Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Tiberius501 wrote: I feel like the main mistake was the broad selection of such specific classes to choose from. I mean, besides the odd rules choices as well, to be broad, why didn't they do races and backgrounds rather than classes? Being specifically a Scion or Primaris Marine is constrictive in a book that is meant to be inclusive. I want to be smuggler with a rogue trader, but I have to pick a guardsmen. So they did broad sort of wrong, but maybe I'm getting it wrong and you can branch more.
You might have it wrong. The "scum" selection of characters iirc go from tiers 1-3 so you could play a scavvy smuggler at tier 2 along with your friends tier 2 rogue trader (although the tier on that one is another ball of wax.. see the discussion last page). Or you could ask your friend to level up to tier 3 and you could play a desperado smuggler aka Han Solo.
Ah okay well that’s better than I thought. And you can be an Inquisitorial Acolyte as well. The classes then seem alright, I retract what I said about that
But also, what is with some of the rules choices? I love that it's simpler, it's what made me really excited for this game, DH/BC/RT, they're all awesome and super flavourful games, but they can be pretty harsh to get going if you're starting a new game, especially for players like me and my group, who don't do well with rules crunch. So we were pumped for this. But this doesn't have nearly the same flavour or 40k feeling.
I'm coming from the same place--the FFG games are gold mines of inspiration and background, but the rules are clunky, fiddly and pretty easy to intentionally or otherwise break (especially as characters become more experienced). So I was pumped for a lighter system that would still have the setting flavour.
"The 75mm gun is firing. The 37mm gun is firing, but is traversed round the wrong way. The Browning is jammed. I am saying "Driver, advance." and the driver, who can't hear me, is reversing. And as I look over the top of the turret and see twelve enemy tanks fifty yards away, someone hands me a cheese sandwich."
Albertorius wrote: There's a whole lot of RPGs that do just fine with a single book, you know. For a great example of complex games with depth that works very well out of the core (or cores) without needing a single additional purchase (but for what you actually want them, because they're great), you just need to go take a look at Runequest 6th edition, WFRP 1st edition, Eclipse Phase, Star Wars 1st edition, L5R (basically any edition), Mutant Chronicles, Conan, CP2020 and a whole lot other games.
Yes, and nearly all of those books are either limited in options for a player in comparisons to the offerings of Warhammer 40k's setting, or they also have a very 'basic starter book' with some samplings, and yet still have multiple books to purchase later to expand your options beyond the default vanilla option. GURPS, an example you gave, is essentially a 'system' book with a LOT of other material that gives you the options.
I suppose what I'm getting at is the impression I took from the development team and various comments from here and there- and while I'm entirely capable of saying that I may have misinterpreted something, you'll have to understand what I was expecting based on that.
The 'end product', as I understood it, was supposed to be something where you could buy the core products, and you and your friends can sit there and decide if you want to be Space Marines, Guardsmen, Arbites, Eldar, Heretics, Necromundan Hive Gangs, or whatever. Essentially, a little box of toys that you could pick and choose for whatever game you wanted to run. Basically, nearly all the options right there from the start without the problem of the Fantasy Flight Games RPG's where you had to buy an entirely new 'game' if you wanted to be something else- despite them all being the same gaming system.
However, it would seem now that the obvious problem is that trying to cram too much into one book means that some of the toys don't fit, and are getting left out of the box.
What I am trying to say is that instead of having one book for an entire game system where you're trying to shove player rules, campaign fluff, GM tools, NPC's and enemies, etc.... it would probably have been wiser to have those various components in their own dedicated books- a player manual, a GM guide, and a bestiary. I know it's cliche' and all, but it's going to include more options for each of them. And while people balk at the idea of 'buying more books', at the end of the day the watered-down 'One Book To Play' model is ALWAYS followed on by multiple books to expand it that you'll certainly need at some point. And I'm pretty sure that's the idea, because it works and people pay for it- despite it being inconvenient for many.
Backfire wrote: That sure wasn't true for Deathwatch, where the Marines were essentially unkillable by standard fare opponents. It was "too hard" because the game was poorly play-tested, unplayable mess. Some kind of reset was necessary.
I've heard this before, and often times when comparing Deathwatch Marines to Chaos Marines in terms of effectiveness. If you put them against one another, and wanted it to be a 'matched fight', you certainly had to beef up the Chaos Marines or put other stuff in there to support them. Or just use some of the gear and skills for Deathwatch marines as a template on Chaos Marines and they could end up being downright scary. Going up against a squad of Iron Warriors that were coordinating their attacks, with skills that complimented and buffed on another was one of the closest battles I've ever had in an RPG.
And yes, standard dudes were easy to splatter in that game- I may have disregarded that as a bit of the appeal to appease some of the complaints people had about Dark Heresy (because some people don't understand concepts like cover, strategically engaging an enemy instead of just running at them and shooting, or coordinating attacks and working together). But I recall playing it quite a bit and we had very, very few issues being challenged by the enemies our GM chose to throw at us. He could have very well tweaked them and I didn't realize it, because I've personally never owned any of the books.
