The one thing that makes me hesitate here is that if it's a Chaos Marine book rather than a Chaos book, I'm betting even more of the rule system will be rehashed. The main thing that bummed me out about DW is the RP section and character background and motivations portion was pretty light. It's hard enough to RP out a bio-engineered super soldier, it's even harder (for some of us) to RP out someone willing to give everything up to Chaos. I'd love to see a deep look at the inner workings and motivations of Chaos, I'm just fearful they'll have trouble delivering.

@Uncertain: It's nice to see someone else who can rationally view 'cost per hour of fun' - I fully agree with you. Though perceived value at the time of sale is still an issue I get stuck on. To me, the $60 core book, despite my logical brain saying "you'll get more out of this than that terrible movie that just came out...and it's even cheaper when you remember how much you just paid to fill your gas tank this week" still causes pain when I plunk the cash down on the counter

MILLANDSON said:

If i am able to buy two books for a total of 60$ and would need to shell around 30-35$ out for future rule and background expansions instead of buying one book for 60$ and paying 60$ for expansions i would go with the first option. Is there a different way to do this equation? I am not aware of one. And that is even before the "better integration of system expansions" argument comes into play. Ripping off customers on 20$ to 30$ is a sound business decision though, in response to Alex´s original post. It is especially sound if customers are dumb enough to let it be done not twice or thrice, but four times over by now An alternative product model does exist, and is very successfull, claiming it to be subpar for the customer , without doing the equation seems weird. I for my part have decided to definitely not buy it, because of the reasons stated. It is a clear rip off decision which i will not support.

tkis said:

I'm seeing it from a different perspective:

a) when DH came out it was a huge success. It was the 40K RPG. All further systems have diluted the brand of it somewhat. In fact newer stuff tends to make older stuff look obsolere, although it's a perfectly good game.

b) At some point gamers realize the way things work: FFG bring out a new product line, publishes some material and then moves its main attention to a new product line. Will BC the last system for 40K RP? Or will there be a new core rulebook every year? If so, how can they still support the older games? Every further system will end up marginalizing one's own favourite game more in attention and ressources. To make a long story short, I am not sure how appreciative gamers will be if they come under the impression that FFG does effectively system hopping, always on the run, always dishing out new RPG systems because the core rulebooks always sell best. If they leave the older systems more or less in the dust, why bother with a new system that is soon to get neglected also?

I'm not saying the latter is the case or necessarily will be the case but it's a legitimate concern to have with the strategy pursued.

And let me just re-iterate again that from a gamers pov being able roleplay Chaos is a boon.

Aöex

ak-73 said:

I am not sure if I agree with your premise that the DH line is unsupported. Firstly, because it was the first of the 40K role-play line it does have a multitude of existing material - perhaps with more 'Ancension' level material needed being the only quibble - and the product release still seems healthy, with multiple scenario releases, and the recent 'Blood of Martyrs' release. I think FFG have done a good job of paying attention to all three lines thus far - although I can see more attention on DW as it has the fewest current products.

And I don't see the other RPGs as diluting the line at all - if anything they provide more diversity to the 40K role-playing experience, and offer opportunities for mixing the systems.

However, it would have been better to have had one system core rulebook, and supplements for the various different systems that now exist - in essence just like many other RPG systems already do, even the TT game follows that principle (well, almost).

Charmander said:

In fairness, the Adeptus Astartes are born, bred and brainwashed for violence. If they aren't in combat, they're training or praying. There's not a lot else to know about a space marine's character or motivation. Seriously, they don't even budget that much time for sleeping or eating since they have bio-upgrades that greatly reduce their dependence on such things. I think the fluff schedule I saw in one of the TT supplements gave them a whole 1 hour every day of "leisure time" and even that was recommended to spent "in contemplation of the Emperor."

I'm not saying you can't RP a space marine, I'm just saying they're all cut from a pretty specific mold. Add your own personality quirks as you see fit. Their motivation is "serve the Emperor!" Now that I think about it, if you could get a space marine in a position where he can't simply kill things in the name of the Emperor (or return to base to rejoin his chapter) you could probably run a pretty interesting story about him searching for a purpose or motivation other than the battlefield.

