Dulahan said:

I'm truly sorry if you've never had a GM ok with houserules, that's unfathomable to me. I have literally never had a campaign (with a pool of about 4 GMs) who hasn't given almost every player a "special request" of some kind for each, to the point where it's almost standard practice across my gaming group. As KommissarK pointed out, it's explicitly IN the rulebook that the "rules' are more like Guidelines, and GMs and Players should bend them as needed to make a fun experience. If those GMs are treating the rulebook as a Holy Bible that cannot be spoken against, they need to readjust their perspective.

Also, if people's issues are roleplaying a Ratling, then why not just pick the ratling option and say in-game it's just a short human? The only thing that makes a Ratling different than the other Guardsmen is the Size (Weedy) attribute, and you could either just say the person is short or simply drop that attribute. Other than that, you have nothing that makes the Ratling inherently Ratling-like that couldn't be found in "normal" humans.

HTMC said:

I never said ANY houserules, I've had GMs that have houseruled games in ways that made them almost entirely unfun for me.

My point though is that it REQUIRES a special request. That should -never- be the answer for something that's such a frankly basic concept. Seriously, a Sniper in a military game should be as common as a Thief or Mage in a fantasy game. And making them ONLY be a Ratling is a problem on multiple levels.

But beyond that, I believe your "Rule 0" cite is fallacious. Because you miss the part where it requires GM Approval. That's the key. GM Approval! And probably other players being ok with it. And I FULLY disagree with not treating the rulebook as a 'holy bible' - because I've gotten into games that were so heavily modified they weren't the game I signed up for. We're talking things along the lines of "Why do I even have a corebook then?" style changes. It can go much too far, and really kill the fun (especially in a system I might like!). The fact is when I'm trying to find a game to play, it's likely because I want to play the rules I know. A minor change here and there, ok, but things that mess with balance on the lines of the ratling thing? Big issue for me. As a player I'd be suspicious "Special Snowflake" style accusations in my head.

So yes, if being a sniper with such generic advances as the ratling one has REQUIRES GM approval, which is THE POINT of Rule Zero. Then it's a failure in my opinion. And just because you can't fathom a GM who isn't acquiescant to such things doesn't mean it isn't an issue. That's sort of the point of a Beta, to catch these sorts of issues.

EDIT: Honestly, to add something constructive here. Why not make ALL, or at least most, of the Comrade Advances "Specialist Agnostic" - completely take anything but some of the most blatantly specific stuff like the Priest's "Chanting" guy and make them generic. So any specialty could take them if they paid the XP? Might require a change in costs, perhaps, or maybe some Specialties get a slight discount. But by doing that suddenly things can be a lot more customizable yet, which is, IMHO, a VERY good thing.

and it would totally ruin the feel of an army based game. IMHO anyway.

Dulahan said:

I think this is an excellent idea.

LuciusT said:

I think it's a horrible idea. There's already not that much that differentiates the different Specialities, considering that OW has adopted the freeform advance model of BC. Making that kind of change basically means you get your starting bonuses and equipment at character creation, and the suddenly it pretty much does not matter what Speciality you picked. Having Speciality-specific companions helps keep the flavor of the different Specialities, and a lot of them just don't make sense in the context of other Specialities: why would an Ogryn have a Servitor following him around, or why would a Medic need someone carrying weapons for him?

Sure, it's technically more customizable, but the system is already very customizable (especially considering the recent reduction of XP costs with the latest update). A completely customizable system would just do away with Specialities/Classes all-together and just do something like the Regiment Creation Rules but for PCs, and while that might be appealing to some, I think it makes zero sense in the context of war-simulation RPG, where the PCs are supposed to be members of the armed forces with very clearly laid-out roles.

