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.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
It sounds like some of the issues come from the same core problem we observed with the Munitorum Field Manual - no central repository that information can be pulled from when writing a new book.

It's called a Setting Bible and I've been advocating GW create one for years.

They did have one, at least last time I worked on a GW licensed product, along with a glossary of terms.

 Albertorius wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
It sounds like some of the issues come from the same core problem we observed with the Munitorum Field Manual - no central repository that information can be pulled from when writing a new book.

It's called a Setting Bible and I've been advocating GW create one for years.

They did have one, at least last time I worked on a GW licensed product, along with a glossary of terms.

It might be the case that they're working so flat-out to provide us with items we constantly complain they don't make fast enough that they don't have adequate time to play-test and proof-read, so the presence of the Setting Bible makes little to no difference.

 Albertorius wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
It sounds like some of the issues come from the same core problem we observed with the Munitorum Field Manual - no central repository that information can be pulled from when writing a new book.

It's called a Setting Bible and I've been advocating GW create one for years.

They did have one, at least last time I worked on a GW licensed product, along with a glossary of terms.

In this case BaronIveagh is incorrect, the problem isn't actually a Setting Bible, but a master rules document. Similar, but distinct- a setting bible is more fluff focused.

The snippet from the author is interesting, but even if management did mandate a lot of nonsense, it was on his head not to leave so many errors and inconsistencies across books he conceptualized as a single document (or two documents, basic rules for the box set, and 128 pages of real rules for gang war). There's literally no reason for gun stats to change from book to book with a single primary author.

The directive issues he describes- the stats thing, the box game, aren't any kind of excuse for the basic text and editing errors that infest basically 3 years worth of books. That they didn't need that many supplements isn't his fault (and can be blamed on management), but the content certainly is- just based on "So I initially wrote the rulebook," and "Then I wrote the Gang War supplement." Taking authorship of the first three rulebooks that way makes the rules problems his responsibility

What I think is telling is that he mentions Gang War 1&2 being written as a single book that had to be done as the 2 smaller book because a smaller format book is what they had committed too and it doesn’t seem like there was time to change that... I think that speaks to the relatively short amount of time he had... it’s obvious GW are rushing books out and writing and editing suffer but this gives us a sense of just what that deadline looks like from their writers perspective. The writer clearly has a lot of regrets about how it turned out but clearly tried to do his best. I think when we have a company that keeps authors names off their works and rushes them, the company has wrestled responsibility from the author. There isn’t really much if any editing and revisions going on; their tempo really makes it seem like the majority of these books are written in a single draft with only the rules getting more than one pass, to revise the rules, but not necessarily to revise the writing.

Something I see people say a lot here is that Necromunda wasn't playtested. I have no idea if thats true or not. But one reason (not the only reason) for this statement that people here post over and over is that the rule text is full of inconsistencies and mistakes. Which is true. But...

I don't think many people here realize this has nothing to do with playtesting? i guess this isn't common knowledge, but most game's final rules text is written AFTER the playtest phase is completed.

So errors in the rules text wouldn't be found during the playtest phase. Instead, playtesters work from a raw rules document, often filled with its own inconsistencies. Feedback from playtesters is gathered and applied by writers when creating the final rules text.

Very, very often writers make mistakes and create unforeseen issues when writing the final text. Proofreading is supposed to catch those problems. Sometime sit does, and the writers can go back and revise the text. Sometimes it doesn't. This is because sometimes the proofreaders aren't actually familiar with the game, and more focused on the readability of the text. But often the writers themselves or someone else involved with the design of the game does a proof reading pass specifically to look for errors, and even then errors still get through. In fact, if you've ever worked on a game you now how easy it is for ridiculous errors to get through even when you thought you did an excellent job proofing.

Necromunda is full of errors and weird problems, and I have no idea how much playtesting was done, if any. However, rules text errors does not indicate a lack of play testing. those are two separate things.

* You might ask "Why don't they do more playtesting AFTER the rules text is written?" The answer to that is more playtesting leads to writing and revising more rules text. Thats not what any company wants. They want to get the game that they think works out the door as soon as possible, The proofreading phase is supposed to catch all of those issues.

