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.

Hi guys. Way back in January, I made a promise to do some RPG reviews. In the intervening months, stuff got insanely hectic, and I totally suckfailed and didn't manage it. So I'm gonna start some now, with my most recent purchase- Black Crusade.

I reckon my value as a reviewer is only of use to you if you have a little background on me, so I'll tell you what I generally like, and keep it brief. I'm usually the GM in my group, if not, I like pretty deep, storytelling orientated games over action/combat (though I do like my heroic combats and stuff). I've played any and all systems and founds stuff to enjoy in almost all of them. I currently run a Rogue Trader campaign, and am enjoying it a lot.

Now, on to Black Crusade.

Overview:
The book itself is presented in pretty much the same structure as the other 40K RPG books, with all the problems and advantages that this entails. It starts with some introductory stuff, and then launches into the characters. Following are the predictable talents, skills, armoury and psychic powers sections. After that come the GM/Setting/Adversary settings. I loved this layout in Dark Heresy, and have been less enamoured of it in each subsequent game. I know each game is supposedly "stand alone" but huge amounts of the books are "copy pasted" from Dark Heresy, and it's really annoying to have to lug around the weight of the books. Anyhow. I know the advantage is that you can buy just one, and have a complete game, but I find it annoying as a long term collector. Add to that that adversaries tend to be spread across multiple books and I certainly feel the weight when I'm lugging my books down to the FLGS for the game.
The book has many pieces of artwork, but I gotta say, I'm not digging the visual style as much as I have been previously. There's some good stuff, but a lot of it seems really OTT and technicolour to me.
On the rules for DH/RT/DW/BC in general, I have to say I find them to be overly complicated and clunky in general, and I tend to streamline a lot of stuff in my games. Others may like this detail but I find it slows the game down a bit and detracts from the experience.

Characters:

I like that they've made building a character much more freeform with just basic archetypes, and then a fairly open skill selection. I find myself doing this anyway in my Rogue Trader games, because it "fits" for a character to have a trait or talent, so I let them buy it at increased cost. The archetypes are reasonably solid, too. Humans and Marines get a Psyker, social/leader, Fighter and Weirdo archetype each.

The archetypes are a bit limited. Since they're so open and simple, I would have liked a couple more in the basic book, even just one more each. Also, the write ups for the characters contain lots of repetition. I also had my first misgivings here, when the way the characters were described seemed channelled in a very specific direction. More on this later.

Skills/Traits/Talents:
I skimmed this section as I'm not a player. The most important difference to the other books are that now the cost of skills is related to your "allignment" in terms of which chaos god you lean towards. While this is flavourful, I would hope it's not too limiting. I felt the book was pushing towards a "chaos worshipper" angle here, and I'd like to see more support for playing a pure "renegade" who disdained chaos (a la some of the Iron Warriors, Night Lords and Alpha Legion). Some of the new talents and traits are good, but it's nothing spectacular.

Psychic Powers:
Again, these are angled at different gods, and I was again a bit worried that this would lead to pigeon holing in a particular direction. I'm not saying the god specific stuff is wrong, just that I wanted more support for agnostic renegades. I guess it does get across the horrible temptation or worship accurately, though.

The GM and setting sections are where it all started to fall apart.
The GM setting (unless I was heavily misreading it) is very prescriptive, sort of implying that the point of the game is to be mwahahaha evil, and collect corruption and infamy points. "noble" renegades are discouraged. I think this is unfortunate, because there's nothing wrong with a bit of choice. I mean, I can ignore it if I want, but I still would have prefered a broader outlook on the part of the game writers. The new game has a system for infamy and corruption. I don't really like these systems, because holy god is there a lot of book keeping and rolling on random tables involved. If I use the book, I will probably alter this section significantly. This is a sort of extension of the Rogue Trader profit factor idea, where you "test" to get new items. To be honest I prefer the idea of having an expendable resource for these things. Infamy points are also a bit like Fate points, but they do a lot more. I felt this section more than anything else slightly railroaded you into the "really fanatical god worshipper renegade" style of play. I am not a fan, and unfortunately it seems to be core to the game's mechanics. It's also the biggest pain when converting between systems.
The setting is a warp storm called the screaming vortex. The background for it is fine, but to be honest, I would find it a very bland roleplaying setting compared to the delicious depth and complexity (and VARIETY) put forward in Dark Heresy. The setting section in DH set my mind aflame with ideas, the setting section in BC left me thinking "Right, so Tzeentch Planet, Nurgle Planet, Khorne Planet...blah". Nothing particularly clever or interesting, nothing I'd really want to play on. And the NPCs in the vortex are often described as being incredibly monomaniacal. It's almost like they were afraid to add too much depth in case people got confused.

