I do have to wonder if they read these forums, however.

They do it's just incredibly rare of them to post in them.

Still hoping for the new book, personally. Curious as to how DH2 will do. If they can do a better job than "DH1 had these books, which covered these contents, so we will make DH2 variants of them, with the same general contents, formatted to DH2", then I think they might fail; you show me how DH2 does that to DH1, in the main book, and I can figure out how to port those changes to the nine DH1 books I ALREADY own, with OW as a reference, maybe, and then DH2 won't have as many books. Do their Psykers need different splat options than OW Psykers? Do we need another splat book filled with the same good, bad, or changed fluff of the Adepta Sororitas, that you just couldn't lump into core, even though they are a militant organization, and might've fit as well in OW?

I'm not as big a fan of DH, personally; being Mystery Inc., when I could be a flying pirate lord, or a Space Marine Terminator, just doesn't do it for me, especially when an Inquisitor has nigh-unilateral access to stuff, except for his penny-pinching Acolytes. I liked the idea of BEING an Inquisitor (special snowflake syndrome), though I see where many people looked at Ascension as if waiting for it to just burst into flames on its own merits, but I like murdering things in 40k a bit more than just poking my nose around in a Cthulhu game, being the weakest things in the room, where even looking at a book will drive you that bit much more mad. Not truly investigative, myself. I have no doubt that it's a good game, though, and maybe DH2 will be more than just a rehash of Scooby-Doo Cthulhu with a better, more streamlined rule set (I haven't put down the money for it, yet).

Yeah I kind of think Fantasy Flight Games missed a trick here by not following World of Darkness' system structure model, with a core rulebook for "generic roleplaying in the 41st millennium" (Or the 'Mortals' Core Rulebook for NWoD) with then a splatbook that explores options and addons and racial stats etc for the various factions and races and scenarios, that way everything plays to the same unifying structure and you can use resources from every line without too much time and effort invested converting things backwards and forwards.

DH2 seems to be taking the model of Black Crusade and creating a tome for each Ordo rather than random splat books.

Also if there is going to be 2nd edition of any other 40K RPG line, it won't (most likely) be like DH2.0.

They basically cut their losses with DH2.0 not turning out the way they first intended it to be, so they reverted to the more stable previous editions (1.5) and polished it up instead. Personally I'm not complaining there, I like the result.

But if they want to potentially make more money, they'll provide a new system altogether, if only to reduce/avoid competition between the first edition and second edition. Goodbye backwards compatibility.

I would guess it's actually the opposite. If they want more money, they should not be putting up barriers to new books. A new book that requires you to convert to a new system is a higher barrier than a new book that adds further options for what you've already got. New editions can help you broaden your market, but it's splatbooks for existing editions that help you consolidate (or squeeze the last few dollars out of a line you're abandoning) and get existing fans to pay up rather than sticking with what they've got.

I think a source book on Titans would be great. Actually creating Titan orders the same way that one could create Space Marine Chapters and Imperial Guard Regiments. Titan Legions could be an excellent supplement which would work for other games like Deathwatch, not just Only War. It would allow for epic warfighting rather than just being a grunt in the mud.

I won't say it wouldn't be cool, but I would personally find it about as boring as I would find a tank scenario. Being in a Leman Russ, or a Baneblade, especially a Knight or a Titan, would be awesome, except I don't move, I don't take damage, I occasionally push a button to launch an attack, and I wait for the vehicle's health to be depleted, or the enemy to be, and if the vehicle IS wrecked, we might not have other equipment to continue any battle, and we lost a TITAN. I'm not always a fan of slogging in mud, dodging for the next closer piece of cover, but when you know nothing can hurt you, because you are in a war machine with armor like a Land Raider, nigh 100 SI, and void shields that DON'T auto-cave after any one attack (I'm looking at you, RT), it sort of takes the fear out of it, for me, at least, and if they DO down the Warhound, you still have to fight, now on foot, whatever downed a Titan.

I'm not saying they shouldn't make such a book, or even that people wouldn't buy it (Hell, even I might buy it), but I can't say it'd be the most riveting game of Only War, at that stage. The AdMech are the regulators of the Titan Legions, and they only pass them out rarely, for the biggest fights, that already field enemy Titan-analogues, so either you win, or you later CAN'T win.

Certain aircraft like Fighters/Bombers would be a nice thing to have at least. Since the Imperial Guard and Imperial Navy do work together intimately, I don't think it would be out of place to have a supplement that focuses solely on the Imperial Navy for support.

