Honestly - I don't know you, and anything I say is a perceived attack on someone's character - but this attitude has always baffled me.

Some people take what is given and then forge ahead with it - adding their own ideas to it and changing what doesn't seem correct for the vision they are trying to portray. This goes in life as well as gaming - and these people are called leaders.

Some people take what is given and stop. They cannot - or will not - think beyond the confining walls provided for them by their leaders (in this case - the game designers) - these are called followers.

====

There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a follower - the vast majority of mankind in real life is made up of followers (in at least one aspect of their lives).

But please - be a good follower. If you will not take the time to be a leader (and being a leader in ANY capacity takes time and effort) - that is understandable - but a good follower accepts what is given. A bad follower complains that what was given was not enough.

====

In a gaming sense - the Imperium of Man - is an Imperium of Followers. Those followers are expected to obey - because they cannot lead the race to bettering itself.

The bad followers? Unhappy Imperial followers who are too busy complaining - and before it's too late - they're enslaved to one of the Ruinous Powers and the chance to complain is over.

====

Thomas Paine says it better:

"Lead, follow, or get out of the way. "

signoftheserpent said:

How do I run a game involving a small dynasty of Rogue Traders trying to become a very large dynasty of Rogue Traders?

In the game I'm running atm, the players discovered a space hulk filled with bugs. They looked at it, turned around and flew away. THey went to their nearest Forge World and used their Mechanicus contacts to track down the locations of some Space Marines. One of them had an inquisitorial contact and sent them an astropathic message asking them to provide some form of authority they could present to the Astartes in order to convince them to send aid. Eventually, through yet more wheeling and dealing, they managed to get a meeting with an Astartes, groomed themselves to make the best possible appearance, and talked via vox to the captain of a Strike Cruiser. He took it back to the Chapter Master and, thanks to the players interactions, resourcefulness and overall low cunning, they managed to organise for the Chapter Master to send a squad of terminators to the space hulk. Thus the players managed to earn the 600 achievement points required for objective two of their "Salvage from a Space Hulk" Grand endeavour - Obtain Military Support.

IF I ever throw in Necrons, it's not going to be an all out fight. It's going to be a creepy, lovecraftian mindfeth, where the players will be creeped out by a tomb they're trying to rob. I MAY throw in ONE damaged Necron Warror, give it a basic set of stats I'll pull out of the air and use a rule where every round it can make a toughness test, healing 1D5 wounds for every degree of success. They won't be fighting it... they'll be ESCAPING IT.

Rogue Trader isn't about fighting these aliens, it's about ripping them off and making a profit. If you and your players want to play a game which is all about blowing thing up, play DH or DW. Trader works better when players find a better way to succeed than fighting. Fighting, after all, is expensive. Who wants to pay to repair armour plating when you can simply buy out or sell out all of your problems? Don't blame the game if you are trying to run something else with the same book.

In other news, and on the thread topic, I managed to pick up Into the Storm myself the other day. Some of the other guys here might be bitching about it, but I found it covered everything I wanted it to. It's a fantastic addition to the Trader line and maintains the quality that the FFG guys are getting known for. It WILL, however, be much better when partnered with the Battleflet book coming out... now I can't wait to get my hands on that bad boy!

Medhia Nox said:

The obvious companion to your statement is, "But please - be a good leader." If this is not done, then the aspiring leader should consider the "get out of the way" option too.

Just throwing this out there. As for myself, I'm pretty happy with RT, but my expectations were that everything would come out slowly over a few years. I fel much better about starting a campaign of it now that Into the Storm is in my hands (previously, I've just run two one-shots using the on-line scenarios).

N0-1_H3r3 said:

I've pointed it out above, and would like to repeat it. Your response fails to address the key point raised by signoftheserpent. We got stuff on the history of the Calixis sector, some background on Port Wander, some freebie adventures that are firmly set in FFG's own little nichê of the 40K universe. So it's not that there's lack of stuff. It's just that the priority given to THIS material over canonical 40K material that is rightly considered integral to running a Rogue Trader game.

You know what? I can happily make up, from scratch, stuff about some hithertho unexplored nichê in the 40K universe, but I want FFG to give me the canonical 40K setting. If you can't do that for copyright reasons, or other IP strangling on behalf of GW, just say so up front. But any reasoning to the effect that the material that did make it into the page count deserves higher priority than canonical 40K elements looks very questionable.