While mechanically this book seems on par with the other FFG books, and I like the open ended character creating, the feel and background are to me sadly limited and lacking. The book seems to try and drive the game in a very particular direction and offers no support for any other style of game. Out of the FFG offerings, this is the weakest book I've read, and definitely did not inspire me to want to run a campaign or even a once off. Considering I'm a fan of 40K Chaos, that suggests some disconnect between me and the writers on the direction of the book.
Although, I did smile when I saw Dakka's own HBMC credited as a playtester.

I'm glad I'm not the only person to think the artwork wasn't quite up to scratch. One of the main reasons I buy all the books (other than the fluff) is for the artwork to use as inspirations. Apart from the archetype pictures, I felt most of it failed to expand upon the setting or provide much in the way of insight.

Speaking of archetypes... those offered failed to allow me to create the character I had in mind for an NPC out of the box because he wasn't a Kill/Maim/Crush/Subvert type character.

To offer the counter-point (as you said you are not a player Da Boss), as someone who has played it I can say the game was a lot of fun and felt very different to Dark Heresy and Deathwatch. To me, criticising Black Crusade for being too Chaos-centric and not allowing 'agnostic renegades' is a bit like condemning the Eldar Codex for not having enough Tyranid units in it. To say that it 'falls apart' is a bit much.

It's a game based around fighting for Chaos (in one form or another), so the game revolves around that axis. Moreover, given the open nature of the game's character design you are far more capable of doing what you want with the system.

As more books get released I'm sure we'll see more and more Archetypes (they're easier to do than specialist ranks as you don't need a special table of Skills/Talents, just starting Skills/Talents and a special trait rule).

As for the Screaming Vortex itself, that's a personal preference thing. I don't find the Calixis Sector to be all that compelling, and the Koronus Expanse is a bit 'meh' to me. I love the Jericho Reach from Deathwatch though, and I found The Screaming Vortex to be an interesting and well-realised backdrop. But more than that, and I say this every time about these RPGs, you get out what you put into it - so if you don't want to set it in the Screaming Vortex then you don't have to. Our Dark Heresy games are set in a Sector of our own creation, so why shouldn't your Black Crusade games?

Appreciate the debate H.
I agree with you that the book is good at getting across chaos worshippers, but I think that there's more to being a renegade from the Imperium than that, especially pertaining to the long war. Just a personal preference of mine and in no way saying the the book does what it does badly. To use your analogy, the Tyranid codex would not suffer from having rules or ideas for Genestealer Cults or Eldar Pathfinder armies.
Archetypes are good, definitely agreed.
Agreed as well on the Screaming Vortex thing- if I was doing a game I'd raid it for the things I thought were okay, and then use or make other stuff for my actual game. The review is just giving my view on the material put forward.
Glad you enjoyed it as a player though. Do you enjoy DH/DW/RT too? Or is this enjoyable in a different way?

Lovely review there, DB. I wouldn't wonder if different play styles were taken care of in supplements (a la Radical's Handbook and Blood of Martyrs).

Da Boss wrote:To use your analogy, the Tyranid codex would not suffer from having rules or ideas for Genestealer Cults or Eldar Pathfinder armies.

To put it what I was saying another way, if a book's stated goal is X, and it achieves X (but achieves nothing else), then complaining that it doesn't have Y (when it never intended to include Y in the first place) isn't really criticism, it's a statement of personal preference. Black Crusade's aim was to present an RPG where you play as a group of characters dedicated to Chaos (in some form), and as a game I believe it achieves that goal. It doesn't cover everything (for instance, it doesn't cover what it would be like to be part of a Genestealer cult, assuming one would even have free will in such an organisation), but as the book's only aim was to cover those that worship Chaos, I cannot criticise it for not including non-Chaos-centric heretics as it never set out to do that in the first place.

That's all what I was trying to get across.

Da Boss wrote:Glad you enjoyed it as a player though. Do you enjoy DH/DW/RT too? Or is this enjoyable in a different way?

I've not played RT.

I can say that I prefer GM'ing Dark Heresy and I prefer playing Deathwatch. I've had a lot of fun GM'ing Dark Heresy games over the past two years-ish, and heaps of fun playing Deathwatch games. I've run a few DW games, but I always have more fun playing them for some reason. I like the intrigue and mystery you can have in Dark Heresy, throwing in plot twists and big reveals and whatnot. At the same time I love the heroism of Deathwatch, and we've all gotten into the habit of big speeches that we use to trigger our Demeanours as we charge into combat - usually quoting something from 40K, or telling the history of our characters as a form of boast. It's a lot of fun.

