Gen Con happened this weekend and if you hadn't guessed by the FFG website it was a really big deal for 40k Roleplay and Fantasy Flight in general. They had all the dev's in attendance and each one gave a seminar (Ross gave multiple on Deathwatch). My group plays Dark Heresy most of the time (but we use all the books) and we even sat in on a couple of demo's Mack did of the Space Hulk card game and Horus Heresy. He sold us on both but unfortunately the card game was sold out.

So between his seminar and our two demo's we pumped him for information from multiple angles of attack. We took a bunch of pictures and under the guise of photographing the game we even took some video. So here is what we were able to get out of him along with some general impressions.

- Every time we mentioned a book title he got visibly excited. He smiled, nodded while we talked and engaged us, asking about what we hoped to see, commenting on what we said and asked us a lot of questions to our questions. He didn't do this as a dodge though.

- He was very up front if he just couldn't answer. His go to phrase was "I can't speculate on the future of things we haven't announced. The warp is fickle and I'd hate to get you excited about something that changes". This became a little game for my group and many of his answers were simply prefaced with "The Warp is Fickle".

- His seminar was great. We didn't get a lot of new information but he did clarify a lot of things.

- He really likes the cover for Blood of Martyrs".

- We asked if Grey Knights would be playable with Daemon Hunter and if so would they be compatible with Deathwatch. He told a funny story about how Grey Knights were in an odd spot, the theme wise went very well with Dark Heresy but were space marines and needed to feel that way. When he took over Dark Heresy there was a discussion about Grey Knights and he basically called dibs because he loves them so much. He never said "yes they are playable" but he talked about the concept as if that were the only way they would be presented.

- When asked about metaplot and the adventure series he said that it was a tight rope to walk. GM's should never feel like their stories are being destroyed by the metaplot. He also feels that a published adventure trilogy should be "totally epic." Adventures going forward will make sure to point out major players from other books and tell you where you can find them. They will also give you optional swap outs (in case you've used those characters) and will contain advice for the GM's from playtesting.

- He cleared up a BIG misconception about how the Holy Ordo's operate. Apparently an Ordo Xenos Inquisitor will hunt down daemons. He MIGHT turn that over to a trusted Ordo Malleus ally but might as likely hunt it down himself. The Holy Ordo's are where Inquisitors get their resources, training, allies and support network. That network is designed for a specefic thing but no Inquisitor will let Heresy or daemonic incursions happen just because they aren't the right Ordo.

- The Sisters of Battle are the chamber militant for the Ecclesiarchy and NOT the Ordo Hereticus. Some of these might be a no-brainer for you guys but it was a huge "OH" moment for me.

- He thinks that Inquisitors would arm their acolytes instead of making them buy everything themselves. He thinks the money is really only spent on "non-standard" gear or "best craftsmanship". He allows his players to get gear from their Inquisitor if they are qualified to use it. He doesn't like a player with "Weapon Training Flame" sitting around saving up for a Flamer.

- When asked how a GM would balance for that he talked about a level one character with a Bolter and Power armor and how it looks over powered at first glance but rank 1 only lasts 1 game session. A lot of careers can get powerful gear quickly (like clerics or nobles) and that the iconic gear was really important to the feel of 40k. To that end he presented a few tricks to challenge players where the group has varying gear levels and how to equalize things to make everyone feel like they had a "moment in the light".

- He is apparently playing an Ordo Xenos Inquisitor in a Deathwatch game and loving it. He had some hilarious stories to tell about his Rogue Trader Seneschal as well.

- That man LOVES the Imperial Guard and can list way to many regiments.

- When asked if vehicle rules for Dark Heresy would be the same as the ones from Rogue Trader he said "The warp is fickle." We all got scared and he clarified that Sam (rogue trader dev) did a great job with those. The games are a family and it would be odd if the Dark Heresy rules were vastly different. He might add to the rules to account for new things that weren't in RT but that baring something big he didn't forsee himself re-building them from the ground up.

We asked about vehicles (like a Chimera) if those would come out soon or if we had to wait for Only War. He gave us some great ideas on how to handle vehicles using the RT rules by making up stats we felt were right and then transitioning into the new stats. Basically explain any differences by as local to the vehicle. He used the example of real life tank guys, they know the little things about their tank that are different from others. Different Chimera's from different forge worlds might be slightly different.

- We asked about a tech-priest book. He didn't say "no" but instead clarified that he didn't see the current like up as "career books" but instead he thought of them as "chunks of the game background that were highly likely to interest certain careers". He wants every book to interest every player.