In saying that, I don't mean to be the baddie. You know, I WANT to buy a 40k RPG. If FFG can't produce a RPG set in that cosmos, so be it. I'm not interested in "Koronus Expanse: the RPG". I want canonical 40K. It's like some people saying "Oh, I would've wanted to by Warhammer RPG - but I'm not interested in Runebound: The RPG."

Windjammer said:

Firstly I think you fail to appreciate that there is a hierachy of canonical. For Example people are talking about Necrons and Tau and Dark Eldar and Tyranids. As far as canon goes the Tau are on the wrong end of tha galaxy. Necrons havnt even at the point the adventure is taking place really become to be a threat to the imperium. The Tyranids incursions according to the cannon are also pretty much in the east and the south. Dark Eldar? I cannot think of another GW race which has been so under developed and resourced in main stream canon. I could almost say with confidence that the majority on this board would be happier that FFG brought out material for the squats in the Koronus expanse than the dark eldar. If the Eldar were missing or the Orks I could understand. They are truly mainstream. But even then they are tailored to the types you would encounter on the edge of imperial space. On the edges of imperial space you are unlikely to find craftworld eldar...you are more likely to find eldar pirates (how they were described incidentally in Rogue Trader 40k) reavers who have forsaken the eldar path, and as for orks freebooterz were the outcasts of choice for those ork players that didnt want to play one of the mainstream ork clans and thematically fit in with the Rogue Trader pirate/privateer lifestyle.

Secondly I think you fail to understand that Rogue Trader is not in 'Imperial Space' and thus metaphorically 'at the borders of mainstream canon' so the normal rules about what is canon and what isn't is almost against the spirit of the game. It is closer in fact to the flavour first edition of 40K 'Rogue Trader' where theres theres a haphazard expedition into the unknown beyond the imperial space. And what you will find beyond imperial space especially at the edge of the galaxy will be radically more diverse than what GW canon has to offer. Infact my greatest gripe is that there isnt a random alien generator (but there is in DH GM kit? how wrong is that!) or a decent random system generator rather than waht we got on the RT Gm kit. The

The point is that Rogue Traders have and always will if you read your fluff inhabit the part of the 40k universe which is enigmatic weird and beyond the imperium (canon). If you dont do that and expect your run of the mill tyranid/tau/dark eldar adverseries then you are not playing Rogue Trader to it's own canon. That why the character class was chosen as the standard bearer name for 40k first edition because at that time 40k canon wasnt fully developed and they had to choose a character to symbolise this grey area that allowed the players to play without gainsaying the non existent canon in the late 80'searly 90's. Of course 40k developed into a more mainstream Defined setting as the yaers. Rogue Trader is at the edge of that definition where canon slips away and is replaced by the players imagination, and thus is a return to the original setting of 40k where canon is not the salient issue. Infact the lack of canon at the edge of imperial space is integral to running a rogue trader game.

You're still talking from the point of view of Koronus Expanse the RPG, not 40k.

signoftheserpent said:

This is getting silly. And trust me I have posted some pretty silly, stupid, ignorant things in my time.

To say it is NOT 40K the RPG because it doesnt cover "canon" of what has been shown before is to say that EVERY FRICKING THING PUBLISHED BY GW/BL IS NOT CANON.

I mean honestly, before Dan Abnett wrote the Eisenhorne books, there was no info on the Scarus Secore, on Thracian Prime, on Gregor Eisenhorne, so does that mean Eisenhorne isnt canon?

Before Sandy Mitchell wrote the Commissar Caine novels, none of those worlds, regiments or folks existed, does that mean they are not canon?

Before GW released the Tau codex for 3rd edition Table Top, teh Tau didnt exist, so they are not canon even then? When were the necrons first mentioned? Was it in the earlier books and works of the "original" canon material?

Koronus is very much canon, as GW has entered into a license with another company to allow them to create information for a sector of their IP. Afterall if you look at the galactic map in the most recent rule book for TT, there you will see the words Calixis Sector on the map. Where in previous editions it was not there.

Everytime a author writes something new, be it a novel, a codex, a article for White Dwarf or whatever, if it was never anything mentioned before (like say, 90% of the material in the Horus Heresy novels), by your definition it is not canon.

I would love to have all the stats that you want as well. And honestly, most of them are out there, in real books from FFG/BI. Dark Eldar? Check, they are in Purge the Uncelan. Tau? Check they are in Deathwatch, with Vespids in the GMs Kit and Kroot in Rogue Trader. Eldar? Yes, in a frickin lot of books (Rogue Trader core, in Dark Heresy's Creature's Anathem, in Rogue Trader's Lure of the Expanse), Orks? Oh yeah. (Creature's Anathema, Rogue Trader core, a whole career path in Into the Storm). So yeah, Necrons are missing.

