Greetings, Deathwatch fans!

If you are hungering for more Space Marine action, rejoice! The Free RPG Day adventure, Final Sanction , has a 23-page sequel named Oblivion's Edge . Completely free to download, you can take your Kill-team out of the frying pan and into the fire through both adventures. Enjoy!

A very nice gift, thanks FFG.

The Tyranid stats alone are worth the price... and of course this being free makes it even better

DW

Tyranid Warriors! w00t!

This is awesome, yet it's only just about to become July. Why haven't the FFG team got that time-speeder-upper machine working yet so we can get to August?

BYE

H.B.M.C. said:

To give us more time to play these wonderful demo adventures?

So stoked. Fighting a Tyranid invasion is the perfect way for preparing people for how awesome Deathwatch Marines are!!!

GIMMAH!!!!!!

Very nice. Just finished reading the adventure and I can't wait to add it as Part 2 of the mission. The players in my group are going to love this!

Thanks again FFG.

RenoDM said:

Ditto, thanks FFG, you roxxors my boxxors!

I don't want to look, in case a certain cheater wants to GM it. Could it work as a one shot for players who haven't played Final Sanction? Some people in my group have played FS, others have not.

we has bugs, we has bugs that are tooled down...which means we gets bugs that are EPIC when the rules actually do come out.

Now we have to start speculating on what 'Nids we're going to get?

Warriors
T-Gaunts
H-Gaunts
Gargoyles
Broodlord
Genestealers (hopefully with the same rules from CA)
Hive Tyrant (interviews have mentioned that)

We've also got the Lictor from CA. Will we get a Carnifex and/or Tyrant Guard? Everything else you can pretty much ignore (we don't need Pyrovores or Trygons, as but as they'd be), but I'd be a sad Marine if we didn't get stats for a Carnifex.

BYE

quality. nice one FFG.

on the back of the freebie DW pre-ordered

Awesome.

Thanks for the hard work

Nojo509 said:

Absolutely. You might want to consider how much background to give for it in terms of the NPCs and set up but it definitely stands on its own (while at the same time really flowing well from Final Sanction). Owen did a great job with it.

Another extremely heavily combat oriented scenario.

On the one hand it's interesting that FFG have clearly created a game where PC marines start extremely powerful and able to take on major foes. On the other it does seem so far to just be about throwing those pcs into combat after combat after combat. If I wanted to play that kind of game I'd play 4e D&D.

Don't know how many times it needs to be said:

You get out of an RPG what you put into the RPG.


How the scenario runs is dependant on not just what's written, but the players and the GM.

And the notion that a game about Space Marine Kill -Teams is too ' combat heavy ' is beginning to get really silly.

BYE

To play Devil's Advocate, one of the major criticisms of even the concept of Deathwatch , a game where you could "roleplay" Space Marines, was that, well, it was going to be combat, combat, combat, and therefore probably not really worth bothering about it. This seems to be one of the reasons that FFG has released the Designer's Diaries that focused on how it wasn't all combat, gave them "Natures/Demeanours" so that they could be interesting individuals, and produced a video with Alan Merrett telling everyone that they were wrong for ever thinking that Marines (or at least some or many Marines) didn't have personalities that you could roleplay (how could you have ever thought that, you idiot fans!).

Perhaps we could view Adam France's opinions in a different way? Rather than in the seeming context of "The game is great, you're just whining!" we might offer a more positive interpretation. Yes, everyone knows that a game on the Space Marines was going to focus heavily on combat. It comes with the territory. However, as above, FFG has spent some time trying to tell everyone that it isn't just about combat. So maybe Adam France is suggesting that it would have been interesting to see more overt elements of this in the free adventure?

Now, they might be in there. I haven't had the opportunity to really look through it or its sequel. Maybe, though, it's a possibility of turning the denigrator/protector axis into a discussion? As H.M.B.C. suggests, it might just be about what you put into the game. As a demonstration product one realises that you cannot put the entire game in there, but surely it is there to demonstrate the flexibility and facility of the product in handling the type of gameplay that FFG have described (and as a product push it's one of the reasons that I don't pay much attention to the idea that "It's a free product!")? Thus, one might ask what elements Adam France feels should have been included other than "combat combat combat," or at least how he thinks the demo could have been better handled?

Ah well. Just a thought.

Kage

Adam France said:

Sorry Adam. I'd rather play as Space Marines when I have an itch to chew up and spit out enemy scum. Bolt Pistols and Chainswords beat sword and board fantasy ANY day for me.

I think these two adventures were put out there to highlight some of the rules involved in the new game rather than to highlight the roleplaying aspects of the game. If you've ever read any of the Space Marine novels, you know there are ample opportunities for combat and roleplaying in the same story.