I would say that the one problem I do recall having with a lot of the FFRPG's was when people who were inexperienced with it tried to run it like a D&D game, or when TFG in the gaming group would end up reading the included campaign the GM was using and trying to 'cheat' (though it wasn't effective).
One thing I particularly loved about the campaigns was hearing someone complain that it was short on maps and it was pretty 'basic' with just guidelines and none of the stuff D&D or Pathfinder games have. Another GM I know laughed and said, "Yes, how dare they expect you to be a GM and draft things up and improvise, instead of a guy laying tokens down on a map and reading from a book the whole time!"
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/09 16:43:15
Adeptus Doritos wrote: Yes, and nearly all of those books are either limited in options for a player in comparisons to the offerings of Warhammer 40k's setting, or they also have a very 'basic starter book' with some samplings, and yet still have multiple books to purchase later to expand your options beyond the default vanilla option. GURPS, an example you gave, is essentially a 'system' book with a LOT of other material that gives you the options
None of those are "a very basic starter book". None at all. All of those are self contained books with oodles of options. Some are of course more limited in character type choice... but not in setting, only in comparison with 40k. And even that's not true in cases like Eclipse Phase, Mutant Chronicles, Conan, Star Wars or CP2020.
As to GURPS and Hero, I specifically singled them out as rules sets, so I'm not exactly sure what your clarification clarifies.
The 'end product', as I understood it, was supposed to be something where you could buy the core products, and you and your friends can sit there and decide if you want to be Space Marines, Guardsmen, Arbites, Eldar, Heretics, Necromundan Hive Gangs, or whatever. Essentially, a little box of toys that you could pick and choose for whatever game you wanted to run. Basically, nearly all the options right there from the start without the problem of the Fantasy Flight Games RPG's where you had to buy an entirely new 'game' if you wanted to be something else- despite them all being the same gaming system.
What I'm saying is that the fact you did not find what you wanted in this book is not a fault of the "one book game" idea, but of the company and its development decisions. Every single thing you've said above (and a lot more) can be done with Mutant Chronicles, for example... transferred to the setting, of course. Every single thing you've said above (and a lot more) can also be done with Eclipse Phase or CP2020 too, again giving it the appropriate setting berth.
The specific way they have decided to tackle it is what is the problem, not it being a single book.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/09 16:56:28
Albertorius wrote: None of those are "a very basic starter book". None at all. All of those are self contained books with oodles of options. Some are of course more limited in character type choice... but not in setting, only in comparison with 40k. And even that's not true in cases like Eclipse Phase, Mutant Chronicles, Conan, Star Wars or CP2020.
Eclipse Phase, Conan, and Mutant Chronicles- I have very, very little familiarity with. Just a very general 'this is the setting and you can be stuff like X'. Not an in-depth knowledge of them. Admittedly, my awareness of RPG's isn't on your level at all, and I'll attribute that to finding it difficult to get a group together for something other than D&D... and I do not enjoy D&D, if I may be genuinely honest.
Star Wars, to me, is one of those games that I have seen a lot of expanded books for with additional races, classes, etc. But it has been quite some time since I've looked at the books, and I have absolutely no interest in that setting any more, so I'll concede that you could very well be 100% right about it and I could be 100% wrong.
Albertorius wrote: As to GURPS and Hero, I specifically singled them out as rules sets, so I'm not exactly sure what your clarification clarifies.
Yeah, maybe we were on a weird wavelength and didn't communicate with one another very well. GURPS and Hero are basically 'systems', to my recollection. The settings and other stuff is other books. I think I've still got some of the Hero books, I know for a fact I've got a pretty beat-up Dark Champions book somewhere.
Albertorius wrote: What I'm saying is that the fact you did not find what you wanted in this book is not a fault of the "one book game" idea, but of the company and its development decisions.
I do disagree to a point, but I will admit that it could be done in 'one book game'- it'd take considerable work for something like 40kRPG's. Because, hypothetically, if you wanted to give players the options for playing everything from a Primaris Reiver of the Flesh Tearers in a Deathwatch Kill-Team, to Knights serving the Ruinous Powers, or a Radical Inquisitorial Acolyte with a background as Adeptus Arbites... it could very well be possible, but it'd take some significant editing. And that's just me trying to imagine a book that's also going to include things like vehicles, campaign setting fluff, NPC's, enemies, etc. The scope of a 40kRPG, in my mind, is huge- to the point were I recall GM's in older games using a lot of stuff from other games frequently (Ships from Rogue Trader, tanks and stuff from Only War, etc.).
Albertorius wrote: The specific way they have decided to tackle it is what is the problem, not it being a single book.
