Hi, its me. Peacekeeper_b, the original poster of this thread.

I agree with lots of what has been said. It is all in the role playing in the end and what you get out of it and what you use as a choice. As I said in my REVIEW, there were things I liked, things I didnt like, things I was going to use and things I was going to discard. Just by comparison, this book has more of the discard variety then the keep variety for me.

And being labelled the worst book so far for DH does not mean it is the worst book ever made, it just isnt as good as the books that came before it.

I believe anyone of us can make good arguments for or against this book, but that isnt necessary, as my post wasnt a debate or a argument, it was my opinion. Just that. I was sharing my thoughts that may help others to like the book, dislike the book, find uses for the book and so forth. Not to tell you to not get it, not use it and not like it. Please, buy many copies, use it religiously, force FFG to have a top selling book in Q1 for Dark Heresy so I get more Dark Heresy supplements.

But dont claw and insult one another or start a flame war over it. That just sounds useless.

Snidesworth said:

Yes. And sometimes, in certain situations, a military based character might be a better choice for interacting with other military types, if the story requires it. Rules aside. Sure another PC might have a higher Fellowship, but grizzled veterans and admirals will probably feel more at ease speaking with a fellow ex-guardsman rather than a death cult assassin or a psyker.

...which I guess is represented by Peer: military or navy. Aw crap. Nevermind. The rules rule everything.

Peacekeeper_b said:

Peacekeeper_b said:

My apologies, Peacekeeper_b. I had no intention of implying that your original, and very well thought-out post, was in any way a damnation of the product. I just wanted to lend my support to to those who saw something worthy in Ascension. There have been so many of these in recent days that I perhaps overreacted in my post. I DO have problems with this supplement. But, overall, I find that I can live with them. It just seems that so many other posters are condemning the entirety of Ascension that I had to speak up. My post was not meant to be a referendum of your dislikes of Ascension, since I DO share several of them. Rather, I just wanted to validate the fact that some of us DO find some nifty and good things in it.

My apologies that I failed to explain that in my previous post. I tend to be a minimalist, so I don't like to post "wordy" responses. Again, my apologies if my last post implied otherwise.

I totally agree with the opinion of Sister Cat. This supplement is not as great as for example IH, but its totally different! As I said before, none of these things that you all mention as flaws actually ruin the roleplaying. There is a lack of consequence in power levels, but still it does NOT ruin the gameplay. And one important factor is that the classes are not suppose to fight each other like in WoW or other competitive computer game. They are there to support each other and form a force that is not a set of lone individuals, but specialists that work together. I thought it was so obvious that it's not even worth mentioning it, unless I offend someone's intellect (and I'm not taking about the characteristic! ) That was true aim of Ascension, the one that FFG achieved in a splendid way.

I hate arguments like "He stands no chance against that psyker face to face". It just begs for a sort of an answer like: "Oh really? Then I'll just call Vindicare to shoot him from like 600 metres. Or, using my Influence, I'll just call for Calexus". What kind of talking is that? We are supposed to play roles, not challenge each other on the ground of awesomeness. Yes, mechanically psyker can do a lot more things better way than others. BUT it's up to GM to handle that. Some social groups just don't like psykers visibly (cause at least their eyes shine a bit when using psychic powers) affecting people. Moreover, psyker is not a common lore encyclopedia that can handle any ceremonial situation like Storm Trooper in Military, Techpriest in Mechanicus and the like. In my group psyker really has to invent many ideas of how to use certain social powers, describing what to tell or suggest and still be aware of consequences, that if the target of his telepathy powers notices manipulation he may dislike it severly as many people treat psykers as devil's seed. It's not only "I use that power, tell me effects". I'd be plain stupid that way.

I think that Ascension is a really good book, with many splendid rules and one of the best RPGs in terms of group work on such a large scale that goes beyond the tip of the characters' noses, straight into politics, military, religious organisations and the like. Ascension is not perfect, that's why I will keep marking it as 7/10 as a supplement, but the whole game (taken to higher levels with Ascension) is still 10/10 for me.