We've not played all that many games of Black Crusade, but it was certainly different. It wasn't just "OHLOLS! Chaotic Evil let's kill and/or rape everyone we meet", it was far subtler than that. For instance, my Apostate Priestess managed to capture a pirate vessel mostly through interaction, even going so far as to get the first mate to kill his Captain in order to show loyalty to me. We ended up with a terrified crew (they were very scared of our Night Lords Marine), who were all endlessly loyal to my Slaaneshi Priestess. You never get to do that in the other 40K RPG's!!!

In my own personal opinion,

they may suggest that players should play evil charachters, but I sincerely don't care. We are talking about degeneration of the chaos mark, we are talking about deceiving... you follow the gods of Chaos because you belive in them, how and what you do is your personal business.

A Khorne follower can be kind and merciless, only if he snaps and get corrupted can't be kind as once he was... at least I see this as a main thing for roleplaying.

Hello Heretics,

Interesting debate here, though I somewhat disagree with the OP's view in that BC was never meant to be what he'd wanted it to be, as far as I could read FFG's declarations about it.

In my humble opinion, there's much from Black Crusade that was once found in 'ye olde' Realm of Chaos' mechanics for warbands and daemonhood, and this is positive. The rules for DH and RT easily allow for non-chaos renegades, which isn't at all the purpose of Black Crusade - the game's name itself refers to the Black Legion's chaotic raids against the Imperium of Man.

My main disappointment, outside of the scenario featured in the rulebook (which is but a railroad and assumes the players to be simpletons) is the lack of consistent explanation as to why the PCs would be working together (the scenario in the rulebook basically starts with "you met in an inn"...), though mechanics are present for common projects for Compacts, which are not unlike RT's Endeavours.

A simple and elegant solution would simply to have the whole warband of PCs be members or serfs of a single Traitor legion, as featured in the Night Lords novels and the First Heretic novel, whereas the Astartes all belong to the same unit (while some could be followers of different gods if a non-aligned Legion is chosen, i.e. Black Legion, Iron Warriors, Night Lords, Alpha Legion, Word Bearers or rogue chapters such as Huron's Astral Claws etc.). Non-astartes PCs could hence be the ship's navigator, crew, squires, tech-adepts, etc.

The hard stuff with BC will be, I reckon, to write intelligent scenarios without them being either action shoot-outs, dungeon delving or betraying the whole idea of being Chaotics. I think that "Vampire the Masquerade" and that kind of "grimdark" games might be a key here...

Just my 2 cents.

Edit: I found the Screaming Vortex, though a bit "manual of the planes", a good inspiration to write up background elements for my Death Guard army for WH40K, going as far as writing a short background description of each of my miniatures in that army (>70) in a single round printup which I glue under their base. I especially liked the daemon worlds and Xurunt, though I'd have appreciated more specifics (specific people and situation) and less vague and non-specific purple prose as the WH40K line seems to suffer from, compared to the WH40K armybook's background.

In relation to what you said about why these characters would be working together, I have to say that the accompanying GM kit does go into this a bit. This GM kit out of all the GM kits is, to my mind, the best one. It does go over the ideas of group cohesion, what their goals should/could be, how they would operate as a team and so on. It's brief, as all the GM kit info is, but it's welcome information.

Additionally, a GM can also come up with their own reasons why they'd be working together, as could the players if they discussed it before hand. I understand that the core rulebook could have done with more guidance in this area, but at the same time it should not dictate how someone should approach the game. I think the GM kit information is a middle group between the two.

Well, I'm sure that FFG haven't marketed it as anything other than what it is, sadly, I went in blind, hoping for something else, and what I got was a disappointment. I'm not sure how FFG's intention is supposed to diminish that opinion? At least my review is providing a good warning to other people who think like me, right?
I mean, I said it does what it does well, so I don't think I disagree with you guys at all- it's just that what it does is a bit 2D for my tastes.