And @Dulahan: Again, this is not being condescending, but it sounds like your history of RPing is pretty unfortunate, and doesn't at all match the experience of anyone I personally know who has RPed. I fully believe you've had groups and GMs like you described, but I would hope that worldwide that's a minority experience rather than a commonality, but obviously neither of us can say for sure. In my mind Rule 0 boils down to treating the rules as rules except when they get in the way of player enjoyment, because RPGs are supposed to be a fun group experience rather than a competition (I realize some RPGs break this rule, but within the context of 40kRPGs). You make GM and fellow PC approval sound like a huge obstacle, but again, in my experience with multiple GMs and groups, this has never been an issue. Maybe I am in the minority here; again, I have no way of knowing, but I can only speak from my experience. What this does highlight is that different people play different all across the world, so even if "Rule 0" and house-ruling is a big no-no to you, it's perfectly viable for lots of people: for instance, go take a look at the RT forums, which has a full subforum dedicated to house-ruling. Based on that, I would assume the FFG design philosophy falls more in line with accepting house-rules rather than trying to avoid them, which I guess is unfortunate in your case. Again, not trying to belittle your views, since I believe they're fully valid, I'm just trying to express my own and what seems to be others'. I would definitely be annoyed (and probably quit) if a game I knew had been house-ruled beyond recognition, but I feel that's far more an issue with the GM and group than with the system/rules itself.

HTMC said:

I think that's an excellent idea too…

The Specialities, like my understanding of the archetypes in the Black Crusade, give a good starting point. How the character develops is, and should be, up to the players and the game… not up to the game designers and their vision of how a given character archetype should develop.

LuciusT said:

There is definitely such a thing as too much freedom and character creation is already a lengthy enough process with just the 'limited' choices that are in the book. If you have some advanced players, it works fine. But less experienced players can get overwhelmed very quickly by too much choice. There also has to be some amount of guidance on how characters progress. If there weren't power levels in the game would vary wildly and it would be even more difficult to balance. It is a fine line, trying to find a middle ground between character customization and creativity and ease [and speed] of play. I think FFG has it pretty good with the BC and OW rulesets. They are definitely an improvement over DH, RT and DW.

Really now, the class system is a bit misleading because, unlike DH, RT and DW, they don't define what you are, they only define what you start as. The Munitorum doesn't care who your Ratling is, it only cares that it's a Ratling and thus stucks him with sniper gear. That didn't stop my Ratling player from nabbing a flamer at the first opportunity (for 'cooking', he claims).

Similarly, nothing stops a Weapon Specialist from picking up a long-las or a sniper rifle (they can even do this at character creation) and becoming a very competent dedicated marksman. They'll never be as good as a Ratling sniper, but that should be expected. Ratlings are down right famous for their accuracy and stealth.

i am currently playing a Ratling and she is an absolute beast, I feel almost too powerful. While my team-mates struggle to get rid of even one opponent (heavy gunner, weapon specialist, medic) I cap one every round. The first comrade special is INSANE.

we play with point distribution so I start with 40 BS and 40 Agi. After the second session I had 50 BS. We are a sharpshooter regiment, so I have a targeter.

so… I am hiding somewhere (agi 40 + 20 stealth + 20 camo + 10 size = stealth roll of 90 not counting the stummer…) which makes me basically impossible to notice. Even if the enemy sees me the get a whooping 10 (size) + 10 (prone) + 30 (camo) 50!! BS penalty to shoot at me. which makes me pretty much untouchable against ranged units with a BS under 50.

She does INSANE damage. So the round starts, I delay my action, my comrade takes a full action aim form me. Once an opponent moves somewhere or dodges a shot I shoot him with 50BS + 20 Aim +10 Accuracy +10 short range (everything under 100 m, so basically every shot) +10 standard action with 100 BS if I roll under 60 the target eats 3D10+4 dmg, so pretty much a deathsentence for every opponent but the hardest ones. those take 2 rounds. Should I somehow get a penalty for something (like running opponent, called shot etc. the targeter gives me +10) and if I get my hand on a laser scope I get an additional +10 BS …

as it now, my teammates pin and distract the opponents and I pick em appart 1 by 1.

don't get me wrong, I am totally digging my insane killingpower, but I am unsure if it's not too much compared to other specs.

IIRC your comrade and your PC act in the same turn, so you don't need to delay your action, page 199 under the section for comrades in combat.

