I haven't seen anything posted yet, so I thought I would chime in.

I hope I am not rocking the boat too much with this, however I've heard rumblings from several sources that there is a "new version" of Dark Heresy in the works.
Being a big fan of the current game(s), I'm not sure how to take this.

I am concerned (as I am sure are others) that if FFG is going to take it the game a similar route as they did with Warhammer Fantasy, that it could spell a major blow to the franchise. I know a LOT of people who are still sore over 3rd Edition.

Honestly despite the few areas in the game system, and a few bits in Ascension, I personally do not see anything wrong at all with what is out now. I'm of the opinion that if it isn't broke, don't fix it (or break it depending on your point of view). There is quite a bit more that the game needs and could explore rather than a reboot of the system.

Or are we looking at something totally different like a DH boardgame or cardgame?

This inquiring mind would like to know.

If it is a nice pretty updated core book with all the eratta and clarifications edited in and maybe some bonus materials added (like when a book goes paperback and gets a bonus short story thrown in) then I would be very happy.

If it is the dark future version of Warhammer Fantasy 3rd Ed. then I will simply stop buying FFG products and pretend that it doesn't exist. I can't emphasize this enough! Warhammer 3E and D&D 4E are ABOMINATIONS! Do this to us at your own peril!

PURGE THE IMPURE!

FFG have said they are not going to do a new version of DH ala WFRP 3rd ed. Also, they've only just release Rogue Trader and Deathwatch isn't even out yet and uses the same basic rules set and are explicitly and intentionally inter-compatable. It would be pure madness to release a wildly different version of DH right now. it is so infinitely improbable you could power a ship with it.

If there is a new updated core rules that is compatible with the existing books, then I will be very happy indeed.

Yea there's no way they'll change the system (at least for quite a while). Could definitely do with a new Core book though, my old Black Industries one is falling apart.

A new core book with streamlined Character Creation and suggestions and recommendations of how to move away from the current career/class and rank/level system so you could actually build the character you want without having to start with 2500+ XPs, a drawback system to gain more starting XPs and the removal of the income rules, maybe a new homeworld or two.

Still would like to see some alternate career ranks for real commissars, officers, dock workers, gangers, spies and other common 40K crafts.

But overall, I still really like DH. Just give me Abhumans fellas. I mean, both Ogryns and Ratlings live on Karrick and the Moon of Karrick, yet we only have stats for Beast House Ogryn.

And a better stating adventure.

ZillaPrime said:

I hate to play the devil's advocate, but I really like a lot of the changes they made to D&D 4th Ed. But despite it's steamline system (which makes it easier for newbies to learn and understand), they still model the whole game around this stupid thing were levels 1-10 players are in dungeons, 11-20 they go out and build armies, blah, blah, blah. How limiting and lame can you be? So I like Patherfinder better!

If they do revise Dark Heresy, I wish they would do an intro that really introduces those who have not read the novels or not familair with the wargame. I was familiar with the Fantasy game, but not this and it has been tough to understand and to teach my wife what the hell all of this stuff means. I had found an intro to the world that someone put out, but it was really dull to read.

Dark Heresy is a part of a trilogy, of which only two parts are out. So there's no way in hell we'll be seeing a new version so soon.

I also don't think that there is a financial need for it, after all I see a lot of people playing and buying the books locally.

So I think the only thing that we'll get is a revised book with the errata etc.

Peacekeeper_b said:

I just want to jump in and say that I second all of the above suggestions. These are changes that I would love to see in DH.

Like I said, I personally there are many more areas of the 40K universe that need to be touched on before any thought of a new set of rules should be considered.

If there is anything we need, we need a set of books that work in all three systems.

A big book dedicated to the Imperial Guard, another dedicated to the Navy, and at least one dedicated to expanded information in regards to Imperial Government. Perish the though of the need to get more info about the Xenos races and all their stuff, as well as an expanded look into Chaos. That friends is only the tip of the iceberg.

Considering that virtually everything FFG has published since taking over the license has been of clearly inferior quality to that of BI, I really hope there's no truth to this.

LuciusT said:

LuciusT said:

Agreed as well. If nothing else we need an expanded book on Imperial Society in general with various alternate and unconventional careers. While the Empire is a great multitude of different cultures and lifestyles, amongst the more connected and developed worlds and systems there is a common style of life that stands out that has yet to be fully fleshed out.. Gamers like details like that for both gaming and reading.

Atheosis said:

I respectfully have to disagree in full with this statement. I think FFG has been doing a great job with the games. Sometimes even beyond that. Yes they are not perfect and there are problems, if not a few things that suck. You get that with all games. However, that aside the rest represents some of the best license adaptation that I've ever seen. FFG is finally doing what's been needed to be done with 40K for years. Bring together the fluff, expand and explore the universe, and make a cool RPG along with it. FFG is taking the concepts above and beyond, and that is what you need to keep a franchise fresh and interesting.

BI didn't publish much, so there isn't a lot you can use to compare with the material that which has been put out by FFG. In fact FFG has actually cleaned up and fixed a lot of the problems left over from BI when they took things over.

Was the material BI put out inferior or superior? No I don't think so. I think they did a great job getting the project off the ground, however FFG is the ones who have strapped rockets on it and let it go. Would BI have done things differently? Who can say. There is no way to know or to compare since most of what BI developed is now part of the whole under FFG and it's hard to truly pick out anything solid..

I think the biggest problem overall is that there is a lot yet to be explored that has not been touched on. BI never had a chance and FFG is in the process of doing it as we speak, with every new release.