Firstly, having run a lot of Deathwatch obligatory 'it is a roleplaying game' 'you get out what you put in' and 'there's as much combat as you want'. The two sample adventures speak to the strength of the game and also demonstrate new 'things' you don't get in Rogue Trader or Dark Heresy. Personally, if I'd received a heavy investigation or political mission I'd have been pointing out that it didn't highlight the 'new' or the 'awesome' in Deathwatch (and it is very, very awesome).

If we consider the three games as follows:

Dark Heresy: Investigation

Rogue Trader: Exploration

Deathwatch: Action

This outlines the, I feel, core values of each game. It doesn't preclude other things (certainly my campaign features plenty of action in DH and Exploration in Deathwatch for example) but it does speak to a fundamental direction and theme for the games. As such, having combat related sample adventures is entirely apt.

The fact that Adam doesn't want to see 'a lot' of combat doesn't make them bad adventures (subjectively, they're not). They're just not what he personally wants. The game isn't catering for one person though, it's catering for its core values and customer base. Not everyone who likes Dark Heresy will want to play a Deathwatch game. Just as people who love Deathwatch could be uninterested in Dark Heresy. That doesn't make either 'bad' it is a matter of personal taste.

In terms of showing what else Deathwatch can do, taking some things (non-NDA ones) from my game:

Bodyguard an Inquisitor and an AM Magos, one to negotiate with Xenos, the other while doing an archeotech dig.

Board a derelict Xenos spacecraft and deal with the warp-ghost remains of its crew.

Get involved in Crusade politics and machinations.

Expose an IG General who was harbouring radical elements.

Reinforce a cut off IG regiment until more help can arrive. This involving extensive morale boosting and included lots of 'Why does the Uplifting Primer say X's weapons are weak when Corporal Janek's head was turned into mush by one'

There's just a handful. Not all of them involve combat but most do. Likewise most of the investigations my group's Inquisitor undertakes involve a fight somewhere down the line.

LeBlanc13 said >>>

I think these two adventures were put out there to highlight some of the rules involved in the new game rather than to highlight the roleplaying aspects of the game.

Hence the suggestion that I was making in my previous post—perhaps Adam was expecting something that was a demo for the game rather than an illustration of the use of, say, the Horde game mechanics? This might explain his disenchantment since, based upon the discussions over the past year it was less the mechanics that people were "concerned" about and more the roleplaying side of things.

LeBlanc13 said >>>

If you've ever read any of the Space Marine novels, you know there are ample opportunities for combat and roleplaying in the same story.

Merrett's comments notwithstanding, specifically with regards to this comment, to some people many of the Space Marines novels often jar them out of their personal suspension of disbelief because of their "humanity." We even have an allusion to this in the recently released explanatory video—"...they give up their humanity to protect humanity." Well, except when they don't, which seems to be quite often, though it varies from Chapter to Chapter.

The only reason that I'm saying this, however, is once again point out that there continues to be "concerns" for some about the roleplaying angle and perhaps—just perhaps—seeing a bit more in the demo might have been what some people were after.

Of course, with that said I'm coming dangerously close to speaking for Adam France, so my apologies for going about too far in the whole Devil's Advocate thing.

Evilref said >>>

Personally, if I'd received a heavy investigation or political mission I'd have been pointing out that it didn't highlight the 'new' or the 'awesome' in Deathwatch (and it is very, very awesome).

Certainly, that is the other side of the coin that LeBlanc13 seems to be referring to.

Evilref said >>>

Dark Heresy: Investigation

Rogue Trader: Exploration

Deathwatch: Action

Just purely out of interest, I've always seen it as:

• Dark Heresy: Action-Investigation
• Rogue Trader: Action-Exploration
• Deathwatch: Action-?

Evilref said >>>

In terms of showing what else Deathwatch can do, taking some things (non-NDA ones) from my game:

I don't think that anyone that is interested in the 40k universe for any length of time is going to have any trouble thinking of "missions" for Space Marines. They are not, after all, a completely unique prospective just as thematically Deathwatch isn't overtly that original. One could look to the likes of the Alien RPG, Twilight 2000 , or any number of other war/combat-focused games to see how the game could work. It just seems that the question of interpretation of Space Marine psychology as something that have "given up their humanity to protect humanity" but are otherwise just, well, human? Seeing how that is handed in the expanded book is going to be interesting. (Again, Merrett's comments about the obviousness of "personality" aside.)

Just some more thoughts and, as ever, with the caveat that for the majority of people decisions are going to have to be made when they see the final product.

Kage

H.B.M.C. said:

Well, if all you want is a game where pcs square off against various strings of 'hordes', 'because that's what DW KILL Teams dos', then I guess this adventure is not too combat heavy. If you want a game on the other hand where the pcs are SMs, but have more to do than just kill things, it is imo too combat heavy and narrowly focused.

I thought DW wasn't just about killing things? Wasn't that what we have been told? Am I wrong? Is this a game just about killing things, with theoretically the occasional bit of minor inter-party angst, or occasionally browbeating of the odd npc here and there?

