Oh no! It's another money making conspiracy!!!


I could set my damned watch to you Kain. You are wonderfully consistent when it comes to jumping to conclusions and making wild assumptions.

BYE

Wonder if this will have an alternate career rank for the Dark Eldar like the Orks and Kroot got, just so we got a little more diversity. Would be nice, but happy either way with this.

Hm, stupid question to the people who know the rules but can't talk too much about them: In the tabletop it seems that the main difference between cabalites and corsairs is equipment and power from pain. In the fluff it's the degree of nastiness and devouring souls vs. spirit stones. How hard would you estimate it to be to change the cabalite with a few houserules into an Eldar Corsair?

Kain McDogal said:

Ork characters make an appearance in Into the Storm, yes... but Ork NPCs don't. It was a matter of considerable hassle working on Edge of the Abyss, writing up Morgaash Kulgraz, because any material I used from my own work on Ork Freebooter player characters to stat up this NPC would have to be repeated in full, which would eat into wordcount that could be better used on new material rather than reiterating old material. The more books a given set of non-core rules is needed in, the more times those rules need to be repeated.

In this case, I wrote all the NPCs for the adventure and used the rules I'd written for the player characters to give them appropriate detail without being burdened by the need to reiterate material from other books. In essence, everything you could want to know about Dark Eldar in the Koronus Expanse is contained within this book.

And, I should note here, that it's quite difficult to be as clear as I want to be without revealing information that I shouldn't yet reveal.

Kain McDogal said:

Actually, it couldn't have shown up in Hostile Acquisitions or Koronus Bestiary.

Firstly, because Hostile Acquisitions had gone to print by the time I started work on the Dark Eldar material being discussed here. Secondly because I didn't work on Koronus Bestiary, and I believe it was finished by the time I started work on the Dark Eldar material being discussed. It is actually impossible to retroactively put material into books in the manner you suggest.

Mjoellnir said:

Speaking in the vaguest possible terms, it wouldn't be completely without work, but it's entirely doable. There are a few talents and traits you'd need to replace, which is the main thing, but as they're quite concept-defining, you'd lose a lot of the character of the career path in that way if you just removed them.

The best way to look at this book is as the DE ‘expansion’ for Rogue Trader. An adventure that brings them into the world of Rogue Trader/The Koronus Expanse, a host of NPC/adversary details, and a new career. I quite like that notion. I really hope they do that for the Eldar in Deathwatch (‘cept maybe not the career part, as that wouldn’t make sense!).

BYE

N0-1_H3r3 said:

As I've written I couldn't care less about how many material needs to be repeated in adventure books and would steal the space from boring stories, because I won't buy any adventure books anymore. So for my group it means we miss the chance to introduce a Dark Eldar Player or NPC in our campaign as long as one of our player doesn't fall in to this cheap trick and will buy it for himself, but this won't happen because as we all know players usually won't buy adventure books as much of the content will be useless to them. And this is the main reason why setting and adventure books should never contain information a player needs to build his character.

I'm curious if there ever will be a future book containing Dark Eldar and if that makes references to this adventure book so that no material has to be repeated, but then I will completley stop buying FFG books!

I must support Kain. Adventures should not unclude PC careers etc., just NPC/adversaries stuff. All PC related things should be in sourcebooks. It is bad enough that FFG wastes space for adventures in small books like BoJ or FF.

I disagree, you don't NEED this book. It contains options, but not necessary ones. FFG is not making the DE a huge part of RT and forcing you to buy this book, they are kind enough to throw in some character options in what would otherwise just be an adventure book.

The argument by some in this thread is that adventures should never, under any circumstances, include any new tech, any new/alternative character options wether it be skills, talents or what have you, nor I assume any new NPCs as that would require buying the adventure if you want ready made DE enemies?

Name one gaming company that does not include these things in their published adventures.

nifoc said:

My concern is with everything clearly player character related, where the player has the option to build or round out his character. Putting these in everything not a core- or sourcebook is a mistake, putting these in an adventure book is a sin and I really don't know of any honourable gaming companies who would have ever done that. To make myself clear I mean adventure books and not campaign books, which are traditionally a mix of source-, setting- and adventure books.