Maybe we have a different concern for this product, then, and I'm curious about what you mean here. All arguments aside (with my full admission you could be much more knowledgeable than I am and could very well be right about all of this- but in my defense I'm working on memory, because I have no RPG books in my possession here and haven't for some time), I'd like to know what you mean about the method they're using to tackle it.
Adeptus Doritos wrote: Yeah, maybe we were on a weird wavelength and didn't communicate with one another very well. GURPS and Hero are basically 'systems', to my recollection. The settings and other stuff is other books. I think I've still got some of the Hero books, I know for a fact I've got a pretty beat-up Dark Champions book somewhere.
GURPS and Hero are generic systems, kinda like D&D, so you're completely correct in that they are systems without an actual setting attached to them. In those cases you got the D&D route for them: you buy separately the rules and the settings. Another good examples of that kind of games would be FATE Core, the Cortex generic guide, Genesys or Tri-Stat.
I do disagree to a point, but I will admit that it could be done in 'one book game'- it'd take considerable work for something like 40kRPG's. Because, hypothetically, if you wanted to give players the options for playing everything from a Primaris Reiver of the Flesh Tearers in a Deathwatch Kill-Team, to Knights serving the Ruinous Powers, or a Radical Inquisitorial Acolyte with a background as Adeptus Arbites... it could very well be possible, but it'd take some significant editing. And that's just me trying to imagine a book that's also going to include things like vehicles, campaign setting fluff, NPC's, enemies, etc. The scope of a 40kRPG, in my mind, is huge- to the point were I recall GM's in older games using a lot of stuff from other games frequently (Ships from Rogue Trader, tanks and stuff from Only War, etc.).
Any one of the generic systems above could do them:
- With GURPS. Tri-Stat or Hero you'd have a pool of points that you'd use to make the character you wanted.
- In FATE Core, you'd make the character as a set of traits and Aspects that would give you a refresh rate. You could do that either piecemail or via templates.
- Cortex would, similarly to FATE, require you to create the character's distinctions and dice pools, but it's really very easy to do.
- The case of a PbtA 40k would probably be more akin to the old FFG books, but you could make a complete 40k game if you wanted: you would just need to create enough playbooks for all the archetypes you wanted. Or you could go the City of Mist route, which in itself is an hybrid of Fate and PbtA.
And so on and so forth. There's actually nothing in 40k complicated enough to not fit into a book, to be honest. You'd first have to choose how you would want to balance characters, be it from a "power" PoV or from a "character's time in the limelight" PoV.
Maybe we have a different concern for this product, then, and I'm curious about what you mean here. All arguments aside (with my full admission you could be much more knowledgeable than I am and could very well be right about all of this- but in my defense I'm working on memory, because I have no RPG books in my possession here and haven't for some time), I'd like to know what you mean about the method they're using to tackle it.
Well, kinda what I said above: There's nothing inherently that complex in 40k that would make impossible to have everything you need in a single book. Species, types of characters, quirks, traits.... nothing is really that complex to begin with, and 40k being an infinite setting, what you'd need rules-wise is a toolkit to make the stuff your own anyway.
By method I mean that the one they've used, of having very defined "classes", each on it's own little tier niche (although one you can expand from).... is actually pretty restrictive, all told. And takes too much damn space.
For example, say that instead you go the "packages" route: For example, you have a certain creation points maximums you can spend, and the rules you can buy are in smaller "packages", like say, species packages, combat role packages, profession packages and so on.
- You want a primaris librarian? Ok, you buy the "Primaris" species package, the "veteran soldier" package and the "Warp Psyker" package. Done
- Want a skitarii? No problem: "Human" species package, "Cybernetics enhancements" package, "Infantry soldier" package.
- Let's say a Chaos cultist: "Human", "Ork" or "Eldar" species package, "Lost and Damned" package, add whatever else you want depending on the specific character.
There, done. Anything you want in a single book. Even more if you add to the book a package creation rules set.
(DISCLAIMER: Those are, evidently enough, examples I pulled out my ass, right now, thinking about it for like a minute. With a bit more time you could make actually good ones :p).
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2018/08/09 18:34:55
- You want a primaris librarian? Ok, you buy the "Primaris" species package, the "veteran soldier" package and the "Warp Psyker" package. Done
- Want a skitarii? No problem: "Human" species package, "Cybernetics enhancements" package, "Infantry soldier" package.
- Let's say a Chaos cultist: "Human", "Ork" or "Eldar" species package, "Lost and Damned" package, add whatever else you want depending on the specific character.
