OK, I need to gripe because I love the systems but am getting that 2nd generation RPG bog down of too many table across too many books and not enough sourcebooks or at least sourcebooks with consolidated materials.

Please Fantasy Flight: Consolidate!!!

e.g. When looking up a weapon I can think of at least 4 books with weapons (including the main) in DH, 3 in RT, 2 in DW, and 1 in BC. Is ONE book with ALL the weapons listed too much to ask? It'd sell like hotcakes IMHO!

-Same for Vehicles and Ships.

-Same for Alternative career paths.

-Same for Creatures (how many repeats including illogically different stats across the systems?). Looking up Ork's is a confusing nightmare as their equipment is in several books and the various ork stats are in 3 others and the idea of Ork PCs are in two others.

Yet instead of books like these or more sourcebooks we get more adventures? I don't know the sales ratios but I'd have to assume the sourcebooks sell better than the adventures...so why more adventures? Some of the adventures have some good things that would be better in sourcebooks.

For example, Rogue Trader's "The Frozen Reaches" had some new rules for large scale military warfare (loved it) but I'd rather see that in it's own sourcebook. The adventure was just 'OK'. That whole large scale could have been a great section of a military book with a huge amount of vehicles listed instead of the two vehicle lists that I know of (RT ITS and the one DW sourcebook I do no own but I have seen...name escapes me.) That book could have"

• -All the RT ships (Main Rulebook, ITS, and BFK) and the components so we don't have to look up through 3 books and several charts at the same time. CONSOLIDATE!
• -Various small vehicles for land, air, space, and even sea. Why have we not listed the Leman Russ but we have a Landraider? CONSOLIDATE and ADD NEW ONES!!!
• -Vehicle rules for both Ships and small vehicles. CONSOLIDATED!
• -How to conduct a large scale war with Roleplaying (Frozen Reaches addendum and then some!)

Hey we're talking about a big book that could fetch prime cash here FF!!! AND THAT'S JUST ONE OF THEM!!!

Sure we can use spreadsheets and custom jobs but I prefer a solid sourcebook or a single FF created PDF with ALL the details. There is opportunity here!

Less adventures and more consolidated books. By the time you're done you've got more products that more people want.

Disagree with me or add your own. I'd like to see these boards give them more feedback so they can create the products that the GMs and players want and need.

I request the opposite!

ratrimble said:

I personally have never and will never purchase an adventure book for an RPG - i like to get the wellspring of ideas in my head out and into games so they are anathema to me. However FFG treat the 40k RPs as separate product lines that happen to use the same base rule-set. As such while the systems may have small sections on integration they should largely be considered just that - seperate products. Thus the idea of central resource books that cross the system would not only not comply with that concept, but also make FFG a lot less money overall.

On the other hand they have been updating some content - take the Adepta Sororitas that got re-released in Blood of Martyrs. It's an example of FFG admitting that something didn't work so good and that with the updates to the rules since its release it could be handled so much better. Expect to see more of this as time goes on, untill we reach a point where people won't be demanding rules 2.0 releases and cross-system compatibility because we will have naturally reached that point by all books being published using the same, refined rules system and everything being more balanced.

Kasatka said:

Hey I don't know about you but my RT campaign is ALREADY an amalogam of Rogue Trader, Dark Heresy (the RTs homeworld is Fenksworld and we had an introductory adventure in Volg...using a great deal of the DH info on both), and Black Crusade (One of our antagonists is a Slaanesh adherant follower in the Saynay clan). Heck, I've got the fires in the works for my brave captain and crew to stumble upon a forgotten chapter of Space Marines or find a latent Necron Pyramid in the void...so that's ALL 4.

Nonetheless even in the same game Dark Heresy still has a huge number of cross tables to look up for weapons/armor/equipment and there are details omitted.

When I'm sitting down to write an adventure for my players I have time. When we need to adlib the guys and gals are getting cross with me because I have to remember WHICH DANG BOOK IT'S IN!

That 2.0 release can't come soon enough. I love the games and FF is doing a good job but I am getting really frustrated.

I agree. I homebrew most of my adventures and I'm tired of sorting through a bunch of different books just to find different weapons. More sourcebooks. Also, squats.

jpomz said:

GW would totally yank the license from FF for that almost as readily as if they made a squad based minatures ruleset for WH40K RPGs (daring to compete with the cash cow instead of bolstering the love of the 40K universe as they seem to intend with giving the RPG rights to FF.)

I have no idea why they won't bring the squats back but don't mind metahumans like Ogryns or Runts...they thought a way to make "Space Orks and Space Elves"but Squats???