There is even a long debate about including adventures in character related sourcebooks as most adventures start with an advice for players not to read it's content and it's really stupid to assume that somebody would buy a book which is clearly adressed at him and wouldn't read all of the book he has paid for so that he doesn't spoil his fun. With an adventure book this problem is multiplied by 100.

I'm really interested if there is even an option to play an Dark Eldar in The Soul Reaver adventure or if the DE only appear as adversaries and the Carreer Path is a mostly unrelated bonus only used to explain some DE game mechanics in detail - and to be a sales argument.

WotC regularly includes new magical items in their adventures, and they used to include new feats as well. Don't know what they're up to these days though.

Paizo used to do the same, and I assume they continue that practice with Pathfinder. Both of the above gaming compaines are a) the biggest ones around and b) have games where a single magical item is something you can easily construct an entire character around.

Catalyst introduce new tech and sometimes new Qualities in their Shadowrun adventures fairly regularly.

But since you have already commited the "No True Scotsman" fallacy I see no reason to think you will argue your point like an adult.

Shadow Walker said:

I partially support Kain. I don't buy adventure books, but I don't feel like I'm missing much if an adventure has the odd Talent or Equipment. I also don't mind rule/sourcebooks having adventures in them. Even if you don't play it, you can raid it for stats & ideas.

That being said, we're talking a new race here! I have stated in another thread that I find non-human characters much more intriguing than human ones. Thus, it is likely that I will purchase this to get this material. Who knows, it might even be my first PDF purchase.

I can't help but worry though. If this is the first in a string of adventure books... what if each one has an alternate Dark Eldar career path?

I'm not a huge fan of ready-made adventures. I prefer to make up my own campaigns and missions and whatnot, so I've not had any real use for the adventures FFG have released so far (other than mining them for NPC profiles). That said I don't see a problem with a virtual DE 'expansion' that contains an adventure, NPC profiles and a career for a singular race in an an entire book.

And "honourable"? A "sin"? HA! So overblown...

BYE

H.B.M.C. said:

BYE

N0-1_H3r3 said:

Hm, I guess I'm going to try, thanks.

I don't buy adventure books either. Though I would hardly mind if a GM ran something from a book.

And I don't support Kain at all , on this. Who isn't helping himself by constantly throwing accusations at FFG of being sneaky cheats, who are publishing stuff in really shady ways in an effort to steal all of our money. And frankly, just being generally childish and whiny.

There's never been one true way to publish an RPG book, and what FFG is doing has been done by Palladium, White Wolf, Wizards (and everyone else who ever owned D&D, from TSR to Hasbro). They've all put out books like this from time to time, that is books primarily focused on an adventure that also include crunch useful for anyone, it is absolutely NOTHING new. I've only been gaming for about 15 years now.

The vocal minority really need to clue in to the fact that being vocal doesn't make up for being the minority, at least when it's a topic that's been argued a few times, with little to no change public opinion. Case in point, the composition and contents of books, how it 'should' be according to a few individuals who I shall refrain from naming, and how the current way FFG is running things, which most of us are cool with.

Or is it that us in the majority don't count, because we're just a bunch of stupid sheep, or something? :-

Blood Pact said:

Ever heard of GDW, R.Talsorian, Chaosium, Dream Pod 9, Pinnacle, Eden Studios or even tho old Mongoose to name a few?

It's obvious that a person who has been cheated for 15 Years thinks this is the normality.

Kain McDogal said:

Considering the difference in production volume and books sold. WotC, White Wolf and FFG ARE the normality.

The hyperbole that you keep spewing is just tiresome. You accuse people of cheating you when they are being very honest about their products, and claim that not doing things your way is a "sin" and not the actions of an "honorable" publisher. The whole thing sound like a child that's never been told "no" and now gets upset when he realizes that the world does not in fact revolve around him. I've never been cheated by a publisher, because I've always known what book I'm buying. But from your arguments I begin to suspect what the problem is on your end.