- He loves CSI and did a hilarious "glasses on and off" bit when talking about Book of Judgement.

- He did a whole "Look at your RPG now look at me now back to your rpg" gag when he had technical difficulty with his projector during the seminar.

Wow, now I sound like a stalker. Chatting with him and the other 40k devs totally made my con. It was exhausting to watch him give demo's of games. I hope he brings that energy to making books.

ShatterCake said:

For the first paragraph, I can vouch for that. I've only been working with Mack a short time, but he makes sure to ask tonnes of questions from the playtest leads as to how they go about stuff in their games. He's **** good at that sort of thing.

And yea, that's how I've always seen the Inquisition. You can tell that just from Eisenhorn, who is himself a member of the Ordo Xenos, but spends most of his time hunting heretics (at least in the books). The Dark Heresy book also says that.

As for the last bit... well, the Sisters of Battle are sort of both. They have always been the armed forces of the Ecclesiarchy, their way of getting around the wording of the Degree Passive that the chuch should have "no men under arms". However, the Convocation of Nephilim (see page 42 of the Inquisitor's Handbook) made it so that they were also the Chamber Militant for the Ordo Hereticus. They work for both of them, which, I guess, would likely prove interesting should there ever be a disagreement between the two organisations.

Yeah I'm sorry to say that Mack is wrong about the chamber militant thing. The chamber militants are the military attachments to the Ordo's so its impossible for them to be the chamber militant to the Ecclesiarchy as they are not an Ordo.

The Sisters of Battle are the Ecclesiarchies military force that are also the Chamber Militant of the Ordo Hereticus, its especially odd to make that claim considering that page 42 of the Inquistors Handbook specifically says they are the Chamber Militant of the Ordo Hereticus in the Convocation of Nephilim box. I will be really dissapointed if something like that appears in the book because it directly contradicts the background in the Witch Hunters codex and the IH.

Kaihlik

Maybe I misquoted Mack on this one, but I got this part from a discussion I over heard between a fan and Mack and Ross. Basically the Codex is wrong, Inquisitors Handbook quotes that and now it's getting fixed. Maybe GW changed it or maybe it's just a long running mistake by the company that had Dark Heresy before them.

The whole point about the Sisters is that the Ecclesiarchy shall have no "Men at Arms" so this holds water to me. The Ecclesiarchy has the sisters because they aren't men.

Both assertions concerning the Sisters of Battle are actually correct. While the Adeptus Sororitas as a whole represent the military force of the Ecclesiarchy, there are those orders which are tied closely in service to the Ordo Hereticus and almost exclusively serve as a fighting arm for the Inquisition. No organization is ever fully subservient to another within the Imperium. There are various accords, oaths and pacts which form bounds of varying degree between the all of the Adepta. It is all very feudal in the grim, dark future.

-=Brother Praetus=-

ShatterCake said:

Care to share?

Nojo509 said:

Yeah. please.

The ones I remember were situational.

For someone in the group has high armor: Add a servitor or one or two combatants who have high pen weapons that aren't more powerful than the others. To stop these weapons falling into player hands (if you don't want them to have them) make them burn out quickly. Lets the players have them for a few shots beyond the fight.

For someone in the group with high powered weapons: Bump up the main bad guys agility but don't adjust his number of dodges. Have him hold his dodge for when the high power weapon guy fires.

Only one person in the group really a "fighter": Build the enemy groups the same way with several weaker characters. Then make the tougher guy stand out with clever looks or an odd style of weapon. This also gears up the group slowly by giving them "unique" weapons that they want to use for the cool factor. Players want their character to feel unique but also "from 40k".

He also said that combats need to be creative. They need to tell a small story inside the big one. Interactive terrain and "descriptions" make that work. He suggested unique scars or gear for that too. He used an example of a game where the group was attacked by 3 guys, one had a bent scope on his rifle, one was shirtless and the last guy was missing his left hand. The group started calling targets out as "skins, short range and lefty". While it was just 3 hive gangers the group felt like they were each characters.

He also suggested having the Inquisitor just plain give the group better gear to bring them up to the problematic guys level because he is going to throw them into bad situations. He said that players remember the cool way they beat foes, not how much damage they did in one roll. Give them cool fights and don't worry about the math to much. It made me wish I played in one of his games.

There were others but I forget this convo on tape. This was also advice to a new GM so I don't know how useful it is to experienced players.

