Dodskrigaren >>>
After reading that, I'm wondering how straightjacket FFG is going to make Marines sound.
Well, there is one line of thought that suggests that Marines should be straight-jacketed. Of course, in this case I choose to see it as giving them the option to stand out from the "average" Marine, who are more straight-jacketed than the PCs, thus subscribing to one of the normal fantasy conceits about the players being special from the start.
Atheosis >>>
It does seem perilously close to crossing the line into roll-playing, but I'm willing to give it a chance. Now that all the disappointments regarding the Chapters choices (or lack thereof) are out if the way, I'm really hoping the mechanics of the game redeem it.
Something similar to the concepts of "Demeanours" was generated in fan speculation, though in that case it was specifically associated with the armour, e.g. older armour might have "heroic abilities" associated with it, Marines can develop more powers for their armour as they gain experience, etc. Mostly this was speculated as being technological, but the idea that the charactereven if they die in the processperforms some form of Chapter-specific heroic deed being able to pass their armour down through the generations of the Chapter? It has that rather interesting Pendragon flavour without actually making the Marines into noble knights that have children.
Atheosis >>>
I will say though that any time I've ran a game with once a session abilities, I've always treated it as two to three hours of play time. Though I tend to agree it's a little bit off design-wise.
Well, you can always take a bit out of other systems that can handle the "once per game" mechanic even within PbP?
Adam France >>>
I have to say I'm not impressed, this seems like a game mechanic for players who don't know how to roleplay. It smacks of 4e D&D's powers, especially with the arbitrary 'once per game' rule.
If handled well, this is not necessarily a bad thing. I personally leave the "roleplaying" aspects to just thatroleplaying, modelling the intelligence (etc.) of the Marines in the conventional manner. There might be Chapter-specific abilities, be it more or less Bloodlust or whatever, but the idea of having "powers" is not necessarily a bad thing. It does make it a bit video-gamey, but that might not be a bad thing. (Well, unless it is overdone.)
Adam France >>>
I am seriously doubting I will bother buying this game, it just doesn't look like it's going to have much of interest to me, and almost every DD makes me more and more convinced I won't like it.
I'm tempted to buy it just to see how it ultimately handles Marines. The little tid-bits that we get with Designer's Diaries are interesting, but ultimately you have to judge it with the book. On the other hand, I already know that I'm not going to be using the system, but the more interesting bits there are in it the more likely that I'm going to use them in the system that I do use. Homage and all that.
N0-1_H3r3 >>>
I don't see it; the easiest way to think about them is as an extra Fate Point you get once per game (an an appropriately dramatic moment) for roleplaying your character.
There's an alternate way of handling them, thougha reward to roleplaying. Rather than just being a one-game shtick, you make them something that is powered by Fate. They don't come back for the session (whatever the individual might define that as) unless they do some roleplaying that is consistent with their Natures.
Urgh, begins to sound like WoD, but you get the drift.
For me, though, abilities that are powered by "fate" (essence, karma, whatever) this is how they tend to work. Burn a point and you get the ability. It gets a bit more than that, though, with the idea of Good and Bad Points from 'ole Amber DRPG but... err... I digress.
N0-1_H3r3 >>>
Personally, the first thing I'm doing with Deathwatch when it comes out (and I can show it to my players) is integrating Demeanours and Fate Points more closely, so that each time you use a Fate Point, you need to trigger a Demeanour first.
Oooh, you beat me to it. What he said.
SonofDorn >>>
What I'm going to do before I buy DW (and most likely I will), is to read through the rules and make a thorough evaluation based on what I've fully seen before my eyes and not the tidbits of information that is presented to us here from week to week.
Sounds like a valuable thing for everyone to do. I tend to get "library" copies to evaluate before buying (i.e. the copies that a friend has purchased). I would still love to see online samples in the form of a table of contents and index, but that's unlikely to happen.
Arag >>>
Well, I agree with you, but only partially. I'll buy the game and look into it's mechanics to see what good and what's to be changed. But right now we are getting previews and what I'm seeing (a stand-alone idea as it is) doesn't make me happy. I'm not judging the game here, I'm judging the info given on demeanours.
That seems fair enough. I see them more as a part and parcel of the story of modelling a character. I'm not going to use them as is, but would rather explore the idea of associating it with "glorious deeds" of the past, allowing them to acquire some bonus to an endeavour.
Sister Cat >>>
However, I do see a potential pitfall in the whole "once-per-game-session" thing.
Mine is that I'm not fond of the other players being able to get a say in the matter.
Kage