souljawebb said:

Actually, it's been stated that the background in the Deathwatch rulebooks is canon, though I can't find the reference just at the moment. It's all approved by GW long before publication, and FFG have been given the opportunity to define the history, origins and structure of the Deathwatch.

No, an RPG published by Fantasy Flight doesn't suddenly become canon just because they produced it... but it does become canon because GW's IP department have approved it.

It's all canon. Whether or not you agree with it, or choose to accept it, is an entirely unrelated matter.

Sigma 957 there you go a nice one there.

miss dee said:

Well my impression from Deathwatch is that Ross Watson has been working hard to bring that group spirit across with Squad modes, Oaths to be taken as a group and all.

As such I would go for sth personal. First of all, the players should choose it and it should relate to sth about the way they understand themselves as a group.

So I'll probably go for something like the 'Brotherhood of ...' (or similar) where the blanks are to be filled by the players. If they fill in Sigma 957 it's their choice of, course, but I'd be a bit disappointed.

Maybe more sth like Brotherhood of The Emperor's Wrath or Brotherhood of Divine Protection or... Brotherhood of Steel.

Alex

The brother hood of Canon Whining!

crisaron said:

Lol. Nope, kill-teams come with 10 brothers or so max. ;-)

Alex

FatPob said:

They are GW

N0-1_H3r3 said:

how can you use something to back your case and say you cant find the reference at the same time

souljawebb said:

I'll make the prediction: if the game is a best-seller (and it probably will be), you will see most of the stuff in a GW publication some time soon. So you can prepare yourself for what's likely to come in here.

As for what you personally consider Canon, that's your business and probably not of too high public interest. Everybody, including me, has their own interpretation of the 40K setting, whether they admit it or not.

Alex

souljawebb said:

Memory. As it stands, I'm quite busy at the moment - working on future supplements for Rogue Trader, and haven't the time to trawl through every designer diary and podcast and interview made by the FFG gus about Deathwatch to find a single reference.

souljawebb said:

Just a point of interest: No they aren't. Black Library is a division/sub-company of GW, but BL and GW are run by different people. Also, whether you consider the RPG canon or not is moot, because objectively, it is canon, because Games Workshop have said it is canon.

Also, for confirmation of Deathwatch being entirely canon, you can see the interview Ross Watson and Sam Stewart carried out with Dark Reign, for which I was the interviewer, and N0-1 was one of the audience, so we heard it straight from the horses' mouths.

As for you not caring what people think of your writing, you do understand that debating in a poor manner (bad grammar, punctuation, layout, etc) will mean people are more likely to ignore your points or think less of you, right? This is because, if you can't be bothered to put the time into writing properly, most people aren't going to put the time into trying to read your comments.

My stance? It's all canon, which is to say materials supported by GW. That doesn't mean that you have to listen to every little bit of the material, or even believe that it is any good, but it's all there. Take the Star Wars universe and the debacle that came up with Lucas' introduction of "midichlorians" as a way of measuring strength in the Force (rather than the aura approach represented in Anderson's books, for example). And there was much NERDRAGE!

With regards to your souljawebb's arguments, I must admit that having to rewrite someone's post just so that you can begin to make sense of it can be... frustrating. More so since the rewrite might not actually bear any resemblance to the point that the original poster was trying to bring across. On the other hand, this particularly forum might not be the best venue for forwarding that particular type of argument.

I've often found that rather than trying to argue with someone whether the material is official or not, talk about its flaws and merits. In short, does the material do well in the setting? Is it flexible enough or it is a somewhat verbose prattling that doesn't really say anything? Do the rules, in your opinion, really reflect the most elegant solution to what they are trying to abstract? You'll still probably find that there will be a positive trend towards the official rules and writings, but that's not particularly surprising is it? This is the official forum after all.

It's all good until someone loses an eye.

Kage

MILLANDSON said:

Point number one I was never debating I just responded to the OP with my thoughts then BAM im trolled for not agreeing with you and NO-1 and suddenly I have bad grammer whatever the point is your debating I mearly stated my thoughts which I am aloud to on this forum you telling me im wrong in a rather rude fashion I might add doesnt matter to me I can play the game however I want. My thoughts stand that only GW is canon thats how I will play and thats all that matters TO ME I shared my thoughts with the OP if he chooses to use my thoughts then so be it but you dont need to TROLL me for having them. And as for your think less of em comments once again dont care what you think of me dont know you and dont care to.

souljawebb said:

There is no need whatsoever to get so irate. You posted, and I quote: " the FACT is that only things written and published by Gamesworkshop themselves could ever be considered canon. " Now, you're welcome to that opinion, but you attempted to present it as unquestionable truth (prefacing a thought with "the FACT is" gives that impression), which is a different matter entirely.

