no use in these situations, therefore balance.". But in practice, that means a player just ends sitting around with nothing to do for big chunks of any given session. And being socially inept as a drawback either means the character nullifies it by just letting the face-man do the talking, or they raise player tension by making things hard for the group.
(I'm not accusing anyone of bad-wrong-fun, play whatever canon abomination you like so long as everyone's enjoying themselves. )
Subtracting the opposing dice pool and rolling the remainder is faster, but it's boring and frustrating for the opposing player, who gets to roll nothing, and it heavily encourages minmaxing.
It's a poor game mechanic fixated on simplicity to enhance "role" playing, that breaks down once "roll" playing occurs at the table. It's the cancer of RPGs.
None of the WEG D6RPGs are infected with this Heresy. Hopefully The 40KRPG will be free of this blight as well.
adamsouza wrote: Subtracting the opposing dice pool and rolling the remainder is faster, but it's boring and frustrating for the opposing player, who gets to roll nothing, and it heavily encourages minmaxing.
It's a poor game mechanic fixated on simplicity to enhance "role" playing, that breaks down once "roll" playing occurs at the table. It's the cancer of RPGs.
None of the WEG D6RPGs are infected with this Heresy. Hopefully The 40KRPG will be free of this blight as well.
Who is the "opposing player" here? The GM? Because the only other instance I can think of one in an RPG would be opposed rolls between PCs (which could be governed by different rules).
There's a lot of games where the GM doesn't ever need to roll a single die (all the PbtA games, for example), and the last thing I'd call those is "boring" for either the GM or the players.
Iracundus wrote: The balancing wouldn't and shouldn't be in raw stats. A Marine is less suitable for an investigative type campaign because their stats and skills are combat orientated. If the solution is NOT to go in blasting, then the Marine is not more overpowered, and if the Marine lacks those political and investigative skills that the normal humans have, they may even be at a disadvantage. Marines are like the archetypal D&D paladin class. A Marine deviating too sharply from their Chapter's ideals is basically at risk of turning renegade (even if they justify it to themselves). A Marine that just goes around clobbering everyone in human society that gets in their way may attract the rest of the Imperium's unwelcome attention.
The problem is the GM enforcing these "softer" restrictions. Too much and it becomes a form of straitjacket or railroading. Too little and the restrictions are not really restrictions and the Marine is overpowered.
Eh, that's never worked out in practice for me. It's very well to say "One character will be no use in these situations, therefore balance.". But in practice, that means a player just ends sitting around with nothing to do for big chunks of any given session. And being socially inept as a drawback either means the character nullifies it by just letting the face-man do the talking, or they raise player tension by making things hard for the group.
(I'm not accusing anyone of bad-wrong-fun, play whatever canon abomination you like so long as everyone's enjoying themselves. )
Agreed. Good games happen when all players can be involved, all of the time. It's never a good thing when some players outclass others.
One of the first RPGs I played was Rifts. I picked a character based on how he looked in a picture. It turned out that his equipment included power armour (making me impervious to normal weapons) and a thing like an onager dunecrawler, with a couple of massive guns on the sides and a handy gunrack on the inside, containing pretty much any weapon I could want. Another guy was playing a sort of mutated dog person thing, with basically nothing. It was nonsense, but at least the guy inside the armour wasn't a genetically-modified psychopath with two hearts and stuff.
I think that marines could work if everyone is playing one, or maybe if you've got a team that calls in a kill team when required. An adventure in which a squad of marines had to investigate something without massacring everyone they came across could also be entertaining.
It goes without saying, but primaris marines are a further step away from normal humans.
Who is the "opposing player" here? The GM? Because the only other instance I can think of one in an RPG would be opposed rolls between PCs (which could be governed by different rules).
There's a lot of games where the GM doesn't ever need to roll a single die (all the PbtA games, for example), and the last thing I'd call those is "boring" for either the GM or the players.
Star Wars by WEG, Shadowrun, Torg, D6 Space, D6 Fantasy, Mutants and Masterminds, DC Heroes by Mayfair, DC Heroes by GR, Vampire, Werewolf, Mage, Changling, Mummy, Hunter, Shadowrun, Abberant, are all RPGs that I've played that use an opposed roll mechanic. Hell even D&D has opposed skill checks now.
When things oppose each other, they both roll. The one with the most successes wins the challenge. The one with the most dice usually, but not always wins.
What I was talking about is that some games later abridged this process to comparing the size of the opposing dice pools and automatically assuming dice rolls would cancel each other out. This leads to whoever had the higher total wins, before even rolling the dice.
It's the 40K equivalent of a Space Marine charging a Big Tyranid, getting to roll nothing, and losing the assault, with only the Big Tyranid rolling any dice, to see by how much he defeated the Space Marine.
It's a terrible mechanic. The only positive thing it does is save a few seconds of counting additional dice that were rolled, at the price of making situations binary in nature.
schoon wrote: Has anyone at GenCon picked up the pamphlet for this yet?
I picked it up. Not much in it outside that the core book will allow for imperium and zenos as well as chaos. Then they'll release campaign books to focus on specific groups. The first campaign is called imperium nihilus and it sounds more like a setting book and less like an adventure like we tend to associate RPG campaigns with. The rest of the pamphlet just talks about 40k and, Ulysses and Ross.
Noting rules wise in it by I did talk to a Ulysses employee that play tested it and its large d6 pool, he even indicated handfulls of dice, where you have to get 4+ on a certain number to succeed. 6s are special effects but i really don't know much else about that as i didn't bother to ask more detail due to the seminar being tomorrow.
Vector Strike wrote: Oh yes, forgot about that (almost 2 years without playing that system :( ). Anyway, I hope they keep this.
Despite the RPGs being made by a US company, 40K comes from an British company, so everything in those books was in the Queen's English. You won't find 'color' in those books, only 'colour' (unless the proof readers missed any!).
Indeed. I can attest to the preponderence of armour and the lack of armor. I have yet to fully confirm the English Extraneous Vowel theory though due to a complete lack of references to a foetus or an oesophagus even in the Nurgle themed book.
There are extra vowels that shouldn't be there. The one I remember is the extra you in vaporize (should be vaporise, even in British English. Vapourise is actually wrong). GW always gets this one wrong too - along with colouration (should be coloration) and a couple of others that always get my goat.
Mostly though, the proofreading in the 40kRPG books really needed some extra work. The most egregious one was Millenium instead of Millennium on one of the front pages of the special edition of Rogue Trader but mistakes were everywhere and they spoiled the books for me somewhat.
Is it wrong of me to read the headline of this topic and think "Warhammer 40,000 Roleplay returns! For now! Until GW gets tired of it and cans it again!"
Vector Strike wrote: Oh yes, forgot about that (almost 2 years without playing that system :( ). Anyway, I hope they keep this.
Despite the RPGs being made by a US company, 40K comes from an British company, so everything in those books was in the Queen's English. You won't find 'color' in those books, only 'colour' (unless the proof readers missed any!).
Indeed. I can attest to the preponderence of armour and the lack of armor. I have yet to fully confirm the English Extraneous Vowel theory though due to a complete lack of references to a foetus or an oesophagus even in the Nurgle themed book.
There are extra vowels that shouldn't be there. The one I remember is the extra you in vaporize (should be vaporise, even in British English. Vapourise is actually wrong). GW always gets this one wrong too - along with colouration (should be coloration) and a couple of others that always get my goat.
Mostly though, the proofreading in the 40kRPG books really needed some extra work. The most egregious one was Millenium instead of Millennium on one of the front pages of the special edition of Rogue Trader but mistakes were everywhere and they spoiled the books for me somewhat.
Is it wrong of me to read the headline of this topic and think "Warhammer 40,000 Roleplay returns! For now! Until GW gets tired of it and cans it again!"
I'd say so, given how quickly this announcement came ((FFG lost the lisence in Febuary) it's likely GW was intrested in keeping the 40kRPG alive. given that they would have had to negotiate a contract, then compose a game system, all before the announcement was made, I suspect GW was moving fairly quickly in that regard. which makes me suspect that the break with FFG was eaither GW deciding they simply didn't wanna continue a relationship with a company that was being more a compeitor. or more likely, FFG decided they wanted to end the relationship. after FFG got the sytar wars lisence thats where their intrest shifted, FFG likely decided that paying to renew the 40k lisence wasn't worth it.
Who is the "opposing player" here? The GM? Because the only other instance I can think of one in an RPG would be opposed rolls between PCs (which could be governed by different rules).
There's a lot of games where the GM doesn't ever need to roll a single die (all the PbtA games, for example), and the last thing I'd call those is "boring" for either the GM or the players.
Star Wars by WEG, Shadowrun, Torg, D6 Space, D6 Fantasy, Mutants and Masterminds, DC Heroes by Mayfair, DC Heroes by GR, Vampire, Werewolf, Mage, Changling, Mummy, Hunter, Shadowrun, Abberant, are all RPGs that I've played that use an opposed roll mechanic. Hell even D&D has opposed skill checks now.
When things oppose each other, they both roll. The one with the most successes wins the challenge. The one with the most dice usually, but not always wins.
What I was talking about is that some games later abridged this process to comparing the size of the opposing dice pools and automatically assuming dice rolls would cancel each other out. This leads to whoever had the higher total wins, before even rolling the dice.
It's the 40K equivalent of a Space Marine charging a Big Tyranid, getting to roll nothing, and losing the assault, with only the Big Tyranid rolling any dice, to see by how much he defeated the Space Marine.
It's a terrible mechanic. The only positive thing it does is save a few seconds of counting additional dice that were rolled, at the price of making situations binary in nature.
'
the problem with abrdiging that process is weird rolls are part of what makes RPGs (gaming in general fun) a decade later I'm STILL talking about that time a guy shot the arm off a BATTLEMECH in a Mechwarrior game I was playing.
I'm a little curious how they'll "open it up" for a varity of character concepts without it coming off as basicly "yeah let's ignore the IoMs structures and xenophobia"
BrianDavion wrote: I'm a little curious how they'll "open it up" for a varity of character concepts without it coming off as basicly "yeah let's ignore the IoMs structures and xenophobia"
The options are there for players who want to portray the more grayscale characters of the galaxy, the ones who would work with other species in order to meet mutual goals.
BrianDavion wrote: I'm a little curious how they'll "open it up" for a varity of character concepts without it coming off as basicly "yeah let's ignore the IoMs structures and xenophobia"
I find that actually reflects things better.
The Imperium isn't a unified whole. Unless you're part of Ultramar or other densely populated areas, you're quite often fairly well isolated. The Emperor is a legend, the Astartes a myth. Chaos is something generally used to keep children in line.
We see the Galaxy from near omnipresence. Down on the ground, it's a very different affair.
They offer you the option to have a variety of characters. Then it comes down to the master and the players to decide if they want to use a 100% imperial human party or a more excentric group for their campaing.
Thats the best way to do it.
Galas wrote: They offer you the option to have a variety of characters. Then it comes down to the master and the players to decide if they want to use a 100% imperial human party or a more excentric group for their campaing.
Thats the best way to do it.
Exactly. And those rules for creating xenos player characters can also be used by the GM to make xenos NPCs.
Just watched the YouTube Seminar, and lots of great information.
- The big takeaway = Broad and inclusive core rulebook that gives a framework for everything, and...
- Campaign books - Adventures, Setting, and Player Options - that delve into details for specific play areas such as...
- Imperium Nihilus, Doom of the Eldar, Orks, Space Marines, Death Watch, etc.
- Base game mechanic is d6 dice pools - unique system, but borrows from TORG (specifically) and others
- Combat will be brutal, and critical hits will be particularly nasty
- System will balance for gritty and epic play levels, and everywhere in between
- Psychic powers will be part of the game - high risk, high reward
- Starships and vehicles will be part of the "broad and inclusive" core framework
- Campaigns and adventures will have epic ideas - visiting the Black Library, fighting in the pits of Commorragh, meeting Primarchs, deamon princes, etc.
- There will be a beginner box, GM screen, and all the basics one would assume
- Adventure Anthology will be one of the first products
- Setting = 8th Edition storyline and all that entails
So hyped now. Gencon this year was fantastic for rpg's. Both 40krpg announced and Numenera 2. My top fav rpg's getting new versions.
Which one do I run? Which one do I just play in? Help me.
Edit
The WORST way to run a fun rpg is a theme park where you look at what other people did and kind of follow in their wake. I think meeting any of the big typical hero's of a game would be the worst thing to do and basically be like a dm of the rings campaign where the players are carted around to follow in the steps of larger people. Kinda sucks really. I have GM'ed for a lot of people over my nearly entire gm career and all I can say is almost every player has consistently said they would find that kind of campaign boring or had to suffer through a bad gm lead them through it. The best rpg's are always about the players first that lets them do the epic stuff. So naturally in a world which has primarch tier characters it really takes away from some of the dramatic tension when your not really having much of an impact.
Dunno. It's nice to meet the big NPCs here and there. Means you are part of a bigger whole.
But I think you should only meet them when you can help them in any meaningful and conceivable way. No point sending the 'newborns' to meet Guilliman and he asks you to bring him some rat tails
We see the Galaxy from near omnipresence. Down on the ground, it's a very different affair.
It can be a different affair but there are basically 2 universals in the Imperium, veneration of the Emperor and Abhorance of the Alien. Human/xenos cooperation does exist but outside of certain Inquisitoral factions and powerful Rogue Traders, or battlefield nessecity, it is always illegal and ruthlessly persecuted if discovered.
One of the reasons that the FFGRPGs worked so well is that they were tightly focused in terms of scope and setting.
A free for all 40KRPG will really need a strong GM or it will a huge mess.
- The big takeaway = Broad and inclusive core rulebook that gives a framework for everything, and...
- Campaign books - Adventures, Setting, and Player Options - that delve into details for specific play areas such as...
- Imperium Nihilus, Doom of the Eldar, Orks, Space Marines, Death Watch, etc.