Hopefully the Chaos book will provide more in this regard, however, because I do agree that getting in the right mindset will be more difficult than any other book so far (and far more malleable than a space marine's options.)

Why do people keep ignoring the obvious reason, even though it's been stated twice buy myself and MILLANDSON!?

If I only own DH/RT/DW, and an expansion for playing Chaos/Eldar/whatever comes out for one of the game lines I don't own, I have to go out and buy two books!

You all seem to be taking it for granted that not everyone buys in to every game line. And that an expansion book for Rogue Trader doesn't help someone who only plays Dark Heresy and only has Dark Heresy books, or vice versa. Suddenly you need to go out and buy the core book and expansion in question, or you just don't buy it at all.

The only way for it to work perfectly would be if they made similar expansion books for the other lines (so a "how to play Chaos" book for DH, RT, and DW). Now THAT is something that would be an unsound business decision.

Blood Pact said:

They already have a "how to play chaos" for DH, it is called the Radical's Handbook. The systems all have some major issues when you try to cross characters over from one to another, characters in DH/RT do not have speciific abilities against a horde, DW weaponry seems to be on a slightly larger scale. What a lot of us want is One 40k core book, that streamlines the rules for all of the systems to make them mesh better, possibly rethink the unnatural traits, allows for a smother transition from one game to another. After all it is all one setting, at one point or another characters from all three main books will interact in someway with eachother. MILLANDSON did mention this is due to some constraints from GW and not really FFG's intention, if that is the case it still sucks maybe they should broker a new deal.

Blood Pact said:

Because bringing out a consolidated core rulebook for the 40K RPG would be a good decision, pricing it around 25$ and bringing further expansions as expansions to the general rules at about 30-35$ this way you still pay the price of a full core book of the current hairsplitting system, but have the freedom of choice what to add to your gaming library,maiking further additions more cost effective without having to pay for the same redundant 150-200 pages again and again and again.

Considering the quality of past FFG products associated with 40K, I can garauntee you that the Radical's Handbook won't hold a candle to Black Crusade, as far as playing a servant of Chaos goes. Especially since the Radical's Handbook isn't about letting you play a chaos worshipper.

And yes, I know exactly what you want, I play WW's games. However, it's too late to be converting the lines over to that style for no good reason, when they're so **** new. Maybe if they do a 2nd edition of them all...

And some of your complaints ring rather hollow, they're not reprinting 150-200 pages, they're not even reprinting 100 pages. Recall that character creation in all the game lines is different, so they're not reprinting that, and while the areas concerning careers/specialties are similar, none of it is a reprint either, except for a few paragraphs of "now we're at the next step, where you blah blah blah..." , which is alright because there's some redundancy in the WW books too, even with the one core rulebook.

So assumin ALL of Dark Heresy's chapters 3 (skills), 4 (talents), 7 (playing the game) and 8 (GMing) are reprints, that brings us to a grande total of 87 pages. And when you factor in artwork and that they're not word for word the same all the way, it's actually less than that.

Blood Pact said:

That isn't exactly true. I've used Creatures Anathema with Rogue Trader without any need to refer to the Dark Heresy book.

Yes, putting a book in another line makes it less likely that a person will look at it. It may make certain things harder to use. But the systems are compatible enough that you can easily get some use out of an expansion for any of the game lines.

If needing it to be a stand alone book is what it takes for the book to be produced, I'll happily pay the extra $10 for repeated (hopefully with all the most recent errata) core rules.

RedMike said:

Reread what I wrote. It's not my premise.

Blood Pact said:

Because repetition doesn't make it anymore believable?

RedMike said:

Thus you should unify the game lines.

RedMike said:

Nonsense, they want to increase profit by branding what are normally campaign sourcebooks as stand-alone games. That and only that is that the truth, everything else is marketing hogwash .

RedMike said:

Intentionally so in order to be able to justify a new full game at full price. Plus they didn't want to put up with the effort of creating a unified approach and forsake the above marketing trick.