Instead of complaining all the time we should give FFG one big thanks for what they did, because IMHO, none of us gathered here could have done it better. Think about it! They created a whole book and they did it nicely. They came up with so many ideas of power level characters that make this game totally different from D&D and the like on the similar level, because it mostly focus on roleplaying. Until now most of the time we complained about only some single aspects. But I guess it's human nature to post several topics of "this book is dumb or stupid or whatever else" instead of at least (AT LEAST) one like "What I really like about Ascension is". I will not start it 'cause it's too late now, as those who like it, have already said what they like. It just fruit for thought for the future.

Necrozius said:

Necrozius said:

For the record, isn't a Primaris Psyker very heavily connected to military command in some way? I could have sworn I remembered such things in the fluff, and I'm fairly sure that Tabletop IG can take a Primaris Psyker as a HQ, that is, a (potentially solo) commander of the forces...

Unusualsuspect said:

Oh yeah! Good point. Forgot about that.

Still... I'm sure that a generic Commissar has an itchy trigger finger when it comes to keeping an eye on their regimental psyker...

Necrozius said:

Yes, many Primaris are attached to IG regiments. However, those tend to be the ones whose powers and philosophies are more geared to conflict; Pyro- and Telekines mostly. Diviners and Telepaths often get attached to the Administratum and sometimes the Arbites even. Biomancers can really go about either way, though probably tend to be more militant. Ultimately it falls to the Scholastica Psykana where a Primaris is assigned.

-=Brother Praetus=-

Reilly said:

Very well thought out and thorough. I enjoyed reading your response and agree with your counter points.

@Necrozius

Yes. And sometimes, in certain situations, a military based character might be a better choice for interacting with other military types, if the story requires it. Rules aside. Sure another PC might have a higher Fellowship, but grizzled veterans and admirals will probably feel more at ease speaking with a fellow ex-guardsman rather than a death cult assassin or a psyker.

...which I guess is represented by Peer: military or navy. Aw crap. Nevermind. The rules rule everything.

Actually, I disagree. I feel quite fine assigning bonuses on top of those talents, purely due to background. For example, in my game, the group will likely be taken prisoner by a Commissar (*). In the following light interrogation, I fully expect the Schola Guardsman to waltz through the whole thing, precisely because he is a loyal guardsman coming from a Schola Progenium and thus will have a certain amount of sympathy on his side.

Should such a character then acquire Peer and Good Reputation, he's simply going to get even higher bonuses. In the same way, the Psyker will start most social situations at a disadvantage because he's a spooky psyker and a Hive world or Voidborn character will probably have a better time memorizing and picturing three-dimensional maps.

(*) Since that sounds like the cliched "Incarcerate the characters" plot, I'll elaborate: They're most likely going to alienate a member of the Chaliced Commissariat up to the point where he'll try to have them tried and shot. At about the point they meet him, a real Commissar and the squad he's attached to are going to show up and take the characters into (semi-protective) custody mainly to spite the Chaliced.

H.B.M.C. said:

That is an exceptionally biased example. I wonder what would happen if the guardsman/stormtrooper was from a Feral World, and our obviously incompetent psyker was suddenly the scion of a noble house and a master of the social arts? Let alone they come in incognito and without heavy embellishments marking them out as daemon magnets.

Suddenly, our stormtrooper is looking mighty foolish blundering about in the back alley checking the straps on his carapace armour for the Nth time, while the psyker is in the midst of the crowd, tossing back quaddis wine while making light conversation. And that conversation is really just a powerful telepathic illusion projected into the centre of the room to distract the forewarned guards. The real psyker is the one dressed as the waiter in the sidehall, reading everyone's thoughts simultaneously.

Once the targets have been identified in the party, the psyker proceeds to burn down the entire building with a powerful fiery conflagration of death. Conversely, perhaps they just wait for the target to be relatively alone before blamming him with a Divine Shot, through a floor if necessary, or bursting his brain with a blood boil. A bit of Chameleon, Forget me Not, and such other powers are well attainable by this same psyker all at once. They have absolutely zero chance of causing psychic phenomena due to the absurd fettering rules (good concept; TERRIBLE execution). Looks like the stormtrooper was just the eyecandy for this one.