Oddly enough, I was thinking on this earlier before I got home to read the response, and I was even thinking something like this because I remember a particular superhero RPG I played (forgot the name of it)- but there was not really a specific thing for creating every hero someone could come up with- you didn't have a 'class' for a hero like Batman, or like Spider-man... and the potential for superhero concepts is so broad you can't even begin to narrow down all those possibilities like that. So in this game, what you would do is pick simple things like "Resilient Form", "Flight" and "Energy Blast". That could very well be a super-durable caped hero flying around shooting lasers from his eyes, or a mechanized android with laser weapons built into his forearms, or a flying insect dude that shot energy beams from his butt. Whatever you wanted, you just picked the best 'general ability' that could suit it and slapped it together. That way you could even work in crazy stuff like supernatural heroes, or tech-origin heroes, or even stuff like mutants.
Now that you think about it in that context, I think you're absolutely correct about fitting it all into one book if you did it like that. However, that almost makes me a bit annoyed because I know game developers probably thought about this method before you or I have discussed it, and it was probably on the table at some point- but it's a lot easier to throw out some pre-assembled 'archetypes' in piecemeal fashion across several books over time, and hey- it's a business, I suppose. Making money with a thing is good, making money for a while with a thing is better.
Albertorius wrote: - You want a primaris librarian? Ok, you buy the "Primaris" species package, the "veteran soldier" package and the "Warp Psyker" package. Done
- Want a skitarii? No problem: "Human" species package, "Cybernetics enhancements" package, "Infantry soldier" package.
- Let's say a Chaos cultist: "Human", "Ork" or "Eldar" species package, "Lost and Damned" package, add whatever else you want depending on the specific character.
There, done. Anything you want in a single book. Even more if you add to the book a package creation rules set.
That just makes everything a variant of 'counts as'.
I'd rather a Skitarius character class than a basic frame-work that mimics the Skitarii.
H.B.M.C. wrote: That just makes everything a variant of 'counts as'.
I'd rather a Skitarius character class than a basic frame-work that mimics the Skitarii.
At the end of the day, with a 'plug in stat packet' system like that, you'd be achieving the same effect. It would certainly be displayed as the go-to template for such a thing. But it would allow certain things to be applied universally. While some of his examples were considerably vague, there would be multiple more 'packets' that are pre-assembled to create the desired character template.
The way I was recognizing it was if one applied basic roles to a racial template, you'd build on top of that from a recipe list to create your character. Within the manual itself it would explicitly lay out how to do that. It wouldn't just be a vague toolkit, it'd be using a very simple reference system rather than filling entire pages with information on one class, in an RPG as overwhelmingly huge as 40k.
I suppose it's easier to think of it like a list of keywords. You look through the book, see Skitarii and its assigned keywords, and those are referenced to tell you what skills and stat modifications to make to your character's racial template.
H.B.M.C. wrote: That just makes everything a variant of 'counts as'.
I'd rather a Skitarius character class than a basic frame-work that mimics the Skitarii.
It seems you have a weird perception of what "count as" is in regards to an RPG.
For a live example of a package system with literally oodles of personality (and no "count-as" whatsoever) you could take a look at Tenra Bansho Zero or The Secret of Zir'An. Both give you packages full of interesting and very steeped into the setting options. And both do it in a single book.
For the sake of argument, though: what would you say a skitarius character would absolutely need for you to regard it as such instead of "a basic frame-work that mimics the Skitarii"? And does the skitarii "class" in WANG manages to do it? Also, are all skitarri from all forgeworlds to conform to that, or would there be variations?
I'm not sure there's much problem with doing a "Skitarius upgrade" package if there are recognizable elements indispensable to it... and you'd still be able to add more packages to give it diverging abilities.
Anyways, to each their own I guess. Likes and dislikes are thoroughly personal.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2018/08/10 06:23:48
Anyway, I think I'm being slightly salty haha, apologies.
Honestly I think all of us in this thread have been down this spiral of "Oh sweet a new 40kRPG!' to "Oh, these rules seem odd" to "But.. why?" and finally ending in "Why the hell would I want this when I have the old FFG ones "
«Hope is the first step on the road to disapointement»
I had no hope for this game, I am not disappointed. It began obvious quite soon that it wouldn't be nearly half as good as the old ones.
I heard some things yesterday that I didn't particularly like about the system. It has a random roll based loot acquisition system similar to the FFG games where you have a wealth characteristic and you just make a difficulty check based on the rarety of the item to see if *poof* you get the item with no real consequence to your wealth unless you roll a critical failure on the wrath die or somesuch. While I don't doubt that some like that mechanic, I'm personally not a fan of that kind of purely random acquisition system.
The second is that marines have core rules for their race that gives them a bonus to hit or damage mobs (don't know which) and with the tactical class get some sort of draw two crit cards pick one ability. Unfortunately, the core moral ability central to almost every loyalist marine, ATSKNF, is absent. Sure, you can take a fearless talent at character creation but that isn't the same thing (ignoring fear checks, immune to intimidation). The kicker is that the generic monster manual marine entry has the ability (reroll resolve failed resolve checks) that player character marines lack.