RedMike said:

You know it's one thing if a company decides on a business strategy for their own profit and at the expense of the customer. If a company thinks it has the clout... I consider that legitimate. But it's another thing to try to sell the public hogwash. Deathwatch could have as well been released as campaign book of 250 pages, even containing some content in it RoB too, if you cut out the redundant stuff.

The descriptions of the setting can be unified, saving space. The basic mechanics of chargen are the same (roll characteristics, determine wounds, spend xp) and don't have to be fully explained over again. A combined armoury would be much shorter than the trivial combination of both system's chapters because the main part are the gear descriptions which are largely the same. A unified rank system could have been implemented. Etc etc etc.

I don't even know why we're debating this. Countless of RPG systems have proven that such an approach is possible. They didn't want to because of the customer but because of profit. Legitimate but I don't believe anyone telling me that the motivation is anything else.

Guys - stop trying to fool FFG's customers, it's not becoming of you.

Alex

deinol said:

You are correct sir, but allow me to elaborate.

Books like Creatures Anathema are quite simple to use interchangably between the lines, in fact I imagine more than a few supplements are made with some degree of flexibility in mind.

But a supplement entirely devoted to letting you play a servant of Chaos, fully fleshed out with new homeworlds and careers (cause it would need them, otherwise, it's not really comparable to what Black Crusade is going to be, if it's just a bunch of advanced career ranks that modify the standard DH careers) would not be so easy to tranfer between systems. Dark Heresy characters can be plugged in to Rogue Trader with not too much difficulty, yes, but it doesn't work so well in the other direction, and even DH to RT, there is some discrepancy between what you get just tacking on an extra 5,000 XP to a Dark Heresy character, and what you get from a starting RT character.

In simplest terms, employing such a supplement with the wrong game line would be pounding a square peg through a round hole. You can do it, but it won't really be a good fit.

ak-73 said:

Totally agree. While people put up with it and keep buying the increasingly questionable corebooks, FFG will keep pumping them out at the increasing expense to their existing game(s). I predict an Eldar game next year, and (shudder) an Ork one the year after that ...

schoon said:

If they released an Eldar book I would definitely buy it. Pre-order even.

Adam France said:

was kind of hoping for a Mechanicus series. This whole thing is exploitative. BUT, how long have we waited for 40k RPG? Do i love it? hell yeah whats not to love with all theat grim darkeness and mansauce! Do we all love it? looks like it, 'cause we are making it viable enough for them to put out another core series, we all get pasionate on the forums and there are bucket loads of posts on the 40k pages..

I run my own business and the bottom line is profit. For me and my staff, we need the income coming and our overheads met. FFG is doing the same and paying a licence for these games as well, which I bet includes a share of profits to GW.

So, do you want DH, RT, DW and now DC supported for, well, forever? I am not prepared to take the risk this will disappear again any time soon, So i am voting with my wallet. Hell FFG exploit me more Colectors editions do the Tarot deck anything but dont let these systems die because they will be an aweful long time gone!.oh, but do it with quality courtesy and great Customer services. ie keep up the good work.

Really? Deathwatch could have just been some campaign book for Dark Heresy or Rogue Trader? That is an absolutely awful idea, and I'm glad they decided to 'cheat' me by making me buy it as a core book. I'd rather have the full rules all contained, instead of needing to lug around another book along with it for the important bits. Not to mention the changes required to make it fit in to DH or RT.

Not to mention, a supplement isn't going to get as many supplements of its own as a core book.

But the current setup we have is hardly exploitative, so quit crowing about it you jackasses. It's much less than 100 reprinted pages in each of the core books, we're not being cheated or taken to the cleaners. Rogue Trader isn't a "campaign sourcebook", neither is Deathwatch. This isn't D&D and they're not Dark Sun or the Forgotten Realms, where you can take all your basic classes and races and just play them in new (albeit very interesting) settings. They're whole new games.

As for the countless systems that have proven that having a single core book full of rules... what countless? The only two successful ones were WW's current line, and D&D sorta (the default D&D setting was Greyhawk, remember). Oh, and the original World of Darkness line was more like what we have with the 40K games FFG is producing, and it was massively successful.

