Hi Dark Heresy fans!

I just uploaded a new designer diary that showcases a new errata update for the game rules. Enjoy!

Thank you,

Again, it clarifies a lot...

Finally, combat cloaks are officially the way I've had them in game since the first player looked at it in the book and commented that it wasn't a cloak, it was a absolutely fabulous evening cape.

Though, being on errata 3.0 now dose beg the question: is the game system perhaps a bit too overly complected? I mean, the more complex a system is, the more prone to breakdown that system will be and the fact that we are on the third iteration of a 15 page errata dose show a healthy bit of system breakdown. Of course, most of the revisions and additions to the errata dose seem to be focused on correcting another book as opposed to the core rules, but still, this might be something for the developers to keep in mind in regards to future work on the line: skew for simplicity and avoid copious amounts of errata down the road. Oh, and stop lobotomizing the editorial staff servitors, that might help their performance a bit and avoid the erratas to correct misprints and type-o's ;-)

But the lobotomizing is the FUN part!

When will get a 4.0 with the other supplements and with current errata put in the correct order?

Still missing a few things I have documented:

You added the Peer (Military) to the Guard Captain. But that creates a problem with the Good Reputation (Imperial Guard) talent that you later added for Guard Commander. The Good Reputation (Imperial Guard) requires Peer (Imperial Guard) but there is no Peer (Imperial Guard) talent anywhere in the Guard advancement tables.

Warden/Divisio Immoralis lists the Forbidden Lore (Occult), shouldn't this be Scholastic Lore (Occult)?

Legate Investigator has Ciphers (Inquisition) should this be Ciphers (Acolyte)?

Under Scum, should Shark Inquiry +10 be Inquiry +20 since Fixer has Inquiry +10?

And for Scum, You have Melee (Power Sword) for 200 at Cutter (Level 6), but it is listed for both Ganglord and Charlatan (both Level 8) at 100.

Oh yeah... Working on the update for both the Career list and the Character sheet. Should have those in the next couple days as I try to make sure I don't miss anything.

Yay, finally some loving for all the characters in need of light armour that prefer to stay puritan!

While we're at it: How does Helpless interact with multiple-D10 weapons? When I use my lascannon on that unconscious gretchin, do I blow him into oblivion with 6D10 or 10D10?

Legate Investigator has Ciphers (Inquisition) should this be Ciphers (Acolyte)?

This might indeed be Ciphers (Inquisition), although it doesn't exist in the Skills section - the alternate career is available at rank 4, which is a point where every base career already has Ciphers (Acolyte)

Thanks for pointing that stuff out, Redeucer! I would be interested in seeing your document.

I think what I will do next time (and perhaps in the near future) is to copy what some of the other FFG developers do on their boards; release a "pre-official" FAQ document for comments and review on the boards first, then put up the "official" version for download a week or two later.

I may also end up making an Errata thread of some kind, jury's still out on that idea though.

Awesome, thanks for the updated errata! Always good to have more updates!

One thing I'm frustrated by, though, is the lack of clarification on the issue of Scum income (unless I missed it in the new errata somewhere?). It's been a consistent problem in my game group, and when I started a thread on here about the issue a few months back, there were many different interpretations offered but little consensus found. I know I can think of about three or four different ways to play it based on the RAW. Addressing this issue would be very, very, very appreciated

Thanks for every and any errata, FFG, but

- there is still a lot of gear "mispriced". For example, compare the "hand cross bow" from the core rules with the more advanced laser pistol in price

- a lot "overlapping" in skills (like "Common Knowledge: Tech" and "Tech-Use") have never been cleared up.

My question:
How about building a "task force" of your best "staff servitors" to tackle the problem once and for all and not "piece by piece"? My request aims mostly at the price tables.

I used to "staff" a PDF-Trooper for Dusk some weeks ago. I wonder why a shovel (a 90-7 entrenching tool) ...ah well, you know what I mean.

Thanks.

FFG Ross Watson said:

Ross,

The Errata thread has been tried twice already in the new forums and has been abandoned both times. There is one HERE and HERE . (Hopefully those work, if not, then http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=99&efcid=3&efidt=58552&efpag=1#70152 and http://new.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=99&efcid=3&efidt=2799&efpag=0#18023 can be cut and pasted in) Maybe if it was stickied or something and had a post from the staff once a month or something to know that it was being read.... Just brainstorming. Do what you think you can work with, Ross.

I'll see if I can find the rest of my notes when I was originally going through the careers. I can't remember where, but it seemed there was another one like Power Sword with Scum that was doubled up in a career path and could be bought for less points at a later level.

Cifer,

Legate Investigator has Ciphers (Inquisition) should this be Ciphers (Acolyte)?

This might indeed be Ciphers (Inquisition), although it doesn't exist in the Skills section - the alternate career is available at rank 4, which is a point where every base career already has Ciphers (Acolyte)

That was part of the problem. The skill Ciphers (Inquisition) doesn't show up anywhere prior to this. Another option that could make sense would be for this to be Forbidden Lore (Inquisition). When I see one-offs like this, I tend towards thinking it is an error rather than leaning towards skill bloat.

