I'm looking forward to a new edition giving me brand new rules to play with rather than rules I already basically have. I'd love for them to make a new edition of rogue trader using the FFG Star Wars rules, modified for the 40K setting. I've been playing a lot of the the Star Wars game and it's amazing how much more elegant the system is. It addresses issues with writing (mechanics are ALWAYS listed in a separate paragraph from flavor, modifiers are applied much more easily, social combat is more varied and easily adjudicated, soak values are much more sensible but still deadly, along with lots of other quality of life improvements). I see the BRP system currently used in 40K RPGs as fundamentally flawed, short of being torn down completely and rebuilt from the ground up.

I'm looking forward to a new edition giving me brand new rules to play with rather than rules I already basically have. I'd love for them to make a new edition of rogue trader using the FFG Star Wars rules, modified for the 40K setting. I've been playing a lot of the the Star Wars game and it's amazing how much more elegant the system is. It addresses issues with writing (mechanics are ALWAYS listed in a separate paragraph from flavor, modifiers are applied much more easily, social combat is more varied and easily adjudicated, soak values are much more sensible but still deadly, along with lots of other quality of life improvements). I see the BRP system currently used in 40K RPGs as fundamentally flawed, short of being torn down completely and rebuilt from the ground up.

That's just never gonna happen, remember the original Beta for DH2?

Social interactions. It doesn't work very well right now and there are too many unknowns in the rules for it to work properly.

Unknowns such as?

Couldn't really say, I suppose...they're unknown.

Compared to combat, the social scene being "just make a skill test or two" could appear to be somewhat simplistic, I guess. I've not really got much of a problem with it being that way. I prefer it to turning social interaction into a psuedo-combat, anyway.

Social interactions. It doesn't work very well right now and there are too many unknowns in the rules for it to work properly.

Unknowns such as?

Couldn't really say, I suppose...they're unknown.

Compared to combat, the social scene being "just make a skill test or two" could appear to be somewhat simplistic, I guess. I've not really got much of a problem with it being that way. I prefer it to turning social interaction into a psuedo-combat, anyway.

I feel Disposition is a good system if the NPC is solitarily important. Like an imperial governor/commander/rival inquisitor. It gives the warband a base to work on for them even bothering to help them and at worse actively hinder them. Wouldn't really work well with groups or the shopkeep down the street. At least I've never seen it work well. maybe for cult size groups you're trying to convince not to kill you.

Basically only use Disposition like rolls themselves, if the NPC can have lasting consequence on the story. No one cares if a shopkeep likes you or not, they'll still take your money.

I'm looking forward to a new edition giving me brand new rules to play with rather than rules I already basically have. I'd love for them to make a new edition of rogue trader using the FFG Star Wars rules, modified for the 40K setting. I've been playing a lot of the the Star Wars game and it's amazing how much more elegant the system is. It addresses issues with writing (mechanics are ALWAYS listed in a separate paragraph from flavor, modifiers are applied much more easily, social combat is more varied and easily adjudicated, soak values are much more sensible but still deadly, along with lots of other quality of life improvements). I see the BRP system currently used in 40K RPGs as fundamentally flawed, short of being torn down completely and rebuilt from the ground up.

That's just never gonna happen, remember the original Beta for DH2?

The rest of these aren't going to happen in an errata, either. Especially since FFG has basically completed the line.

I'm looking forward to a new edition giving me brand new rules to play with rather than rules I already basically have. [...] I see the BRP system currently used in 40K RPGs as fundamentally flawed, short of being torn down completely and rebuilt from the ground up.

That's just never gonna happen, remember the original Beta for DH2?

I've harped about this before: Beta1 wasn't the substantive re-write that many people imagine it to have been. It ported over most of the mechanical problems from the standard WH40KRP rules set (such as a lack of 'depth' to the percentile system which causes Tests to go from 'rarely succeed' to 'rarely fail' with minimal space in between), with a few random add-ons.

I'm looking forward to a new edition giving me brand new rules to play with rather than rules I already basically have. I'd love for them to make a new edition of rogue trader using the FFG Star Wars rules, modified for the 40K setting. I've been playing a lot of the the Star Wars game and it's amazing how much more elegant the system is. It addresses issues with writing (mechanics are ALWAYS listed in a separate paragraph from flavor, modifiers are applied much more easily, social combat is more varied and easily adjudicated, soak values are much more sensible but still deadly, along with lots of other quality of life improvements). I see the BRP system currently used in 40K RPGs as fundamentally flawed, short of being torn down completely and rebuilt from the ground up.