But hey, don't let me spoil your nerdrage with my logic and reason. Take a page from AK-73, he certainly won't let something like that slow him down.

Huros said:

Exactly. It's okay if FFG seeks to make profit. I said this before. Profit means ensured continuance of the product lines. But then you have people trying to sell you that it's not because of profit but all for the sake of customer - please! I mean I can even understand a company not wanting to say "We do this because of profit." That would sound uncaring. But why don't some of the posters here just say: "It's a business decision." That's it. It doesn't need more explanation, finished.

And what Adam hinted at is actually something I am scared of. Corebook after corebook. Do you think that FFG will shell out 5 to 8 sourcebooks each for 5 or 6 or more game lines? And if FFG only puts out 2 sourcebooks for DH a year, I mean, that's like saying: this system is obsolete.

Dark Heresy was a smash hit . And I think with the path outlined by Adam, they'd be diluting the brand. Why is D&D still in business? Not because of the mechanics of any edition, they are sub-par. Not because of worlds of Forgotten Realms or Dragon Lance, there is other wonderful fantasy worlds. It's for one reason only: the brand. When people think of Jazz, they think Louis Armstrong. When they think of RPGs, they think D&D. If I was in charge at FFG, I would have tried to build the brand first and foremostly.
I'm not claiming that I'm necessarily right here but.. let's just say I wouldn't have a good feeling about the many corebook approach.

Still it's their company and I wouldn't let anyone else tell me how to run a company of my own either. But I'd listen to other people.

Alex

ak-73 said:

I get the impression FFG, rightly or wrongly, will only listen to a change in sales figures.

Huros said:

I've heard the 'don't criticise too loudly, or we may end up with nothing again' argument before here, and I don't like it. Yes, of course FFG needs to make a profit. However, what you're explicitly saying there is ... 'I don't care how bad a book might in fact be, if it's got 40K RPG on the cover I'm buying it'. That is not a recipe for great sourcebooks. It gives no incentive for FFG to up their game, (or if you prefer 'keep it up').

Listen, I question -seriously- this business model as a customer, as it isn't producing books that particularly excite me above half.

To me, I honestly cannot see that having an endless string of deliberately seperate and narrowly focused RPGs in the setting is better than taking the DH rules GW gave/sold to FFG, adding the Ascension sourcebook (or something like it) to flesh it out, then giving 'campaign sourcebooks', that work within the expanded DH core rules but can add tweaks and flourishes for each campaign type. This would mean NO repeat information would have been necessary, and each and every campaign type would have been intercompatible.

The campaign sourcebooks could have great expanded the breadth of the 40K RPG as a whole by now, and would have stripped away the utterly artificial need for 'a DW equipment manual', 'a RT equipment manual', etc etc.

Seriously how can anyone claim the existing way is better than this? The mind boggles.

We could have also had campaign sourcebooks that by the way detail a part of the setting, for example;

A Mechanicus Campaign Sourcebook.

An Eldar Campaign Sourcebook.

Urrgh ... even if you must ... an Ork Campaign Sourcebook.

Along the way I'd have liked to see the default setting of Calixis/Koronus begin to receive more detail too, and regular soft cover adventure module releases helping to bed in the game types. Quality adventure modules can be banged out very quickly folks and DO NOT require hard covers.

Yes I enjoy roleplaying in the 40K setting, but I don't believe FFG are doing as good a job as I'd hoped. I'm finding I've gone from buying each and every book sight unseen, to now checking first and not buying about a third of new books. I believe the fluff content has dropped both in quantity and quality across the board, and judging from the morass of rules dispute threads littering these boards the contradictory rules caused by the nonsense of 'seperate games' are far from desirable. Some is better than none, it's true, but don't tell me it's raining when in fact FFG are pissing down my back.

