My point is that it's comparing apples and oranges. D&D happens to split their core material over three books. Your suggestion for 40k would require a "core book" - that requires a non-core book to play.

I know what your point is, but your point begs a question that still hasn't been answered: Why does this make a difference at all? Who cares that you have to buy a core book and a non-core book to play a game?

The terminology here being used is inaccurate and confusing the point.

There would not be a core book and a non-core book required to pay a game

There would be one universal core book/ruleset - that each game line would share - and a second "core" book for each game line, with the things specific/exclusive to that game line.

There would then be additional splatbooks for each game line, but each line and the splatbooks thereof, would be all fully cross-compatible, and designed as such.

Or that's my understanding.

That's how I read it, too.

There would be one universal core book/ruleset - that each game line would share - and a second "core" book for each game line, with the things specific/exclusive to that game line.

There would then be additional splatbooks for each game line, but each line and the splatbooks thereof, would be all fully cross-compatible, and designed as such.

Or that's my understanding.

Yes, and the universal core book would be an incomplete game on its own without one of the game line core books to complete it, which is bad for reasons which Decessor has yet to elaborate upon.

Does it, really? I would think the core rules would contain most of the -necessary- materials. Everything you absolutely need to play a "generic scenario". Which would probably assume that players took on the roles of regular Imperial citizens - probably with potential for Necromunda style gameplay. It'd be a shallow gaming experience, I figure, but certainly a doable one.

That said, I personally have no ill will towards getting multiple books - mostly because I feel a compulsive need to complete the set once I get one.

Does it, really? I would think the core rules would contain most of the -necessary- materials. Everything you absolutely need to play a "generic scenario". Which would probably assume that players took on the roles of regular Imperial citizens - probably with potential for Necromunda style gameplay. It'd be a shallow gaming experience, I figure, but certainly a doable one.

Well, yes, but the fact that the game is technically playable doesn't mean it's really a complete game the way it is when paired with one of its gameline books.

Lupa's comment is close to what I was getting at. WoD core book works fine by itself. This theoretical 40krpg core book would not,

You still haven't explained why that would be any worse than D&D, which isn't really playable without all three core books. Like, yes, I understand that three core books is different from one core book and one add-on book, but you haven't explained why that difference actually matters.

What people haven't said here, but I think should be said, is that you can, easily, fit imperium fluff and full RPG mechanics for every single codex race and organisation in one single book. The actual crunch, when you peel away all the filler that, at times, makes it actually harder to understand, is hilariously short .

You still haven't explained why that would be any worse than D&D, which isn't really playable without all three core books. Like, yes, I understand that three core books is different from one core book and one add-on book, but you haven't explained why that difference actually matters.

First of all, I've seen people argue that a unified 40k core book would be as simple to create as nWoD's model. Which isn't the case. Most inhabitants of 40k lack reason or opportunity to do much beyond their narrow specialisation. So there's no obvious default party for a core book.

Second, I think FFG do a decent job of tweaking and improving the ruleset with each new 40k rpg. That would be a hell of a lot more difficult if there was a core book and add-ons, vs. single core books for each system.

Third, because the rules are different for each 40k rpg anyway, they can be customised to that game's setting and theme. e.g. Detailed starship combat would be a waste for most Dark Heresy groups but essential to most Rogue Trader groups.

Is there any need for an obvious default party? There isn't in World of Darkness. Could easily run a game concerning regular humans living on a hive world that get tied up in the gangs and cults, or try to survive a Xenos invasion.

I'll agree on point two, but the God Machine chronicles are an example of how to work around that.

It's all completely academic however, as it isn't going to happen.

It's all completely academic however, as it isn't going to happen.

Why not? I've been thinking/wondering about this lately, and I'm not sure why FFG wouldn't want to do something like this. Why they came out and said there won't be 2E's for anything but Dark Heresy.

