So, i see it and i buy it, and i happy, but...

I read the kit... One adventure(lot of fluf) and 4 usefull pages for actual gming (i mean mechanics, tables, and other stuff) and no torpedoes. I have a bad feeling about this... So i open the screen.

Inside i see quick reference for combat and weapons, very good. Combat action list, good too. But do we miss something here? Hmm... let me check. No void combat rules, no void combat weapon reference. What? Where it is? It make me very very very sad... and no torpedoes stat. WTF?

Screen is partialy useless for me now as i know ground combat from Dark Heresy GMing, and i use screen for quick reference 90% at time, so i need a handmade screen that fits better for the game. Thats very bad... and no TORPEDOES!

Why would you think there would be torpedoes? FFG made it fair clear they were keeping that for a big book on ships and stuff.

Also, you could have come here and asked what was in it before you bought it. It being mostly similar to the DH screen is no surprise, and screens almost always only contain the basics, they have never, in my experience, covered all the tables for all combat in a system.

Plus, Drydock (free PDF in the support section) covers all of the space combat stuff as smaller tables and the like.

MILLANDSON said:

Then, i think, it was not so clear to me and not to me to. Drydock is good, but why in GM Kit adventure with toprpedo capable ship and don`t include torpedo stats in there (disclaimer about it was loooong time ago awfull)? Not to make more money, i hope.

So im frustrated and waiting for book with oficial torpedoes in it. Sad.

House rule on torpedoes if you really must. I fail to see why it's such a big deal, to be very honest.

while I don't like gamers internet histrionics I must admit that I see how including a ship with torpedo tubes without any actual torpedo rules can be seen as a sort of faux-pas by the gaming company.

that said I just house rule torpedos (because my players immediately asked about them) but I am not that rules obsessed guy. more like old school DIY aesthetics. much less stress that way.

Space combat is already massively abstracted, I honestly cannot see the problem. Torpedoes are essentially small space vessels which attempt to ram the opposing vessel - pick a damage value for a successful hit, decide on the speed and manoeuvrability and roll with it.

Cat that Walked by Himself said:

as I said. also it is obvious that ship ordnances should have been part of the core rulebook. it is a mistake. plain and simple

btw, before this stumbles into pro and anti FFG bog I would love to hear a little bit more about that system generator thingy I hear is a part of the GMs toolkit...

Cat that Walked by Himself said:

It's a 2 page lightweight system generator. There's a table for the star, a table for the planets, and a couple of others that let you generate what effectively amounts to encounters for your players: xeno ruins, human/alien civilisations etc etc. It's nice, but not incredibly detailed, I imagine FFG will build on it at some future date.

Well, I don't feel space combat, in terms of vessels firing at each other, is meant to be or should be a large part of Rogue Trader. It's more like a vehicle (pun intended) for getting the players from endeavour to endeavour and engaging in the odd boarding action, in my opinion. If you want to make a bigger meal out of though, concoct your own rules for the lot; as written they're intended to be a 'quick and dirty' resolution rather than anything approaching a 'realistic' simulation.

P.S. The 'screen' in the kit is very nice, albeit at quite a price.

You say random adventure seed and I like it.

since old FASA Star Trek and various travellers spaceship combat was a big part of a sf RPGs. you have to count on players and GMs wanting more of that. Also rules where already in the book and they decided to cut them out in favor of more flavor text.

IMHO it was a bad call and that happens even to the best of us. of course, you might disagree.

Cat that Walked by Himself said:

ye-e-e-es....Just be alive to the fact that it's not the most incredibly detailed random adventure generating tool in the world. It generates a straightforward system with something in it. The something varies, but not enormously. Apart from the physical layout of the system, we're only talking about ten potential outcomes here, really.

No, I'd agree that cutting rules in favour of fluff is almost always the wrong decision. However, Star Trek is exclusively about life on a 'starship' (originally it was basically about starships fighting) and Traveller too started as exclusively about life on an armed trading vessel, Fading Suns mentions duels between nobles in their starships . Whereas Rogue Trader (original here) was about someone who used a starship to get around but the game focussed on the skirmishes on planets and starships, not on space battles. It's not the same situation at all, really, but I don't begrudge anyone who wants it and there is BFG (which I own) to draw on for more detail, if desired. I just don't think whining about something that really isn't a core mechanic of the game is warranted (pun intended). :¬)

Also, when they said "cut out" they mean dozens of pages worth of stuff. The main rulebook was/is already massive, and, to keep the game practical, they had to remove "expendable" content, content that was not immediately essential, or content they wanted to use, but didn't want to rip apart to fit it in somehow.

All that is really needed is the basics for starships and the like, because it covers that area enough to start with, where as other, essential stuff, remained. It's pretty much guaranteed that a ship book with all the stuff cut, like torpedoes, more hulls, more parts, etc, will be released, so I'm sure everything you need will be in that.

The game is entirely playable as it is, so I think they made the right decision. I'd rather buy two books that are brilliant, rather than one book with missing bits and ill-explained equipment and the like just so they could fit everything they cut out in the same page count as the book is currently.