I understand what people are saying about their concern over the release of so many core rulebooks, but we have to remember what form FFG acquired the license in. They got into working on this game when it was originally to be 3 distinct RPGs based around the same system. Rogue Trader and DH are distinct RPGs that happen to work quite well together because the power level of Ascension and Rogue Trader are so similar. DH and DW do not work well together, because they are different games based on the same system.

FFG cannot retroactively go back and rewrite the plan from the ground up to work with a 1 core book, many sourcebooks approach. They inherited the DH core rulebook built around the idea of a trilogy of games based on the same general system. The DH corebook that they inherited would not have supported this approach.

I would like to see BC link very closely with DH because the games seem to have similar enough settings (two sides of one coin even) to allow us to use sourcebooks between the games. I would very much like to see BC start at DH powerlevel and expand in the same way (level 1-8, then a dark-Ascension), so that we can use the sourcebooks from each between the two games very readily.

It is a shame that with each core rulebook there must be rules reprinted and sections of each core book are rendered pretty uninspiring to fans of the other games. But it is important to remember the way they set about this project, and the current status of it. Not all 40k RPGers play all of the games, and many only play one. Each needs to be a standalone product. Hopefully in 40k RPG 2.0 we will see them rethink the whole system from the ground up to accommodate all 4 levels and styles of gameplay, maybe receiving one 40k RPG corebook and then sourcebooks for the 4 specific subsets of the 40k RPG, but I somehow doubt that. It's not like most RPGs where everything branches directly off the corebook, the 40k RPGs are all vastly different games built on a framework of similar rules. The only thing we really see repeated from core rulebook to core rulebook are the actual rules of combat and skill tests, and some fluff.

Adam France said:

For the record, my arguement is "your criticisms are weak and based on flawed reasoning". Though I do see that people have stopped shrieking about there being 200 pages of material reprinted between the core books, so all my 'hard' work wasn't for nothing (honestly, I just flipped to the table of contents and counted the number of pages in the Skills, Talents, Playing the Game, and GM sections).

Adam France said:

And you all continue to ignore the fact that making everything some sort of campaign sourcebook that built on top of Dark Heresy is hardly a perfect business model itself, because all you're turning around and doing is forcing people to buy Dark Heresy and other supplements, even if all they want to play is Rogue Trader or Deathwatch.

What you're suggesting is not the model that WW is using, though it is very very close to it. The core WoD book is for making mortals, every subsequent book builds off that, with vampire for the most simple and probably well known 'splat' for me to draw upon as an example. Either the various skills, talents, player and GM rules, and maybe even the setting would need to be all contained in their own little book, with nothing else, making for a very bland product. The WoD gets away with this because there are no races or classes, everyone is making a mortal, while being a vampire or werewolf (or whatever) is the relatively simple addition of a further template on top of the standard mortal creation system. In this theoretical model the core book of the 40K line would need to be more, it'd pretty much need to be what we got in the Dark Heresy book.

It would suffer for this though, for one thing, the core rules would have needed to be a bit more robust and flexible, to be able to accomidate the later games all the better. And there would also be the risk of the DH game suffering for the need to be able to integrate the others, whether by having its pagecount eaten up by the rules, or what have you. See, where this fictional DH differs from the one we have, is that it was made with being the basis for the future games in mind, which does bring some inherent differences tot he equation we have on the table. As soon as the real DH book was published they were pretty much on a set path they couldn't change.

The system that WW uses for its World of Darkness Line, with one book that contains all the core rules of the game, and other supplements adding various supernatural creatures on top of it for playablilty was specifically designed, from the ground up out of whole cloth. They looked at what they had done before, with Masquerade and Apocalypse, and how none of those games worked perfectly with crossover because their rules were all different despite being built off the same foundation (more different than what we have between DH/RT/DW), and decided to make some changes to accomidate matters when they created the New World of Darkness. That's the primary reason it works, because it was specifically built to all build off the same core rules, it's not some kind of flipping accident, they had worked 13 years on the old model and knew exactly what they could do to unify the ruleset for all the games, and let them build it in a more modular way. I've been playing WW games for over 10 years, so I think I know what I'm talking about.