These are the first two adventures, they are what we are all getting to see first. The template (broadly speaking) of a DW adventure. Just because a great player might be able to pull some roleplaying opportunities out his ying-yang does not mean an adventure doesn't need to present and suggest opportunities and challenges that aren't connected directly to either a strategic or tactical combat issue.

Honestly, these adventures remind me of the scenarios for the old Inquisitor tabletop game, a string of combats linked by some story and a limited amount of roleplaying.

Re what I'd prefer from a sample adventure rather than just a string of combats linked by a storyline thread; really I'd want what I'd expect from any other rpg, as broadly as I can put it is an adventure that presents the pcs with an interesting setting and task, that effectively gives the party a mix of challenges that are not all (or even necessarily mostly) combat oriented.

The thing is if everything is just about combat it will be... boring. It really will.

I find that combat works best in rpgs when it's not a long, regular and grinding process. I love combat as much as the next guy, but it should have context, tension, be descriptive, and preferrably over fairly quickly in real time. If a combat lasts longer than an hour real time I tend to think there's a problem, and if it has taken that long I probably wouldn't want another combat that game session. Any more than that and really are you playing a roleplaying game or a tabletop combat game?

Nojo509 said:

Heck, I'd love to run either or both for our group. The problem is finding time people can play. We'll bring it up at our game and see what people think, I guess.

@Adam France:

Adam, I agree that the demo adventures are somewhat combat-oriented. That in no way means that the DW RPG can only be run as combat-oriented. For instance (as an extreme), the DW kill-team could be appointed bodyguards to the sector governor's 6-year old daughter when she's on vacation on a fringe vacation-world. The DW kill-team can endure tea and biscuit parties with the little girl and her stuffed animals for the entire session.

More realistically, they can be agents/bodyguards for an Inquisitor and used to gather intelligence rather than combat.

They could explore a newly unquarantined planet, and not have any combat but encounter strange xenos devices and buildings, gathering and identifying xenos artifacts.

The DW team could be sent to a planet to oversee an evacuation of an important scientific team, say from an oncoming Tyranid invasion, yet only be expected to fight "in case" the enemy shows up early. (and the GM does not actually have the enemy arrive early). The DW team has to use social skills to get the colonists/scientists moved, etc.

And so on.

Bodyguarding, intelligence gathering, exploration, escorting, etc all can be run as non-combat intensive as the GM wants.

Just because the demo adventure has significant combat (showing off the Horde rules, as well as Tyranids), does not mean that the game can only have combat. There are plenty of ways that a GM can run a campaign, which include having minimal or no combat in a session. Don't get too twisted about the demo adventures. It's there to be cinematic and cool, allowing the players and GM to experience some of the new highlights and atmosphere of the DW game (such as Hordes) while facing off against one of the mightiest and most iconic WH40k enemies, Tyranids. It's a small snippet of the game, just like any adventure, and is not the only way the game can be run.

Keep in mind that the combat in the demo adventures is not one long combat, but a series of short combats. Honestly, combat vs Hordes (when they aren't negated by spending friendly hordes) seems to be a matter of just a few rounds before the PCs win (taking a few wounds). The PCs can also get creative if they want to avoid combat, such as scouting ahead to avoid the enemy, using the assault marine (with his superior speed/maneuverability) to lead the enemy away from the others, etc. Heck, the GM might let them get a boat from the manor (private yacht) and sail around to the docks and avoid the majority of the enemy, and so on. It comes down to how creative the players and GM are, really.

Adam France said:

For some reason the answer to this seems to be getting ignored (as it's been said many times but you keep repeating yourself), so I'll try saying it one more time.

It's up to each group whether they want their game to be all about combat...or not. I've pointed out examples of non-combat missions. Other people have as well. At this point it's feeling as if you're just attacking the game for the sake of it.

The sample adventure is not 'all adventures'. It's your game, the book's the toolbox, it's up to you what you make with it.

Hosted Final Sanction, first session 8 hours, and only about 15% forward in part 2 of the adventure. We used much of the time to roleplay happenings with the pdf at the chapel and with the assasin.
And when they arrived at the pdf base, there was a long investigation on the incompetence of the major inside (the infected officer).

So those that do not see the roleplaying oppertunities in the demo's are not looking beyond the headlines, or do not have, maybe, enough experience using a story in a personalized way. Storybooks only give you the backbone of the story, the GM and the players must fill inn the meat.

-

Oblivions edge, there is one thing there that is a more heavy inconsistency of the weapon stats, the Hellgun, I believe it is using the Inquisitor Handbook stats and not the updated Rogue Trader stats (reflecting that the Hellgun have a powerful armor percing ability in the tabletop (and for those saying the weapons are not named hellguns but hotshots... don't)). So updating the Hellgun to the "better" stats.