I think FFG have done a pretty good job, the BI produced stuff certainly isn't noticably superior, and there are somethings I definitely applaud FFG for doing, such as full colour hardback supplements. Most of the issues with DH stem from its original system and how it scales, you certainly cannot lay that at FFG's door. Perhaps BI some some ingenious plan as to how it would work, but alas, we'll never know.

Peacekeeper_b said:

While I agree with possible Abhumans, and maybe some alt career ranks and homeworlds, I REALLY LIKE the income. I mean, how ELSE are the PCs supposed to get stuff? It's not really like we have the Influence of anyone ACTUALLY IMPORTANT, or the resources of the same.

And I personally have no real issues with starting at 400 Xp. Sure, it limits your starting options, but that's the entire POINT. And to have an open system, you might as well just go play something else that's actually freeform/mostly freeform with an XP system...like ShadowRun or BESM. With out it, you get a bunch of blobs who all do the same thing, and no one really gets to shine, or you get a lot of characters ala Favorite Animes or Video Games. I don't know about you, but unless i'm playing BESM, I don't want to be playing with Cloud Strife or Wolverine in my group.

While limitations can be annoying, they are NEEDED for a game like this.

ClockworkGecko said:

You're free to disagree. Personally I think the major additions they've published such as Rogue Trader and Ascension are crap (and I'm becoming progressively more and more worried about Deathwatch). We're each entitled to our opinions.

Dammit, I've purchased 3 (three) corebooks and 2 (two) inquisitor's handbooks for the convenience of our party, and they are going to tell me that they are discontinuing their support of DH?

Not that my adventures would suffer a bit in a couple of decades with all these books out, but... you know... I'd still want to see DH supported.

Atheosis said:

Interesting... I share the same view as regards DW and maybe Ascension (to a degree), but why would RT be crap? I would regard RT rather as an extension for DH.

egalor said:

I hate the no-risk psyker system, the lackluster and narrow career choices, the blah rank system charts, and the incomplete starship rules, just to name a few things.

Atheosis said:

Funny. I both played and ran DH for about a year before RT came out and no psyker in our game has ever suffered any negative feedback more severe than the food around going stale. Then we got RT and I rolled myself an Astropath. In the first game, I nearly killed the entire choir when attempting long-distance astropathic sending. Granted, it was mostly a matter of lucky/unlucky dice rolls, but since then I'm leery of calling the RT psykers' system "no-risk".

Wow, so this is where the ubiquitous angry vocal minority hangs out .

Personally, the members of my gaming group (and probably 90%-95% of DH players) love the DH/RT products that FFG has put out, including Ascension, and we're beyond excited about Deathwatch. The mechanics are sound and the games themselves are as true to the fluff as they need to be to satisfy. Having lurked on these boards for an admittedly short time, it's pretty obvious that many of the posters here won't be satisfied with anything FFG (or indeed any game company) puts out in terms of Warhammer 40k RP. It ain't perfect but it's the best show in town and I think Ross and company are doing as good a job as can be done with the IP.

So, here's a loud "Heck No" to a new version of DH, especially one that in any way resembles WFRP3 (UGH!). The last thing I want to do is a ton of money on yet another version of yet another game. Again, let me reiterate in stronger terms should FFG ever consider retooling 40K RP to look like WFRP, I can pretty much guarantee that my friends and I will jump ship taking our money with us.

gawdsofwar said:

You're painting with some broad strokes there. As I stated, I was quite satisfied with what BI did with DH. I have issues specifically with FFG's design philosophies. Mainly because they mostly suck.

Morangias said:

When I was running DH, our ImpPsy *constantly* rolled phenoms and always got the "rain of blood" entry. Became a running joke after the third time in a row. Then he became possessed, but I didn't was to discourage him from playing, so I gave him a GM crafted "minor" possession. Every time he rolled, I asked him to roll another off-color die (Chaos Die) and if I could tally up a 9 with the Chaos die and any other die he got a phenom/ peril roll off that as well. Plus constantly teasing him with "I can give you more power" whispers in his head was fun too. He eventually was rolling as many Chaos dice as he was regular dice and they finally had to put him down.

Atheosis said:

H.B.M.C. said:

I will.

Rogue Trader: Careers totally boring and unimaginative. I (as in me, not you or necessarily everyone or anyone else) cannot get excited about any character created in Rogue Trader. While some of the ideas are great (gaining skills at +10/+20 if you get the skill more then once during character generation before spending XP, getting the Talented talent to replace repeated starting talents, getting points to spend on characteristics, the origin path) overall none of the careers inspire me, fit the character I wanted to build or make me even want to play the game.

Hopefully into the storm will do what IHB did for DH.

Ascension: I wont even go into detail here, there are plenty of forums that already discuss how f'd that book it.

Deathwatch: With each DD I get less excited.

But that is only a handful of the books they have made. I enjoy most of the books, but will not say they are better or worse then BI. I really like Radicals, Creatures Anathema, Lure of the Expanse. Kind of meh on the Haarlock Legacy.

Hit and miss. Not perfect, not flawed. FFG is not better or worse then BI, just different.

Though at times Atheosis seems to just not like the direction of the game and thats ok as well.

H.B.M.C. said:

I was merely explaining my original position that I don't want a new version of DH. I'm not trying to convince anybody of my opinion. I just don't like the way FFG has handled the 40k Roleplay line since they took it over (for the most part). Personal preference.

I already listed things I didn't like about RT in an earlier post. In general I feel that FFG doesn't do a very good job of creating rules that are internally consistent, well thought out, or remotely balanced. As far as Ascension goes, I see it as a game for munchkins, and not a very well thought out one at that. Of course this is all simply my opinion. It also reminds me that I should probably take RT out of my games played list.