The supplements built on top of this fictional DH wouldn't be some tiny little book that doesn't cost you much, despite people's previous ramblings on the matter claiming that they would. You'd spend your $60 on DH, and then you'd go and spend nearly as much on the supplement to play Deathwatch, or whatever, because contrary to what's been said there's less than 100 pages that get reprinted between the various books, so they're still going to be about 300 pages, and would probably be bumped up to a full 400 with the addition of more fluff or something, or unless you wanted to stick everyone with DH's weapon tables, then you could probably drop things down to 300. But in the end, you're still being left with two albeit fantastic, but also fat and weighty books to lug around for your gaming needs. The core book for the WoD is only half the size of any of the DH/RT/DW core books, so it's not too much of a hassle to carry around with you in addition to the 400 page Vampire, Mage or whatever book you have.

Which brings us to one of the worries of the player base at hand, longterm support. As merely supplements of DH itself, how would we know that RT and DW would get the amount of support that they're getting right now? And of course, there's still the ever present, and ever ignored, problem for those people who would say, "What do you mean I have to buy Dark Heresy if I want to play Space Marines? That's another $60!"

I do agree with you on one thing, I think it's way too soon for them to come out with Black Crusade, another year perhaps and they chould have brought it out, given Deathwatch more time to establish itself, and stabilize the whole gameline with additional supplements for all three of the main games. But I can see some good reasons for not waiting either, because we don't really have any sort of 'evil' game right now. Radical's Handbook doesn't really let you play a Chaos game, it does help with it a bit, but it doesn't enable you much more than the base Dark Heresy book does on its own.

So yeah, you can talk about how you'd like it if they'd done it another way, but don't talk to me like it's some perfect business model that they passed up onto squeeze us for more money. You can serve it up, but that's a bull sandwhich I'm not going to eat.

Adam France said:

People claim the existing way is better because not every customer has the same needs or desires that you do.

Yes, BI/FFG could have had everything be created for one line of games, centred around the DH corebook. And the game would probably be out of print by now and no longer supported. Supplement fatigue would have killed it. New gamers would be daunted by the sheer number of supplements while old ones would be satisfied with the huge numbers already on their shelves. This is a well known and recognised phenomenon in the RPG industry.

Releasing them as seperate game lines allows people who are only interested in DW to focus on the DW supplements, without having to try to figure out which DH/RT ones are useful. And they know that those DW supplements will be choc-full of useful material. 'Generic' supplements have to cater to lots of different play-styles. A generic bestiary for example would have to contain creatures that would be suitable opponents for acolytes, rogue traders and space marines, while specialised ones can focus on monsters that make good opponents for use in the specific lines.

Another complaint I'm seeing a lot here is that because FFG are releasing a new game that the older lines will receive less support. That probably isn't true - the older lines just probably wouldn't have received more support regardless. The company releases products at a rate they believe the market can sustain. If they think that sales of DH are high enough to justify more supplements then they can hire more staff to prepare them. But as time goes by the sales go down, leaving them with more staff than they need to publish the handful of books that the line can sustain. So they move those staff on to the new game.

So it isn't the case that DH is only getting X products instead of X+2 because of BC. It's that DH would have been getting X anyway, but now GMs might be able to find some useful material in the BC products as well.

Blood Pact said:

Dont pat yourself on the back too hard. Word for word its not exactly reprints. However, reinventing the wheel is the issue. The careers in rogue trader could have been the same as the ones in Dark heresy (and many are. Guardsman is Arch Militant, Magos is Tech Priest, Astropath is Psyker and so forth). So we will have at least 50+ pages in Black Crusade that are "New Character Creation" rules that are just replacing other existing character creation rules. And despite the obvious, the systems are very similar. Choose a origin (planet or in DW chapter), choose a career and a few odds and ends around that. Things that would easily be addressed in a side bar.

And the armoury while not 100% the same, would cover essentially the same general areas. Guns. Weapons. Armour. Drugs. Gear. Cybernetics. With a good chunk of it being repeats.

So yeah, Im sticking ot my assumption that 150 pages will either be direct reprints or reinventions we dont necessarily need.