If you want to prove that battles aren't always important, then so be it. But it still remains that a psyker will outperform the stormtrooper immeasurably in a number of situations. Bar minor situations dealing with military hierarchy, which the psyker could be well versed in via various Lore skills, Secret Tongues, or simply mindraping to gather information where necessary.

Individualised roleplaying aside, when both characters are built from the same ground up, the primaris psyker will outperform stormtroopers. That's practically a given. I know that writing perfectly balanced encounters isn't what this is all about; in fact I'm often a proponent for saying "Screw the rules! This is about acting in character!" and the like.

But I can already foresee more than one group with at least one member sitting silently in the corner being outclassed all evening while the Primaris Psyker and psychic Inquisitor high-five each other over the corpse of several bloodthirsters. The vindicare, meanwhile, is backflipping his way through the temple undercroft while insulting the entire convent of Battle Sisters whose bolterfire he's evading each round with ease.

The Hobo Hunter said:

It is EXACTLY what I mean! Exactly!

In it's a pity that designers say - 'Oh, it's HUGE success', when it's obvious that this supplement has a lot of really BAD game design ideas.

The Hobo Hunter said:

Of course it is!!!

Unless you're playing a completely freeform RPG (in which case anything presented ruleswise in DH is now irrelevant) then any concept of rules and balance is inherently factored into the game. As such it pays to be able to see where various entities stand mechanically based on their given rules and how they interact within the game.

You can blame the GM for not catering to his/her players all you want, but i think that's a bit of a copout to the system in general when you begin to use it as the be-all and end-all to any discussion.

I've been involved with Dark Heresy since Black Industries first released the game, either GMing or occasionally playing, sometimes both, for different groups at any given moment from then until now. One of those groups I've been involved with since it was released, when we were finishing school. Outside of DH, I've dabbled in RT (and found it somewhat lacking) as well as playing in various other RPGs, and have been good at and fond of creative hobbies besides RPGs in general.

Despite this, in all honesty, I don't feel confident enough to be able to run an interesting and believable campaign catering decently to players and characters with wildly fluctuating powers at their disposal while throwing significant threats at them to keep them on their toes. And whilst doing this, trying to not have every single threat become a sector-ending phenomenon (that devours billions of souls and leaves the entire system a charred wasteland by the end), because frankly that gets old real fast if every campaign devolves into a villain of the week, especially when they have to be escalated to challenge whatever Primaris Psykers and Vindicare assassins can bring to bear.

Throwing galaxies at each other with Unnatural Willpowerx4 is a little too OVER9000 for my interests, really, and I don't have any idea how I could possibly run a game like that for any reasonable length of time. Never mind the ~50k XP cap the game summits at.

No, I don't have any proposed fixes to Ascension. I never considered the concept viable to begin with because I honestly have no idea how to scale the characters, and their skills, talents, and powers up further without it turning every campaign into an OVER9000 slugfest or having the players end up running the entire sector, neither of which appeal to me and not many, if any, of the rest of my group I would imagine.

That's my more-or-less-rant on how I don't have the first clue how to keep an Ascension game running. Myself, and more importantly, the rest of my group, have put too much effort into their characters and their lives to screw with them now. I'd love nothing more than to tell the end of their stories alongside them, but I'm afraid of spoiling it with this book.

H.B.M.C. said:

So, your point is that rules have no affect on game? So, maybe you should discard rules entirely and play story-based WH 40K Role PlayingGame? Or... You should maybe try and play Ascension-level DH with a commoner character? All stats = 30, no talents, no skills. Pure roleplaying.

And it will be a fault of players and GM that your character will die every combat and you will sit back in corner, waiting till combat will resolve.

Mrakvampire said:

I bet you think the Adept is useless just because it is not as good in combat as a Guardsman, don't you?