In an ideal world, there wouldn't be player-centric content in a book intended for GMs. If there are no suitable supplements planned for the next few months, though, and it fitted well in this book, I can see why it was done this way. Better for it to be out there than just a gleam in Fantasy Flight's eye.

Sure, you would keep a constant eye on your Dark Eldar and quite possibly lock them in their suite at night, but if you feed them a steady stream of miscreants who require creative punishment, I can see the arrangement working for both parties. The Dark Eldar gets the fix they need to survive, and the Rogue Trader gains a terrifying ultimate sanction.

Pity it wouldn't fit with the game I'm currently playing in, or indeed the one we have planned after that. Played with a black sense of humour (in a mature group), I think this could be a riot.

nifoc said:

Ever thought of quality beats quantity?

while i don't like that this career path is published in an adventure book. i have never had a problem with the quality FFG material. the adventures are a bit bland but are easily spiced up. the developers usually leave room for just that. the rest of the material is fairly well balanced.

the problems i have with the publishing of this career path in this book are:

As a GM (yes i am both a player and a GM. just not at the same time.) allowing my players access to the book lets them look over the adventure as well as the career path. also I use the time my players are "leveling" to review my current adventure. we can't both have the book at the same time, and while i'm sure you would like me to buy 2 copies it's not happening. this is also a problem in gameplay. if i'm running the adventure and the DE character needs to reference something, it breaks the flow of the game and my focus.

from a publisher's point of view i can see how this decision makes sense to a point. however in a business causing the customer difficulties is usually a bad thing. i'm glad that the dark elder are coming to RT. i just think they should have been introduced in a source book, either before or after this adventure. this is my personal opinion. others may or my not agree with it. then again i think everyone knows what opinions are like.

Kain McDogal said:

While I do not own any scenarios/adventures from most of these publishers I do know that Chaosium often has put rules in their scenario-books that might interest players - from new spells (usually cool for both the Referee and the player) to useful mechanics.

Generally I do not buy books with adventures and scenarios any more, except for CoC, and I prefer to write my own scenarios - regardless of the game. I do like to read a scenario once in a while as they can give you new ideas and inspiration, not to mention NPCs and other cool stuff. So, while I would prefer a new Careerpath to be in a setting- or supplementalbook, I do not mind seeing it in a scenariobook. It really does not hurt anyone in what book it is published - rather the opposite...

Trader Austin said:

Why not copy the relevant material and, when the player needs to reference it, show it to him. Personally I have written all the Careerpaths in a .DOCX with all the current errata and printed it so that the players always have a easy reference... I still use the book for Talents and Skills though.

Quite a lot of the 40K RPG books have adventures in them. Book of Judgement, Ascension, Edge of the Abyss, First Founding and so on. All filled with player options, and all have adventures as well. I really don't see how "my players might see it!!!" is a real criticism. Are they really so desperate for an advantage that they’d read ahead? Doesn’t that kinda ruin the surprise?

BYE

H.B.M.C. said:

Not answering you here, just following up on what you are saying.

If you're scared that your players will read stuff you ask them not to read maybe your in the wrong group, and maybe the problem is not with them.

As to Kains litte snide remark about quality versus quantity: You do understand I wasn't making an argument about quality right? You do understand that all I did was point out the flaw in your argument right? But it's just so much easier to change your argument rather than realize that you are pretty lonely on this forum as well, so even your views aren't the norm, never mind the publishing industrys norm.

1. I think that putting not adventure related stuff into a adventure isn't a nice thing.
2. Having content come with an adventure isn't really a problem.
This leads to an interesting observation. A book comes of that has Z number of pages. X of these pages are adventure. Y of these pages are setting / rules / fluff.

At what point in time / at what page number does it become an adventure book with rules or a rulebook with an adventure?

I think everybody has to answer this question for himself and obviously it's a hard thing to do that without having seen the book in its entirety.