That's just never gonna happen, remember the original Beta for DH2?

The rest of these aren't going to happen in an errata, either. Especially since FFG has basically completed the line.

I feel like they'll get at least one more out. Wasn't the rumor they're doing a ship supplement with rogue trading in it or something for "empire building" it was hinted in Enemies Beyond or something. I'd at least like a book about the minor ordos.

I'm looking forward to a new edition giving me brand new rules to play with rather than rules I already basically have. [...] I see the BRP system currently used in 40K RPGs as fundamentally flawed, short of being torn down completely and rebuilt from the ground up.

That's just never gonna happen, remember the original Beta for DH2?

I've harped about this before: Beta1 wasn't the substantive re-write that many people imagine it to have been. It ported over most of the mechanical problems from the standard WH40KRP rules set (such as a lack of 'depth' to the percentile system which causes Tests to go from 'rarely succeed' to 'rarely fail' with minimal space in between), with a few random add-ons.

It was still a step in the right direction

Honestly, I'm curious if FFG hasn't seen the value of the 40K license go down quite a bit. Games Workshop has been consistently pissing off its existing customers with its practices, and RPGs, especially ones like this, are pretty much only played by longtime players as opposed to newcomers. FFG has given up completely on the warhammer fantasy rpg, and it's seriously slowed down production on 40K RPGs. I'm aware that the 40K books sell well on DTRPG, but FFG spends a lot of money to print huge (for this industry) runs of expensive 40K books, so I wonder if the sales for that have lagged below expectations. I'd like to think that some part of this is due to how conservative they were with updating the rules, but it's likely more to do with brand recognition and marketing. I imagine that the Star Wars RPG is ridiculously successful in large part due to branding, so my hope would be that the number of new players fielded by that system and property would encourage FFG to link those players to 40K games through similar rules.

I'll say it before and I'll say it again; If FFG tries to sell me special proprietary dice that can be easily done with numerical dice that all rpg players (except newcomers) already have for a WH40K game I'll just never play the game.

I'll say it before and I'll say it again; If FFG tries to sell me special proprietary dice that can be easily done with numerical dice that all rpg players (except newcomers) already have for a WH40K game I'll just never play the game.

I say this as someone who was equally opposed to weird custom dice: you really should give it a shot. The dice mechanics are interesting and allow for deeper results than a simple numerical roll. It's a very well designed system and is a lot of fun.

I'm currently in an Age of Rebellion campaign and I have a mixed opinion on the dice.

The positive aspect is that they really put effort in integrating the dice into the actual system to reduce calculations. Basically you won't need a calculator to figure out if you passed a check (in case of more complex checks)

A negative aspect (in my experience), those threat/advantages symbols come up so often that it becomes hard to find a narrative reason of why something might have had a positive or negative side effect. It feels too forced in my opinion.

So yeah, not sold on it. The game is fun, but at the same time the dice are a bit overhyped and let's not talk about the pricetag for them if you want to give all your players their own set of dice.

The GM of my group has gotten 9 sets of dice (including from the beginner boxes). If they were just from dice sets, then that's 9 x $14.95 = $134.55.

Sure you can just share the dice too, but meh. Lucrative product again for FFG.

I can get 20 d10s for less than $12 (and these are reusable for other games).

I can't even imagine the logic that went into the decision tom buy nine sets of dice. Holy crap. A group of 5 can get by on a single set (the one included in the beginner's game), two rounds it out so you have enough dice for just about any roll you have to make. I understand they're pricey, and yeah if $15 is gonna break the bank maybe don't play the game, but there's absolutely no reason to drop that amount of money on dice.

At least two sets are required once characters starts to level. Skill levels go as high as 5 and there are only 2 proficiency dice and 3 ability dice in a set for instance.

But then it's also handy for the GM to have 2 sets of dice in case of opposed checks... I guess that's luxery.

A negative aspect (in my experience), those threat/advantages symbols come up so often that it becomes hard to find a narrative reason of why something might have had a positive or negative side effect. It feels too forced in my opinion.

I felt the same, in the end I just said to the players "If you get advantage, you can pick a bonus to do on your roll, you can set up a shot for another player, or for yourself next round, or something you want happens." But it does mean the players need to be switched-on to the narrative as much as the GM is.