- Base game mechanic is d6 dice pools - unique system, but borrows from TORG (specifically) and others
- Combat will be brutal, and critical hits will be particularly nasty
- System will balance for gritty and epic play levels, and everywhere in between
- Psychic powers will be part of the game - high risk, high reward
- Starships and vehicles will be part of the "broad and inclusive" core framework
- Campaigns and adventures will have epic ideas - visiting the Black Library, fighting in the pits of Commorragh, meeting Primarchs, deamon princes, etc. - There will be a beginner box, GM screen, and all the basics one would assume
- Adventure Anthology will be one of the first products
- Setting = 8th Edition storyline and all that entails
re the bolded bits; this sort of thing is exactly why some of us were reticent about the tonal shift of 8th. The reason the RPGs were great was that they went beneath the top-line "big damn heroes" stuff in the same way as the better BL novels and specialist games did, they helped retain and reinforce 40K's proper tone and themes, they were a place to escape the uncritically heroic bombast that came to characterise the main studio's writing in recent years.
- The big takeaway = Broad and inclusive core rulebook that gives a framework for everything, and...
- Campaign books - Adventures, Setting, and Player Options - that delve into details for specific play areas such as...
- Imperium Nihilus, Doom of the Eldar, Orks, Space Marines, Death Watch, etc.
- Base game mechanic is d6 dice pools - unique system, but borrows from TORG (specifically) and others
- Combat will be brutal, and critical hits will be particularly nasty
- System will balance for gritty and epic play levels, and everywhere in between
- Psychic powers will be part of the game - high risk, high reward
- Starships and vehicles will be part of the "broad and inclusive" core framework
- Campaigns and adventures will have epic ideas - visiting the Black Library, fighting in the pits of Commorragh, meeting Primarchs, deamon princes, etc. - There will be a beginner box, GM screen, and all the basics one would assume
- Adventure Anthology will be one of the first products
- Setting = 8th Edition storyline and all that entails
re the bolded bits; this sort of thing is exactly why some of us were reticent about the tonal shift of 8th. The reason the RPGs were great was that they went beneath the top-line "big damn heroes" stuff in the same way as the better BL novels and specialist games did, they helped retain and reinforce 40K's proper tone and themes, they were a place to escape the uncritically heroic bombast that came to characterise the main studio's writing in recent years.
Primarchs and the Black Library, jeezo
agreed,, I loved the street level feel of Dark Heresy. I imagine we wont have a great deal of 'low level' focus
The best rpg's are always about the players first that lets them do the epic stuff. So naturally in a world which has primarch tier characters it really takes away from some of the dramatic tension when your not really having much of an impact.
It's all a matter or scale and perspective.
Primarchs are the demigods of their universe. They are of the mythos of their setting. 99.99% of denizens of the 40K universe will never meet or even be directly effected my them in any way beyond word of mouth or religion.
Complaing that Primarch level character's in a setting outshine the player characters accomplishments is like complaining that a Clerics diety actions outshine the actions of the Cleric.
Since the Sun God defeated the God of Darkness while they both created the world we live on, and my Cleric can't compete with that, I clearly can not achieve anything meaningful.
- The big takeaway = Broad and inclusive core rulebook that gives a framework for everything, and...
- Campaign books - Adventures, Setting, and Player Options - that delve into details for specific play areas such as...
- Imperium Nihilus, Doom of the Eldar, Orks, Space Marines, Death Watch, etc.
- Base game mechanic is d6 dice pools - unique system, but borrows from TORG (specifically) and others
- Combat will be brutal, and critical hits will be particularly nasty
- System will balance for gritty and epic play levels, and everywhere in between
- Psychic powers will be part of the game - high risk, high reward
- Starships and vehicles will be part of the "broad and inclusive" core framework
- Campaigns and adventures will have epic ideas - visiting the Black Library, fighting in the pits of Commorragh, meeting Primarchs, deamon princes, etc.
- There will be a beginner box, GM screen, and all the basics one would assume
- Adventure Anthology will be one of the first products
- Setting = 8th Edition storyline and all that entails
Thanks for the link as well as the rundown. Any mention on whether or not this will be a traditional release or crowdfunded?
- The big takeaway = Broad and inclusive core rulebook that gives a framework for everything, and...
- Campaign books - Adventures, Setting, and Player Options - that delve into details for specific play areas such as...
- Imperium Nihilus, Doom of the Eldar, Orks, Space Marines, Death Watch, etc.
- Base game mechanic is d6 dice pools - unique system, but borrows from TORG (specifically) and others
- Combat will be brutal, and critical hits will be particularly nasty
- System will balance for gritty and epic play levels, and everywhere in between
- Psychic powers will be part of the game - high risk, high reward
- Starships and vehicles will be part of the "broad and inclusive" core framework
- Campaigns and adventures will have epic ideas - visiting the Black Library, fighting in the pits of Commorragh, meeting Primarchs, deamon princes, etc.
- There will be a beginner box, GM screen, and all the basics one would assume
- Adventure Anthology will be one of the first products
- Setting = 8th Edition storyline and all that entails
Well, if all this is incorporated into the base game, it's going to make for one hell of a core rulebook. I hope they don't end up going all over the place with it, but I am interested in seeing what they produce.
I'm fine with the options for epic stuff. I've often found it's easier to ignore options and scale down a game's scope than it is to try and bring a small scale game up to epic levels. (See the desire for and complexity of Ascension for Dark Heresy 1e.) I never liked the (gear bonus + situational bonus + talent bonus + action bonus - assorted penalties) complication required for every PC action to bring the players' chances of success out of the 30-50% range. I'd love to see a system that assumes a good to great deal of competency from the PCs, and then adds gear for flavor in 40K. Basing the 40K systems in the early 00's revision of a late 80's system for playing grimdark fantasy sewer jacks was probably a mistake, in retrospect. It was a system assuming you had swords and small but fierce dogs in your setting, not automatic weapons and plasma pistols.
I hope they have better support for creating your own NPCs this time around. I didn't like the old systems' way of giving you the stats of (for example) all the ork types from the wargame, premade with full stat blocks, but never told you, "to make an ork NPC, start with this baseline statblock and add stuff from there." This go around, I'd also like to see a better system for having 'mook' level NPCs, the type that can be dropped in one shot, action-movie style. I've always felt that was a handy tool for making the PCs seem like competent heroes at what they do. And such a ruleset is easy to ignore if you need every member of an opposing hive gang hard as nails in an underhive street-level campaign, but hard to incorporate your own houserule system if one isn't already implemented.
So I have some hopes, and the sparse information we have so far seems to imply that a lot of them will be met. I've been wanting new 40Krpgs for a while now, because after years of running the various FFG systems, I've gotten so where when the 40KRPG bug hits me, I look at the shelf of those books and slump my shoulders at the thought of running that clunky system again. A more modern, streamlines system with higher expectations of PC competence would be just the thing I'm looking for!
re the bolded bits; this sort of thing is exactly why some of us were reticent about the tonal shift of 8th. The reason the RPGs were great was that they went beneath the top-line "big damn heroes" stuff in the same way as the better BL novels and specialist games did, they helped retain and reinforce 40K's proper tone and themes, they were a place to escape the uncritically heroic bombast that came to characterise the main studio's writing in recent years.
Primarchs and the Black Library, jeezo
agreed,, I loved the street level feel of Dark Heresy. I imagine we wont have a great deal of 'low level' focus
I don't understand this sentiment. This isn't a pick up game of 7th ed 40k where the added onus to correctly frame and balance the gaming session is abdicated by the company and thrown instead onto the players.... it's an RPG where determining the relative power and setting of the campaign between GM and players has always been part and parcel of the experience. If they have rules for normal humans then in no way, shape, or form are you prohibited from using them exclusively just because other options will seamlessly exist in the background to plug in (as opposed to artifically carved off to resell at full price like with the BI/FFG system).
36:50 "If you want to play as barely capable guardsmen on a mission way above our paygrade, you can do that."
I see no reason why they wouldn't introduce (given the FFG/BI carving up of the universe) an IG specific book, an Inquisitorial specific book, a deathwatch specific book, etc.
re the bolded bits; this sort of thing is exactly why some of us were reticent about the tonal shift of 8th. The reason the RPGs were great was that they went beneath the top-line "big damn heroes" stuff in the same way as the better BL novels and specialist games did, they helped retain and reinforce 40K's proper tone and themes, they were a place to escape the uncritically heroic bombast that came to characterise the main studio's writing in recent years.
Primarchs and the Black Library, jeezo
agreed,, I loved the street level feel of Dark Heresy. I imagine we wont have a great deal of 'low level' focus
I don't understand this sentiment. This isn't a pick up game of 7th ed 40k where the added onus to correctly frame and balance the gaming session is abdicated by the company and thrown instead onto the players.... it's an RPG where determining the relative power and setting of the campaign between GM and players has always been part and parcel of the experience. If they have rules for normal humans then in no way, shape, or form are you prohibited from using them exclusively just because other options will seamlessly exist in the background to plug in (as opposed to artifically carved off to resell at full price like with the BI/FFG system).
It's very simple; if theyre doing a lot of epic stuff with primarchs, commorragh, huge battles and a big focus on epic combat, then they are going to be spending less time on the smaller, more intricate details. I dont mind too much, as FFG did a great job last time in giving us that kind of thing
The best rpg's are always about the players first that lets them do the epic stuff. So naturally in a world which has primarch tier characters it really takes away from some of the dramatic tension when your not really having much of an impact.
It's all a matter or scale and perspective.
Primarchs are the demigods of their universe. They are of the mythos of their setting. 99.99% of denizens of the 40K universe will never meet or even be directly effected my them in any way beyond word of mouth or religion.
Complaing that Primarch level character's in a setting outshine the player characters accomplishments is like complaining that a Clerics diety actions outshine the actions of the Cleric.
Since the Sun God defeated the God of Darkness while they both created the world we live on, and my Cleric can't compete with that, I clearly can not achieve anything meaningful.
Your sun god isn't running around the campaign directly intervening and able to sweep all your accomplishments directly away if needed. If you ever do something so important that it might make a difference the temptation is always there for your average GM to just bust out the primarchs to solve it and stick to "canon" in the setting which is so boring man. I find the idea of primarchs in 40k even on the tabletop to be ruining the setting a lot in general as well. It's not dramatic or interesting and I can't even slightly relate to them. I don't see what people ever found interesting in them other than interesting fluff set up in the background to make 40k that much more tragic, but now it's like oh well we can just have Primarchs do it all. The Sun god needs you to intervene in the mortal world. The Primarchs should be doing it themselves if it's that important and that is why I hate the setting. Feels like people aren't in control of their own fate and actions anymore.
If I do a new 40k campaign it's likely going to involve some angry normal space marines at being betrayed in a way. I know my Deathwatch group thinks the primais marines are stupid and said their DW characters would be super pissed to find out they fought and died all for this. I still think that if GW knew they could make space marine civilians and space marine farmers and make the whole Imperium space marines (male and female) they would and just forget about normal humans if they could. Everyone in my rpg group's has looked down on the return of the Primarchs where as my gaming groups have loved it. Anyone with a basic sense of narrative skill would know primarchs are boring and rpg's tend to put story first. If it matters I am a writer who has had some success here and there creatively.
Regarding power levels, they've made it pretty clear that the rule set will support any desired "power level."
Luke is no less a farm boy from Totouine for encountering Darth Vader, and even by the second film, he's totally outmatched. My point is that encountering epic story bits need not outshine the PCs if done well.
It's clear that Ross and Ulisses are excited to pay in a much bigger sandbox than GW had been willing to allow in the past.
Right but he is the main character in a movie and the entire story revolves around him and his family troubles directly. Darth Vader is his father and he tries to redeem him instead of killing him on his path to growing older and becoming a Jedi.
This is a perfect example becaise one of my players played in another GM's Star Wars campaign and he met and followed alongside Luke and other great hero's of the story and his group were glorified messengers for all the big characters of the Rebellion and always had to tag alongside them and get bailed out by them in ridiculous situations. He said it was one of the most boring games he ever had and the game didn't last long. Gee I wonder why if all my actions were meaningless since Luke or in 40k's case a Primarch can do it better or even a space marine then geez why am I here? If I was going to do an epic game involving primarchs I would make the PC's the primarchs and let them really open up on the galaxy and have some fun. They could even create new interesting ones too.
Gamgee wrote: Right but he is the main character in a movie and the entire story revolves around him and his family troubles directly. Darth Vader is his father and he tries to redeem him instead of killing him on his path to growing older and becoming a Jedi.
This is a perfect example becaise one of my players played in another GM's Star Wars campaign and he met and followed alongside Luke and other great hero's of the story and his group were glorified messengers for all the big characters of the Rebellion and always had to tag alongside them and get bailed out by them in ridiculous situations. He said it was one of the most boring games he ever had and the game didn't last long. Gee I wonder why if all my actions were meaningless since Luke or in 40k's case a Primarch can do it better or even a space marine then geez why am I here? If I was going to do an epic game involving primarchs I would make the PC's the primarchs and let them really open up on the galaxy and have some fun. They could even create new interesting ones too.
Yeah, that's sounds like a bad campaign. It is NOT however the fault of the setting or its creators though but rather that of the GM and to a lesser extent the players that allowed him to do it. It has nothing to do with the 40k universe and this upcoming RPG unless Ross Watson takes a stun baton to the head from a rogue Arbites and decides that the entire official setting will shoehorn in all players as gophers for NPCs with the climax of each adventure mandated to be a deus ex roboute. A bad GM and/or horrible players can ruin even the best laid plans of a game developer.
Well, there goes all my hype. It sounds like the kitchen sink approach is going to leave it with the depth of a puddle.
Never thought I'd be more excited for an Age of Sigmar product than 40k, but I trust Crucible 7 to handle 'Warhammer' a lot more than I do these guys after reading those garbage bullet points.
Arbitrator wrote: Well, there goes all my hype. It sounds like the kitchen sink approach is going to leave it with the depth of a puddle.
Never thought I'd be more excited for an Age of Sigmar product than 40k, but I trust Crucible 7 to handle 'Warhammer' a lot more than I do these guys after reading those garbage bullet points.
Depth in an RPG world is pretty much dependent on the players and GM. You can have all the backstory and history of the Lord of the Rings but if your players and GM are unable to weave it into the story they're creating, it counts for diddly squat.