Dabat said:

You've lost your bet. ;-)

Adept is a very balanced career with other careers in DH. Balanced. Yes. Blasphemous word. ;-)

Mrakvampire said:

Sister Cat said:

I agree with both you and Peacekeeper, most of what he disliked about Ascension I disliked (for the most part), but I still like it. I bought it and I like it enough that I am going to use it. There are some parts of it I do not think will ever see the light of day in my game, but that is nothing new, for any game book from any company. IMO I do not believe that Ascension is a bad book, it just seems not quite as well thought out as their other books. I would have loved to see some things for Sorcery, for example

Mrakvampire said:

It isn't balanced with the others at all, it is a niche class. Very few of the classes in DH are balanced against one another in any way. They all have their job though, and the Adept does it's job very well.

Dabat said:

Yes, and therefore it is balanced. Balance doesn't mean that he has similar combat abilities. It means that he excels in his role.

To the contrary - Storm Tropper in Ascension is not balanced, cause he do not excel in his role - Combat, cause Vindicare can kill faster (attacker role), can sustain more fire (defender role) and so on.

You've yet to consider the idea that someone may want to play as a Storm Trooper because they want to play as a Storm Trooper!!!

Or that someone wouldn't want to play as a Vindicare because they don't like the idea of playing as a Vindicare.

H.B.M.C. said:

And someone wants to play a commoner in DH game, so what? I point out that it is bad design to create a career that is inferior to others.

You want to play Storm Trooper? Fine. If I were a designer, I would grant you this ability, but instead of lame career presented in book, I would create 'Heroic Storm Trooper' and grant it Unnatural Toughness (x2) on Rank 10 as advance. It was so difficult to upgrade lame careers to the power level of Vindicare? I'm talking about Primaris cause it is broken totally and without serious overhaul of system it is very hard to create interesting challenges to all players-characters, not only for Primaris.

H.B.M.C. said:

One of the guys in our current group would quite likely play his guardsman as a stormtrooper because it fits his character (from a roleplaying sense) the best, provided:

A) He doesn't go Inquisitor/Interrogator because, frankly, short of Nrvnqsr he was the most like (read: only) character fit for that job and

B) He "resurrects" him back into the game, because he was 'technically' exiled on the spot for disobeying a direct order from his inquisitor during our campaign, and I allowed him the possibility of his character returning should he ever wish it because I figured removing a character with a well-established history and 3 fate points (2 of them well-earned) would be unforgivable if permanent.

I still don't think him playing a storm trooper because it's a logical choice is going to make him feel any better once the vindicare (assuming we have one) and psyker (quite likely; we have quite a badass telepath right now) outclass him immediately in combat while still pulling more than their weight elsewhere.

I don't take my fellow players giving their characters roles based on their concept over rules as something special; we all consider it a given because we prefer a good story over munchkin characters. That in no way forgives a class for being utterly useless compared to the others, because a character who sucks at everything is going to be redundant, and they'll never get their equal share of the spotlight. Everyone is eventually going to get sick of the guy who misses every shot or gets upstaged by the assassin in his chosen field every time.

And I don't just mean in particular circumstances, like a scum in an ecclesiarchy academy or a techpriest trying to charm the pants off a joygirl. I'm talking genuine redundancy as a character, all other circumstances equal.

The Hobo Hunter said:

Ugh. Don't get me started on the pre-Errata, pre-Inquisitor's Handbook Scum career. Outclassed in just about EVERYTHING.

To the contrary - Storm Tropper in Ascension is not balanced, cause he do not excel in his role - Combat, cause Vindicare can kill faster (attacker role), can sustain more fire (defender role) and so on.

Kill faster? I don't think so. Stormtroopers have an amazing ability of causing massive damage. Its verbal component generally is "Basilisk strike to the following coordinates:"
Storm Troopers excel in warfare, but that's the total of combat, not the single-person aspect of the Vindicare. And as has already been mentioned: Getting the Vindicare takes only more Degrees of Success on Autofire weapons than he gets with his dodge. Stormbolters are pretty much made for Vindicare-splatting.