The only thing I can think of, and this might be a bit out there, is that GW is getting ready to kill 40k. The timline keeps inching closer to 41k, the time of endings has arrived... Maybe they are getting ready to let the Golden Throne fail, see what happens and move in WH41k - Something New!

Do you have any better idea/information about the rationale behind not creating a Grand Synthesis?

The day that the Golden Throne fails is a dark day for all of us. I can't help but wonder to what degree they'll screw up the franchise this time around.

I certainly hope we won't be seeing Guilliman at least then.

Perhaps. It seems kind of unlikely, but truly, I hope I'm wrong on the grounds that I would love to see more content, and a system revised in such a way for greater cross-line compatability. It's a nightmare rebalancing Deathwatch content to be remotely survivable for the Guard. I'm still not sure if my new statblocks are reasonable xP

Doesn't look like the way FF does things. Have you checked the Star Wars line? They are following the same path...

I can't say that I have. I've been looking for a good way to do Star Wars RP since I ran Star Wars d20 (which was -awful-) and so far my best conclusion is in fact a mish mash of Only War & Rogue Trader, with stats inserted for Star Wars of course.

It's all completely academic however, as it isn't going to happen.

Why not? I've been thinking/wondering about this lately, and I'm not sure why FFG wouldn't want to do something like this. Why they came out and said there won't be 2E's for anything but Dark Heresy.

The only thing I can think of, and this might be a bit out there, is that GW is getting ready to kill 40k. The timline keeps inching closer to 41k, the time of endings has arrived... Maybe they are getting ready to let the Golden Throne fail, see what happens and move in WH41k - Something New!

Do you have any better idea/information about the rationale behind not creating a Grand Synthesis?

The 40k RPG line and FFG's handling of it have a steadily worsening reputation, due to things like their release schedule, (lack of) errata, (lack of) balance and endless copy pasta of the same ruleset over and over again. It is quite conceivable this would cause sales to decrease. Since FFG, as a company, does not seem inclined to actually improve their product (that takes more time than is profitable, due to their utter disorganisation and lack of coordination among their writing staff...), the most profitable way to deal with the 40k liscense is to squeeze as much money as possible out of it with content that is already available in a slightly new dress, then sell it to someone else.

This is directly contrary to a unified 40k RPG using an existing system. You cannot dress up a unified RPG in a new guise and sell literally the same ruleset and work under a new title, as seems to be their business strategy currently. They are milking their IP dry while they still have it, and will ditch it when their contract is up.

This is all purely speculation based on their products and feedback given there-of, but that's what I think is bound to happen eventually, due to how they handle the IP.

It's all completely academic however, as it isn't going to happen.

Why not? I've been thinking/wondering about this lately, and I'm not sure why FFG wouldn't want to do something like this. Why they came out and said there won't be 2E's for anything but Dark Heresy.

The only thing I can think of, and this might be a bit out there, is that GW is getting ready to kill 40k. The timline keeps inching closer to 41k, the time of endings has arrived... Maybe they are getting ready to let the Golden Throne fail, see what happens and move in WH41k - Something New!

Do you have any better idea/information about the rationale behind not creating a Grand Synthesis?

The 40k RPG line and FFG's handling of it have a steadily worsening reputation, due to things like their release schedule, (lack of) errata, (lack of) balance and endless copy pasta of the same ruleset over and over again. It is quite conceivable this would cause sales to decrease. Since FFG, as a company, does not seem inclined to actually improve their product (that takes more time than is profitable, due to their utter disorganisation and lack of coordination among their writing staff...), the most profitable way to deal with the 40k liscense is to squeeze as much money as possible out of it with content that is already available in a slightly new dress, then sell it to someone else.

This is directly contrary to a unified 40k RPG using an existing system. You cannot dress up a unified RPG in a new guise and sell literally the same ruleset and work under a new title, as seems to be their business strategy currently. They are milking their IP dry while they still have it, and will ditch it when their contract is up.

This is all purely speculation based on their products and feedback given there-of, but that's what I think is bound to happen eventually, due to how they handle the IP.

