so my qestion is what is the 12 career paths avalible and how in depth will charecter creation be, will it be as in depth as rouge trade or maby al littel less as in the case of deathwatch. i realy hope that the careation will be as in depth as rouge trader because i have found that the more in depth the carecter creation is it helps the players become more inrole and genraly makes peole more in volved. any other veiws?

I would think they would assimilate much like alternate career paths. It would be cool to see them develop a individualistic specializations involving maybe something like 12 soldier arch types like medic, infantry, paratrooper etc...I can only guess what the developers are working on but I know that they will keep the core mechanics the same with skills. Maybe some adjustments to mechanics like full auto and semi auto like they did in BC. I think there will be some changes to talents.

I've got hopes that it will mix the branching paths from DH, a few paths from RTs origin paths, and overlapping ranks from DW.

Imagine choosing an Imperial world home, then choose some Origin path options, like Hopes & Dreams/Trials & Tribulations/Recruitment, and it leads you into the Officer career path. Perhaps your homeworld will give you a rank to buy from like DW chapters, and this could be replaced by your Regimant depending on which is more important to your character. Your specialization, Officer in this example, would give you the bulk of your choices, and you could branch at certain points, like becoming a Quartermaster who could help equip your unit better or feed them with more than rations corpsemeal, or a Commissar, or some sort of tent bound Commander.

But I don´t think this will be the case. FFG has proven themselves to be too curious to sit idly by on their char-gen laurels. The 4 lines currently don´t share the same level up system, but each one is familiar to someone that has played any other, so I expect something new.

I hope it will be similar to BC, where there are no ranks to deal with. Each class would have a permanent alignment, meaning some advances are cheaper or more expesive than others, but they are all available barring pre-reqs.

DJSunhammer said:

Alignment is specifically appropriate to BC with the Dark Gods, what would you see for the IG characters that would be similar? Making some sort of category tags, like Combat, Exploration, Command? I think those would be tied too closely with the Specialties, making many Officer PCs similar to other Officer PCs. Scouts "aligned" to Exploration, etc.

If they use tags that would relate to the dark gods; War, Change, Decay, Perfection... it could be cool if these were ways to build in how the men and women on the front lines all fall from grace, becoming the enemy of those they fight for. CO/CNO PCs who are skimpy on giving good weapons to their unit in favor of buying top self amsec and cigars, or the man in the tank who is always coughing into the mics and walks by the cooks kitchen every night with the unconscious hope of spreading his sickness to the whole platoon.

IDK, I just don't see it happening quite the way BC does it, especially since it's thematically appropriate for BC heretics, unchained from the demanding expectations of the "orderly" Imperium.

jordiver2 said:

Don't take the word alignment too literally. I mean it would work like alignment does, where specific advancements are cheaper than others.

Lets say instead of advancements aligned to gods, they are aligned to role. There would be a category of social enhancements, or melee, or ranged, or tech etc.

A tech priest would be able to buy tech related advancements for reduced cost than say, melee or social advancements. But he could still get the melee and social advancements, rather than some of them being totally unavailable, like they would be with the system used by DH. There would be no defined tables associated with rank, but there would still be clear paths. Like a hybrid between DH and BC characters.

Other classes would have different paths [i'll call it that now.] A commisar might be melee and social advancements. A medic would be utility through medicae and probably shooty advancements and so on. Most of the classes would have obvious paths like that.

Of course, that may not be the way character advancement works at all. Its more likely just gone back to the rank system used in every other book. This would be how I would do it if I were writing the book though.

I think that could work, but if there isn't some way to change alignment, there should be more than three stages of alignment.

I've been idly thinking about making some sort of system which hybridizes the careers/ranks system with the open system from BC. There would be careers, though they might be smaller than their previous incarnations. Beyond that anything would be open, but at a higher cost than from the careers. Elite advance packages and alternate ranks would be important.

crowhaven said:

Right now we know 8 of them for sure: Though nothing about them beyond what their name says:

Commissar

Sergeant

Heavy Weapons

Storm Trooper

Medic

Enginseer

Sanctioned Psyker

Ministorum Priest

It's all conjecture what the rest will be. And we only know those 8 because they're mentioned in the announcement pages.

DJSunhammer said:

Alright, that seems to make a lot more sense now. I like that idea, too Although they already do the whole "elite advance" where the GM can allow the PC to buy pretty much any advance for whatever price the GM allows, but I like the tiered prices from BC, and making OW specializations have cheaper paths but open to everything could be really nice.

I really hope that it'll be somewhat in line with Rogue Trader, more than anything else.

With Dark Heresy, I don't think the characters end up as fleshed out as I would like them to and with Deathwatch and Black Crusade, the latter in particular, is way, way too open-ended.

So here's to hoping for something Rogue Trader-ish.

I could imagine some sort of Melee centered archetype as to me they all (except priest perhaps) sounds ranged focused or Fellowship focused.

Bassemandrh said:

Commissar is probably going to be at least balanced on Fellowship and Melee, as they iconically have a sword and a pistol. So I'd guess they'll be decent. Ditto Sergeant... unless a real commissioned officer option exists.

I think the Storm trooper will not be the arch typical Hellgun, Capace Storm Trooper but more the shock trooper/assault specialist.
The sergeant would be the basic leader career along with the Commissar (the only commisioned officer).

what I do hope is that the character can form a somewhat uniform unit and not a freak legion. All with a Lasgun and Flak Armour.