Oh yeah, Tyranids. Well you can have Genestealers from free in Final Sanction on the Deathwatch page, and more in Oblivion's Edge for free on the same page. Oh and then they are in Creature's Anathema, Deathwatch core rules, and a strain of them (for Rogue Trader) is found in Into the Storm on page 249, complete with a adventure hook involving Gene Stealers on a Space Hulk (well a Hazeroth Class Vessel at least).

Yes it would be nice if Rogue Trader had a broader bestiary. But it doesnt. Crying wont help, complaining wont help. I know, I did that when Dark Heresy came out, but now they are there, plenty of these critters. Sure, its in many books and it will cost money. But hey, honestly, most of these books are available at discount on Ebay or even as cheaper PDFs on Drive-Thru RPG, allowing you to buy them at way lower prices. And if the finances are aproblem, figure out what books you need first before you go get them and milk them until the next adventure.

The Imperium of Man is a large place. FFG can only cover what they are allowed to by their deal with GW and space available in the books. Honestly, if Rogue Trader was made a supplement for Dark Heresy instead as a new game of its own, it woudl have freed up rough 100 pages for more background, but guess what? It is its own game, for whatever its worth. If you find something lacking, take the initiative and make it up.

If that's the case, I'd like to point out that, during the interviews Ross/Sam have given Dark Reign, they have said that they are not allowed to cover areas of 40k covered by previous GW canon (such as established sectors, etc). As such, due to the terms of their licence, they are forced to write up their own sectors/areas of the 40k setting. Whether you like the FFG settings or not, there's nothing FFG can do about it. Complain to GW for taking away their chance to cover areas from the 40k history in the RPG if you have to complain to anyone.

Me, I'd have loved to see an Eisenhorn/Ravenor based book for Dark Heresy, covering the sectors involved in those novels, the politics of those sectors, all that good stuff. Equally, I'd have loved to have seen, in the future, a setting book for Deathwatch for the Armageddon Wars, covering the Ork invasions of that sector. Sadly, due to GW, those will never come into being.

Hence why we, as the fans of the game, should work together to come up with fan supplements that cover the things that FFG can't.

EDIT: Peacekeeper posted just before me, and whilst I may not agree with him on everything (such as me thinking Rogue Trader is the best gameline of the 40k RPG line, and that Ascension was actually pretty good and close to what I was expecting), I agree with him on this.

Peacekeeper_b said:

I thank you for your elaborate response. Like the poster above you who raised a pretty similar response, you didn't pick up the point I was making but a closely related one I didn't make. I wasn't talking about canon, I was talking about canonical elements of the 40K universe. As you point out quite rightly, the amount of canon in 1982 and in 2010 as regards 40K are two vastly different things, thanks to the gifted authors like Abnett who added to it so beautifully. However, on my understanding of "canonical" - and I apologize for not making that clear straight away, sincerely - the limit of quantity is a lot tighter. Canonical elements of a setting are those that typify it, are characteristic of it in the highest order. Just to illustrate by analogy to the RPG setting that got the highest definition of canon ever... the Forgotten Realms. In that setting, it is canonical that NPC #1337 (let's call him Khelben) killed NPC #051 in the year of XXXX at place ZZZZ. Realms canon is filled with thousands of such elements. Yet none of these are canonical in the more strict sense of telling you what's at heart of that setting. For instance, dark elves living in the underworld would be canonical of the setting in a way that NPC #051 wouldn't be.

And that's what I point out as regards the canonical Rogue Trader universe introduced in the original book whose cover graces the first page in the FFG version. Look to that book to see what really makes the 40k setting tick. It's not about every petty detail, but certain factions are just integral to this setting. A reincarnation of that game has to recapture the integral elements of that original setting, or else it fails to be a reincarnation and rather approximates something else. (In fact, this is a common complaint leveled at the current re-imagining of the Forgotten Realms, so the logic of these arguments are not peculiar to FFG at all!)