The more I hear about this, the less interested I become. I'll reserve final judgement for when I actually see a copy in person but its starting to feel more and more like the kiddie pool of 40krpgs. I'm admittedly focusing on the marine aspect so I don't know if I'm getting that impression from the attempt to balance marines with everyone else or the jack of all trades master of none kitchen sink inclusive game design.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/10 14:51:32
We Munch for Macragge! FOR THE EMPRUH! Cheesesticks and Humus!
Yeah the ability the marine has in the Free RPG Day adventure is just that they get a passive +1 Icon to any successful attack against a mob. For every 2 Icons you get above the 'to hit' number you'll hit (and kill because they're mobs) another member of it.
So the "Angel of Death" ability is just an extra half a guy dies every time you unload full auto into a crowd.
Fafnir wrote: Oh, I certainly vote with my dollar, but the problem is that that is not enough. The problem with the 'vote with your dollar' response is that it doesn't take into account why we're not buying the product. I want to enjoy 40k enough to buy back in. It was my introduction to traditional games, and there was a time when I enjoyed it very much. I want to buy 40k, but Gamesworkshop is doing their very best to push me away, and simply not buying their product won't tell them that.
warboss wrote: The more I hear about this, the less interested I become. I'll reserve final judgement for when I actually see a copy in person but its starting to feel more and more like the kiddie pool of 40krpgs. I'm admittedly focusing on the marine aspect so I don't know if I'm getting that impression from the attempt to balance marines with everyone else or the jack of all trades master of none kitchen sink inclusive game design.
I'm going to look at the final product myself, but if it's playable- I think it would be fun to get some guys together and play this through tabletop simulator over Skype.
warboss wrote: The more I hear about this, the less interested I become. I'll reserve final judgement for when I actually see a copy in person but its starting to feel more and more like the kiddie pool of 40krpgs. I'm admittedly focusing on the marine aspect so I don't know if I'm getting that impression from the attempt to balance marines with everyone else or the jack of all trades master of none kitchen sink inclusive game design.
I'm going to look at the final product myself, but if it's playable- I think it would be fun to get some guys together and play this through tabletop simulator over Skype.
I'm sure it's playable but that isn't a particularly high hurdle to jump over. I was personally just hoping it would be better than my first impression indicates. It feels like a somewhat shallow (at times poorly organized/thought out) rush job despite the pretty art and the obvious time they had to put into it and the pedigree of some of those involved. Again, it's just an opinion and a first impression at that but I'm not impressed. It's not bad enough from anything I've seen previewed to be unplayable though by any means.
We Munch for Macragge! FOR THE EMPRUH! Cheesesticks and Humus!
Just read the full rulebook. It covers a lot of ground rules wise, but nothing in much detail. (eg there are base rules for flying ships, but only three ships present. One Human, one ork, one eldar).
Not very much in the way of background/fluff. As an 'introduction' to the 40k lore I would say it is poor and even with your little table of 'objectives' new players to 40k will not have much guidance at all on the lore.
I really don't understand what they were trying to accomplish with the character creation. It is definitely not simpler than previous entries. But it also is definitely NOT the 'play what you want to be' they said it would be.
Character 'archetype' is a misnomer, these are classes and are as limiting as you would expect taking a class to be.
I genuinely find the dice rules to be a lot more clunky. Not necessarily because its a dice pool, but because there are so many added extras (shifting, ruin, wrath, glory, ect). I also saw a fair amount of complaints about the D100 system and how it can be difficult to determine difficulty because of the various modifiers. Well those same issues are pretty much present (add/subract dice and/or DN due to various keywords and other modifiers).
Also the layout of the rules is not to my liking. Feels unstructured and just a dump of words. No clean page breaks for sections, it just continues on like a uni assignment bashed out the night before submission (YMMV)
I hate to be the one that says it, but this looks like another little swindle where they say, "Oh, you will totally be able to be nearly anything, this is just the -starter- book. You see, Deathwatch and Arbites and Tau will be included in..."
Backfire wrote: That sure wasn't true for Deathwatch, where the Marines were essentially unkillable by standard fare opponents. It was "too hard" because the game was poorly play-tested, unplayable mess. Some kind of reset was necessary.
I've heard this before, and often times when comparing Deathwatch Marines to Chaos Marines in terms of effectiveness. If you put them against one another, and wanted it to be a 'matched fight', you certainly had to beef up the Chaos Marines or put other stuff in there to support them. Or just use some of the gear and skills for Deathwatch marines as a template on Chaos Marines and they could end up being downright scary. Going up against a squad of Iron Warriors that were coordinating their attacks, with skills that complimented and buffed on another was one of the closest battles I've ever had in an RPG.
And yes, standard dudes were easy to splatter in that game- I may have disregarded that as a bit of the appeal to appease some of the complaints people had about Dark Heresy (because some people don't understand concepts like cover, strategically engaging an enemy instead of just running at them and shooting, or coordinating attacks and working together). But I recall playing it quite a bit and we had very, very few issues being challenged by the enemies our GM chose to throw at us. He could have very well tweaked them and I didn't realize it, because I've personally never owned any of the books.