MILLANDSON said:

^ Aye, this.

MILLANDSON said:

The game is playable as it is to a point. Space battles have played a large part in my campaign up to this point (and there is huge starship section that basically guarantees that PCs will get into space battles) and I feel that ordnances are essential part of that. One of my PCs is void master that has chosen mastery of small crafts trait and obviously he wants to shine in dogfight or leading strafing runs on starships.

On the other hand Koronus expanse fluff was, IMHO< somewhat lackluster and seemed to try to do delicate balancing act between saying nothing and anything. I would rather see more mysterious Koronus section and still get two-three pages on torpedos and launching bays. Just basic stuff. Nothing more.

Also while I understand general lack of tolerance for RPGers making whining noises on these board it still should be noted that not everyone complaining is not troll in a feeding frenzy. Making torpedo tubes part of an adventure scenario and yet leaving rules for torpedos out is not so smart thing to do. Everyone makes mistakes and it is better to point them out and not pretend they are not there.

Cat that Walked by Himself said:

If you could at any point indicate where I called you a "whiner", a "complainer" or a "troll", I'd appreciate it greatly, given I was under the mistaken impression I was just informing you of the entirely valid reasons for FFG doing what they did, rather than casting an opinion on your views (which I at no point mentioned).

If you are going to quote/reply to my posts, I'd appreciate if it at least actually accurately matched up to what I said.

Im greatful for Drydock and the GM screen (i cant really call it a kit) as for rules on this or that wich isn't covered in the book I make up on the fly when I encounter them and re adjust when they do come out if it fits. the one part I do feel is a little negelect compare to the other systems based on the GW ips. for all the talk on the boards is players and GMs begging for that next book that will fill that empty space. For some reason I feel the wait is going to be worth it in the long run. Adventures are nice, but I really want a ship or tech book to compare my notes too, my players are realy enjoying the ups and downs of trading. for those that want a good refrence materail for space combat check out GURPS space and spaceships, the PDFs are good prcie and the rules are solid and easy to convert.

MILLANDSON said:

TBH im think im a "whiner" and "complainer" in this thread .

TBC i love RT book and Space Opera genre. And i like great spaceship battles. Great tables at the end of kit. Not bad adventure inside the kit. But when i look on "*", right above Torpedoes i have some bad anger issues rising inside me. Call it immoral stupidity, but i feel it wrong... and i can`t do a little bit about it, so i came here and whine a little.

not you but gaidheal did (and he meant original poster). which is not a big deal and does not make him (gaidheal) a bad person but I am just trying to point out that there is knee jerk reaction in dismissing criticism as whining.

as I pointed out this is due to usually somewhat agitated state that RPGers tend to get into when posting about games they love.

I hope you (all) see that I didn't mean any offense.

On the other hand I don't see reason for you (MILLANDSON) to get combative so much about this.

Also, you (all) could have pointed patient zero of this topic to one of dozens homegrown variants of torpedo rules that are lying around here and net in general including this nice fan supplement that is being hosted on Dark Reign. Instead you (all) try to explain to him that he is somewhat strange for wanting torpedos in a game that features space combat in every published adventure up to a date.

http://www.darkreign40k.com/ships-of-the-void/new-download-ships-of-the-imperial-navy-2.html

When companies fail to provide something, as they always do - no biggie there, we should provide for ourselves.

I didn't call anyone a whiner, so, sorry mate, no cigar. What I did say was that it's not a major part of the rules, in my opinion, that space combat as a whole is more an excuse for boarding actions than anything and that I don't like it when companies cut rules for fluff. I did, however, agree with the later summing up of FFG's position and balancing of competing desires.

Oh, I also pointed out how to run torpedoes, no special house-rules supplement required.

Gaidheal said:

do I get a cigar

as I said no biggie nor do I think that everybody should watch out his words at all times or even that whiner is particularly offensive. but for the sake of argument, and bear with me for a moment, it seems that people tend to, due to previous bad experiences, lump any complaint into 'whining' category. it seems that defending game as written is something akin to orthodoxy.

IMHO, leaving out ordnances is sort of a faux-pas as far FFG is concerned. I say that as someone who has all of their books for DH and RT.

Aye, you can have a tin of Henry Wintermans. Mea Culpa . I didn't actually call anyone a whiner but I'm not going to try and argue the clear implication, heh! In point of fact I was speaking in general terms and not about the original poster, your point about taking care is well made, though. :¬)

I really feel that it benefits FFG and game designers to have open and even sometimes unpleasant discussion and not hero worship (that they deserve ). They are big boys and they can take it.

edit: and I am a **** for not spotting your solution earlier on.

I'm a big fan of the RPG genre and I like FFG and even GW's products, I doubt anyone's going to accuse me of hero worship, though. ;¬)

It's to their credit that not only do they not attempt to silence criticism but they've refused to delete critical posts, even when the author requested it, in order to avoid the appearance of being self-serving. Mongoose has a similarly robust attitude, too, whereas GW...