Now that "something else", let's call it "Calixis Sector: the RPG", could be deeply attractive in its own right (and like many here, I'll grant you that it is). But by definition, it is a lot narrower than the real thing. And quite oddly so, since the FFG book is massive, boasts a more extensive page count than Rick Priestley's original offering, and yet we're constantly re-assured that "packing the whole 40k cosmos into one book is not feasible". Well, I'm sorry but that re-assurance is proven wrong by historic precedent. 40k's factions, however sparsely spelled out, are a lot more integral - or canonical, if you will - to the 40K setting than a bloated career system or some write-up about an unexplored nichê in the 40k universe.

PS. I'm not even going to address the equation of "40k canon" with "imperial space", since a single look at Priestley's RT proves that wrong.

MILLANDSON said:

Thank you for pointing that out. I was indeed ignorant of this background information. Ah yes, it all makes sense now. Also, it alleviates me to look at future FFG offerings to see if the situation ever changes. Now I know that it won't.

Windjammer said:

As Millandson has said, FFG don't - generally speaking - have free reign to make sweeping or absolute declarations about the 40k universe as a whole or detail things much beyond the corners of the overall setting that exist for the sole purposes of the RPGs. Sometimes that changes - FFG were given the opportunity to define who the Deathwatch were and where they originated, for example - but for the most part, the Calixis Sector, Koronus Expanse and Jericho Reach are the parts of the galaxy that FFG have to do with as they see fit, but at the same time, are limited in their ability to delve into matters elsewhere in the setting.

And, quite frankly, the relatively narrow focus of the background - one sector per game, rather than a whole galaxy of variables and myriad threats (because there's far more out there than just the handful of forces that have models in the wargames) - allows for more specific detail, a more eclectic and more varied array of threats and situations and characters. It's a restriction beyond the control of anyone but a group of people at GW HQ, but it's one that brings opportunities with it.

People complain about the relatively small number of worlds and organisations detailed in the RPGs as they currently exist... imagine how much less detail there'd be if someone tried to describe the entire galaxy.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

This is why I like the FFG RPG stuff. If I want detail for other parts of the 40k setting, I can just buy the codex/novel/etc that covers that area. I'd much prefer brand new background and information than just stuff that is rehashed from other GW sources.

Windjammer said:

Windjammer said:

But many of those elements which you believe canonical to the 40k universe would simply not be when dealing with the 40k universe from a rogue trader's point of view. In a way yes you are correct Priestleys 40k is more about the 40k universe at large at large while Rogue Trader RPG deals with a smaller area of the imperium. But take away the Koronus expanse or the Calyxsis sector and you are still left with rogue traders and they are just as likely as characters (in some cases more likely) to deal with factions unknown to the imperium.

In short what would be more integrally thematic to a Rogue Trader game?

A rogue Trader who deals with an integral faction are necrons/tau/dark eldar/chaos?

Or a Rogue Trader who deals with (you own randomly generated alien race)

The former faction/antagonists of the the former are thematically more in keeping with Death Watch and the Ordo Xenos/inquisitors part of 40k

The latter is thematically more in keeping with Rogue Traders BECAUSE they are not canon or have a Canonical reference to the wider 40k mythos, weather its set in the Koronus Expanse or any other grid reference in the 40k universe.

Windjammer said:

Rick Priestly's Warhammer 40,000: Rogue Trader is no longer canonical. It has been updated, revised and changed countless times. It would make no sense for FFG (or any other company) to make a RPG based on the original setting that only a few of us "ahem" older patrons know much if anything about.

FFGs objective was to create/continue a game series based of MODERN 40K. As such, this game has more in common with Andy Hoar's Rogue Trader novel series (Rogue Star and Star of Damocles) then the original 40K of 1987 (or 1988?). It would be like DC Comics producing a RPG for its characters, but solely based on comics from the early 1980s. A modern fan (the target audience) would pick up the game and look at it and not be familiar at all with the characters, themes, styles and setting.

Sure, now the modern fans may stop and go "where are the Tau?" and so forth, but as a marketing scheme FFG is doing the right thing in making the purchase of thier future and further books worthwhile by adding in stats for such critters as time goes on in newer and newer books. Did they have to include Ogryn in Disciples of the Dark Gods? No, but Im glad they did. (still want Ratlings LOL).

If you are interested in setting the game in other sectors/places/worlds, there is a world of information out there, from Forge World Imperial Armour books to Black Library reference books (like the Sabbat Worlds Crusade supplement) as well as straight GW codices and the ever popular Black Library Novels.

If I had the Necron Codex I would go through and convert the entire thing to RT/DH/DW standards, but alas I do not.