Nearly got our homebrew navy supplement together in terms of crunch. Life has been getting in the way sadly, so progress has slowed right down. We're largely down to just finishing off the "Bestiary" section where people should find enemy pilot statblocks and stats for their craft. I think.

Fluffy stuff is going to take a lot longer, of course, but I suppose if you guys want I can see about making a crunch-only version available when it's ready.

The trouble I have with a 40k "core book" is: what do you do with it? WoD core book is effectively X-Files: the RPG. There's no obvious equivalent for 40k since most normal people *cannot* simply head off and do stuff. They're too busy dying of plague or worked to death in manufactorums. All of the 40k RPGs give a reason why the party gets to move around and get involved in interesting events:

DH: inquisition

RT: warrant and ship

DW: space marines under the auspices of the inquisition

BC: chaos champions, can act as they like

OW: guardsmen who move from warzone to warzone.

As for OW, I think it's a fine system. There is definitely a story to be told about being a normal person still fighting the horrors of the 40k universe. Succeeding is a bonus. And then you have the vanishingly rare retirees, such as our squad sergeant who ascended to Rogue Trader.

I don't think the core book needs to be a playable game on its own. D&D has been selling games split up into three parts since commercial RPGs were a thing.

I'm Surprised this thread is still going in my absence..

No new book ? awh

I don't think the core book needs to be a playable game on its own. D&D has been selling games split up into three parts since commercial RPGs were a thing.

I respectfully disagree. For many editions, D&D has split material over three core books. But with those core books, you *can* run a D&D game.

I respectfully disagree. For many editions, D&D has split material over three core books. But with those core books, you *can* run a D&D game.

And with a core book and one line-specific book, you could run a 40k game with two books instead of three. I'm genuinely not sure what your counterpoint is supposed to be here.

I don't think the core book needs to be a playable game on its own. D&D has been selling games split up into three parts since commercial RPGs were a thing.

I respectfully disagree. For many editions, D&D has split material over three core books. But with those core books, you *can* run a D&D game.

Technically, you really only need the Player's Handbook. Or, with 3.x, the OGL SRD.

It has everything you need to play a game, though not a lot on setting or the other inhabitants of the world.

The relevant D&D concept here isn't the three core rulebooks. The relevant concept is the Core Rulebooks being the base game, and then the setting/worldbooks, or the other splatbooks, being in addition to the core rulebook. It's all equally interchangeable. You can even cross over between any or all D&D 3.x setting and D20 Modern/Future/Past, Star Wars D20, even Pathfinder, or pretty much anything else using the OGL D20 Ruleset, without running into mechanical difficulties, I mean, sure, it'll look crazy, and have to be some kind of insane homebrew setting, but it's entirely doable.

Also probably relevant - GURPS. One set of core rules, then loads of add-on source/splat-books for whatever kind of game you want to run using GURPS - you could even run with them all, though it'd get nuts pretty fast.

The way things currently are, it's a bit like General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. There's no Grand Unifying Theory. What's being looked for is the equivalent of a Grand Unifying Theory for 40k RPG play.

The way things currently are, it's a bit like General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. There's no Grand Unifying Theory. What's being looked for is the equivalent of a Grand Unifying Theory for 40k RPG play.

Why? Why is it okay to buy three books to play a game if all three of those books are core, but not okay to buy two books to play a game if only one of those books is core?

The way things currently are, it's a bit like General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. There's no Grand Unifying Theory. What's being looked for is the equivalent of a Grand Unifying Theory for 40k RPG play.

Why? Why is it okay to buy three books to play a game if all three of those books are core, but not okay to buy two books to play a game if only one of those books is core?

How, precisely, did you come to that conclusion from what I said?

Granted, the GR/QM/GUT analogy probably wasn't the greatest I've ever used.

How, precisely, did you come to that conclusion from what I said?

You were pretty explicit about it:

What's being looked for is the equivalent of a Grand Unifying Theory for 40k RPG play.

Now, granted, that's a passive statement which very much implies that you, personally, aren't looking for this, or if you are you for some reason feel the need to avoid responsibility for it. Probably the first one. But the question isn't directed at you specifically. Why would anyone care that they have to match a splatbook with a core book to get a complete game if they're already willing to buy three books to play D&D? Why does the requirement of mixing core books and splatbooks make a difference if the actual number of books you pay for is under your threshold?