On topic: Would like to see more support for acolytes planning missions. One thing my players have said is that they seem to always be at a disadvantage to the NPCs around them, in terms of intel, weaponry and knowledge. The game Blades in the Dark (still in beta) has a flashback mechanic where players can spend "Stress" (like fatigue mixed with insanity) to say they planned for X eventuality, if it makes sense. More stress is spent to deal with the more specific problem. It would make sense to anyone who has read Eisenhorn or Ravenor that acolytes would do their homework on their enemies and wouldn't go in blind, even though players do! But it would be boring to have them sit and plan for everything for an hour a session.

http://game2.ca/eote/

There's a free app! Between my game group, we own 6 sets of dice (I got two sets from buying the awesome beginner games, which also include a bunch of cardboard punchouts you can use for other games. Sometimes I get lazy and want to just lean back in my chair and use the (free) dice app, because we all play sitting around a coffee table and have to reach forward quite a bit to grab the dice. I don't really miss rolling the dice that much, but for people who do, you can get by on 3 sets for 95% of use cases unless you have very high level players or enemies (and at that point it would be less unwieldy to just use an app). One of those sets you can get in a very nice beginners box, and the other two can be had for like 20 bucks.

Also, it's ironic to me that people are getting really antsy about buying proprietary dice in a forum for a game with a $60 core rulebook that is house rules and copy-pastes from a set of rules they already own. People were in fact clamoring to have the same rules sold to them a second time so that their old stuff would be "compatible." It's hard not to conclude that a lot of people are just averse to change when they dismiss the various low cost options for entry for being too "different."

As for the advantage/disadvantage coming up frequently, that's by design. The dice in this game typically have either a success/failure on a side, or an advantage/disadvantage. That means if you roll failures, there will be less disadvantage to cancel your advantage, and if you roll disadvatages, there will be less failures to cancel your successes. The most likely outcomes are success with disadvantage or failure with advantage. You can partly avert the issue of running out of ideas by having players roll less when victory is assured or when nothing interesting will happen if they fail. Also, keep in mind that it's players job to "spend" their advantage with cool ideas and the GMs job to "spend" the disadvantage, with suggestions allowed from either side.

You can use applications yes, but the feel of rolling actual dice can't be replaced for me by an application.

The price tag for the Star Wars books are exactly the same as the 40k books, they also copy pasted their core rulebooks, but on top of that you need to buy several expensive dice sets for just this game (in case you won't settle for some dice application of course).

Yes this is all expensive stuff, so you're right that at least a subgroup of us here will be big spenders, but I'd rather spend it on actual content than merely dice sets.

Also, your comment about being averse to change, I AM playing the game, I just wouldn't be able to spend money on it myself because I think it's not worth it. I think that card has been overplayed Nimsim.

The price tag for the Star Wars books are exactly the same as the 40k books, they also copy pasted their core rulebooks, but on top of that you need to buy several expensive dice sets for just this game (in case you won't settle for some dice application of course).

This isn't really fair because they said when EotE was in the works there were going to be 3 games that all shared the same mechanics that you could mix and match, and they delivered on that. DH2 never had any voiced goal of being consistent with the other 40k games and (given what we saw in the original beta) could have diverged quite a bit had FFG desired to put more resources toward its development. The SW games being functionally the same was a design choice; in 40k RPG it was laziness and an entrenched, grognardy fanbase.

There's also a low-cost set that gives you the rules, a set of dice, and an adventure for like $40. And you don't need to buy any more than that one set, it's easy to make due with. The cost of entry is a lot lower than a $60 all-in-one rulebook.

I've no problem with FFG releasing separate game lines using the same basic rules, but your stance about this is a bit ironic though.

I thought you took issue with the fact that having several different game lines (BC, OW, DH2, ...) having almost identical core rules, that it is lazy of them to do that (copy paste!), yet the only difference with Star Wars is that they told you in advance that they would do that. So suddenly the act of copy pasting is fine to you.

While having no problem with it myself, I would still have preferred the core rules to have been released separately from the specific game line stuff. A separate book where players then add a specific setting to it through supplement books. So the EotE, AoR and FaD would only contain their specific game line stuff.

The same can be said of the 40k lines, but at least we're enjoying gradual updates and refinements with the disadvantage that some stuff needs to be converted (like in case of non-existing or merged talents).

I'll say it before and I'll say it again; If FFG tries to sell me special proprietary dice that can be easily done with numerical dice that all rpg players (except newcomers) already have for a WH40K game I'll just never play the game.

I say this as someone who was equally opposed to weird custom dice: you really should give it a shot. The dice mechanics are interesting and allow for deeper results than a simple numerical roll. It's a very well designed system and is a lot of fun.