DJSunhammer said:

Well, as long as the enemy can't find you they can't dodge your attacks either. Though I'm not sure if this bonus goes away after your first shot.

vogue69 said:

Pretty much what a sniper is, really. However, being stationary carries it's own drawbacks. Eventually your GM will get wind of how lethal your sniper is and will start sending in mooks with scanners, preysense equipment, flamers, close-range artillery support, jump infantry like Stormboyz and/or attack beasts. And if he's feeling particularly cruel, he'll just introduce Kroot into the campaign.

well i am not afraid of any of this. the range is just too sick. the time it takes enemies to find me and wobble in range for their flamers, they are dead meat. it's not like my squadmates just stroke their balls, the heavy gunner and the weapon specialist can dish it out pretty well.

what i am afraid of is entering a building… close combat :fear:

JuankiMan said:

now ogryns IMHO should be the equivalent of that in melee and tankability.

I would change my ratling chick in a heartbeat for a cool ogryn.

Ogryns in OW are a bit like Ork Freeboters in RT. They excel at what they do (e.g.: stompin' gits), but they're almost incapable of doing anything else.

It depends on wether you feel combat alone can provide a fulfilling RP experience.

I think RPing an Ogryn in OW can be pretty **** funny.

I don't think allowing you to pick any comrade is without flaws, but I think it would be pretty reasonable to allow you to take 'advanced training' and buy another specialists comrade advance as an elite advance. So the Weapon Specialist could teach his gun caddy to act as a spotter for sniping for a few extra XP. But you'll never have to wonder why the Ogryn has a servitor.

I would really like Ratlings to be developed beyond the cartoonist archetype currently standard in GW. Even WFRP doesn't extend Halflings beyond the comic. In fact Ogres have more rounded psychologies…

No wonder no one wants to play them.

They don't have physical strength, so how about techinical and support roles? What about a Ratling medic, vox/electronic warfare specialist, pilot. There are all sorts of possibilities, but currently unexplored or perhaps forbidden by GW?

Fresnel said:

They're abhuman, an therefore second-class citizens by default. No one would assign an abhuman an important task such as field medic or operator of sacred machine spirits. There are possibilities, indeed, and Ratlings are known to be highly resourceful, but their condition as non-humans is a very important part of what they are and what they mean within the Imperium.

And sure, people play Ogryns for their "rounded psychologies". Right

I doubt many will play Ogryn for deep character exploration, but it can be a lot of fun playing a character who is halfway between Ludo (from Labyrinth) and the Hulk.

And for another way to play a Ratling try SSgt Crapgame from Kelly's Heroes. Don Rickles is pretty close to a ratling anyway.

Ratlings are trusted enough to be given weapons and the job of a sniper. In Real World a sniper is an elite status role.

How easy would it be for a sniper to take out his own side - they are trained to kill at distance and then escape. If he was inclined to settle scores, then how could anyone know that the longlas blast that killed Sgt B'stard wasn't from some rebel sniper? If a soldier was inclined to deflect the role of sniper would be perfect - no one has greater opportunity. So the argument that they are distrusted is shaky.

The degree to which their abhuman status limits them within the IG is ultimately for the GW line editor to dictate. If they can be trained to be good medics, vox operators and pilots, then the Imperium is under exploiting a resource. It would be nice if FFG could push the envelop on this with GW. I don't think loosening the ropes a little in OW would break 40k…

JuankiMan said:

Note that I was referring to Ogres (WFB) and comparing them with Halflings…

There's a difference between "second-class" and "distrusted". It is not that they're suspect as abhumans, though many an officer and comissar do, but they're considered to be fundamentally inferior. For a human, a sniper position is an elite status. Ratlings are snipers and scouts because High Command consider them useless for any other battlefield role, possibly out of prejudice although it is undeniable that they are very poor frontline troops. That doesn't stop a Ratling from learning medicae or even tech-use. He could even learn how to drive, though he would have trouble reaching the pedals.

But no matter what he knows and what he can do, the only thing the Imperium cares about is that they're Ratling so they'd better shut up and give thanks that they're given the honor of fighting for He Who Sits On Terra.

Fresnel said:

I fail to see the difference.