Arbitrator wrote: Well, there goes all my hype. It sounds like the kitchen sink approach is going to leave it with the depth of a puddle.
Never thought I'd be more excited for an Age of Sigmar product than 40k, but I trust Crucible 7 to handle 'Warhammer' a lot more than I do these guys after reading those garbage bullet points.
i wouldnt say theyre garbage but I agree with you on thinking the whole thing will have less depth. Ross Watson was the head of the FFG40krpgs so having him back isnt a bad thing, I just imagine it will cater fsr less to more in depth RPer's tastes and more to the combat centric 40k tabletop crowd than the previous versions
Arbitrator wrote: Well, there goes all my hype. It sounds like the kitchen sink approach is going to leave it with the depth of a puddle.
Never thought I'd be more excited for an Age of Sigmar product than 40k, but I trust Crucible 7 to handle 'Warhammer' a lot more than I do these guys after reading those garbage bullet points.
i wouldnt say theyre garbage but I agree with you on thinking the whole thing will have less depth. Ross Watson was the head of the FFG40krpgs so having him back isnt a bad thing, I just imagine it will cater fsr less to more in depth RPer's tastes and more to the combat centric 40k tabletop crowd than the previous versions
Also there is an argument to be had to simplicity. If your group just wants to rpg mostly for a story and wants to keep the game moving fast then 40krpg is way too dense for most. Numenera is basically the complete opposite of 40krpg in terms of design. Meant to be light weight and easily able to improvise in as a player and a GM, but the setting is left vague so the GM/Player can make up what they want for the story and their character. I know it drives a lot of people crazy when there aren't discreet systems in a game and its left to more open interpretation. On the opposite side of the spectrum there are a lot of folks who like 40k setting but hate the rpg's because of their density of mechanics which to them seem superfluous if everyone can just agree to roleplay a bit more.
Arbitrator wrote: Well, there goes all my hype. It sounds like the kitchen sink approach is going to leave it with the depth of a puddle.
Never thought I'd be more excited for an Age of Sigmar product than 40k, but I trust Crucible 7 to handle 'Warhammer' a lot more than I do these guys after reading those garbage bullet points.
That has to be the absolute worst definition of "depth" I've ever seen referencing a game. Carving up a single setting into thirds or fifths and then drip feeding it out at full price with largely (but not completely so as to be just incompatible enough) copy pasted rules over 8 years is not depth. Taking 1/3 of the universe and giving players who are interested in only that slice most of what they need while the other 2/3 of the universe and the players interested in that get nothing for years on end is not depth. Will the initial book(s) be less detailed for each individual power level? Yes.. but that's better IMO than most getting nothing while one small slice gets just enough. If they pull it off, everyone will get a good amount to start playing regardless of their individual tastes and then get more each year as time goes on. This way everyone gets to enjoy the full experience during the entirety of the license instead of wildly varying levels of support (in terms of numbers of books as well as actual years of practical use).
Some of you appear to have an issue with wanting to play in an established IP and then wanting said established IP bend to revovle around your characters.
adamsouza wrote: Some of you appear to have an issue with wanting to play in an established IP and then wanting said established IP bend to revovle around your characters.
If I'm playing an RPG the game damn well better revolve around our characters. Otherwise I'd just watch/read about it, no point in playing.
That doesn't mean that the setting must revolve around the characters, though. And I don't think that's what people was asking for. Most established settings tend to be big enough that you usually don't need to rub shoulders with the signature characters all the time.
adamsouza wrote: Some of you appear to have an issue with wanting to play in an established IP and then wanting said established IP bend to revovle around your characters.
If I'm playing an RPG the game damn well better revolve around our characters. Otherwise I'd just watch/read about it, no point in playing.
That doesn't mean that the setting must revolve around the characters, though. And I don't think that's what people was asking for. Most established settings tend to be big enough that you usually don't need to rub shoulders with the signature characters all the time.
This. I played in a Dresden Files game for 4 years. Only two of the player characters ever even saw Harry Dresden and his screen time and dialogue was less than a Stan Lee cameo.
Arbitrator wrote: Well, there goes all my hype. It sounds like the kitchen sink approach is going to leave it with the depth of a puddle.
Never thought I'd be more excited for an Age of Sigmar product than 40k, but I trust Crucible 7 to handle 'Warhammer' a lot more than I do these guys after reading those garbage bullet points.
That has to be the absolute worst definition of "depth" I've ever seen referencing a game. Carving up a single setting into thirds or fifths and then drip feeding it out at full price with largely (but not completely so as to be just incompatible enough) copy pasted rules over 8 years is not depth. Taking 1/3 of the universe and giving players who are interested in only that slice most of what they need while the other 2/3 of the universe and the players interested in that get nothing for years on end is not depth. Will the initial book(s) be less detailed for each individual power level? Yes.. but that's better IMO than most getting nothing while one small slice gets just enough. If they pull it off, everyone will get a good amount to start playing regardless of their individual tastes and then get more each year as time goes on. This way everyone gets to enjoy the full experience during the entirety of the license instead of wildly varying levels of support (in terms of numbers of books as well as actual years of practical use).
If I want broad strokes then I can flick open any Games Workshop publication, more specifically a Codex. They provide a decent overview of the various factions and races.But compare the amount of depth in Only War or Deathwatch compared to their respective codex's, because FFG had hundreds more pages with which to do their thing. Yes a lot of it was what was found in the codex, but they could go into so much more detail. When a setting like 40k is so unfriendly to 'Adventuring Parties' consist of OCDonutSteal Librarians and Shas'O's brushing shoulders then I would expect an RPG book that focuses on specific groups, not these broad stroke kitchen sinks. It's a limitation of the setting, one that people should come expecting and not throw out just because they want to be special snowflakes.
If I wanted a generic RPG system where I can cobble together an Astarte, an Eldar and an Ork I could go use a dozen homebrew systems/edits. I went to the FFGRPGs because of the depth and detail they provided on specific groups and regions. Almost the entirety of the information we have on the Deathwatch was taken from the RPG and much of the Inquisition as well (although granted DH1 was written in-house before FFG).
I'm not even going to get into how off the balance is going to be at Level 1/equivalent if they expect Guardsmen, Marines, Orks and Eldar to rub shoulders.
The point with Primarchs or any other big name characters in any RPG setting is not for them to be a direct boss fight foe or someone to bail out the characters. They are the quest-givers or background ultimate antagonist while the characters go against underlings. That is why I hold to the old adage "If you give it stats, the players will find a way to kill it." If you don't give them stats, then a GM will never be caught flat footed by some rules lawyering player. If some foolish player decides to attack anyway, then they can be disarmed, imprisoned, or if still persistent, just annihilated.
D&D gived you stats for the different Gods. That doesn't mean EVERY campaing ends with the players fighting the Gods. Is an option if a GM or a group wants to use it.
And thats what a RPG should offer you. Options (Within the setting), for the players to choose. If they want to give you stats for the Primarchs that doesn't mean that your campaings need to have anything to do with a Primarch.
Iracundus wrote: The point with Primarchs or any other big name characters in any RPG setting is not for them to be a direct boss fight foe or someone to bail out the characters. They are the quest-givers or background ultimate antagonist while the characters go against underlings. That is why I hold to the old adage "If you give it stats, the players will find a way to kill it." If you don't give them stats, then a GM will never be caught flat footed by some rules lawyering player. If some foolish player decides to attack anyway, then they can be disarmed, imprisoned, or if still persistent, just annihilated.
Wow that sounds so fun not being able to do what I want and being railroaded along. Great gm advice write a book and it will serve as an example of what not to do. He was always threatening us with a bbeg we couldn't beat to get us to go in the direction he wanted instead of the players.
I had a GM like you once and even his unstattable opponents didn't make it. I even did it by accident. This is why I love rpg's. Me and my party did the impossible and to this day everyone talks about it. It's about great stories and impossible odds. Also I did kill the quest giver and took his position too and conquered an unconquerable waaagh and betrayed a lord of the planet to become its new rogue trader lord. All in one story arch.
Iracundus wrote: The point with Primarchs or any other big name characters in any RPG setting is not for them to be a direct boss fight foe or someone to bail out the characters. They are the quest-givers or background ultimate antagonist while the characters go against underlings. That is why I hold to the old adage "If you give it stats, the players will find a way to kill it." If you don't give them stats, then a GM will never be caught flat footed by some rules lawyering player. If some foolish player decides to attack anyway, then they can be disarmed, imprisoned, or if still persistent, just annihilated.
Wow that sounds so fun not being able to do what I want and being railroaded along. Great gm advice write a book and it will serve as an example of what not to do. He was always threatening us with a beg we couldn't beat to get us to go in the durection he wanted instead of the players.
I had a GM like you once and even his unstattable opponents didn't make it. I even did it by accident. This is why I love rpg's. Me and my party did the impossible and to this day everyone talks about it. It's about great stories and impossible odds. Also I did kill the quest giver and took his position too and conquered an unconquerable waaagh and betrayed a lord of the planet to become its new rogue trader lord. All in one story arch.
Your aggressive response in no way addresses or even remotely resembles the point he was making. I'm glad for you that you got to Mary sue your way into such a powerful position... while your fellow players probably got taken along for the "everything in the campaign is about gamgee" ride (unless everyone got their own planet!) but quest givers beyond the power level of the party have been a staple of rpgs since the 70s. It's appropriate possibly for 18th-20th level dnd characters to attempt to usurp the king/quest giver' s power but not so at lower levels. The same is true in 40k as your interrogator trying to off the inquisitor Lord of the sector or a tactical marine dethroning a primarch as head of the legion should be the rare exception and not the ridiculous standard you design the rules and setting around in the introductory core rulebook.
It's odd that you're whining that power levels above normal humans are getting support initially while simultaneously lamenting GMs who might not let that low to mid level character effectively take control of the setting itself.
Personally I think RPG's are all about interpretation and not about killing stuff like a videogame. Thats why this "I destroy this GOD by pure brute force and stats" is very... gamey for me.
I prefer when the players work his way to gain those achievements, and not by taking the best combo of traits/weapons/etc (You know, the way of the munchkin)... but by pure interpretation. In a old Warhammer Fantasy roleplay game, our warband of chaos cultists stealed the leadershipg of a Chaos Horde that was following Archaon without having a single battle. Pure diplomacy, conversation and carefully crafted plans.
Obviously this is why I normally prefer Vampire:The Masquerade over more dungeon crawler RPG's like Pathfinder.
So, when he is talking about "Don't put stats to something like a GOD", isn't talking about making them unbeatable to railroad the campaing, but making them something that you can't just kill withou thinking with the right amount of munchking cheereos in your character.
The best rpg's are always about the players first that lets them do the epic stuff. So naturally in a world which has primarch tier characters it really takes away from some of the dramatic tension when your not really having much of an impact.
It's all a matter or scale and perspective.
Primarchs are the demigods of their universe. They are of the mythos of their setting. 99.99% of denizens of the 40K universe will never meet or even be directly effected my them in any way beyond word of mouth or religion.
Complaing that Primarch level character's in a setting outshine the player characters accomplishments is like complaining that a Clerics diety actions outshine the actions of the Cleric.
Since the Sun God defeated the God of Darkness while they both created the world we live on, and my Cleric can't compete with that, I clearly can not achieve anything meaningful.
Your sun god isn't running around the campaign directly intervening and able to sweep all your accomplishments directly away if needed. If you ever do something so important that it might make a difference the temptation is always there for your average GM to just bust out the primarchs to solve it and stick to "canon" in the setting which is so boring man. I find the idea of primarchs in 40k even on the tabletop to be ruining the setting a lot in general as well. It's not dramatic or interesting and I can't even slightly relate to them. I don't see what people ever found interesting in them other than interesting fluff set up in the background to make 40k that much more tragic, but now it's like oh well we can just have Primarchs do it all. The Sun god needs you to intervene in the mortal world. The Primarchs should be doing it themselves if it's that important and that is why I hate the setting. Feels like people aren't in control of their own fate and actions anymore.
If I do a new 40k campaign it's likely going to involve some angry normal space marines at being betrayed in a way. I know my Deathwatch group thinks the primais marines are stupid and said their DW characters would be super pissed to find out they fought and died all for this. I still think that if GW knew they could make space marine civilians and space marine farmers and make the whole Imperium space marines (male and female) they would and just forget about normal humans if they could. Everyone in my rpg group's has looked down on the return of the Primarchs where as my gaming groups have loved it. Anyone with a basic sense of narrative skill would know primarchs are boring and rpg's tend to put story first. If it matters I am a writer who has had some success here and there creatively.
this isn't a problem with the game it's a problem with a GM. if Gulliman is running around personally interveneing with the PCs the GMs PROABLY doing it wrong (done right mind you it can work in a "ohh hey, someone's attacking Gulliman we need to come save him and tip the tide") don't assume just because they say you might MEET Gulliman that you'll see him frequently in a combat role, he'll likely be a quest giver
If the RPG is open enough, you can do anything with it. And whilst I liked the fact that the FFG40kRPGs were split into different games with different settings (allowed for far more specific story-telling), I'm not against a more open system.
The only fear is that it becomes a Magical School Bus-style tour of all the big names in 40K.
H.B.M.C. wrote: If the RPG is open enough, you can do anything with it. And whilst I liked the fact that the FFG40kRPGs were split into different games with different settings (allowed for far more specific story-telling), I'm not against a more open system.
The only fear is that it becomes a Magical School Bus-style tour of all the big names in 40K.
From a game design perspective, a system robust and adaptable enough to be able to handle any situation, from simple attacks to demigods walking the Earth, is a laudable goal.
It doesn't prevent deep diving into different aspects - if anything it facilitates it. It may not touch on every single aspect from the get go, but the framework is there, waiting to be developed.
That's how I interpret their "broad and inclusive" statement.
As had been pointed out above, we'll have to wait and see.
May I ask why? I mean, all the PbtA games, GURPS, WEG's Star Wars and Shadowrun (for example) use d6s exclusively, and they couldn't be more different. Die size doesn't really mean that much, other than they're using them.