My issue is more that FFG is primarily the only outlet to get them at. They aren't commonly available like Fate Dice, from what I've experienced. Even then I can't use them for other stuff. Not to mention they're expensive, on top of FFG books being expensive anyways with sometimes shotty construction (DH2's first run binding at least is probably one of the worst things I've experienced.)

I've no problem with FFG releasing separate game lines using the same basic rules, but your stance about this is a bit ironic though.

I thought you took issue with the fact that having several different game lines (BC, OW, DH2, ...) having almost identical core rules, that it is lazy of them to do that (copy paste!), yet the only difference with Star Wars is that they told you in advance that they would do that. So suddenly the act of copy pasting is fine to you.

While having no problem with it myself, I would still have preferred the core rules to have been released separately from the specific game line stuff. A separate book where players then add a specific setting to it through supplement books. So the EotE, AoR and FaD would only contain their specific game line stuff.

The same can be said of the 40k lines, but at least we're enjoying gradual updates and refinements with the disadvantage that some stuff needs to be converted (like in case of non-existing or merged talents).

I was more taking issue with th second edition of Dark Heresy being essentially the same rules. If they were to release a second edition of Star Wars touted as fixing all problems with the game, I'd be ticked off if it had as few changes as DH2 does. I never voiced complaints about the sales model of the original 40k line. I also think that the sameness of the various Star Wars books is overstated. They act more as glorified settings supplements than core books, and each have a large amount of new content. You can also get the beginners games for 19 bucks at coolstuffinc, each of which include a set of dice, cardboard icons, an adventure, basic rules, character folios, and rules reference. That's a pretty great deal. Also, I've been able to get the Star Wars dice through Amazon, local game store, and other online retailers. Unless the game is sold out (because it's a popular game and RPGs get limited print runs), it's basically available anywhere you could buy a d20 set.

I think you have to compare DH2 with DH1 rather than with Only War or Black Crusade.

Since there is no first edition of Black Crusade or Only War, they couldn't call it Black Crusade second edition or Only War second edition.

Anyway, I don't see us agreeing on that topic at all so let's stick to the actual topic at hand.

I feel like they'll get at least one more out. Wasn't the rumor they're doing a ship supplement with rogue trading in it or something for "empire building" it was hinted in Enemies Beyond or something. I'd at least like a book about the minor ordos.

Indeed. You could cover off a Second Edition of Deathwatch and Rogue Trader very easily as a detailed splatbook rather than a new core book - Daemonhunter included lots of nice things for 'normal' Ordo Malleus cells, but at the same time it's also the Grey Knights Character Generation book.

As for the advantage/disadvantage coming up frequently, that's by design. The dice in this game typically have either a success/failure on a side, or an advantage/disadvantage. That means if you roll failures, there will be less disadvantage to cancel your advantage, and if you roll disadvatages, there will be less failures to cancel your successes. The most likely outcomes are success with disadvantage or failure with advantage. You can partly avert the issue of running out of ideas by having players roll less when victory is assured or when nothing interesting will happen if they fail. Also, keep in mind that it's players job to "spend" their advantage with cool ideas and the GMs job to "spend" the disadvantage, with suggestions allowed from either side.

Indeed. It's a nice system to me because that second 'track' gives you a mechanism for rewarding extreme competence (because even on a simple success/failure roll, the really good character will net advantage another wouldn't), and gives the GM a mechanism for payback where players take repeated pot-shots instead of thinking tactically (because firing badly aimed snap-shots at a Nemesis-level adversary will keep missing and keep piling on threat into the bargain).

I'll keep the Threat/Advantage stuff discussed here in mind the next I play the game.

To sum up if I was game designer;

A. First make attack & damage into ONE SINGLE roll based off of DoS

B. Get rid of Toughness based soak

C. Rework Weapon Codes - to play with Dos - as per Above

D. Use a Advantage/Disadvantage System over granular / cumulative Modifiers

E. Make everything from Astartes to Scum fully compatible - granted I am NOT SAYING balanced just compatible (Scum Tier 1 / Astartes Tier 3)

FIN

To sum up if I was game designer;

A. First make attack & damage into ONE SINGLE roll based off of DoS

B. Get rid of Toughness based soak

C. Rework Weapon Codes - to play with Dos - as per Above

D. Use a Advantage/Disadvantage System over granular / cumulative Modifiers

E. Make everything from Astartes to Scum fully compatible - granted I am NOT SAYING balanced just compatible (Scum Tier 1 / Astartes Tier 3)

FIN