When playing one of the ready made scenarios on board of a space hulk, we twice met a legendary Tyranid Hive boss. First time, he charged us for one round and we got so much damage in that he burned a Fate point to escape. Second time, he ambushed us, managed to get I think one hit through to our Assault Marine past the Dodge, Parry and Storm Shield, then we killed him in 1 round. This was against an enemy which was supposed to be pretty much the toughest comer on entire Sector. Granted we had fairly much experience by that point, but still. We played on nerfed Errata weapons (in original tables, Bolt weapons were grossly overpowered) and I had intentionally nerfed my Devastator by avoiding the most OP weapon/feat/ability combos.
There was a thread somewhere where people made optimized Deathwatch builds and most of them could easily solo a Bloodthirster. A Psycher could kill a Bloodthirster simply by walking towards it!
Despite everything I'd hope it's still passable and can be built into a better system.
But I gotta say, a month ago I was really diving in and lovingly crafting an adventure to run for some people as a way for us all to get a real feel for the game and test it out, and now I'm just sorta looking at the half finished collection of word docs I have saved and I have no real motivation to finish it.
Fafnir wrote: Oh, I certainly vote with my dollar, but the problem is that that is not enough. The problem with the 'vote with your dollar' response is that it doesn't take into account why we're not buying the product. I want to enjoy 40k enough to buy back in. It was my introduction to traditional games, and there was a time when I enjoyed it very much. I want to buy 40k, but Gamesworkshop is doing their very best to push me away, and simply not buying their product won't tell them that.
OMFG I can't even get my hands on this book yet, and the doom and gloom in this thread is palpable.
This reeks of the edition wars of D&D where every new edition there is a cadre of loyal acolytes to an earlier edition.
Rejoice brothers, if you prefer the FFG40KRPG there are tons of books available for it !!! Play all you want !!!
I'm not crazy about this RPG release apparently being modelled after and actual 40K release, with multiple optional cards packs, poker chips, and a dumbed down starter box.
The starter set is disposable and costs almost as much as the core rules. You might as well just spend the extra $10 and buy the actual rules. Why would you spend $50 to see if you are interested in a $60 RPG ?
$20 Poker Chips ??
Related review video by AirsickHydra, based on his playing through Wrath & Glory: Blessings Unheralded
rules discuassion
I'm picking up a copy in September. I'll share my thoughts on it once I get to actually read it.
The new 40KRPG, to be published by Ulisses Spiele. It is completely separate from the FFGRPGs, and will be far more streamlined, using D6 pools instead of D100s as well as several mechanics designed to make the game simpler to play and easier to pick up for newcomers. Additionally, the game will take place during the "present day" of 40k (I.E. after the appearance of the Great Rift and the conclusion of the Indomitus Crusade). There is an introduction comic here revealing multiple game mechanics. A second and slightly more fluffy introductory piece is available here.
What We Know
The Core Rulebook will contain rules for Humans, Space Marines, Eldar, and Orks. There may be future expansions with other alien races such as the Tau or Dark Eldar.
There will be "Adventure Path" style releases. The first release will follow a group of Imperials in Imperium Nihilus, the second following Ulthwe Eldar.
The game uses a d6 dice pool system. Rolls of 1-3 are failures, 4-5 are successes, 6 is a double success, and if more successes than needed are rolled a 6 can be shifted from the total successes for extra bonuses to the roll effect (such as a boost to damage rolls in combat or allowing a task to be completed faster). One of these dies must be the Wrath die, which is a blatant ripoff of the Ghost die from Ghostbusters RPG or the Wild Die from D6 System: if you roll a 1 on the Wrath die, bad gak happens, but it can also generate wrath points (a consumable resource, like Edge in Shadowrun - for example, you can spend a wrath point to re-roll all failures on any single roll).
You can't reroll the Wrath die using wrath.
"Failing forward" is the name of a deliberate attitude the developers took towards the entire design, meaning that even if a roll is failed, no one failed roll will be enough to lead to a TPK situation; it will still have negative consequences, however.
After choosing a species and character Archetype, characters pick Keywords, suggesting allegiance ("Imperial Guard", "Inquisition", "Ganger", etc.). In addition to fluffing a character out, they have crunch effects like making it easier to get rare gear or aiding in getting help from another faction.
The game has a player "Tier" system, from I-V, which reflect a combination of a given character's combat ability, authority, and wargear access, among other things. A Tier I character would be a Guardsman, Eldar Corsair, or Ork Boy (grunts, essentially), while things like Space Marines, Eldar Warlocks, and Commissars would be Tier III. Any given campaign will have an agreed-upon Tier set for it, which will dictate limits on Archetypes, dice pool limits, and the overall challenge level of the campaign. This ensures that a given campaign won't pit characters against anything too easy or too hard for their expected power level- an individual Genestealer that would be the "main villain" of a Tier I game session would only qualify as a basic mook in a Tier III game, for example.