H.B.M.C. wrote:If the RPG is open enough, you can do anything with it. And whilst I liked the fact that the FFG40kRPGs were split into different games with different settings (allowed for far more specific story-telling), I'm not against a more open system.
The only fear is that it becomes a Magical School Bus-style tour of all the big names in 40K.
I liked how each subsystem for FFG's system had a completely different feel to it. Dark Heresy had a horror feel to it, almost like Call of Cthulhu. Lots of investigation. Lots of delving into things you knew were way beyond your comprehension. No matter how strong your character got, you knew you were one encounter away from death at any given moment. Deathwatch felt like more of an action game. You may not necessarily be more powerful than the thing you were going up against, but you knew you were gonna make it feel pain. Rogue Trader felt the most like a traditional exploration/adventure game. Never played Black Crusade or Only War, but I always heard they had a unique feel, too. I'm really looking forward to Wrath & Glory, and I hope they manage to build a system that allows for any and all of those game types to exist.
EnTyme wrote: Never played Black Crusade or Only War, but I always heard they had a unique feel, too. I'm really looking forward to Wrath & Glory, and I hope they manage to build a system that allows for any and all of those game types to exist.
Only War is more action-oriented like your Deathwatch example, but instead of knowing that you are one of the baddest mofos on the planet, you know that you are probably the least bad mofo on the planet (if you are a PBI - I guess a Leman Russ driver might feel differently). You know that you will see combat, and that you will die a horrible death. Going up against Tau, your life expectancy is about d3-1 rounds of combat. Therefore, accept your fate and die with the Emperor's name on your lips.
It's actually fairly refreshing to know your character is going to die and when he/she doesn't... you have something to celebrate. Of course, we played ours as a gritty, Hamburger Hill meets Saving Private Ryan meets Black Hawk Down.
Black Crusade can go so many ways, it might be the most open of the games.
Once Black Crusade came out with its non class-and-level based character creation and leveling systems, all the other FFG corebooks became really expensive exclusive content books for my group. (Starships and resources from Rogue Trader, etc.) I never really liked having to collect five 'different' lines just to have access to weapon and vehicle stats from a shared universe.
Again, I like the notion of the corebook being as broad a toolkit as possible. It's a lot easier to impose restrictions on published materials to scale down than it is to make up your own stuff to scale up. The more tools they want to give us to make the game our own, the better, says I.
Sweet, 8th edition storyline. I look forward to the new gentler Imperium where new ideas are welcomed, blasphemy against the Emperor and his creations are common place (Cawl) and Primarchs being resurrected via xenos sorcery isn't a problem for the Inquisition. Everything being nothing but a comic book with cartoonish characters is a blast.
New information: target release of GenCon 2018, and looking for 1 product per month thereafter.
Having become a huge fan of D&D 5e since it's launch, and loving its slow release schedule, a product a month seems insanely rapid to me. I know that there's enough material, but is there enough market demand for such an outpour of content? I guess it's a tried and tested method for many companies, but it's not the 90s anymore, and just unleashing books isn't quite the recipe for success that it used to be.
I am looking forward to most these things, in reality and genuinely - it will be good times!
Indeed but mostly a joke as with any RPG it doesn't really matter anyway. All you need is the core system and play whatever storyline you want as opposed to other types of games where you are restricted heavily by the rules.
My group just started a Black Crusade game where they're all loyalists (playing the same classes but renamed), set just after Imperium Nihilis fell under the mega warpstorm and such.
So we're pretty excited for Wrath & Glory, as it basically supports what we're trying to play already haha. Although we're enjoying the Corruption system, playing as loyalists who have to struggle with the fact that they're being mutated the longer they stay here. But a newer and improved rules system might be nice too. So I'm certainly keen to see how they do it
Having become a huge fan of D&D 5e since it's launch, and loving its slow release schedule, a product a month seems insanely rapid to me. I know that there's enough material, but is there enough market demand for such an outpour of content? I guess it's a tried and tested method for many companies, but it's not the 90s anymore, and just unleashing books isn't quite the recipe for success that it used to be.
I kind of agree especially since they seems to be talking about at least two campaign in a book. Paizo, king of the adventure path, take six months to release a campaign "in a book". I'd love to see a core book and the usual screen, an "extra stuff we couldn't put in the core book, but will sell you for full retail" book and a starting adventure/campaign book. Then I'd like them to take some time and get some feedback on the base game and the adventure to se what to do next. Also, I don't have cash for a book a month...never did.
No-one forces you to buy it all. If they release a couple of campaigns a month, so much the better - more choice for me as a GM. That's a better situation to be in, IMO, than the problem I have with Star Wars Age of Rebellion - one campaign published, and I don't like it.
Sourcebooks ... depends what they're about. Nobody cares about having fifteen varieties of boltgun or a myriad ways to fiddle with them for optimum damage, but if the Orks sourcebook goes into the sort of detail on their society that used to be in Waargh! The Orks, for example, I'll grab that.
I suspect part of the reason for the release schedule is to flesh out the previously artificially cordoned off sections of the game that are now combined into one. The core book might only have a superficial glossing over about topics like spaceship combat so it is important for them to come out with a spaceship book sometime soon to satisfy the Rogue Trader crowd for instance even if that aspect is only peripheral to most groups..
BrookM wrote: I do hope that they've got a good ROW distribution in place, so we don't have to wait weeks or months for stuff to finally arrive around here.
Isn't it a German company? That should hopefully make some of that (at least within the EU) alot easier. I don't know if the Asmodee merger had that effect for FFG products (and it likely didn't have an effect on the 40krpgs as they were already starting to fall into the will they/won't they continue category with alot of gamers due to the slow/nonexistent pace of releases).
German company? Ho-hum, so they are! Ignore that comment then, as this may mean not having to wait for ages on books to arrive, like with FFG back in the day.
Can't comment on Asmodee, IIRC the RPG ranges were killed off before the takeover / merger.
AndrewGPaul wrote: Nobody cares about having fifteen varieties of boltgun or a myriad ways to fiddle with them for optimum damage, but if the Orks sourcebook goes into the sort of detail on their society that used to be in Waargh! The Orks, for example, I'll grab that.
I disagree, I love the fact that there are lots of different boltgun types, the mauler (cinder crag bolt pistol), angelus, volg (spitfire) or gowyn de az. These kind of things really make the rpg come to life and the ffg stuff was packed full of character and coolz
The Inquisitor's Handbook was full of different types of weapons that all had the same rules - they just added flavour to the universe by fleshing out all the different places.
May I ask why? I mean, all the PbtA games, GURPS, WEG's Star Wars and Shadowrun (for example) use d6s exclusively, and they couldn't be more different. Die size doesn't really mean that much, other than they're using them.
I haven't played any of the others, but Shadowrun has never been lauded for its mechanics. In fact, 4th Edition was a nightmare of min/maxed overspecialzied characters rolling more dice than any reasonable game should need to be thundering across a tabletop.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gamgee wrote: The best rpg's are always about the players first that lets them do the epic stuff.
For younger, less sophisticated players, maybe.
For a long time, I've just found the best RPGs are the ones which build a place for the characters to inhabit that excites and challenges the players.
Besides, look at a long-lived game like Call of Cthulhu. That's about as far from your idea of the "best" RPGs as it gets, and CoC is great.
I haven't played any of the others, but Shadowrun has never been lauded for its mechanics. In fact, 4th Edition was a nightmare of min/maxed overspecialzied characters rolling more dice than any reasonable game should need to be thundering across a tabletop.
Shadowrun used to be lauded for its mechanics but those days are indeed long gone and it hasn't kept up with the current streamlined industry trend in the core game (the spin off poorly edited slapdash Anarchy aside). That said... I don't think it's fair to tar an entire game with the same brush just because of extreme pornomancer builds.
Shadowrun had all kinds of problems, not just pornomancers. And I say that as somebody who played it beginning with 1st Ed and loves the game.
But its mechanics are a mess. I contemplated trying to figure out what other systems I could switch it to for a while, but never did the work. Getting rid of magic and metahumans (or at least, trolls) helped balance it out a bit and make it more playable, but without the metahumanity and magic, it's not really Shadowrun anymore, and instead just a cyberpunk game. Which isn't a bad thing, since cyberpunk is a great genre. But magic was clearly a measure/countermeasure system, and trolls broke the difficulty curve in the same way Dwarves could do in 1st Edition WHFRP, for example.
I don't know what to think so far. I really love the existing 40kRPGs, being individually focused yet cross-compatible. We have played the freedom of Rogue Trader, the freedom of a different kind that is Black Crusade, the honestly pretty funny PC massacre that was Only War, the absolute carnage of Deathwatch and the intrigue-packed Dark Heresy stories, and I have always felt like the really granular D100 system was about as good as you can get for 40kRPGs.
At least in my opinion, RPGs don't have the same need to be simple enough to accomodate entire armies as the 40k game itself does. You can really get all that itty gritty detail on the character sheets and this is a good thing. Each time I see people talk about simpler systems I see 'the conscript and the Lictor punch each other, both roll a D6 with the lictor getting a +1 bonus and the winner getting the kill' and I am just like nooooooooooooooo
40k is full of insanity like gretchin having a 33% chance to parry the Wailing Doom with their nailed iron tube. We don't have to have that in our RPGs.
Please please I pray to the Dark Gods it will be so detailed I can just sit for hours writing up random things to add in (like how I added in the gravgun in deathwatch. S/2/-, ignoring armour on targets smaller than Massive and doing 1d10+target armour+5 damage. We all agreed that seemed right.)
Also, in before my hopes are dashed with another 40k style super abstract game.
Spoiler:
'Don't worry, the CSM only rolled a 2 to wound'.
Even if I don't get my Matrix Eldar and BL Marines and all that lovely stuff I at least hope for a system granular enough to permit it.
Veteran Sergeant wrote: For a long time, I've just found the best RPGs are the ones which build a place for the characters to inhabit that excites and challenges the players.
This is what makes the best RPGs. The world is there to be interacted with, and characters will only interact with things that are interesting to them. Players who have buttons to press and real options to take will always find it more rewarding than a Draugr bashing simulator. Certainly 40k has this property, and has the possiblities and space for all sorts of things to happen. I liked the fact that each FFG40kRPG was different because a space marine shouldn't have the same set of buttons to press as some peasant investigator.
Regarding the general mechanics, I'd like combat to be fast and brutal. I've GM'd sessions of combat that took hours to fight off a small quantity of bandits. ITs dull for everyone. If this means having a fairly small selection of weapons avaliable to each player, so be it, the longest wait time was finding out how a particular snowflake weapon worked. A boltgun to the unarmoured head should be lethal for all characters, whilst an armoured space marine should find lasgun shots fairly trivial. I'd rather have 'cinematic' rather than realistic weapon ranges for ease of playing on a tabletop with models. 200m in 28mm scale is over 14m in real life, and this really restricts combat scenarios.
AndrewGPaul wrote: Nobody cares about having fifteen varieties of boltgun or a myriad ways to fiddle with them for optimum damage, but if the Orks sourcebook goes into the sort of detail on their society that used to be in Waargh! The Orks, for example, I'll grab that.
I disagree, I love the fact that there are lots of different boltgun types, the mauler (cinder crag bolt pistol), angelus, volg (spitfire) or gowyn de az. These kind of things really make the rpg come to life and the ffg stuff was packed full of character and coolz
In the background? sure, that's fine. Rules-wise? it doesn't matter to me. Plus or minus 5% here or there, or a slightly different range isn't relevant to the game.
Maybe. I know some people get really invested in the gear their characters have, and like to fiddle with it. My group doesn't; choosing a boltgun over a lasgun is enough. We've run a Dark Heresy campaign for a year or more with just the core rulebook (just one core rulebook at that - in the hands of the GM).
Theres RPG that work more like a dungeon crawlers, and players that prefer those, where a great variety in equip is basically a necesity for the game to have variety and be fun.
More "interpretative/narrative" RPG's don't need that much.
I haven't played any of the others, but Shadowrun has never been lauded for its mechanics. In fact, 4th Edition was a nightmare of min/maxed overspecialzied characters rolling more dice than any reasonable game should need to be thundering across a tabletop.
Sure it has, just not by you. Funny story bro: the devs tried to limit the dice thrown in 5E and took a beating from paying customers. If you don't like rolling a bunch of d6s that's fine, but...
For a long time, I've just found the best RPGs are the ones which build a place for the characters to inhabit that excites and challenges the players.
Besides, look at a long-lived game like Call of Cthulhu. That's about as far from your idea of the "best" RPGs as it gets, and CoC is great.
Would you like some Grey Poupon with that opinion? It's not some mature, refined truth. It is just your belief.
And just as you don't like Shadowrun, I don't like CoC. It doesn't resemble the source material and results in a TPK more often than not. Then there's the problem of all the BRP games it inspired with its wonky long and linear randomizer. It probably inspired GW to make WFRP a percentile system...and no one lauded its mechanics.
From what little I've gathered about the mechanics so far is it's likely to be based on a variation of one of the old WEG game mechanics. The guy loved TORG and basically bought the rights to TORG and the WEG D6 system books.
Someone already mentioned target number 4. WEG's MASTERBOOK/HEROIC game HERCULES and later DC UNIVERSE games both were a variation of the D6 system that used used a target number and counted successes for task resolution.
....Speaking of WEG's DC UNIVERSE RPG.. having just dug out a copy to review... The WEG DC UNIVERSE RPG already has every mechanic required to make a comprehensive WH40KRPG. It scales from civilians, sidekicks, and all the way up to Justice League level heroes and villains, as wella s vehicles.
All they need to do is turn the super power and gear creation rules into premade bundles.
SPACE MARINES get the racial abilities/powers they have in the fluff + Power Armor + Weapon
IMPERIAL GUARDSMEN get no powers + Armor + Skills
Psykers get to pick from a list of pregenerated Psychic powers, etc...
Functional, good, core rules for this kind of stuff already exist. They just need to reskin it with a 40K flavor.
You can probably find a copy of the DC UNIVERSE on Ebay for cheap if you want to check it out.
I haven't played any of the others, but Shadowrun has never been lauded for its mechanics. In fact, 4th Edition was a nightmare of min/maxed overspecialzied characters rolling more dice than any reasonable game should need to be thundering across a tabletop.
