Hordes in melee and a question about Space Marines

By Khalayne, in Deathwatch Gamemasters

Posted at

Siranui said:

Shouldn't a purchased product be as-close-to-perfect straight out of the box as possible, though? Asking for the best product possible isn't unreasonable, and it's not unreasonable to gear a product for the variety of common play-styles that are out there, amongst the audience.

I hate to be so crass but......In the bitchy, self absorbed, my-opinion-counts-more-because-I-complain-more world of the internet, yes, it is unreasonable to expect a product to be perfect. Nothing can be perfect to everyone, everyone has different expectations.

The more polished something is the more time it takes to make. Very few companies, in any field, have the power to push a products release date back for polish. Printing is especially time restrictive. These forums have seen the vitriol that can spew forth if the slightest delay happens.

As for common play-styles, what is a common play-style? I am betting there are as many different play-styles as there are GM's that are willing to run the game.

Posted at

Siranui said:

Shouldn't a purchased product be as-close-to-perfect straight out of the box as possible, though?

In an ideal world, sure... but at this point, we get to the subject of expectations, namely what someone means by "as close to perfect as possible", because what's possible and what can be percieved as possible both vary considerably.

As ItsUncertainWho says, these things take time to perfect, and when time is limited, work has to be prioritised, even if it means that some things receive less attention and less fine-tuning than they might deserve, both in the writing stage and in the subsequent playtesting. The actual time spent writing is a small proportion of the overall development time for any one of these books, but even then each writer is expected to produce a hefty block of text - rules and background alike, and trying to ensure that it gels with other sections of the book being written by other people at the same time - in a relatively short space of time.

In short, it's not easy, and while every effort is made to make things as good as possible, what you might define as being "as good as possible" is likely to differ from my definition, given that I'm the one putting out tens of thousands of words for a deadline and thus have a clearer idea of what the task entails.

Posted at

N0-1_H3r3 said:

In an ideal world, sure... but at this point, we get to the subject of expectations, namely what someone means by "as close to perfect as possible", because what's possible and what can be percieved as possible both vary considerably.

As ItsUncertainWho says, these things take time to perfect, and when time is limited, work has to be prioritised, even if it means that some things receive less attention and less fine-tuning than they might deserve, both in the writing stage and in the subsequent playtesting. The actual time spent writing is a small proportion of the overall development time for any one of these books, but even then each writer is expected to produce a hefty block of text - rules and background alike, and trying to ensure that it gels with other sections of the book being written by other people at the same time - in a relatively short space of time.

In short, it's not easy, and while every effort is made to make things as good as possible, what you might define as being "as good as possible" is likely to differ from my definition, given that I'm the one putting out tens of thousands of words for a deadline and thus have a clearer idea of what the task entails.

There isn't time in deadlines for perfection, but aiming for it should always be the goal, regardless.

Certainly the more blindingly obvious errors and typos should not be missed, yet often are in publications. Printers tend to make a meal of tables for sure, but inherent flaws in the design of the core products should be ironed out long before. Out of everything in a RPG's line, the core rulebook should be most close to perfect, as not only should it have been developed before any publishing deadline was even conceived; it will have to withstand the rigours of supplemental rules being tacked on, and must still maintain its integrity. I don't think that DW suffered from too many massive flaws in core design, all told. There were balance issues that should perhaps have been highlighted in playtest, but for a complex rule system produced by a major player, working to deadlines, it didn't do too badly.

Mechanical design and integration is not a factor of word-count, though. Let's not confuse the two. Least of all because we can design system mechanics in our heads while doing the shopping, while getting 3,000 words down and formatted is a rather different matter.

Posted at

Siranui said:

It is multiple times per mission, but I think it's only about once per two ranks. Which is poor in comparison to Solo Modes which are usable several rounds per combat, or even for the duration of combat. It's got a great feel to it, but the balance with other Chapters is poor, and the mechanics incongruous when compared to everyone else's 'once per session' or 'once per combat' style effects.

I haven't gone cover-to-cover as yet, but there's a lot of good things in there, and a lot of the more powerful stuff is tempered with dire warnings to the GM and player alike about the supposed scarcity of such things; which is a good thing.

The really good Solo Modes require Rank/2 in rounds though. Think of Blood Frenzy.

Alex