That's one of those topics they get nasty about. I haven't been to the GW site in years but I heard it's a delatable offense in their forums...as laughable as that sounds...

ratrimble said:

The squats thing was a joke. But actually I would LOVE dark heresy specific miniatures. Converting the GW ones is time consuming and wallet draining.

Fortunately I have every Necromunda fig ever made (the special editions ones) a crapload of Imperial Guard, a sizable Lost and the Damned army and enough odds and ends to keep it lively. Oh misspent undergrad years...finally you pay off...

It'd be fun to customize/convert but shizzz...I'm 37 and have a family. I don't have time to paint let alone play with greenstuff and exacto knives...I'm lucky to have one night a week gaming.

Nonetheless, I have a feeling that GW would not react politely for mini-rules that complete with ANYTHING near their cash cow. I'm still amazed they let someone make an RPG or 4 (and a **** good one...albeit in severe need of reorganization.)

Seeing as how it's more of a tabletop and not a Wargame anything more than the marker mat really takes away the minds eye aspect...

While it would be good with sourcebooks and all I do think that making adventures are probably a better choice for business. They can only really make that many sourcebooks before they start to run out of interesting things to write about in said sourcebooks while there arn't any similar limitations on the writing of adventures and stuff.

God-damned useless board software... hold on...

ratrimble said:

You complain about needing to look through three books. You don't need to look through three books, you only choose to. You don't need to use anything but the core rulebook for each of these product lines, so all further complications or complexities are being added by you and you alone.

As far as Adventures vs Rules Expansions go, your point of view is simply half of reality. There are just as many people saying "More published adventures" as there are saying that we should have less.

BYE

H.B.M.C. said:

Clearly we must all learn to game as you do, sensei.

ratrimble said:

Marker mat?

I only like the adventure books. The rest is just, Fluff.

AluminiumWolf said:

I think you mean crunch.

In a roleplaying context most crunch is fluff.

AluminiumWolf said:

Wait, what?

And as a special treat in Alpha Complex this eventing, your best friend The Computer will be providing you with two choices for dessert:

Crunchy Fluff, or

Fluffy Crunch.

Trust no-one. Keep your laser handy.

Zakalwe said:

Zakalwe: You date yourself with that little bit of nostalgia! THE COMPUTER IS YOUR FRIEND.

Praise the Emperor

ratrimble said:

H.B.M.C said:

"Dark Heresy, Rogue Trader, Deathwatch and Black Crusade are four separate games. They may have the same (or similar) base rule-sets, but they are product lines independent of one another. This is the way they have been treated since the start."

That is not totally correct. I'm currently reading RT: Hostile Acquisitions, which is set almost exclusively in the Calixian Sector. So, in a way this is relying on the fact that readers of this source book have access to DH books to know the different planets, sectors and NPC Characters that are being discussed.

I consider this book one of the first "cross over" books between the lines - hopefully a trend to come.

But to claim that each line is distinct, that's just disingenuous. Ascension in a way was a response to the power disparity in the other lines and to allow DH characters to play along with the other lines. DH Daemon Hunter in the same vein with DW.

Anyway, just pointing out that while they may nominally be different lines, I believe that the designers do consider that the majority or purchasers buy for multiple game lines and they create books that can be mined for ideas in all settings.

Cheers,

J.

Not really what I meant.

I meant that they are separate product lines, and one need never buy anything from another line to get the rules to play the game. If the rule is required for that game, it is printed in that game or in one of its supplements. That and the games have elements to them that they do not share with the other games (Corruption/Infamy, Requisition/Solo/Squad Modes, etc.) because they are separate lines.

Yes, Hostile Acquisition mentions the Calixis Sector. Black Crusade mentions all the other settings. All four games are tied together geographically speaking (or by a Warp Gate). Still separate games.

BYE

jpomz said:

I'm guessing he means a wet-erase board. I have one, too, but I only use it for indoor scenes; for outdoor fights I love to bust out the 3-D terrain and tape measures!

-----------------

With reguard to Adventures vs. Sourcebooks, I like them both. My main complaint with Adventures is: too many trilogies! More one-shots and mini-scenarios for filling in gaps in an ongoing campaign would be more useful to me.

FFG need to step up their game considerably. That's not to denigrate the quality of their ideas, but the organisation of their material is utterly dire. Investing in a proper line editor would help: i'm reading Blood of Martyrs and the editing is beyond a joke. For a professional game publisher this is inexcusable and it's clear that they've stinted on quality control and relied solely on a pc spellchecker without proof reading.

signoftheserpent said:

FFGs editing is certainly very poor, but "for a professional game publisher this is inexcusable"? Editing standards in RPG publishing are often pretty poor. WotC's editing is good, but they're the biggest name in the industry, they can afford it. A lot of the other companies can't.