Sure it has, just not by you. Funny story bro: the devs tried to limit the dice thrown in 5E and took a beating from paying customers. If you don't like rolling a bunch of d6s that's fine, but...
Someone's always going to get snippy if you don't like the same things they do. But you can save the condescending "bro" comments. I'm not impressed, and Rule 1 is the only thing saving you, lol.
H.B.M.C. wrote: The Inquisitor's Handbook was full of different types of weapons that all had the same rules - they just added flavour to the universe by fleshing out all the different places.
They didn't have the same rules, many were very similar with a few tweaks here and there, perhaps a lower weight and ammo capacity or shorter range and higher strength. In the abstracted rules for the tabletop game these things would be negligible
I agree that they add flavour, but I also love the fact that, even though some of the rules barely made a difference, they still made a difference in some small way
I agree that they add flavour, but I also love the fact that, even though some of the rules barely made a difference, they still made a difference in some small way
I also like that they are little mementos of past events. I would much prefer to have a "Judgeslayer" handcannon looted from a Gang boss in the depth of hive Sibellius rather than a simple handcannon. Granted this is largely narrative but it is nice to have some kind of distinguishing in game feature.
schoon wrote: While it's a bit of a stretch to call this RPG news, it's very interesting that GW is willing to explore some of the xenos background.
Given Ulisses' interest in looking deep into the 40K background, I'm sure some of this will come up.
Thank the greater good. I can't wait to see what they are cooking. I get the feeling it's new Xenos army time. Feels like a wonderful time. So much possibilities. My number one want for years now in 40k has been a new Xenos army, but if it's a major new army for an existing Xenos that will suffice. Also there are rumors from Lady Atia of a Tau release that is not part of the Empire. So I think we will see one xenos race get a mini-relese for Tau. However will it be a mini-release? Or will it be a full army release with major support over the years? Who can say at this point.
Also PLEASE give the Dark Eldar some new models even before Tau if necessary. Poor Dark Kin have such an excellent range but it could use some new stuff.
We've heard that 2018 is going to be the "year of the Xenos" if so it stands to reason GW is going to want a big flagship "new release" for 2018, much like how Primaris Marines and Death Guard are this years.
the most likely flagship there would be a new Xenos race the big question is "what?" one can, upon looking back see GW with the new actions have largely been hitting the obvious targets. admech, death watch, gene stealer cults, all where easily tops on the "what factions should GW bring in" listings.
If you forced me to make a GUESS as to a new Xenos race, I'd proably weight the odds towards GW giving us Hrud.
adamsouza wrote: From what little I've gathered about the mechanics so far is it's likely to be based on a variation of one of the old WEG game mechanics. The guy loved TORG and basically bought the rights to TORG and the WEG D6 system books.
Someone already mentioned target number 4. WEG's MASTERBOOK/HEROIC game HERCULES and later DC UNIVERSE games both were a variation of the D6 system that used used a target number and counted successes for task resolution.
I'm not sure how to feel about this. TORG was a wonderful setting marred by some of the worst sub systems I've ever seen. I do not get warm and fuzzies thinking about its system. Don't know about the other variations on it, maybe the core system worked I can just barely remember it.
BrianDavion wrote: We've heard that 2018 is going to be the "year of the Xenos" if so it stands to reason GW is going to want a big flagship "new release" for 2018, much like how Primaris Marines and Death Guard are this years.
the most likely flagship there would be a new Xenos race the big question is "what?" one can, upon looking back see GW with the new actions have largely been hitting the obvious targets. admech, death watch, gene stealer cults, all where easily tops on the "what factions should GW bring in" listings.
If you forced me to make a GUESS as to a new Xenos race, I'd proably weight the odds towards GW giving us Hrud.
I think the number one candidate is a completely new Xenos from scratch so it would be impossible for us to speculate. If they do Demiurg as a separate faction as opposed to a Tau sub-faction that counts as well. Assuming it's not a completely new xenos but an existing one what do we think the prime candidates are?
I can't imagine they'd just drop a brand new Xenos we'd never heard of, unless it's another tyranid "invading from beyond the rim" sorta deal. Then again, I'm not sure what if any of those races is really interesting enough to warrant an army. Maybe slaugh or however they were spelled? I remember those being big in the various ffg games actually. Or maybe one of my DMs just really liked them.
Slaugh would basically be Imperial guard with disguised giant maggot people as HQ elements (who would probably never actually be on the battlefield in the first place). Not very interesting but would require very little work from GW.
Rak Gol are 6 limbed reptile people covered in cybernetics, toting rad weaponry, with a complete disregard for their own lives and possibly being controlled by a long dead(?) alien race.
adamsouza wrote: From what little I've gathered about the mechanics so far is it's likely to be based on a variation of one of the old WEG game mechanics. The guy loved TORG and basically bought the rights to TORG and the WEG D6 system books.
Someone already mentioned target number 4. WEG's MASTERBOOK/HEROIC game HERCULES and later DC UNIVERSE games both were a variation of the D6 system that used used a target number and counted successes for task resolution.
I'm not sure how to feel about this. TORG was a wonderful setting marred by some of the worst sub systems I've ever seen. I do not get warm and fuzzies thinking about its system. Don't know about the other variations on it, maybe the core system worked I can just barely remember it.
The TORG game mechanics were inferior to the D6 system.
BrianDavion wrote: We've heard that 2018 is going to be the "year of the Xenos" if so it stands to reason GW is going to want a big flagship "new release" for 2018, much like how Primaris Marines and Death Guard are this years.
the most likely flagship there would be a new Xenos race the big question is "what?" one can, upon looking back see GW with the new actions have largely been hitting the obvious targets. admech, death watch, gene stealer cults, all where easily tops on the "what factions should GW bring in" listings.
If you forced me to make a GUESS as to a new Xenos race, I'd proably weight the odds towards GW giving us Hrud.
The year of xenos? Sounds like the summer of George.
Yeah, 2017 was Imperium vs Chaos (And yes, they have puss that pretty hard. Probably more Imperium than Chaos but... two Daemon Primarchs and two CSM Legions: TS and DG isn't bad either), so if the promised "year of the xenos" is like 2017 but for Eldar, Orks, Necrons and Tau... my wallet is terrified.
Would be neat if they bring in Rak'gol since it would be an alien faction made by FFG for the RPG. Much like the majority of the DW lore was done by them then used/adapted to release the DW.
Also totally calling it now but I think we'll see Deathwatch release next year to tie into this year of xenos.
Edit
My wallet is quivering in terror too Galas. Especially with my ton of projects I have. For the first time ever... I might have a backlog too big to ever hope to finish. Why must GW make so much excellent models. Imagine if almost every Xenos get's releases next year. I hope they all do and then we also get the new faction.
Gamgee wrote: Would be neat if they bring in Rak'gol since it would be an alien faction made by FFG for the RPG. Much like the majority of the DW lore was done by them then used/adapted to release the DW.
Also totally calling it now but I think we'll see Deathwatch release next year to tie into this year of xenos.
Edit
My wallet is quivering in terror too Galas. Especially with my ton of projects I have. For the first time ever... I might have a backlog too big to ever hope to finish. Why must GW make so much excellent models. Imagine if almost every Xenos get's releases next year. I hope they all do and then we also get the new faction.
my gut feeling is that the Rak'gol could be seen as a bit of a legal issue given they where CREATED BY FFG (the death watch meanwhile where a GW thing FFG just fleshed out) well I suspect a court case would find in GW's favor (assuming they wrote the contract competantly)
I tend to suspect the Hrud because they've long been around in the background, people have long wanted to know more, and they DID apper in more detail in the recent Pertabuo novel
The Jericho Reach was created by them too and the Hadex anomaly and both feature a mention in the Deathwatch codex. The hadex even made it on to the 8th ed map. People need to realize that ffg was liscensing the universe and not buying it. Anything made by them is GW's. Otherwise you run into problems GW had in the past of a creative person cut and running and messing with the lore since they would have to dump tons of time dry time someone left.
Pretty much, it's why GW still has access to the Blood Ravens even if Relic lost the license for good, other sectors created by others, the Storm Wardens..
I don't know if anyone else caught it, he said the game is set in the current fiction, then mentioned it's exciting times with the primarchs returning, both loyalist and heretic.
Also mentioned that Orks and Eldar will be playable, right out of the core book. Looking into adding Tau and Necrons eventually, but not in the core book.
Tyranids not planned as a player race, because they can't figure why or how Tyranids would work with the other races.
Combat will have brutal criticals.
Psychic power will be high risk with high reward.
They already have multiple teams of German playtesters.
That part worries me... less so in an RPG but nonetheless. High risk/high reward is usually fancy code words for very swingy and random. Like roll a d6.. on a 1 you fail, die, and summon a daemon prince, 2-4 it goes off as planned, 5 it is twice as strong, and 6 you succeed at three times strength, die, and summon a daemon prince. I'm not a fan of that as I believe things in RPGs should be optionally high risk/high reward when you're talking about a character a player might have invested dozens to hundred of hours on. YMMV.
That part worries me... less so in an RPG but nonetheless. High risk/high reward is usually fancy code words for very swingy and random. Like roll a d6.. on a 1 you fail, die, and summon a daemon prince, 2-4 it goes off as planned, 5 it is twice as strong, and 6 you succeed at three times strength, die, and summon a daemon prince. I'm not a fan of that as I believe things in RPGs should be optionally high risk/high reward when you're talking about a character a player might have invested dozens to hundred of hours on. YMMV.
That was half the fun on playing a Psyker in FFGRPG. I GMed two campaigns where casting a mid-level power resulted in a TPK. Nothing like casting basic divination spell only to turn into the avatar of Yogsothoth!
Well actually 40k is the more successful gameline between 40k and 30k and AoS. So I would say it will work out pretty well for GW. Most 40k players aren't hedgemonists who want only Space Marines. Those are the crazy extremists we shunt into their containment game of 30k also milk them harder.
You are literally on a forum called dakkadakka the most famous phrase in 40k history is a xenos one. So there you have it.
warboss wrote: That part worries me... less so in an RPG but nonetheless. High risk/high reward is usually fancy code words for very swingy and random. Like roll a d6.. on a 1 you fail, die, and summon a daemon prince, 2-4 it goes off as planned, 5 it is twice as strong, and 6 you succeed at three times strength, die, and summon a daemon prince. I'm not a fan of that as I believe things in RPGs should be optionally high risk/high reward when you're talking about a character a player might have invested dozens to hundred of hours on. YMMV.
I've played games where if you failed to make the required roll by a certain margin there was backlash.
Since we are talking about a game with Dice pools, there will probabaly be a required amount of successes rolled.
Hypothetical Power
0 successes = Backlash
1 success = Minimal Effect
Additional succeses add to effect
So something like a Smite like power could stun you if you fail to roll any successes, or roll a die of damage, against an opponenet, for each success.
warboss wrote: That part worries me... less so in an RPG but nonetheless. High risk/high reward is usually fancy code words for very swingy and random. Like roll a d6.. on a 1 you fail, die, and summon a daemon prince, 2-4 it goes off as planned, 5 it is twice as strong, and 6 you succeed at three times strength, die, and summon a daemon prince. I'm not a fan of that as I believe things in RPGs should be optionally high risk/high reward when you're talking about a character a player might have invested dozens to hundred of hours on. YMMV.
I mainly agree, although if they do it the way games like L5R works (voluntary rasing the TN for boosted results, but with higher chances of failing), it could work well enough.
Summary of the information provided in Ross' RatCon Seminar:
8th Edition background has movement and possibility - Wrath & Glory mirrors this
Tone will include both the desperate strife and rays of hope from current events - a perfect setting for heroes who can affect the fate of worlds
Ulisses is working with GW's writers on developing material
Ulisses wants to go places and develop things not covered before
Game mechanic is a d6 dice pool, designed to be smooth, fast, action oriented, easy to learn, and not rules intensive
Game mechanic borrows from TORG Eternity (primary influence), and the feel of Savage Worlds, D&D 5th, and Savage Rifts
Core book will have: (1) game system; (2) character generation; and (3) general 40K background
Core book is a basic system that can be applied to a broad variety of campaigns. play styles, etc. - Ulisses will not follow the more narrow-focused books of the past edition
Character advancement will be open, with the exception of some more restricted iconic abilities
The system will take diverse power levels into account, and allow play from gritty to epic
The systems supports a great variety of play styles, from combat to diplomacy to social
The system will have something like "Fate Points"
Psychic power system allows channeling variable amounts of power; more power = more dangerous; high risk = high reward
Ecclesiarchal abilities help resist corruption - priests and Sisters of Battle will have access to these
Campaign sets will include: (1) Linked adventures like Pathfinder Adventure Paths; (2) Setting detail books; and (3) Character option books
1st Campaign will be Imperium Nihilus
Imperium Nihilus Campaign will focus on the diverse characters of the Imperium that can respond to the crisis, and thus may include very different characters in a ragtag group
2nd Campaign will be Eldar (possible name = Doom of the Eldar)
Other Campaigns may include: Orks, Tau, Necrons
Adventure concepts they'd like to explore include: visiting the Black Library, hunting fallen Phoenix Lords, speaking with Exodite World Spirits, fighting in the pits of Commorragh, and other big concepts
There will be a beginner box that supports new players, with pre-gen characters, an adventure, etc.
Crimson wrote: So will it use the same awful system as the previous 40KRPGs?
No! \o/
What system does Wrath & Glory use?
Wrath & Glory has a brand-new game system involving dice pools of d6s to represent your character’s abilities. The game focuses on highlighting brutal combat, fast action, and a deep immersion into the setting of the 41st Millennium.
That doesn't sound promising. D6s are not a good base for an RPG. FFG's D100 system was much better.
I'll withhold final judgement till I see the end result, but that does not sound like a good way forward.
warboss wrote: That part worries me... less so in an RPG but nonetheless. High risk/high reward is usually fancy code words for very swingy and random. Like roll a d6.. on a 1 you fail, die, and summon a daemon prince, 2-4 it goes off as planned, 5 it is twice as strong, and 6 you succeed at three times strength, die, and summon a daemon prince. I'm not a fan of that as I believe things in RPGs should be optionally high risk/high reward when you're talking about a character a player might have invested dozens to hundred of hours on. YMMV.