Now off to find my notes....

I would say a new print version is in order. Im getting tired of referencing info that should be correctly printed in the book.

The Mono upgrade on page 142 should read “Upgrades:
Any primitive close combat weapon.”

The Mono upgrade on page 142 should include the
addition “The Mono upgrade can be applied to a power
weapon, but it has no effect when the power fi eld is active.
If the power fi eld is ever lost or deactivated, the Mono
upgrade’s bonuses will then apply.” There should be an
additional special note that reads: “The Mono upgrade may
be applied to any melee weapon, but when applied to closecombat
weapons that do not use an edge (e.g., hammers,
mauls, etc.) it is defi ned differently. GMs are encouraged
to come up with interesting defi nitions for non-edged
weapons. For example, a hammer with the Mono upgrade
is defi ned as having a pneumo-shock enhancement. The ingame
effects remain the same.”

So, uhh... which is it then? If only Primitive, it can't be applied to power weapons. If it can be applied to power weapons, it's not restricted to Primitive weapons. (Personally I'd prefer the former, power weapons are quite powerful enough, and non-Mono weapons quickly get considered pointless). Bit of an obvious one this, does the Errata need an Errata?

I'd also like to propose that future Errata are provided in a format that can be printed, cut out, and stuck into the books in place. A "printable" version is all very well, but it still means you have to read the rulebook then go and check through the Errata separately, for every single rule you read, or every time you choose a new skill. Not very convenient.

Bitterman said:

Both.

A power weapon with it's power field off is a primitive weapon as the blade is considered to act as a normal blade. What makes a power weapon devastating is the disruption field that coats the normal blade. So, when a power weapon is active, it is the disruption field and not the blade it's self that is doing the cutting and damage. When a power weapon is off, it's physical blade, which has the cutting capabilities of any other normal blade of it's type and is thus considered to be primitive in it's cutting capabilities, is what will be doing the cutting. So, applying the mono upgrade to a power weapon means that the primitive cutting capabilities of it's blade is enhanced and is no longer primitive when the field is off.

OK, I'll give you that as some clever reasoning :-) but I'd be surprised if that was the intent of the "primitive only" rule.

After all one has to assume that a chainsword that's run out of batteries or whatever would be just as effective as any normal sword. But it doesn't have the Primitive special rule. Come to that, is there a single melee weapon that (when turned off) could not be considered primitive? Surely, "any primitive close combat weapon" means "any close combat weapon with the Primitive rule", ruling it out of being used on power swords, chainswords etc? And if that's not the case, why the change in Errata 3.0? (Of the two changes I quoted, only the first was new in Errata 3.0, and you'll notice the second says something about "the Mono upgrade can be applied to any close combat weapon..." which directly contradicts the first).

However you look at it, it needs clarification.

but I'd be surprised if that was the intent of the "primitive only" rule.

No, the intent was to rule out chainweapons. In the last errata version, we were given the "power weapons only when unpowered" paragraph, which left the forum wondering (and debating... and flaming...) about chain weapons. This errata now clarified that.

It is worth noting, however, that it is still possible to end up with mono shock weapons: the flavour text and crafting rules in the Inquisitors Handbook mean we can modify an existing primitive weapon to have a shock generator. If we add mono to a primitive weapon (which, for reference, I only allow when the weapon is being constructed) and then modify it at a later date to have shock. You can't, however, mono a shock weapon. Personally, I think this makes perfect sense, as shock actually requires physical contact to work.

No, the intent was to rule out chainweapons. In the last errata version, we were given the "power weapons only when unpowered" paragraph, which left the forum wondering (and debating... and flaming...) about chain weapons. This errata now clarified that.

Sorry to harp on about this, but it doesn't clarify anything at all.

The original rule said, "Upgrades: any close combat weapon."

Errata 2.0 adds, among other things: "The Mono upgrade can be applied to a power weapon" and "The Mono upgrade can be applied to any melee weapon."

Errata 3.0 says: "Upgrades: any primitive close combat weapon" in addition to the stuff in Errata 2.0.

There's no confusion about chain weapons in 2.0. It very explicitly says it can be applied to any melee weapon. "Any" includes chain weapons. There is no possibility of that excluding chain weapons - it's 100% clear.

Errata 3.0 doesn't clarify anything. Instead, the state of play in Errata 3.0 is that you can only apply Mono to a primitive close combat weapon, but if you apply it to a power weapon - oh, wait, you can't. Power weapons and primitive weapons are two completely different categories. So why mention it?

I haven't even gotten to the actual rules of the game. Is it as clunky as it seems? That's a wee disheartening.

Well, it is first edition rules and there is some ironing to be done, TalkingMuffin, so there is some clunk to it, but not as much as there seems to be by this thread.