Black Crusade seems to be easily done as a series of optional packages that could be inserted into any of the three existing games as background packages, elite packages, origin path modifiers, alternate ranks and so forth.

Will be it be a stable stand alone game with its own support line? Maybe. Im just not going to say it is going to be a huge success.

Will it fail miserably? Maybe, but Im not going to say it is going to fall flat.

Will I buy it? Sure. Im addicted.

Would I rather it be a supplement book? **** straight.

macd21 said:

You talk about DH like there are 100 sourcebooks and modules for it ... rather than about 10. It is not particularly well supported yet (even now) imo when compared to other established games, for example it's setting is almost a blank slate still. To suggest there's no market left for sourcebooks for it ... well I just don't see that at all.

I don't believe releasing ever more corebooks starting new game lines will have no effect on the speed of releases on the existing lines. Logic would suggest that is impossible.

I don't accept the different monsters for different play styles argument. Other games don't seem to find that a problem when producing 'monster books' for example D&D (- well old school pre-4e D&D at least) covered a lot of different play styles - yet didn't need to theme it's monster manuals. GMs are quite able to do that. You're talking about artificial 'differences' that FFG insist prevent a more unified system and game set in the 40K setting - I don't accept the differences prevent a unified system.

Okay, it's a bit of a derailment from the original subject but let's address this:

1. The de facto industry standard for decades has been to release one rulebook and multiple supplements for it. FFG/GW are deviating from this industry standard for one reason only: they have a coveted product and they know it. Why hasn't FFG's model been the industry standard? Are other game companies lazy or stupid? Or is it just that if the subject isn't rpging in the 40K universe, you don't get away with it and you turn off customers in droves per chance, hmm?

2. I have been playing RPGs of various kinds since 1984. That one had to buy a core rulebook plus a supplement to play a specific campaign has never been a huge problem voiced with any of the gamers I have met. The core rulebooks usually provide background information that will come in handy in running a non-standard campaign anyway. If any of you think of trying to sell me that it is done in the best interest of customers and not in the best interest of FFG, I call that deception for the sake PR . The normal, industry standard procedure is to provide a core rulebook with a standard campaign (for example Shadowrun with the standard campaign of playing Shadowrunners). In fact it's normally part of a game company's job to decide on a default campaign, based on what they like (if they put artistic integrity above business) or what they think will sell best (otherwise; ideally it's a combination of both).

So cut out the PR stuff, you can't fool veteran gamers.

3. This line of argument that can be seen in this thread is exactly what is turning me off and I suspect others feel the same. Normally I would phrase that more strongly but for the sake of civil argument it's better to put on some restraint. I wouldn't mind too much about this thing as it's up to FFG to make their decision as company and up to me and others to make our decision as customers. What I consider as insulting is the attempt to sell one for a sucker by some posters here and what aggrivates it is that it comes across as if their views are actually the FFG company line .

4. Lastly on the aspect of supporting old lines: " If they think that sales of DH are high enough to justify more supplements then they can hire more staff to prepare them. But as time goes by the sales go down, leaving them with more staff than they need to publish the handful of books that the line can sustain. So they move those staff on to the new game. " First of all, if you find yourself having hired too much staff, you've probably made the wrong business decision. Secondly, all they are delaying the inevitable while diluting the brand. You can run but you can't hide. Eventually you're publishing new game lines will run out of steam too. Then what? All you can do then is a second edition. But when it comes to that point you better have a strong brand - see D&D. A new edition for a strong brand RPG will sell all by itself unless the edition is so bad that rumors of it spread quickly through the gaming community. A new edition for a RPG that has no strong brand will either need substantial improvements (difficult) or gamers will go "Nah, I'll stick to the old stuff, maybe in 2 years time..."

5. I'll say it again: too many new systems will make the old ones appear obsolete . And what is worse when you release Black Crusade now, I as a customer can be fairly certain that it will be obsolete too in two to three years. Hard to get excited over that thought.

tl; dr: FFG knows it has a strong product and uses the leverage it has to make money; some posters try to sell this business strategy as in the interest of the customer when it is not. That is offensive.