Don't forget the word pool. Shadowrun runs off d6s and so long as you don't let players go insane it's not bad. It wasn't a horrible base system to have a basic target number and some things needed more successes than others. Shadowrun's problem was the people handling it the last two generations are idiots who try to contain and appease power gamers and stacked on more bonuses as well as attempts to restrict them that just made the system unusable to the point I house ruled half of it real loose and people actually started having fun.
That said, my house rules of dice pool vs success count for a skill that sounds vaguely appropriate made for a solid system people gasped reasonably well without having to consult the book every five minutes. If you wind up with more 1s than successes something goes horribly wrong, which is real easy to adjust by adjusting the basic target number.
That doesn't sound promising. D6s are not a good base for an RPG.
There's plenty of excellent systems that would disagree with you.
I have yet to experience a D6 based system that was satisfying. They either suffer from total lack of immersion OR they're hideously complex to try and compensate for the limitations of the D6. D20 and D100 systems are just better suited for roleplay I think. More granularity is possible. Its one reason why 40k struggled with balance somewhat, the D6 was holding them back.
Fortunately I have 90% of the FFG books so I won't need this new system if it sucks.
I mean, I hope it won't. I'd like for it not to suck.
I feel the same way about d100 systems. They usually cap out at 100, so it's inherently limiting.
Also, the variance between 5% intervals of a d20 and using 2d10, or a golf ball, for d100 hardly seems worth the added inconvenience.
Also, I know he said he took some inspiration from the new Torg Eternity RPG but does it even use dice pools ? The original Torg did not. I assumed he was referring to criticals and things like the drama deck.
Schoon, I agree with what you are saying, but my personal experience with d100 based games (Star Trek, Inquisitor) usually revolved around them skills being a 0-100% chance of success. You would then min/max the hell out of anything you wanted to actually succeed at and be terrible at everything else. It's simple, but it lacks the open endedness that a dice pool mechanic.
Dark Heresy lost me when in character creation I saw that my character would have like 30% chance of succeeding a task that didn't have negative modifiers.
To be honest I don't like any game where my skill is the target number I need to roll under. I prefer games where the difficulty number is set by the difficulty of the task and you roll to acheive or overcome that target number. D&D adds modifiers to your dice roll, and Dice pool games give you more dice, the better the character is at doing something.
To be honest I don't like any game where my skill is the target number I need to roll under. I prefer games where the difficulty number is set by the difficulty of the task and you roll to acheive or overcome that target number.
How is the latter any different from the former?
Most people's complaints about Dark Heresy aren't actually about the system, but about a bad GM who isn't actually running the system correctly.
Yes, your skill determines the base target number, but there should always be multiple modifiers based on the situation.
Like, if you're trying to shoot a dude who is 5 feet away and isn't suspecting anything, I as the GM would give you a major positive modifier. Probably +40 or so. Trying to shoot a guy on the other side of a crowded market place? That's gonna be a -20 because of the crowd, though I will let you ignore the crowd penalty if you want, with potential consequences... Trying to snipe a guy through a window 100 yards away? That's gonna be a -30 or so mod, but you probably have some other bonuses like aiming. Most weapons also had a full/semi auto mode. Which not only made you more likely to hit, but also gave you the possibility of getting multiple hits.
Dark Heresy does set the difficulty based on the difficulty of the task. Your base stat was really just your baseline. You should never ever have been taking unmodded shots. Unless you just had a bad GM.
Most people's complaints about Dark Heresy aren't actually about the system, but about a bad GM who isn't actually running the system correctly.
Actually I have a massive number of complaints about the system itself and not the GM, especially when it comes to the later books where they seemingly started to phone things in.
Kids, can we stop stating our game system preferences as object facts and just marvel in the fact that the designers of Call of Cthulhu and the BRP system also designed the d6 system for West End Games. Then ponder the same guys making a success count game years before Shadowrun and Vampire. If you're not using d20 or GURPS your probably playing a system based on a game written by three guys...
Where has this been said? Are there plans to eventually have books for all the Xenos? That would be super cool. Oh man I can't wait to run some games from the other side of the setting. Also it will give us a good look into "civilian" life for all these other Xenos and this has me hyped as heck.
schoon wrote: Summary of the information provided in Ross' RatCon Seminar: Game mechanic borrows from TORG Eternity (primary influence), and the feel of Savage Worlds, D&D 5th, and Savage Rifts Core book is a basic system that can be applied to a broad variety of campaigns. play styles, etc. - Ulisses will not follow the more narrow-focused books of the past edition The system will take diverse power levels into account, and allow play from gritty to epic Imperium Nihilus Campaign will focus on the diverse characters of the Imperium that can respond to the crisis, and thus may include very different characters in a ragtag group Adventure concepts they'd like to explore include: visiting the Black Library, hunting fallen Phoenix Lords, speaking with Exodite World Spirits, fighting in the pits of Commorragh, and other big concepts.
[Nervous Laughter]
So we've got a dice pool system that wants to try and cover gritty to epic that will somehow work with 'diverse' parties like Guardsmen and Space Marines.. yeeeaah. I, uh, think I'll be waiting for reviews on this one.
So we've got a dice pool system that wants to try and cover gritty to epic that will somehow work with 'diverse' parties like Guardsmen and Space Marines.. yeeeaah. I, uh, think I'll be waiting for reviews on this one.
I'm in exactly the same position. I want this to be good but...
So we've got a dice pool system that wants to try and cover gritty to epic that will somehow work with 'diverse' parties like Guardsmen and Space Marines.. yeeeaah. I, uh, think I'll be waiting for reviews on this one.
I'm in exactly the same position. I want this to be good but...
Yeah. The CSM were nerfed into the ing ground to not make them complete autotakes in Black Crusade and that did not make for good roleplay.
So we've got a dice pool system that wants to try and cover gritty to epic that will somehow work with 'diverse' parties like Guardsmen and Space Marines.. yeeeaah. I, uh, think I'll be waiting for reviews on this one.
I'm in exactly the same position. I want this to be good but...
Yeah. The CSM were nerfed into the ing ground to not make them complete autotakes in Black Crusade and that did not make for good roleplay.
The problem was you didn't want Deathwatch levels.. Where the only thing that would challenge a party is something so incredibly overpowered. The heavy bolter stats were a travesty even after the nerf.
I don't think (C)SM and normal humans make for a good mix in a party. It will inevitably make things very combat focused (why would anyone send SM to handle nobles and intrigue at a winter ball?) where SM will inevitably be vastly superior.
Because Space Marines will seldom be skilled at anything but combat. You'll need the guys that are good at gathering information, dealing with the local government, a psyker, someone who can actually pilot and repair vehicles, etc...
So a low level Inquisitorial agent, a Space Marine, an Imperial Navy Pilot, and Admech techpriest could all have useful rolls in an adventuring party.
Yeah. The CSM were nerfed into the ing ground to not make them complete autotakes in Black Crusade and that did not make for good roleplay.
XP equalized, normal CSM statistically pasted on a regular basis every "normal" human even after the nerf in combat barring RNG and maybe versus a psyker willing to push powers to the limits and fry his soul.. and that's assuming that the GM disallowed sorcerer marines which were even more powerful. Did they tone them down? Sure, absolutely... but "nerfed into the ***** ground"? Nah.
adamsouza wrote: Because Space Marines will seldom be skilled at anything but combat. You'll need the guys that are good at gathering information, dealing with the local government, a psyker, someone who can actually pilot and repair vehicles, etc...
So a low level Inquisitorial agent, a Space Marine, an Imperial Navy Pilot, and Admech techpriest could all have useful rolls in an adventuring party.
I'm... less sure about this. Would this mean that normal human combat characters like guardsmen wouldn't be viable at all? Or would be considered a dramatically weaker character than any other human with basic training in a field that wasn't combat? The fact that marine would, lorewise at least, be more useful in combat than the other three put together also is an issue, as the others either won't be useful or the space marine won't be under threat.
It's taking every issue with black crusade, than cranking it up another level. At least in black crusade you had human characters who were clearly fair high in power level to start with, and even then the space marines were a bit tepid yet still absolute monsters all at once.
Hopefully space marines remain in the realm of high level/power character suitable for either a replacement character mid campaign or for usage in a higher level campaign, where the characters are all elites.
A marine in his armor will be more survivable than a guardsman, but in a skill based/ dice pool game, a guard veteran could be of equal marksmanship and wield a gun that does the same damage.
Just like in D&D how a fighter is more survivable and better in melee but the rest of the adventuring party is still useful.
Frankly, Marines just aren't good PCs for an RPG. The in-setting justification for them hanging out with some normal humans is flimsy. Then you have the issue that anything that can challenge the marine in combat is fully capable of wiping out the non-marine members. Not to mention your role-play options are limited. Marines are living weapons of war, and at least from human perspectives they wouldn't be very interesting. Marines also aren't exactly subtle. It's not like you can go snooping around the under-hive disguised as laborers with a 8ft dude in power armor following you around.
But it's mostly the setting problems that are an issue. Mechanically a marine being your combat tank/damage dealer is fine in the normal party dynamic. But the role-play options get seriously hampered by a marine being in the party unless you ignore a huge chunk of the setting background. Same thing with aliens in the party.
Its one reason I didn't like the Deathwatch portion of FFG's stuff as much. The system was great, but role-play options for a squad of loyalist marines is very limited. It just ultimately descends into the party being murderhobos. Which does make sense in the setting because that's basically what marines are, but it makes for poor roleplay.
The in-setting justification has been stated that the game is set on the dark side of Imperium, cutt off from proper reinforcements, and the adventuring party is likely to be anyone left alive to answer the call.
So any good citizen of the Imperium should be happy for a Space Marine ally, while a Space Marine, without a way back to his chapter, is likely to attach himself other humans fighting against chaos and xenos.
Space Marines are iconic to the setting. Many people will want to play them. I imagine there will be quite a few Murderhobo groups comprised of Space Marines, from various chapters.
So we've got a dice pool system that wants to try and cover gritty to epic that will somehow work with 'diverse' parties like Guardsmen and Space Marines.. yeeeaah. I, uh, think I'll be waiting for reviews on this one.
Fair enough. No one will really know how good the system is for some time. Some systems can handle diversity, and some not so much.
However, the fact that they've already taken it into consideration as a design goal is a positive sign.
Grey Templar wrote: Its one reason I didn't like the Deathwatch portion of FFG's stuff as much. The system was great, but role-play options for a squad of loyalist marines is very limited.
I don't see how.
The Role-Play aspects of an RPG are up to the players. If you find it limiting then you're the one limiting it.
Just go high powered if you want to use Marines - or have them as the strike team alt characters
I ran a successful campaign with a Inquisitor, Imperial Assassin, Dark Angels Librarian and a Adepta Sororitas veteran
They had to deal with large scale issues as well as combat - so yes they fought off a Dark elder attack on their ship but also had to negotiate with the Ad Mech about the ownership of a star system and also the Eldar about a Slaan in stasis. Then a large Space Hulk turned up for them to deal with - which involved negotiation, planning, leading strike teams etc.
Marines can be in charge of military operations on a large scale rather than just fighting a few bad guys,
High Level games can be as much fun as low level ones - you also tend to get away from the looting aspect when you already have a starship full of useful stuff!
Mixing SM and non-SM characters in the FFG systems tended to result in your characters effectively cowering behind the Space Marine when the bullets started flying, but your Arbiter jingling keys in front of the SM's face while the Cleric did the talking any time diplomacy was needed.
adamsouza wrote: The in-setting justification has been stated that the game is set on the dark side of Imperium, cutt off from proper reinforcements, and the adventuring party is likely to be anyone left alive to answer the call.
So any good citizen of the Imperium should be happy for a Space Marine ally, while a Space Marine, without a way back to his chapter, is likely to attach himself other humans fighting against chaos and xenos.
Space Marines are iconic to the setting. Many people will want to play them. I imagine there will be quite a few Murderhobo groups comprised of Space Marines, from various chapters.
Which still doesn't make sense. Chapters would still largely stick together. They're not going to be sending marines out to join up with random groups of guardsmen and average citizens.
adamsouza wrote: A marine in his armor will be more survivable than a guardsman, but in a skill based/ dice pool game, a guard veteran could be of equal marksmanship and wield a gun that does the same damage.
Just like in D&D how a fighter is more survivable and better in melee but the rest of the adventuring party is still useful.
Because they do equal or more damage in combat, and can actually contribute outside combat? I'm not sure the fighter is the parallel to draw- that's usually a problematic class in D&D, for being one diemnsional and not being even vaguely on the same power level as Spellcasters or rogues.
Also fluff-wise, a guardsmen won't have equal marksmanship or a comparable gun.
adamsouza wrote: The in-setting justification has been stated that the game is set on the dark side of Imperium, cutt off from proper reinforcements, and the adventuring party is likely to be anyone left alive to answer the call.
So any good citizen of the Imperium should be happy for a Space Marine ally, while a Space Marine, without a way back to his chapter, is likely to attach himself other humans fighting against chaos and xenos.
Space Marines are iconic to the setting. Many people will want to play them. I imagine there will be quite a few Murderhobo groups comprised of Space Marines, from various chapters.
Which still doesn't make sense. Chapters would still largely stick together. They're not going to be sending marines out to join up with random groups of guardsmen and average citizens.
Sure it does. There are certainly references to SM chapters sending single marines to act as emmissaries, to link their chapter to the rest of the imperial warmachine. Or you could go with him being a single survivor of their squad. (single squads being even more common in the fluff). Or you could have a marine leading a group of serfs and allies.
Hell, anything involving the Inquisition could work fine. The Inquisitor just asked a chapter for help. He got a couple of marines. Or one strong marine (say, a librarian.). And if no suitably strong leader is in the party, then the GM can play an Inquisitor. Bam, now youve got a valid reason for why you underhive scum is fighting side by side with a SM.