Characters of lower tiers can join higher tiered games through Ascension, wherein they pick up a new keyword, some form of memorable injury or a number of corruption points, some better starting equipment that would allow them to stay competitive (like plasma weapons), and a boost to attributes, skills, and talents that would bring that character up to the equivalent of a starting character for that tier.
Initiative order is decided by the players "agreeing" instead of rolling. They take turns with the GM (i.e. Player 1, GM monster 1, Player 2, GM monster 2 etc...). HOWEVER, DMs can spend a resource called Ruin to go first, while players can spend Glory to go back to back. In the likely case of disagreement or uncertainty as to who goes first, the characters simply roll their Initiative attribute and compare icons, with the highest number of icons acting first. In the case of a tie, player characters win over NPCs, and if the tie is between two players or two NPCs, the players choose who goes first (or the GM does, in the case of the NPCs).
Individually weak enemies can form a mob- a single group that acts as if it was an individual. Mobs gain bonus dice to attack rolls equal to half their size (e.g. 5 dice for a 10-Ork mob) rather than rolling one die per attack, can divide their attacks across multiple targets, and may split into smaller mobs on their turn.
All damage is calculated by adding the weapon's base damage to a roll of at least a single die. This narrows the range and prevents a bolter from rolling a 2 in the same turn a lasgun rolled a 12.
Extra damage and special effects can be added by moving exalted icons. So far the only thing we have confirmed is extra damage die which can do a max of +2 damage.
Your damage rolls are done the same as Icons/successes. (1,2,3) give you nothing but disappointment. (4,5) give you one piddly bit of extra damage. Roll a 6 and you get 2 extra damage.
Basic number of successes needed to pass is 3 with difficult tasks taking more. Because the average number of successes per die is 2/3, this means "average" tasks need a pool of at least 5 dice for you to succeed on average - anything less, and you should expect failure. In general, you need 1.5*target DC dice to succeed at least half the time, rounding down.
At release, there will be 32 archetypes divided amongst the four races (Humans, Eldar, Ork, Space Marine)
archetypes will be added with the campaign sets (really leaning into the Paizo revenue scheme, aren't we?)
Archetypes By Tier
Tier 1: Ministorum Priest, Sister Hospitaller, Imperial Guardsman, Inquisitonal Acoltye, Inquisitorial Adept, Hive Ganger, Cultist, Elder Corsair, Ork Boy
Tier 2: Death Cult Assassin, Sister of Battle, Tempestus Scion, Space Marine Scout, Sanctioned Psyker, Rogue Trader, Skitarius, Scavvy, Rogue Pskyer, Eldar Ranger, Ork Kommando
Tier 3: Crusader, Imperial Commissar*BLAM*, Tactical Space Marine, Tech-Priest, Desperado (read John Wick), Chaos Space Marine, Heretek, Elder Warlock, Ork Nob
Tier 4: Inquisitor (sick!), Primaris Marine Intercessor
There will be Savage Worlds style Campaign Cards, which are distributed at the beginning of the session, one per player. At any time during the game, a player can use the Campaign card to change the flavor of the encounter. The example given was a card which made diplomacy two steps more difficult, but gave every player an additional Wrath point.
A "Framework" system exists for mixed groups, which gives them their reasons to work together when the individual party members might not be inclined to do so.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/08/16 11:53:04
I have the book. It seems fun, but I won't lie, it seems pretty complicated to make a character.
Bedouin Dynasty: 10000 pts
The Silver Lances: 4000 pts
The Custodes Winter Watch 4000 pts
MajorStoffer wrote:
...
Sternguard though, those guys are all about kicking ass. They'd chew bubble gum as well, but bubble gum is heretical. Only tau chew gum.
Adeptus Doritos wrote: ...so the mechanics for this sound like really simple board game mechanics.
Doesn't sound like fun.
Roll a number of dice depending on your stat, get a number of successes based on the difficulty of the task. That's how FFG's Star Wars RPG (and WFRP 3rd edition) work, and Dream Pod 9's systems, and something else I've played but can't quite remember at the moment. Simple is good in RPGs, IMO.
A lot of the complaints appear to boil down to two main reasons:
Use of cards, either because some people don't like using accessories other than their dice and character sheet in an RPG, or because they fear card decks being used to add extra material or patch issues at additional cost. I disagree with both of those reasons, but they're fair enough.
The scope of the game being too wide - Space Marines and Guardsmen in the same party. I remember there being complaints in the opposite direction (not by the same people, I hasten to add!) about Dark Heresy, Rogue Trader, etc - that they didn't cover all of 40k, only a little bit. Damned if you do, damned if you don't, I suppose. Personally, I think it's easier to cover everything broadly in the core rules then add supplements later to drill down, but again, I did like the details of the worlds, locations and suchlike of the Calixis sector. I could have done without the fifteen thousand minute variations on lasgun, though - that sort of thing always feels like a cheap excuse to pad out the page count for no real benefit.