And keep in mind, another thing FFG/BI had to think about when making this game is its playability. We all know that a majority of the Imperium in fairly ignorant on xenos races and chaos powers (even if Rogue Traders are not) but if it was nothing but "canon" critters, encounters, worlds and gear then no player would ever be surprised or truly involved in the emotion/feel of the game. As while they may force themselves to roleplay fear and wha tnot, they would still, as the player, know exactly what they are getting into in just about every encounter.

As for how my PC is not Canon, that is true. Kaladas Ravensbane will never be official canon in the setting and whatever he does will never be reflected in novels, fluff or even future RPGs (similar to how in the Eye of the Old World WF-Battles Netcampaign in the mid 1990s had a massive in game impact on Mousillon but a few years ago when I bought Knights of the Grail WFRP sourcebook I could not for the life of me find the name of my netcampaign character who saved Mousillon from the curse ) but at least me and the other players know that the starting point of our characters adventure is CANON, as FFG/GW present it.

Also remember that WFRP, Blood Bowl and Warhammer Fantasy Battles are not even Canon with each other. Despite sharing the same "original" world.

Disclaimer: Technically Kaladas Ravensbane is canon, as I did buy a Collectors Edition of Rogue Trader and his name does appear on that warrant and on the list of "Known Rogue Traders" published by FFG. Now if his name ever appears in a supplement or under a quate, who knows, but doubtful.

Peacekeeper_b said:

It's possible; I've looked through the "Known Rogue Traders" list a couple of times with a mind to using a name from it. I ended up creating one of my own in the end, but the possibility is still there...

Peacekeeper_b said:

Now that is a very good post.

Having read my way through most of it now, I think that Into The Storm impoves the basic Rogue Trader product so much that it's likely to become my prefered 40k RPG. It added so many details that the core rulebook left out - not least in giving rules for orbitaland sub orbital capacity transports and the like - and the two new races seemed very well developed to the point where I could see even an Ork fitting in with the right crew. I would really like to see a detailed Elder sourcebook though, as I have a hankering to run a game where the PCs are Elder corsairs. Also, since playing the old Space Fleet game I have really loved their spacecraft designs.

signoftheserpent said:

Wow. Seriously?

Into the Storm is a great book full of useful material. It's not our fault you don't have any money to buy every supplement? Every supplement? LOL

This is better than the @!#$ who want female Space Marines.

Gimme, gimme, gimme.

professor_kylan said:

Yes, you get it!

MILLANDSON said:

And that's the real answer. I had totally forgotten about that.

Wodan said:

Wow, seriously what?

I didn't mention female space marines, at all.

Why are the two scenario examples i posted so terrible? I would think they are exactly the sort of thing the average RT gm would write. Is wanting to use canon factions/antagonists not allowed then? If so then RT is not a 40k game.

Wodan said:

signoftheserpent: I don't know about anyone else, but I think what irritated me most about your posts was the tone. You are quite right that there is a lot of "canonical" information missing from the books, but you came across as very arrogant and belligerent in expressing this. I don't care how you play. I just don't like the tone you are using.

I assumed there was a good reason for them to lack information regarding some of the races that you are speaking of. Perhaps it was a game balance issue. Perhaps it was a “canon” date issue. Perhaps it was the notorious “Games Workshop won't let us do X” issue.

I never assumed they were doing it to spite me. I never assumed that it was a ploy to make money. For my money, this company produces some of the most well made games that I have had the pleasure to read through. Your argument made it seem as if they were doing it as a personal slight against you. I also find it frustrating that you seem to be assuming that anyone who knows (and enjoys) all the "canon" would not like this product. I have been reading/playing 40k canon for 20 years and I love these games. "Canon" has changed over time and I have found that the only thing consistent about GW canon is that you can never trust what they say is apart of it. But I would never try to speak for anyone other than myself when it comes to my opinion.

I can see how frustrating it would be for you if you want to fight Necrons or Tyranids. Personally, I don't miss them. I have always felt that Necrons and Tyranids are ridiculously powerful. From a design standpoint, most of the tabletop enemies don't make sense for this game. Deathwatch, yes. But for Rogue Trader I would expect Eldar, Orcs, Dark Eldar, Humans and any Xeno I felt like making up.

Are they perfect? No. But I don't expect perfection on first release. There are tons of reasons why some information may not exist in a book or why there might be mistakes. I hope they finally release what you are looking for. Good luck in your search for the right 40k RPG for you. I am pretty sure FF is the only company in 23 years to gain permission to create a RPG for 40k.