EnTyme wrote: Mixing SM and non-SM characters in the FFG systems tended to result in your characters effectively cowering behind the Space Marine when the bullets started flying, but your Arbiter jingling keys in front of the SM's face while the Cleric did the talking any time diplomacy was needed.
I had a situation where the SM Libarian did a Pysker trick so the Dark Eldar assult team could not see him when they entered the room - the Assassin player was less than impressed as they all targeted her with liquifers and other nastiness. She ws not at all amused.
adamsouza wrote: A marine in his armor will be more survivable than a guardsman, but in a skill based/ dice pool game, a guard veteran could be of equal marksmanship and wield a gun that does the same damage.
Just like in D&D how a fighter is more survivable and better in melee but the rest of the adventuring party is still useful.
Well first a guardsman doesn't have the training, weaponry, or wargear of a space marine even in 40k proper. In a rpg actually doing justice to what a space marine is in fluff, the gap is probably going to be even larger. A normal guardsman should more or less be useless compared to a normal space marine. Even a veteran wouldn't be on par with anyone but a scout if they were doing it accurately, that's strictly a tabletop thing that's due to the abstract and simplified nature not leaving much room.
As for the fighter... well the fighter is a classic example of why having a pure combat class without utility just doesn't work.
Here's the deal... SM hype is great and in all the percentile systems Marines have had to be beasts through crazy stats. That's the sense which most people are looking through.
But over in Shadowrun Trolls have been there since the beginning. Now, just hold your horses and let me explain. In SR you often see the troll wielding a chain gun...because they can. Physically a troll is equivalent to a Marine. SR nerfs the Troll by restricting their social aspects, though many people enjoy making Troll Faces regardless.
So, on the wrong side of the rift people with have to accept Marines wandering around with Inquisitor acolytes, Eldar Rangers and various other motley fellows. And why can't a Marine be charming or intellectually curious? Maybe this "darkening" is what allowed a particular Marine to show off his softer side. Not all of us believe the propaganda perpetuated since second edition. Just saying.
Same as in 40K, you pays your money, you take your chances.
As to the Space Marines, you have to tailor your game for what you want to do. If , for an example- You want to take a half a depleted squad, transport them to point A, and the depleted squad has to do A, to get to B. to get to C, or they are going to die, because of the low supplies, the precarious condition of the transport, and the incoming Chaos, or Cults contingent rolling in, and coming across them, in surprise.
You quite feasibly could end up taking that squad into a trench line, running across a IG squad of greenies, or a small contingent of Vets, who for one reason or another are caught out there in no mans land, and don't even know it.
The deal is, though if your Space Marine squad is too hard for the setting, you have to- by all seriousness, have to up the ante. You shouldn't have that depleted squad fighting a couple of guys. You need to set the adventure to the heroes.
WHY are they there?
What do they need to do to make it to the next meal?
WHO is their enemies, and what do they need to do to win?
Where are they? are they part of a multi tire invasion, are they a small fire team? are they doing a snatch and grab? are they a sniper team, going in to do a piece of work?
How exactly are they related? Are the heroes a scratch team, tied together to survive in a hostile environment? are they the "Lone survivor types", are they there for a reason? is it by chance?
The game is hard core, You don't just get to run around punching grots , except when you are punching them to get the last mag for your boltgun, with two rounds left. and one of the little gits has a Space Marine knife/ chainsword that you need.
Well first a guardsman doesn't have the training, weaponry, or wargear of a space marine even in 40k proper. In a rpg actually doing justice to what a space marine is in fluff, the gap is probably going to be even larger. A normal guardsman should more or less be useless compared to a normal space marine. Even a veteran wouldn't be on par with anyone but a scout if they were doing it accurately, that's strictly a tabletop thing that's due to the abstract and simplified nature not leaving much room.
Fluff is always action hero level of ridiculous. Gameplay design reigns starting level characters down to a playable levels.
Dice Pool games usually revolve around Attribute + Skill = Dice Pool.
Marines do not have superhuman levels of agility or marksmanship, they have superior training.
A IG player Character who puts skill points into his shooting/Firearms skill will catch up, if not surpass the default space Marine Level.
Shadowrun has Street Samurai working along deckers.
D&D has Fighters/Clerics working along side Bards.
Vampire has different Clans working together.
Star Wars has wildly different characters working together.
RPGs have been doing this for a long time now. Some characters will be better at some things than others. It's up to the GM to give them all something to do to let them shine.
If mixed parties with Space Marine were problematic in the FFG40K, it could have been poor Game Mastering or poor game design, but there should be a way to make it work. Plenty of other games have managed it. U.S.G. is already aware of it, and has made a concious design goal to make it work.
adamsouza wrote: Marines do not have superhuman levels of agility or marksmanship, they have superior training.
Marksmanship, perhaps not (though their vastly superior eyesight helps, as does their strength) but speed and agility, most definitely.
(Though if you want to continue that argument I suggest PMs so as to not derail).
NUMEROUS Source indicate that in addition to their strength, Spacemarines are extremely fast. numerous sources (partiuclarly in the horus heresy) describe "transhuman dread" where normal humans are basicly left horrified when fighting marines upon the realization that they're that fast
adamsouza wrote: Marines do not have superhuman levels of agility or marksmanship, they have superior training.
Marksmanship, perhaps not (though their vastly superior eyesight helps, as does their strength) but speed and agility, most definitely.
(Though if you want to continue that argument I suggest PMs so as to not derail).
NUMEROUS Source indicate that in addition to their strength, Spacemarines are extremely fast. numerous sources (partiuclarly in the horus heresy) describe "transhuman dread" where normal humans are basicly left horrified when fighting marines upon the realization that they're that fast
Yeah. They're fast, and even faster when in power armor. Better hand eye coordination gives them better aim with ranged weapons.
H.B.M.C. wrote: If you think that Space Marine's can't be RP'd, then really that's more of a 'you' problem than the game's problem.
Of course they can, the problem is that they can only be RPed in certain ways if they are to be true to the fluff. You are not going to have a Marine infiltrating anywhere for example.
Game mechanic borrows from TORG Eternity (primary influence), and the feel of Savage Worlds, D&D 5th, and Savage Rifts
That last one makes me feel a bit more positive about this. Though it does creak a bit at the higher power levels (where the margin between "fine" and "dead" can be a bit too thin depending on how many damage dice are rerolled), Savage Worlds Rifts generally holds up well to varied power levels, and has a very fast and intense feel. In my message-board game (link below for those interested), I was able to move from a fight with 30 stormtroopers and robots to an APC vs jet cycles chase sequence without ever feeling the system was really dragging.
adamsouza wrote: Because Space Marines will seldom be skilled at anything but combat. You'll need the guys that are good at gathering information, dealing with the local government, a psyker, someone who can actually pilot and repair vehicles, etc...
So a low level Inquisitorial agent, a Space Marine, an Imperial Navy Pilot, and Admech techpriest could all have useful rolls in an adventuring party.
Eh, that seldom works out in practice. When a fight breaks out that can't best be summed up with "The combat monster PC massacres everything, no need to roll dice.", then it's going to be the combat monster rolling dice for 1-2 hours while everyone else makes a token effort in between looking at their phones. And when a social situation comes up, it's the other way around. Either way, you've got a player being bored.
There's a saying about Jedi characters in the Star Wars RPG's--that either everyone should play one, or nobody should play one.
There are ways around that problem, of course--Mutants & Masterminds had a nice system where characters could indirectly contribute to combat through distracting, aiding allies, taunting enemies, etc.
Well, it depends. In my last BC campaign...
- Our Nurgle-ish Heretek managed to be more hardy than Marines.
- The Slaanesh cultist was a mastermind in getting minions (she was directly responsible for collecting 100 psykers and putting them in a room, forcing them to push their powrs just to see what would happen) and picking up plot hooks.
- My TS Sorcerer helped the group a lot outside combat.
The only guy that didn't do much outside combat was the Khorne Berserker, but, well... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
H.B.M.C. wrote: If you think that Space Marine's can't be RP'd, then really that's more of a 'you' problem than the game's problem.
Of course they can, the problem is that they can only be RPed in certain ways if they are to be true to the fluff. You are not going to have a Marine infiltrating anywhere for example.
In our really long Deathwatch campaign our squad infiltrated a Tau fortification using various tools (carefully chosen time of attack, elimination of sentry drones, special equipment such as smoke bombs to feign a fire).
It is harder for Space Marines, especially depending on the Marine size your group decides to go with (we go with 9') but not impossible, and some Marines such as Raven Guard are scarily good at it.
A Raven Guard is what I played, by the way. I managed to get something like 70-80 BS and agility and just went full Sam Fisher Space Marine on the poor Tau.
They could maybe get to a location unseen (although they have significant drawbacks due to their sheer size) but they will never be able to pass themselves off as anything other than a Marine. 'Espionage' type game play is impossible with a Marine outside of very specific settings and espionage gameplay is very common in the RPGs that I have played.
Pseudomonas wrote: They could maybe get to a location unseen (although they have significant drawbacks due to their sheer size) but they will never be able to pass themselves off as anything other than a Marine. 'Espionage' type game play is impossible with a Marine outside of very specific settings and espionage gameplay is very common in the RPGs that I have played.
I think you're coming at this backwards:
Why would Marines be sent in for the purposes of espionage in the first place if they're so terrible at it?
And if the answer is "Well maybe the group has to, and the Marine won't help", then you've pretty much given the chief reason why Black Industries (and later FFG) separated the games out into types.
One thing I hope the game does have is "templates" for parties, with guidelines on what sort of characters will fit into each, to pre-empt That One Guy who will argue that his Dark Eldar can work just fine alongside the puritanical Inquisitor, if you were a GOOD GM.....
I'm thinking of the Iron Kingdoms RPG, where you could choose a template for your adventuring party ("Occult investigators", "Cygnar spec-ops team." or "Trollkin defending their hometown.", and gained bonuses and assets based on that. A typical framework might be:
All of / the majority of characters must be (race) or (class)
The group chooses one character with (class) to be the leader. They gain the Natural Leader talent.
The characters gain (trait)
The party have an office / pirate ship / safehouse / village to call home.
It made it easy to say "This is what the game's about."
Elemental wrote: One thing I hope the game does have is "templates" for parties, with guidelines on what sort of characters will fit into each, to pre-empt That One Guy who will argue that his Dark Eldar can work just fine alongside the puritanical Inquisitor, if you were a GOOD GM.....
Urgh, 99% of the time no.I mean we have The Visarch alongside black templars and so on, and I imagine in universe a few attitudes may be changing, but whats the point of having the setting if people just want to keep going against/breaking it just for their own benefit. There are a few people wanting to be special snowflakes. Dont get me started on KDK players fluffily includin psykers/covens in their armies...'yeah man khorne is so cool with it!..,marines in inquisitor etc,.just for in game benefits. Theres nothing wrong with doing cool stuff but blaming the gm for that?
Game mechanic borrows from TORG Eternity (primary influence), and the feel of Savage Worlds, D&D 5th, and Savage Rifts
That last one makes me feel a bit more positive about this. Though it does creak a bit at the higher power levels (where the margin between "fine" and "dead" can be a bit too thin depending on how many damage dice are rerolled), Savage Worlds Rifts generally holds up well to varied power levels, and has a very fast and intense feel. In my message-board game (link below for those interested), I was able to move from a fight with 30 stormtroopers and robots to an APC vs jet cycles chase sequence without ever feeling the system was really dragging.
adamsouza wrote: Because Space Marines will seldom be skilled at anything but combat. You'll need the guys that are good at gathering information, dealing with the local government, a psyker, someone who can actually pilot and repair vehicles, etc...
So a low level Inquisitorial agent, a Space Marine, an Imperial Navy Pilot, and Admech techpriest could all have useful rolls in an adventuring party.
Eh, that seldom works out in practice. When a fight breaks out that can't best be summed up with "The combat monster PC massacres everything, no need to roll dice.", then it's going to be the combat monster rolling dice for 1-2 hours while everyone else makes a token effort in between looking at their phones. And when a social situation comes up, it's the other way around. Either way, you've got a player being bored.
There's a saying about Jedi characters in the Star Wars RPG's--that either everyone should play one, or nobody should play one.
There are ways around that problem, of course--Mutants & Masterminds had a nice system where characters could indirectly contribute to combat through distracting, aiding allies, taunting enemies, etc.
Urghh hate the Savage Worlds system. Almost anything but that - well not Rolemaster but pretty much anything else.
You can include marines in games and make them work - just don't have them in your low level games as that is very tricky.
And if the answer is "Well maybe the group has to, and the Marine won't help", then you've pretty much given the chief reason why Black Industries (and later FFG) separated the games out into types.
Indeed, and this is the very reason why I have concerns over this game. I can see most games of Wrath and Glory devolving into pure murderporn and that holds little interest for me.
One way we tried (temporarily for a short time) to address that in Black Crusade was to disallow sorcerers leaving tech/magic to "normal" humans. Additionally, I suggested (as the marine character) to only use my starting chainsword and bolt weapons leaving the humans to specialise as wanted/needed in melta/plasma. The marine in effect was the combat jack of all trades. It worked because I suggested it but I could easily see others chafing at the idea. In the end I suspect the only two ways to adequately do it are to either nerf the marine abilities compared to the fluff to something more manageable and/or start the group at higher xp levels.
As for Savage World, in Rifts I've found the combat cyborg to be a good starting character astartes equivalent if you rename abilities.
They could maybe get to a location unseen (although they have significant drawbacks due to their sheer size) but they will never be able to pass themselves off as anything other than a Marine. 'Espionage' type game play is impossible with a Marine outside of very specific settings and espionage gameplay is very common in the RPGs that I have played.
Indeed. Every good RPG will, at least once, have situations where the PCs will need to sneak around or pass themselves off as something other than what they actually are. Marines just can't do that.
Plus the general role-play options for a marine just aren't interesting. If you are being true to the fluff, which I think is imperative for any 40kRPG, the Marine just wouldn't have many compelling things to do outside of combat.
Say your group are Inquisitorial acolytes, so there is some justification for a marine being in the group. Your group is assigned to investigate a social gathering being put on by some noble family that you suspect of having some ties with some group of heretics. There is an upcoming exclusive event which you want to infiltrate.