Even with Dark Heresy's intentionally limited scope, you could do a lot with it (Indiana Jones-style artefact hunting with a party of tech-priests, a squad of Guard troopers even before Only War was released, Hive Street Blues with a party of Arbitrators were three ideas I came up with, along with the obvious underhive gang adventures), so perhaps you don't need this new game's "little bit of everything" approach. Still, I like anything that is less ... heavy than another iteration of an 80s RPG.
adamsouza wrote: OMFG I can't even get my hands on this book yet, and the doom and gloom in this thread is palpable.
This reeks of the edition wars of D&D where every new edition there is a cadre of loyal acolytes to an earlier edition.
Rejoice brothers, if you prefer the FFG40KRPG there are tons of books available for it !!! Play all you want !!!
I'm sure it's just that, a "cadre of loyal acolytes to an earlier edition".
I mean, it's not like most of the posters here were just commenting with great excitement about a new edition of an RPG without FFG's (for many) overly clunky and restrictive system. No, it's just bad faith comments from disenfranchised people with not a sigle thread of validity, because otherwise you might be wrong.
And god knows we can't have that
As to the actual game, I've yet to form my own opinion on it, TBH. I think I don't agree with some of the design decisions, but the core system doesn't seem too bad, and I've simply not read far enough not really tested the system, so I'll have to withhold any informed opinion for a later date.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/16 14:16:19
adamsouza wrote: OMFG I can't even get my hands on this book yet, and the doom and gloom in this thread is palpable.
This reeks of the edition wars of D&D where every new edition there is a cadre of loyal acolytes to an earlier edition.
Rejoice brothers, if you prefer the FFG40KRPG there are tons of books available for it !!! Play all you want !!!
I don't believe that's an accurate description of the overall mood or tone of the thread. If anything, the portion of your post above puts you in first or second place for the most hyperbolic/overly dramatic prize. I'd say mild disappointment to annoyance is more accurate.
The scope of the game being too wide - Space Marines and Guardsmen in the same party. I remember there being complaints in the opposite direction (not by the same people, I hasten to add!) about Dark Heresy, Rogue Trader, etc - that they didn't cover all of 40k, only a little bit. Damned if you do, damned if you don't, I suppose. Personally, I think it's easier to cover everything broadly in the core rules then add supplements later to drill down, but again, I did like the details of the worlds, locations and suchlike of the Calixis sector. I could have done without the fifteen thousand minute variations on lasgun, though - that sort of thing always feels like a cheap excuse to pad out the page count for no real benefit.
Even with Dark Heresy's intentionally limited scope, you could do a lot with it (Indiana Jones-style artefact hunting with a party of tech-priests, a squad of Guard troopers even before Only War was released, Hive Street Blues with a party of Arbitrators were three ideas I came up with, along with the obvious underhive gang adventures), so perhaps you don't need this new game's "little bit of everything" approach. Still, I like anything that is less ... heavy than another iteration of an 80s RPG.
I can't speak for others but, as one of the people who brought up the complaint, I feel the problem is NOT that that a Space Marine and Guardsman are in the same party/core book but moreso that page space was devoted to xenos and chaos in the core book in addition to said Space Marine and Guardsman. I fully support the inclusion of Chaos and Xenos in the RPG as a player option but I feel that they'd have been better served as two separate splat books rather than jammed into the core. As it stands, I don't feel that the layout gives justice to any of the above categories (Imperial soup, Chaos, Xenos) to a degree that I'd expect from an RPG product as it feels superficial rather than the detailed, cohesive effort each of them deserves. YMMV.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/17 01:14:34
We Munch for Macragge! FOR THE EMPRUH! Cheesesticks and Humus!
Thing is... there are plenty of games that let you do anything at all that you could possibly want of a setting from the get go, even with pretty kitchen-sink settings. They usually don't do them as "classes", though, because the aren't usually flexible enough for the task, and tend to take up too much space in comparison with other options.
I'm pretty certain we'll see the 'classes' expanded. We'll see some sort of Space Marine focus book, something on Inquisitors, something on different types of guard, etc.
...which is almost kind of defeating the point. I would have rather had a modular system to build characters rather than relying on old 'pick this one class' systems.
I should not have expected this singular book to carry a LOT of options, but my opinion is that the selection of classes in this almost seems more like 'samples' than an actual selection of classes for something as big as the 40k universe.
It may just be a little bit of a downer to see that if I want to play something like a Primaris Reiver, a Deathwatch Marine, a Grey Knight, an Arbites, etc... I'll probably have to end up waiting months and buying another expensive book.
"
10000 pts
4000 pts