Now, once more with feeling...

As for the Power Weapon/ Chain Weapon / Primitive Weapon thing, the 3.0 errata is rather clear. It can only be used on Primitive Melee Weapons. Now, when you look at the description of Power Weapons in Dark Heresy pg 140 states "If [the power weapon is] not activated, the weapon counts as a normal weapon and characters with the appropriate Melee Weapon Training ( Primitive ) can use it without penalty." That means that when the weapon is powered down, it is a primitive weapon and, as such, can be monnoed. The Errata simply clarifies monoing the primitive aspect of a Power Weapon by clearly stating that such an upgrade only comes into play when the weapon is powered down to avoid folks getting confused and say, adding in the pen bonus for the mono upgrade to the Power Weapon's stats when powered up.

There is no exceptions made for Chain Weapons in the off position, however. when off, they are next to useless as it is the chewing teeth that makes a chain weapon. They have replaced the blade as opposed to simply covering it as a power weapons disrupter field dose.

Graver said:

Thanks, that makes me feel much better. All RPGs have some wonkiness, but at least FFG cares enough to do an errata at all! (learn from this, White Wolf!) As far as the above goes, I'm a little lost. 'Mind a little more clarification?

Well, OK, let me try again. I'm not sure how you can say there is no confusion when I'm confused.

Player: "I'd like to buy the Mono upgrade for my Power Sword."
GM: "You can't. Errata 3.0 says it can be applied to primitive weapons only."
Player: "But the Errata also describes the effect it has on power weapons so I must be able to do it!"

Let me put it another way, leaving chain weapons alone (you say they'd only do damage when they're switched on, I'm pretty sure the teeth are sharp and would simply do less damage when switched off - whatever, let's move on). One has to assume that a Shock Maul switched off is a Club, and an Electro Flail switched off is a Flail, though it's not explicitly stated as it is for power weapons. (Both weigh more than their primitive equivalents, so it's not as though they're lighter and it's the shock field only that does the damage). Can they be mono'd? Under Errata 2.0, yes - all melee weapons could be mono'd. Under Errata 3.0, no, only primitive weapons, and there is no commentary on shock weapons as there is on power weapons. Explain to me how a power sword can be mono'd but a shock maul can't (bearing in mind that "mono" doesn't necessarily mean monomolecular cutting edge, as explained in the Errata). It doesn't make sense!

Power Weapons may count as primitive weapons when they're switched off, but they're not in the primitive group and don't have the Primitive special rule. If we assume that any weapon switched off is primitive, then there's no need for the Errata 3.0 addition; and if we don't, we have to wonder why switched-off Power Weapons count as primitive and Shock Weapons don't (again, ignoring chain weapons for the sake of simplicity). Both updates cannot possibly apply - they directly contradict one another!

Great, we need an Errata for the Errata! In my game (and the key there is MY GAME) we allow Mono modified Chain Weapons. For the most part I understand how it cannot be applied to power weapons and shock weapons, as I can not think of a rational way to make a power field or shock field more powerful. But honestly, all it really does is add 2 to the PEN and remove the Primitive quality. Is that really a game balance issue?

Perhaps the "mono-ing" of a weapon for shock or power just expands the field a bit, or charges it up some (like a hot-shot las-magazine) and therefore the field can "get around" armour easier.

At this point, I would just say its a GM/Player, campaign to campaign, instance to instance, situation to situation decision and I will not be letting the errata make up my mind for me.

It essentially is a mastercrafted weapon option. You want +2 PEN on your already PEN 6 Power Sword? Sure, why not?

I don´t see your guys problems here. Now it is the way we used it in the first way.

Only Weapons with the Primitive Trait can be Monoed. PowerSwords without Powerfield are a primitive Sword, nothing more, so can be Monoed, but once the PowerField is activated again the monoing doen´t matter since the Powerfield is in action and does the actuall damage.

There are other things in this errata which annoy me more.

First the STILL totally nerfed Reaction Action Psyker powers. Then the absence of an Errata for Disciples of the Dark Gods and creatures Anathema. Both are in dire need for one. The statblocks for many many monsters in the CA are simply wrong. Sometimes they countet talents, sometimes they didn´t ARGH So i have to redo the calculations for every creature. In DotDG some of the new Psykerpowers are a 'bit' (<- that is meant in a sarcastic way...) to powerful *cough* Endure flames and flesh like Iron. *cough*

And last some small things which were mentioned in the wishlist Thread for the errata are not included, even if they are rather simple, like weight etc for Bakcpack energysources of a Hellgun etc pp.

"Only Weapons with the Primitive Trait can be Monoed. PowerSwords without Powerfield are a primitive Sword, nothing more, so can be Monoed, but once the PowerField is activated again the monoing doen´t matter since the Powerfield is in action and does the actuall damage."

Fair enough. Explain why the same doesn't apply to Shock weapons. (Chain weapons seem controversial for some reason so we'll ignore those).