The Marine is going to be utterly useless except to come in and save the party if a fight breaks out. He can't infiltrate the party disguised as a guest. He can't sneak around the rest of the noble's estate disguised as a servant, he might be able to sneak, but that's really pushing it. It's not going to be much fun for the Marine player.
Or lets just think about the players "mucking about" between adventures. You're improvising some down time actions for your players before they ship off to the next adventure. Maybe the group decides to go shopping for gear, and maybe have some misadventures along the way. The Marine has no reason to go shopping, go out drinking(unless he's a space wolf), or generally just hang out with the rest of the PCs. All he really has any justification to do is stay back at their base of operations and maintain his gear and practice with his weapons.
Grey Templar wrote: Indeed. Every good RPG will, at least once, have situations where the PCs will need to sneak around or pass themselves off as something other than what they actually are. Marines just can't do that.
Every 'good' RPG? Are they true Scotsmen as well?
This sounds like some very narrow-band thinking.
Grey Templar wrote: Plus the general role-play options for a marine just aren't interesting. If you are being true to the fluff, which I think is imperative for any 40kRPG, the Marine just wouldn't have many compelling things to do outside of combat.
Again, the roleplay aspect is up to you and the GM. If you're struggling with this, it's an issue that you are having, not an issue with the game.
Grey Templar wrote: Say your group are Inquisitorial acolytes, so there is some justification for a marine being in the group. Your group is assigned to investigate a social gathering being put on by some noble family that you suspect of having some ties with some group of heretics. There is an upcoming exclusive event which you want to infiltrate.
The Marine is going to be utterly useless except to come in and save the party if a fight breaks out. He can't infiltrate the party disguised as a guest. He can't sneak around the rest of the noble's estate disguised as a servant, he might be able to sneak, but that's really pushing it. It's not going to be much fun for the Marine player.
Or lets just think about the players "mucking about" between adventures. You're improvising some down time actions for your players before they ship off to the next adventure. Maybe the group decides to go shopping for gear, and maybe have some misadventures along the way. The Marine has no reason to go shopping, go out drinking(unless he's a space wolf), or generally just hang out with the rest of the PCs. All he really has any justification to do is stay back at their base of operations and maintain his gear and practice with his weapons.
Again, you're just making it clear why the games were split.
I'm sorry but all of this "They can't work together!"... then don't!
A RPG is what the players and the GM want to it to be. If they put rules for roleplaying Space Marines, Demons, Dark Eldar, Taus, Orcs and Necrons, that means they should be played all together? "But maybe a player insist in playing a Necron with a human party!" So say him then thats absurd. Easy.
Jezz people, asking for limitations to "balance" the players parties. The rules representation of the different things in a RPG should be as fluffy as possible. If a Space Marines need to have rules that makes him incompatible with a 100% normal human party, whats exactly the problem? If you can't think a way to make that roleplay work, don't do it.
Roleplayers need to understand the setting where they are roleplaying, his rules and limitations.
Grey Templar wrote: Plus the general role-play options for a marine just aren't interesting. If you are being true to the fluff, which I think is imperative for any 40kRPG, the Marine just wouldn't have many compelling things to do outside of combat.
Again, the roleplay aspect is up to you and the GM. If you're struggling with this, it's an issue that you are having, not an issue with the game.
Well, in this case it really is an issue with the fluff. Space Marines aren't normal human beings. They utterly fanatical brainwashed warrior monks. They simply don't do anything outside of fighting, training and praying. They are very good at those things, but anything else they will simply see as being not worth their time. In an RPG, this is fine if you are playing combat scenarios, but in scenarios without combat its going to suck. This is not a problem of just 40krpgs, but with overly specialised characters in general. Either someone is going to get bored when the adventure gets to place where he can't do anything, or you need to run two different scenarios simultaneously so that the overly specialised character can go off and do something useful elsewhere while the rest of the party is busy. Or of course, you need to never let the adventure go to a place where the overly specialised character will be useless, but in the case of a Space Marine that means avoiding non-combat scenarios as much as possible which is extremely limiting on a campaign.
I am of the opinion that as a GM, you don't need to allow just everything. As Galas said, just because there are rules for playing as Orks, Eldar and Space Marines doesn't mean they all should be played at the same time. I always discuss with my players beforehand what kind of campaign we want to be running, so they can adjust their characters to fit in.
Again, the roleplay aspect is up to you and the GM. If you're struggling with this, it's an issue that you are having, not an issue with the game.
Eh, the game can make these issues greater or lesser. Common problems are:
--The GM getting applications for a wildly varied party. Either they have to butt heads with players who might be resistant to changing their character concepts, or some players have to play off-character just to explain why their puritanical Confessor is working with an Ork or whatever.
--Variations in power level can leave players feeling useless because either there are big chunks of sessions where their character can't contribute, or because Bob over there can do everything they can, and more (say, a Techmarine opposite an Enginseer).
--The lack of coherancy (and party members with wildly differing goals) makes it hard to give the group a common goal or reason to stay together.
These are all issues that the game can help with or fail to address. Of course, some groups won't care about any of this. They'll play a Grey Knight, Ork Freebooter, Battle Sister (who keeps giving the Grey Knight dirty looks, for some reason), Dark Eldar Haemonculus and a Nurgle sorcerer who all team up to fight crime and they'll have canon-mangling fun, and that's completely fine. But as mentioned above, I hope there's some solid guidelines to creating compatible and themed parties of the same power level.
Grey Templar wrote: Plus the general role-play options for a marine just aren't interesting. If you are being true to the fluff, which I think is imperative for any 40kRPG, the Marine just wouldn't have many compelling things to do outside of combat.
Again, the roleplay aspect is up to you and the GM. If you're struggling with this, it's an issue that you are having, not an issue with the game.
Well, in this case it really is an issue with the fluff. Space Marines aren't normal human beings. They utterly fanatical brainwashed warrior monks. They simply don't do anything outside of fighting, training and praying. They are very good at those things, but anything else they will simply see as being not worth their time.
Thats just isn't correct. Blood Angels are famous for doing arts. Painting, music, etc...
The Guardians of the Covenant for example, are the most monastic of all Space Marines. They spent a lot of time writting old books, and looking for old sacred texts in the galaxy, etc...
Plus Ultramarines, White Consuls, etc.. are well known for being excelent diplomants and statemens. Not all marines are Khorne Berzerkers that can't say anything more than "KILL MAIN BURN!"
Grey Templar wrote: Plus the general role-play options for a marine just aren't interesting. If you are being true to the fluff, which I think is imperative for any 40kRPG, the Marine just wouldn't have many compelling things to do outside of combat.
Again, the roleplay aspect is up to you and the GM. If you're struggling with this, it's an issue that you are having, not an issue with the game.
Well, in this case it really is an issue with the fluff. Space Marines aren't normal human beings. They utterly fanatical brainwashed warrior monks. They simply don't do anything outside of fighting, training and praying. They are very good at those things, but anything else they will simply see as being not worth their time.
Thats just isn't correct. Blood Angels are famous for doing arts. Painting, music, etc...
The Guardians of the Covenant for example, are the most monastic of all Space Marines. They spent a lot of time writting old books, and looking for old sacred texts in the galaxy, etc...
Plus Ultramarines, White Consuls, etc.. are well known for being excelent diplomants and statemens. Not all marines are Khorne Berzerkers that can't say anything more than "KILL MAIN BURN!"
There's some you'd expect to be like this, but many of them know Diplomacy is on the table for things. I mean hell Space Wolves are very well known for contests of skill (from fighting, to drinking, to uh.. "Singing"). But they still have people who mingle with the local populace, help out others and generally.. Not be completely mindless fighters.
A space Marine sticking out like a sore thumb though isn't exactly an ARBITRARY restriction. now that said a GM could make it work, if while the others are hobnobbing with the elements, the marine is infiltrating with a bunch of abhuman workers through the servants enterance, and is poking around there.
another idea, (one that is actually codified in the new Trek RPG) is sub characters that can be played by a player in a scene where their character wouldn't nesscarily be involved.
the ioriginal dark heresy for example kinda suggests this with grey knights, in that it suggests running them as sort of a secondary party for special strike scenerios etc.
Salamanders are probably the best Space Marine Chapter to work with normal humans. Normally they live in Nocturne, as political figures, or with their old families, etc... so they are the most "Human" space marines.
They could maybe get to a location unseen (although they have significant drawbacks due to their sheer size) but they will never be able to pass themselves off as anything other than a Marine. 'Espionage' type game play is impossible with a Marine outside of very specific settings and espionage gameplay is very common in the RPGs that I have played.
Indeed. Every good RPG will, at least once, have situations where the PCs will need to sneak around or pass themselves off as something other than what they actually are. Marines just can't do that.
Plus the general role-play options for a marine just aren't interesting. If you are being true to the fluff, which I think is imperative for any 40kRPG, the Marine just wouldn't have many compelling things to do outside of combat.
Say your group are Inquisitorial acolytes, so there is some justification for a marine being in the group. Your group is assigned to investigate a social gathering being put on by some noble family that you suspect of having some ties with some group of heretics. There is an upcoming exclusive event which you want to infiltrate.
The Marine is going to be utterly useless except to come in and save the party if a fight breaks out. He can't infiltrate the party disguised as a guest. He can't sneak around the rest of the noble's estate disguised as a servant, he might be able to sneak, but that's really pushing it. It's not going to be much fun for the Marine player.
Or lets just think about the players "mucking about" between adventures. You're improvising some down time actions for your players before they ship off to the next adventure. Maybe the group decides to go shopping for gear, and maybe have some misadventures along the way. The Marine has no reason to go shopping, go out drinking(unless he's a space wolf), or generally just hang out with the rest of the PCs. All he really has any justification to do is stay back at their base of operations and maintain his gear and practice with his weapons.
I don't know about that one.
Do you play THIS game, or is this a hypothetical?
Because on MY end, I played this a few times and every time was a friggin HOOT. We put together a couple of different teams, depending on the setting.
Because we were trying the system, ( which ended up pretty much the same) before we put it to the side, for a "Later game" than never continued.
First one was Only War, with a squad, with attachments.
Second was the demo from the free batch of stuff in the Black Crusade.
Played a Third/ Fourth, but it ended in tragedy of a party wipe. ( Then we brought back a couple of the pre-gen characters, who ended up salvaging the corpses, getting the information for the missions/ rally point, and taking their stuff.)
Your example is kinda meh, on account that the GM should already have a couple of story arcs and hooks to them planned out, and throw the chum at the players, and let them deal with the issues. "What do you do with the off setting Space Marine..." " You have this mission, the chain of command has X,Y, and Z for support" " We need more ammo, and supplies before we roll out on mission again." "We need a heavy weapon for our team, how about we go find one at the Quartermasters?"
Or as is in Only War...
"So, you are wasting my precious logistical assistance for a Grenade Launcher!?!? Did you fill out document 2345? \ "No, that is a form 2346. You should have had that in 3 months before the offensive! I'll do you a favor because I know your Commissar, and I know for a fact that he will make an example out of you for filling out the proper forms, I'll cut you just a little slack and send you back to your XO, and not report you for violation. Just as long as you give me a couple of your lasgun powerpacs, as an act of good faith..."
And then you have to go back and steal the grenade launcher, or find one in the repo-depo, and you later find that the grenade launcher is broken, and you can only get about half of a standard grenade allotment, based on 5 other missions going on and a major offensive getting prepped for.
When you play Only War, you have to ham it up, too, and a Infantryman's Primer is almost a must to Gak the soldiers and hem and haw like real military do.
(Officers are morons, the higher the rank, the weaker the sauce, and technicality is the rule of the day.)
On the Black Crusade stuff, I'd be more of an anarchist, and the characters work together for temporary alliances, only to stick it to each other, unless you come in with your A game, and the characters hold their own as all type A personalities. If I play that one again, I think I'm going to gather up a team and start gathering troops, as well.
Such as when you take that demon ship over, you start subjugating the occupants, and make them dance to your tune.
gather up penal troops and getting down to chaos fun... Stuff like that.
YOU seem to have a block, in which you just need to go back and have fun with it. You have some extra people sitting around, you'd more want to get them off on their own, or set them to another task. I'm not going to go calling you , but I can easily see several other things that I would do if I had such a mix of people.
That Space Marine, should be going and getting some weapons, or lining up back up, or getting a bug out plan ready. Your scrounger should be boosting a vehicle. Your planner should be making back door deals, and setting up the planning. etc. I mean, we're talking 40K, not D and D. there should be no reason everyone isn't occupied, and in on a task.
Galas wrote: Salamanders are probably the best Space Marine Chapter to work with normal humans. Normally they live in Nocturne, as political figures, or with their old families, etc... so they are the most "Human" space marines.
Indeed. Every good RPG will, at least once, have situations where the PCs will need to sneak around or pass themselves off as something other than what they actually are. Marines just can't do that.
What? Seriously, what on Earth are you talking about?
Grey Templar wrote: Plus the general role-play options for a marine just aren't interesting. If you are being true to the fluff, which I think is imperative for any 40kRPG, the Marine just wouldn't have many compelling things to do outside of combat.
It is patently clear to me now that so many of you making these comments have not ever actually played Deathwatch. I was in a campaign for a year, and then ran one myself for a year. Great fun. Some memorable combat sessions, sure, but there was so much more to it than this. You can froth at the lips about this all you like, but you've either never actually played Deathwatch or played a very poor version of Deathwatch.
It is patently clear to me now that so many of you making these comments have not ever actually played Deathwatch.
I have and the campaign that I played in was entirely about shooting things.
That's irrelevant here though as Deathwatch is entirely about Marines, there is no such thing as a mixed party.
Wrath and glory is apparently designed around mixed parties and In a mixed party a Marine has far more combat ability and far more authority than virtually any normal human (a tactical marine has the same approximate rank as a planetary governor...) while at the same time being very constrained by the fluff as to what they can actually do.
Basically I think that for this game to work and for it to do justice to the setting there needs to be very clear party creation guidelines and the GM and players really need to be on the ball.
especially for my British friends.
ing ground to not make them complete autotakes in Black Crusade and that did not make for good roleplay.