Personally, the reason I would want a unified core book which everything else runs off, instead of the established "game lines" model that is currently in use, is because it's something of a pig if I want to use material from a Deathwatch book against Only War characters due to differences between the rulesets, whereas if everything followed a single, unified core system with splatbooks, I could take material from any and all splatbooks and use it freely with no worries about rule incongruence.

Personally, the reason I would want a unified core book which everything else runs off, instead of the established "game lines" model that is currently in use, is because it's something of a pig if I want to use material from a Deathwatch book against Only War characters due to differences between the rulesets, whereas if everything followed a single, unified core system with splatbooks, I could take material from any and all splatbooks and use it freely with no worries about rule incongruence.

Agreed.

But seeing as how I'm a nWoD fan and that is how WW/Onyx Path/CCP have tried to run those gamelines I might be a tad biased.

Also, it doesn't solve all the issues. It DOES cut down on a lot of them.

Plus it doesn't have to 'destroy' the gameline model. Ship Rules in RT; Space Marine rules in DW...that still makes more sense.

Just some consistent rules for interaction would be nice.

Personally, the reason I would want a unified core book which everything else runs off, instead of the established "game lines" model that is currently in use, is because it's something of a pig if I want to use material from a Deathwatch book against Only War characters due to differences between the rulesets, whereas if everything followed a single, unified core system with splatbooks, I could take material from any and all splatbooks and use it freely with no worries about rule incongruence.

Okay, sure, but that's not what Decessor was talking about. What I don't get is what's wrong with having the core rules be an incomplete game that provides a unified basic rules but which isn't a complete game unto itself, and requires one of the splatbooks to function. You'd still have a unified core game and buying two books to play a game is still less than what D&D usually sells.

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.

In any case, I prefer that FFG tweak the system with each new game and tailor the system to each take on the setting. Only War's "Logistics" works differently to Black Crusade's "Infamy".

How, precisely, did you come to that conclusion from what I said?

You were pretty explicit about it:

What's being looked for is the equivalent of a Grand Unifying Theory for 40k RPG play.

Now, granted, that's a passive statement which very much implies that you, personally, aren't looking for this, or if you are you for some reason feel the need to avoid responsibility for it. Probably the first one. But the question isn't directed at you specifically. Why would anyone care that they have to match a splatbook with a core book to get a complete game if they're already willing to buy three books to play D&D? Why does the requirement of mixing core books and splatbooks make a difference if the actual number of books you pay for is under your threshold?

That ... wasn't my intent. Clearly, the physics analogy is in need of work. Let's table it for now.

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.

In any case, I prefer that FFG tweak the system with each new game and tailor the system to each take on the setting. Only War's "Logistics" works differently to Black Crusade's "Infamy".

I think what Lupa's trying to say is that there would be one 'book' with the base 40k RPG ruleset that everything runs on, and then a second book to fill out the core rules for each 'line'.

So, if you wanted to play Dark Heresy, you'd get the base 40k RPG book, and then the Dark Heresy book, that carries the DH-specific/exclusive base rules. If you wanted to then run a Rogue Trader game, or wanted to throw the DH characters into an investigation of a Rogue Trader or alliance with one, you would then get the RT book that carried the RT-specific/exclusive base rules.

Or if you wanted to run Deathwatch, but then have the Kill Team be roving about on a ship, and have the ship and naval actions be an important component of gameplay, you'd get the 40k RPG base ruleset, the DW-specific book, and then for the spacefaring stuff, the RT book, but they'd all be consistent. And if you wanted to send the Kill-team in support of a Guard Invasion, you might pick up the Only War book.

Then, if they were going to add Xenos playable rules, that might be something in a generic splatbook, or perhaps it's own new Line, but it would all be cross compatible with the human-game lines. Thus you could run a game from the side of the Tau Empire, and be Tau, and/or vassal races.

So, for a given 'line' "core" would be the 40k RPG base ruleset and the Line-specific/exclusive book.

The 40k RPG base ruleset 'book' would include the information on organization of the Imperium and the 40k-verse that's currently repeated, often more or less copy-pasted, in every Line's core book. The Line-specific/exclusive book would then have more fluff details specific to the game line, in addition to the line-specific 'careers' or other character creation options, and other line-specific rules/rule expansions. IE, the Dark Heresy line would have the details on Investigations and Inquisitorial operations/organization, while the RT line would have the details on spacecraft and exploration and Dynasty-building.

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?