OH, smack talk. Make the enemies talk. So if one guy is in melee with an adept have him start mocking the adept. This way when the adapt manages to kill him it feels like a real moment for him. If the players hate the enemy it matters more when they kill them.

The issue of the Adeptus Soriatus, acting as the chamber militant is an example of GW not always keeping it's IP straight.

In the period between the end of Warhammer 40,000: Rogue Trader and the release of codex Witchhunter, the term chamber militant refered specificially to the assembly of space marines, who where oath bound to serve each of the three major holy Ordos.

Both the death watch, and the grey knights where mentioned, but no name was ever, to my knowledge, given to this force. However, the terminology was clear, a chamber militant, was made up of space marines.

As someone who was looking forwards to the release of the witchhunter army, I remember palapable excitement that at last I would have a reason to get some marines for an army, and that better still, it would be for my Ordo Hereticus Army which I had wanted for years, and they would likely be a small group of awesome metal figures, just as cool as the grey knights. (I was also hoping for plastic arbites)

What I got, was a change in the established setting making the Adeptus Soriatus the chamber militant of the Ordo Hereticus.

So, it is possible that mark , and whoever is handling GW's IP, with regards to 40k roleplay,have spotted this change in IP, and decided to put it right in Dark heresy, or is possible that what was heard, is all a great misunderstanding and FFG will follow with the change(which actually i do fairly like) and have the Adeptus Soriatus be the military of the eclessiarchy AND the chamber militant of the Ordo Hereticus.

It's not a matter of them keeping (or not keeping) their IP straight, it's more a case of their IP being as flexible as they need it to be.

Sisters were part of the Adeptus Minastorum... then the Witch Hunter Codex came about, so suddenly the Decree Passive shows up, and they're a Chamber Militant. I can almost guarantee that come the new Sisters of Battle Codex, they'll either be back to being part of the AM, or suddenly be their own army.

Never count anything as sacred in 40K. What is taken as set-in-stone law is in reality as fickle as the wind.

BYE

Pardon my nitpick, The Decree Passive just says the the Church may not have men under arms; it has nothing to do with the Ordo Hereticus. I think you are talking about the Convocation of Nephilim. As far as I know the Decree Passive was around during the days of the 2nd edition Codex as well. Though they may not have called it as such. Even then though their purpose was to police the Ministorum and other Imperial offices for Heresy.

andrewm9 said:

+1 geek point.

H.B.M.C. said:

I never have counted anything as sacred. I am a first ed WFRP player...i mean, where did malaal and the gods of law go anyway

By keeping their IP straight, i am refering to the 40k universes massive self controdictory and every changing cannon. I understand why it changes, but it does make it difficult to keep up with.

And the Decree Passive has been in the cannon, since second ed if memory serves.

Being linked to the Ordo Hereticus hasn't though, and that was invented simply so they could be crow-bared into the Witch Hunter Codex. I mean, I like it that way, I like the idea of them being a Chamber Militant - just makes sense IMO - but I don't expect it to stay that way for much longer.

Anyway, my point isn't specific to the Sisters at all, it's to everything. I mean, for over a decade we had Veteran Space Marine Squads in our Marine armies and then suddenly one day they became 'Sternguard', and these 'Vanguard' popped out of no where. Suddenly they're just part of the fluff, and always have been, written into existence to sell a new set of models. And that's why 40K fluff changes - the need to sell more model kits.

BYE

ShatterCake said:

My personal favourite for someone wanting to uber out their gear compared to other players is to inform the group in general that if they start toting around heavy weapons and power armour thier opponents will get wind of it pretty quick and they'll start doing the same (i.e take a heavy flamer, well then your going to really need it). The players then pretty quickly begin to police themselves on more discrete weapon loadouts.

- Raith

Raith said:

Eh, even more realistic is if they are going around in such gear (being conspicuous), then enemies who plan on attacking them are going to do it in a way they think they can win, not a head on battle. Say: Collapse a building on them, snipe from under cover, mines and ambushes, net guns, servitors, cannon fodder, poison, do they sleep in their armor?, etc.

I think the idea is not to punish the player with good gear, but instead let him enjoy his equipment while not damaging the entertainment of the group. A character who wants to feel like an actual Assassin would probably need a pretty good gun/melee weapon. Rather than punish the whole group cus one crazy cleric managed to get an Eviscerator at rank 2 it's probably best to just craft challenges where he has fun and the rest of the group does too.