I'm sure this has been asked a million times and the answer is probably going to be 'we don't know yet' or maybe there actually is a more definite answer. I'd love for the old expansions to work with the game, but I have a feeling they won't. =(

They will be about as compatible as Dark Heresy 2st Edition is to Only War, which is to say mechanically it's a rough and ugly fit. However, if you wish to use the setting info to play a Calixis Sector game with DH2, then the old books will be very useful.

Darn that's a shame. Thanks for the info though. I'll mostly use them for backhistory and fluff then. Thanks.

They'll convert as well as WoTC 3.5 books into Pathfinder. It'll take some tooling on the other side of the GM's screen, but the Characteristics remain the same and Skills are mostly the same. As long as you understand the balance of the Armory in DH2e, you should be able to convert most equipment from DH1e without much difficulty.

I know this is a really dumb question, but what is so different between Dark Heresy and Only War? I know Dark Heresy has lots of imbalances from what people have told me, but what has changed between DH and OW?

I know this is a really dumb question, but what is so different between Dark Heresy and Only War? I know Dark Heresy has lots of imbalances from what people have told me, but what has changed between DH and OW?

Character generation, degrees of success/failure calculation, skills and talents being condensed, character advancement changed to aptitudes instead of advance tables, combat modifiers...

Really quite a lot. Not all of it is good, or even better, but some of it is. They're very similar mechanically, but a lot of the details have changed.

Dont worry, Only War/Black Crusade, has also a lot of imbalances. That's why experienced players take what they like from both systems.

Having run DH1 adventures using Only War mechanics, I can say that the only changes I was ever concerned about involve changes to skills and/or talents, and generally that's just a matter of knowing which skills have been consolidated and which talents have been renamed or removed. All I ever really had to do was tweek the statlines of the NPCs and monsters, and I would usually do that anyway. The core mechanics are close enough that I can use most of my DH sourcebooks without a lot of difficulty... though chapters dedicated to alternate career ranks aren't terribly usefully, now serving only as inspiration for NPCs and/or future PC builds

Which reminds me, there's a page in the back of OW that lists all of the skills and talents that have been consolidated between DH1 and OW in a handy table format.

Thanks for all of the replies. I had a feeling that the details is where the changes are. I'll look into that table at the back of Only War once I'm home. I'm glad they made that table.

They use apitudes in the new Dark heresy. I had hoped I wouldn't have to go through that pain again.

They use apitudes in the new Dark heresy. I had hoped I wouldn't have to go through that pain again.

please explain!

They use apitudes in the new Dark heresy. I had hoped I wouldn't have to go through that pain again.

please explain!

I don't like maths and I don't like having a master thesis to read before I can play a game. Thus I think that the advancement tables worked like wonders as it was quick and fast to get us ready. With Apitudes there's so much to keep flipping back and forth in the books.

I actually failed to make a character in Only War. Yes, I failed. I had to tell the GM that I couldn't understand the system and he had to make the character for me. Worked well afterwards, but that character creation was a pain to experience compared to more easy-to-use character creation from other lines.

I like the aptitude approach. Its basically a more flexible version of the table approach.

I like the aptitude approach. Its basically a more flexible version of the table approach.

The Roles system from the cancelled beta was much, much better.

I like the aptitude approach. Its basically a more flexible version of the table approach.

The Roles system from the cancelled beta was much, much better.

If you really think about it, it is the same, just in another shape. Even worse - it printed redundant information (e.g. as skill tables) for each class, and, what was even worse, used computer-gamey talent trees that were awful (and iirc, they didnt even differ in cost for different roles at all).

If you really think about it, it is the same, just in another shape.

Yeah, except is was much simpler from the perspective of having to create a character and, vastly more importantly, was simple and easy to use for creating your own Roles.

The Aptitude system isn't just a page-flipping pain in the neck, it's also a nightmare to extend upon.

Even worse - it printed redundant information (e.g. as skill tables) for each class, and, what was even worse, used computer-gamey talent trees that were awful (and iirc, they didnt even differ in cost for different roles at all).

It wasn't redundant information, it was essential information. Each role had its own advance scheme. The least space consuming way to list it was to simply list it. This had the side effect of saving prospective character creators from the aforementioned page-flipping pain.

Talents is a separate discussion really. For example, I was not a fan of Talent trees. They had the same exact issues as Aptitudes have. But unlike you I have zero issues with all characters paying the same for stuff. On the contrary, I have issues with Talent costs being based on "class". It's too constraining and D&D-like for my tastes.

I see it rather as a focus than constraining. It is not "natural" to be able to learn everything with the same ease.

E.g. I am much less skilled in learning languages than in learning math.

I think it would be better to adjust the aptitude a little and maybe have some more (e.g. "faith") for variety. But in general I think its as easily expandable as other systems are.

I agree that you have to think a little more, but its not that complicated to watch 2 tables. It just needs a little time to get used to it.

I see it rather as a focus than constraining.

So would I, but for me to be able to see it as focus rather than constraints, the player has to be able to decide.

Beyond ease of use, that's what made Roles so great. Creating a balanced custom Role was simplicity itself and could be done as fast as you could write it up.

E.g. I am much less skilled in learning languages than in learning math.

Which is great if that's what you chose. It's not so great if the system chose for you.

I think it would be better to adjust the aptitude a little and maybe have some more (e.g. "faith") for variety. But in general I think its as easily expandable as other systems are.

If you think so, you should go back and re-read the Roles system. That was easy to customise. Aptitudes are a convoluted pain.

I agree that you have to think a little more, but its not that complicated to watch 2 tables. It just needs a little time to get used to it.

It's not the two tables that are the problem, it's the Aptitudes themselves. To have some degree of control over how they affect you, you have to meta-game character creation. And even then, you don't have full control over how they affect you.

By comparison, the Roles system let you assign X of one XP cost, Y of another XP cost, and Z of a third XP cost. How you assigned them was entirely up to you, and you didn't have to game the system to get a particular skill at a particular cost. You just built the character you wanted, exactly how you wanted it built.

- As already mentioned, I'm in total agreement the Talent Tree system was bollox. Like the Aptitude system it was not something you could easily tinker with or add to. And like the Aptitude system you basically had to game the system to get what you wanted from it.

And that's what I see as the most problematic aspect of both: instead of focusing on the personality of the character, you have to focus on how to unlock the stuff you want for your character. In my eyes that's not conductive to better roleplaying, it's an obstacle to it.

Anyway, I've ranted about this at length several times before, so I'll stop repeating myself now. Sowwies.