For those with the book, can you guys go over the mechanical changes to the general system compared to Deathwatch (the previous most recent version and the first one with marines). I had heard that full and semi auto fire no longer gives you bonuses and that close combat now grants multiple attacks based on your roll (extra attack for every 20 points under threshold or something?). DW needs some tweaking IMHO and I'm curious to see what the next marine containing game evolved into.

warboss wrote:For those with the book, can you guys go over the mechanical changes to the general system compared to Deathwatch (the previous most recent version and the first one with marines). I had heard that full and semi auto fire no longer gives you bonuses and that close combat now grants multiple attacks based on your roll (extra attack for every 20 points under threshold or something?). DW needs some tweaking IMHO and I'm curious to see what the next marine containing game evolved into.

Gladly, this will take time

Skill changes:
Acrobatics acts as both acrobatics and contortionist
Athletics acts as climb and swim
Awareness acts as awareness, lip reading and search
Charm acts as charm and preformer
Commerce acts as barter, commerce, evaluate
Logic acts as logic, gambling and tactics
Linguistics acts as ciphers, literacy, secret tongue and speak language
Medicae acts as chem use and medicae
Operate acts as drive and pilot
Parry is now a skill, there is no parry action
Stealth acts as concealment, silent move and shadowing
Survival acts as survival, tracking and wrangling
Tech-use acts as demolitions and tech-use
Toughness test take the place of carouse

Talent changes:
For the most part, just different names for the same thing
Weapon training talents now are selected based on type and not if they are heavy, pistol or basic
Crushing blow and mighty shot now add damage equal to their primary stat / by 2, not just a flat number
Step aside and wall of steel don't both exist, only step aside does, grants one extra reaction to use with dodge or parry

Trait changes:
Just simple things to bring them in line with how the game runs now, nothing major

Weapon quality changes:
Same deal, simple things to bring them in line with how the game runs now
Flame weapons are now split, with the aoe part of the flame weapon being called "spray"
Primitive changed, primitive (7) weapons can't get higher than a 7 on a d10, though they can still fury/crit
Reliable weapons now jam if you roll a 100
Weapons with the unbalanced and/or unwieldy quality cannot be used with lightning attack

Psychic powers:
Work off the same system as deathwatch and rogue trader

Money/aquiring stuff:
Same as rogue trader

Combat:
Defensive stance grants and extra reaction, as per deathwatch
Dodge/parry now avoid attacks equal to degrees of success, IE 4 degrees of dodges/parries 4 additional hits, AOE dodging works the same as before
Full auto works the same as before, but the bonus is -10
Grappling got an overhaul
Lightning attack got extra hits equal to degrees of success, attack is made a -10
Swift attack got extra hits equal to every other degree of success, attack is made at -0
semi auto same as before, attacks made at -0
Standard attacks gain a +10, meaning counterattacking (which has it's same -20) is only a -10

Items:
Tons of new items, harpoon gun sound like fun? What about a chain halberd, or even a force scythe?
Item upgrades and downgrades are available, upgrades same as before with many more options
Weapon damage same as deathwatch errata
Much more ammo types to choose from
Power armor customization different than armor history, also actual armor uprades such as spiked, vac-sealed and refractory (anti-laser)
Force field rules the same as deathwatch
3 new bionics, also most techpriest abilities such as maglev are now cyberupgrades rather than talents, but require being heretech
Deamon weapon creation very detailed, need an npc to make each one however as tech use, forbidden lore warp/demons, and a few other things needed. Possible to have demon weapon backfire on creator with same type of issues as failing a chaos ritual, and more...

Mutations/gifts:
Large tables for each, most with god specific options for what happens

Spending experience:
All done from a single table based on your god alignment and with base costs that adjust depending on alignment, all talents separated into 3 different levels, everything else the same as before
It's entirely possible to take psy rating as a khorne aligned player, however your psy rating is 0 until you leave khorne

Character creation:
Choose space marine or human, then choose archetype
Various archetypes: Marine: chosen, champion, sorcerer
Human: apostate (fallen priest), heretek, renegade, psyker
Of note, human psykers are more powerful, but more danagerous to play. Also human players start with more XP to spend, and have a base initiative bonus at character creation. Yes it is possible to play with marines and humans in the same unit.

That's all I can really find atm, hope it helped.

juraigamer wrote:
Gladly, this will take time

**SNIP**

That's all I can really find atm, hope it helped.

Wow, that's a pretty exhaustive list! Thanks for putting all that together. I'm really liking the skill consolidations ala Pathfinder. Deathwatch had the old D&D 3rd edition thing going where you could be trained to move silently but apparently weren't trained to do so outside of your bright orange clown costume without additional training in concealment!

Thanks for all the info. Personally, I'd just stick with the Necromunda rules, but I like the background possibilities of exploring the Traitor Legion's adventures.