I think it's a mistake to say " well they have dark heresy, and rogue trader and these other games! cause like yer!" The fact that the rules are very similar but the games are very different, Is amazing, It means you can go for one to the other, with out having to sit down and say okay, we need to read anther X amount of pages of rules, and learn a hole new system, and learn a hole new way to make characters. Is it a bad thing To make a game accessible to as many people as possible ? no? I started with Only war, as my first warhammer RPG, but for other people to get me into dark heresy it was not that much of a stretch , and due to mine, and many other peoples busy schedule of life, work and other things one needs to do, to put food on the table.

So Sitting there and saying " well all the rules are the same " Is a bit sort sighted. Because once you get a group of people into one of the RPGS, it's pretty easy to get people into other games, most of the rules are pretty much the same, but each game has it's own rules.

So sitting here hating on stuff, for the sake of hating on it , was not the point of this topic.

The point of the Topic, was to promote a response from fantasy flight, which in a way, we have already had one of the freelance writers for fantasy flight , comment on this. Mission partly accomplished.

There's different games, and then there's the "Call of Duty/Assassin's Creed version" of different games, wherein everything is largely the same except for a few minor tweaks. I feel that pretty accurately describes the current game line model for the Warhammer 40, 000 RPG, and that a unified system would simply make life inordinately easier for me as a GM, and allow for far greater flexibility for stories.

This is also a forum. On the internet. People will have opinions, and when you prompt discussions like this you can expect those opinions to come thick and fast.

Personally, I would enjoy having a unified ruleset with specific books for each "branch" of WH40k. It took my group a long time to learn OW, getting the books for RT and then expecting everyone to learn all of that material as well as the differences in mechanics was a chore. It just makes so much more sense to have a defined set of rules, and then expansions that detail how that applies to Deathwatch, or Imperial Guardsmen, or whatever. Doing it this way would make it easier to extend 40k Roleplay to other parts of the lore, as you would only have to publish fluff and whatever ties it back to the main rules.

I don't want a core price full size book of "Peasant Hiver: 40K!" That I'd have to buy in addition to "The Greater Good" and "WAAAAAGGHHH!" But I would like it if they standardized armories, and bestiaries out a bit. Which they kinda sorta did in scaling BC from lowly serf to movie marine. I'd really like it if they normalized XP costs and gains across game lines to make cross over characters simpler to deal with. But that seems like a lot of work for a very small part of their audience. So I'd settle for them keeping the XP in mind and being able to just say "RT is baseline, DH1 gets .5 the amount of XP, DW gets 1.5 as much, BC gets .75." That are pretty much spot on and standard in a way that doesn't make the power scaling of independent games a nightmare to keep from homogenization.

I do want limited gamelines like WW does. Like a core rulebook for most of the main factions, including 5 character classes, an armory, talents and traits, rules, a suggested format for adventures, and 1 adventure in the back. Plus 1-3 splats/published adventures if fans respond well. The closest we got to that was Soul Reaver, where I sorta recall No 1's Here maybe saying something like, that he went all out trying to incorporate as much as he could into that book when it came to dealing with Dark Eldar.

Any of us could sit around and work out our own home brew for playing Craftworld Eldar, but we could have and often did the same with Imperial Guardsmen. I don't think getting the sort of support RT and DH got for every possible faction is feasible. But how about one overgrown splat book for each one?

Actually the WW has renounced to have a core book for every game and I'm happy for this, beacuse it's a pain looking for the rules in more than one book to play Hunter.

Love playing Hunter, and I prefer the existing model for NWoD. But White Wolf dropped a while back. It's Onyx Path now.

Probably I wrote in a confusing way, I mean that now every game will have its own core book and I think that this is better, because every game has a different theme.

And also the games of 40K are different to each others.

That...is exactly what I didn't want to hear from WoD T_T;

Damnit, why on earth do they think this a good idea? They changed it FROM that in the transition from Old World to New World for a reason.

*Headdesk*