I really, REALLY hope the specialties are just a starting point and maybe some other stuff instead of being what you're stuck into. I want some malleability, because right now the over reliance on classes is the weakest part of the whole system to me. get out of the 70s and 80s and do some real system design!

Among other things, I don't want to see the Sergeant's path turn him into an officer. What if I want to be a career NCO! They're important too, and officers are often a very different breed with a very different background. Sergeants? They're the one you want to listen to in the heat of combat,, officers are the ones you want telling you what to do beforehand. It's just how it works. It's rare for an NCO to become a Commissioned Officer, this doesn't mean impossible. Or even very rare. Just rare. But the point is both options should be possible. Just like it should be possible to start as a raw commissioned officer without twisting some terminology and squinting. Much, much better if the "Specialties" are just your background and initial skillset at start, and some form of Black Crusade style freeform to go from there.

And Elite Advances are awkward at best, they are not the answer to everything in this system, they're a very clunky mechanic done after the fact to have a way to claim that "SEE! You can do other stuff!" - No. You can't. For one, not all GMs are going to allow things, and just because they don't, that doesn't make them a bad GM. Hell, some of the best GMs I've had in terms of being fun games with fun stories were ones who wouldn't allow things like Elite Advances. And some of the worst ones were the sorts who would. While there were plenty in between too.

From what FFG has described of the game so far, I expect the game will likely take on a form similar to Deathwatch. The Guardsman will have a base set of advancements, and then get special advancements based on their specialist role and their regiment (with famous regiments like the Cadian Shock Troops, the Mordian Iron Guards, and the Catachan Jungle Fighters fulfilling the role that the Space Marine chapters did in Deathwatch).

As for the 4 remaining spiecializations, my guess is that one will be a generic Infantry class (similar to how the Tactical Marine represented the average Space Marine in Deathwatch). The others will probaly fill the three special weapons roles from the Imperial Guard Codex: Snipers, Demolitions Experts, and Combat Engineers (which in the 40K world clear bunkers with flamers rather than build things).

I am guessing that the abhumans will appear in a supplement. So will any options to play a non-infantry based Imperial Guard campaign, such as a squad of Scout Sentinels or Rough Riders, a Vehicle Crew, or any of the Regimental Advisors.

I am really looking forward to this game. It will be interesting to see how close my guesses are.

Dulahan said:

This is a bad mentality to have. Just because you prefer an unconstrained, free-form, mish-mash system doesn't mean that a structured class system is bad, wrong, inappropriate, or outdated design. In fact, within the context of the Imperial Guard , a rigid military structure, a strict class advancement system is the most appropriate way to handle things. It's the military, you don't get to decide from day to day what you want to do.

That said, I would like to see the use of the multi-path class structure like Deathwatch used. For a Guardsman have an Imperial Guard chart, then have a separate rank 1-8 specialty chart, and a unit/regiment chart, then have the ability to buy in to an advanced specialty. I was very pleased with the structure and flexibility of this system in DW.

I wouldn't mind seeing an option for playing a penal legionnaire.

ItsUncertainWho said:

While I would agree you don't get to decide from day one what you do in the Military, I can turn that argument right back at you.

A Sergeant isn't something you're just declared to be - you earn that rank from something else. A Heavy Weapons Trooper should be able to become one too - they remain a Heavy Weapon Trooper by training initially, but became something else. Yet if it isn't starting points, this becomes impossible in the 'actuality' of the system, the 'by the book intent' (Again, this is all hypothetically presuming DH style rigidity - mainly because 'Sergeant' is a known specialty). That's why I say it would be great if this was just the starting point and from there the sky is the limit. So if a DH style system, having Sergeant already breaks the reason. Now, Commissioned Officer is another matter entirely, that's something that you (Mostly) have trained into, but even that becomes possible for NCOs who go through Officer Candidate School.

Dulahan said:

Keeping in mind that this is 40K, the way a founding works, yes, you can just be made a sergeant. It's based on background, skill , merit, and sometimes circumstance, but it does happen in the books.

ItsUncertainWho said:

But again, people get promoted from the other fields too, especially in established regiments.

Honestly I just hope Rough Riders get added in at some point if not in the core book. Bringing in one of the more unconventional no thought of Guard forces would be awesome and a good thing in my book. Cheers!

I think being a rough rider is something that everyone is going to have to be if you want to use them.

Otherwise some guy is going to be trying to drag his horse along on inappropriate adventures.

So Rough Rider should be an overlay that any of the 'classes' could take to represent a horse mobile unit.

ItsUncertainWho said:

I think the mentality comes from the fact that most of the very popular RPGs use a rank based system. And honestly it gets boring.

I mostly found the multi-table advance scheme from DW annoying, you had to turn so many pages just to see what was available and ended up spending a lot of time doing nothing.

AluminiumWolf said:

Yeah, that's a problem that's been in multiple games. Anytime there's a Unicorn player in L5R, heck, the Cavalier class in AD&D2nd just off the top of my head. Very hard to work with because any time they can't use the horse, the player feels unfairly hampered, but anytime they can, they're holy terrors.

but again, would be a great thing to work with a more freeform regiment style builder, then if the players want to be Rough Riders, they'll all be so, or none will be.

Fair points Dulahan and Alluminum Wolf. It makes sense that its all for one or none for all deal when it comes to Rough Riders.