I suspect that Specialist Games just doesn't have the time or staff to do thorough proofreading. I'm sure they do a pass or two, but thats clearly not enough, or whoever they have doing it is just not good at it.

 jake wrote:
I don't think many people here realize this has nothing to do with playtesting? i guess this isn't common knowledge, but most game's final rules text is written AFTER the playtest phase is completed.

Hi! As someone who's been involved at all ends of this process, I don't think that's really true.

I mean, from a tautological perspective, yes, final text is of course written after play-testing is done because you have to implement the changes from the play-testing. However you appear to be implying that most of the work is done after play-testing, which just isn't true in my experience.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 jake wrote:
I don't think many people here realize this has nothing to do with playtesting? i guess this isn't common knowledge, but most game's final rules text is written AFTER the playtest phase is completed.

Hi! As someone who's been involved at all ends of this process, I don't think that's really true.

I mean, from a tautological perspective, yes, final text is of course written after play-testing is done because you have to implement the changes from the play-testing. However you appear to be implying that most of the work is done after play-testing, which just isn't true in my experience.

We have different experiences then (which is valid). I've never worked on a Specialist games project, so of course I don't know how they do it, But what I've described has been very common for other game companies that I've worked with over the last 15+ years.

Yeah, my experience is less useful in that regard, as when I receive the stuff is already finalised and most of the time has been released in the original language.

Voss wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
It sounds like some of the issues come from the same core problem we observed with the Munitorum Field Manual - no central repository that information can be pulled from when writing a new book.

It's called a Setting Bible and I've been advocating GW create one for years.

They did have one, at least last time I worked on a GW licensed product, along with a glossary of terms.

In this case BaronIveagh is incorrect, the problem isn't actually a Setting Bible, but a master rules document. Similar, but distinct- a setting bible is more fluff focused.

Yeah, when I posted I was thinking more of a rules reference than a background bible.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
It sounds like some of the issues come from the same core problem we observed with the Munitorum Field Manual - no central repository that information can be pulled from when writing a new book.

It's called a Setting Bible and I've been advocating GW create one for years.

Have there been major fluff contradictions? I thought it was more rules issues.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

Have there been major fluff contradictions? I thought it was more rules issues.

Not sure about Necromunda, but with BFG? Oh, Yes. The one that I always immediately think of is the Plague of Unbelief and Battlefleet Bakka's Gareox Incident. If the lore for Bakka is right, then the Big Gun Lobby would have been burned by the Inquisition and the New School would have been the winners.

And the Jovian class... just... the Jovian Class.. That ships backstory is twistier than Post-Crisis Powergirl.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 jake wrote:
I don't think many people here realize this has nothing to do with playtesting? i guess this isn't common knowledge, but most game's final rules text is written AFTER the playtest phase is completed.

Hi! As someone who's been involved at all ends of this process, I don't think that's really true.

I mean, from a tautological perspective, yes, final text is of course written after play-testing is done because you have to implement the changes from the play-testing. However you appear to be implying that most of the work is done after play-testing, which just isn't true in my experience.

I've only done a bit of RPG playtesting and the designers were very concerned that the rules actually communicated how to play. So if someone who didn't know how the game was "supposed" to work, they could still play it from the rules as written. We definitely came across the kinds of errors that have plagued the necromunda line all the time. This leads me to believe all the playtesting is done by people who know how it is supposed to work and thus aren't seeing them. Like when writers are their own editors and just can't see what they actually wrote.

Unless a game is playtested by people who only have the text to work from, your game is not playtested. The interview confirms this was the case with the launch of Necromunda. It barely got tested and just when the author and his buddies could get to it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I do like though how things have improved. If the trend continues the remainder of the House of X books should have less issues than the Book of X books did and way less than the first batch of Gang War books.

I just hope they don’t screw with the Escher background and motivations too much. What they did with the Goliaths is interesting and makes them a genuine mirror of the Escher so I will be extremely disappointed if House of Blades either completely ignores that connection¹ or, worse, descends into caricature.



¹ unfortunately this seems entirely possible since they didn’t update the ‘zerker unit entry background and it seems out of place against the new Goliath origin story.