No, we have no right to question your opinion, and what you consider to be canon is your business (though the idea of a personal canon is almost a contradiction in terms); that much is true. But when you present erroneous statements as if they are absolute truth, then you should expect people to point it out, rather than getting defensive and throwing around accusations of trolling.

At this point there is no more to say on the matter one way or another.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

1. I never said I have a personal canon

2. You have been trolling me

3. I did not give any erroneous statements everything I said has been published be GW and you have yet to provide one link or any material from gamesworkshop that is contrary to waht I have said.

4. Deathwatch kill teams do have squad leaders, however the game mechanic is you ick a new leader everygame so you can take advantage of all the different options thats a game mechanic there is a difference with a rule in the game and how they would really operate its a game rule its stupid to think that a military unit which all space marine chapters are would not have a actual leader who reports to the watch captain the Op asked how would others do squad desination you have yet to provide a answer to that question I answered you trolled end of discussion!!!

No offence, but if you think N0-1 is trolling you, you obviously have never met an actual internet troll. Also, given that the Deathwatch RPG is just as canon as anything else officially published about the 40k setting, your comment of " the FACT is that only things written and published by Gamesworkshop themselves could ever be considered canon " is erroneous, because you have stated it as fact when it is entirely incorrect.

It's also probably best not to go around throwing accusations of trolling at people who aren't doing it, especially when the person you are accusing of trolling is one of the writers for the 40k RPG lines.

MILLANDSON said:

which means what to me

souljawebb said:

It means that you're accusing the authors of the game itself, one who has far more interaction with Games Workshop and/or Black Library than you or I, of trolling. If anyone here fits the definition of a troll it's you I'm afraid- congratulations on getting me to bite.

Your argument started off pretty reasonably, but when you encountered a reasoned response that shot holes in it you went all crazy and started writing huge blocks of text that were almost unreadable.

If you want to convince people you're correct on points like this you need to construct a more reasoned, better formatted argument at the least, and then provide evidence as to where they are mistaken. Lashing out and switching from a fact based argument to an opinion based one doesn't usually end well.

Hi everyone, long time lurker first time poster. Regarding the original post, while there is something really cool about Polaria's idea of squad designation constantly evolving to fit the mission, it seems very 40k to come up with some sort of kill team or group name that sounds epic, crunchy, and probably violent- I'm really liking Ariolan's concept of an earned title that could reflect the teams primary M.O., with fitting squad symbol to match.

MILLANDSON said:

Wait... the latter get preferred treatment in here?

Alex

Welcome to the pack, Charmander!

Yeah, I like that idea of 'earned' titles and designations a lot. perfect foor for bannesr and purity seals me thinks. After a while a squad could have racked up a lot of titles, like the heroes of old.

For example: [inquistor]: "Esteemed Governor, I believe your troubles will soon be at an end, Let me introduce you to kill-team Theta: Guardians of the Breach, Ethereal Hunters, Keepers of the Key, Honoured Companions of the Saint, Protectors of Scynthilla."

Charmander said:

my only response to this is dude are u for real I havent trolled nyone if defending yourself is trolling then by all means call me one, and please show me one reasoned response besides yours.

i stated my thoughts then bam NO-1 "ahhhhhhh you dont know what your talking about"

also how do you know how much interaction I have with games workshop or BL for that matter

I have no idea if this is even remotely canon but its the system I'm using for my campaign (not set in the Jericho reach BTW)

Each Killteam has a fixed designation, in the case of the players this is Draconis. There is a list of names which are assigned to kill teams as they are formed and returned to the list when the team is destroyed/disbanded. The Draconis name is being brought back into service for this brand new team after 100 years retirement in honour of the last team to bear the name (who were wiped out doing something very heroic which I will think of before the campaign starts in a couple of weeks). By tradition, the Draconis name comes with the Dragon Sword. A best quality power sword which is carried by the squad leader as a badge of office.

Wargamer said:

This is similar to what I had in mind actually. Good idea. Are you allowing the squad leader to use the sword regardless of renown then, just a GM perk?

ak-73 said:

Why is it a surprise that FFG Staff get preferred treatment on the FFG Forums ?

Bilateralrope said:

I'm personally not expecting any preferential treatment, nor have I heard of any reason why I should get preferential treatment, and I'm not FFG staff. I'm a freelancer, hired as and when required, nothing more.

I'm not keen on being accused of being a troll just for contradicting a statement which I view to be in error, but then, I don't think many people are particularly fond of being accused of things.

I think the problem here is that it is not clear that souljawebb actually realizes that N0-1_H3r3 has actually done writing for FFG for the 40k rpgs.