 Mr_Rose wrote:
I just hope they don’t screw with the Escher background and motivations too much. What they did with the Goliaths is interesting and makes them a genuine mirror of the Escher so I will be extremely disappointed if House of Blades either completely ignores that connection¹ or, worse, descends into caricature.



¹ unfortunately this seems entirely possible since they didn’t update the ‘zerker unit entry background and it seems out of place against the new Goliath origin story.

Could you elaborate on your last point, since I've read house of chains and didn't notice any irregularaties about the zerkers.

 Segersgia wrote:
Could you elaborate on your last point, since I've read house of chains and didn't notice any irregularaties about the zerkers.

It’s just the way the ‘Zerker fluff entry is worded matches better with a house of regular humans experimenting and getting things wrong than it does with a house of tankers pushing their standard procedures too far. It has the situation of the house demographics (defined in the very same book) reversed, as well as their motivations. Further, the ‘becoming abhuman’ thing is kinda backwards too.

Which was fine before they codified the origins of the current House Goliath, back when the entry was written originally. That the then didn’t go back and change the entry, copying it wholesale from a previous publication, makes me worried that we may have different writers for each book, who may or may not have been talking to each other about their plans.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 jake wrote:
I don't think many people here realize this has nothing to do with playtesting? i guess this isn't common knowledge, but most game's final rules text is written AFTER the playtest phase is completed.

Hi! As someone who's been involved at all ends of this process, I don't think that's really true.

I mean, from a tautological perspective, yes, final text is of course written after play-testing is done because you have to implement the changes from the play-testing. However you appear to be implying that most of the work is done after play-testing, which just isn't true in my experience.

But if the final edit is not used and an earlier draft is accidentally put in the printed document because stuff was rushed... Yes, Shadowrun, I’m looking at you.

Regardless, unrealistic deadlines are not helpful for quality products.

New Necro!

Rogue Doc


Gang Lookout


New Escher Weapon Pack

Wow that shotgun look way too oversize, and ugly. Have they not look at the Atalan Jackal shotty before sculpting one?

I expected to see the guild that accompanies the house of blades book.. but ok..

I still think there will be another plastic kit for escher champions and leaders, that body is also new. (the face looks a lot like the smiling goliath design )


and I find this sentence interesting: We’re seeing a rise in the number of Rogue Docs offering their services.. I keep dreaming of a plastic kit for doctors

Dem's lookin' pretty nice.

Chopstick wrote:
Wow that shotgun look way too oversize, and ugly.

Perfect for the 40K universe!

I do like the doc girl

Didn't occur to me that those could be plastic weapons...

 Mr Morden wrote:
I do like the doc girl

Yes, she and the lookout are both ace in my opinion. I love the less-militarized 40K figures.

My name is Chairman Aeon and I approve of this post.

Nice to see non-gang stuff and I wonder if the arms/weapons are plastic—on the new sprue?

Totally digging where this is going.

I still can't believe they keep making underslung heavy weapons like that. What an awful concept.

Chopstick wrote:
Wow that shotgun look way too oversize, and ugly. Have they not look at the Atalan Jackal shotty before sculpting one?

I appreciate they took it from the school of Doomguy

All very nice, but the Lookout is my favourite. Just something about the non chalance.

Bob Lorgar wrote:
I still can't believe they keep making underslung heavy weapons like that. What an awful concept.

I don't mind them in general, but putting your uncovered arm next to the plasma coil on that gun feels quite... unwise.

The doc and the lookout are cool.

Just need to do a more complicated tatoo transfer like they've done with the scroll work for the Sisters of battle.

Chopstick wrote:
Wow that shotgun look way too oversize, and ugly. Have they not look at the Atalan Jackal shotty before sculpting one?

Funnily enough, shotgun itself is not really unrealistic. We mass produce even bigger ones, such as this 4 gauge:




The problem is, he wouldn't be able to fire it one handed, but apparently Necromunda is populated by Custodes seeing they can lift the plasma cannon (that even space marine has to carry with both arms of his suit) using just one and a little strap, go figure.