What dynasty does he belong to?

signoftheserpent said:

If it doesn't say in the book then you might aswell decide for yourself.

I don't have Tome of Fate so I don't know. I was hoping that the necron write up might explain these things as well as give a proper background for the Necrons. I guess FFG didn't bother.

signoftheserpent said:

They did give quite a good writeup on necrons and wtf they are doing in Screaming Vortex while giving plenty of adventure seeds for stuff related to them. I personally like that they didn't go and strictly rule what EXACTLY the necron dudes given in the book are up to, because then I feel much better going my own way for them

I guess making statements about something you haven't seen is quite a moot point.

Asoral said:

I leafed through the NEcron codex in GW on wednesday and was struck by just how different the level of background information on (Necrons, in this case, though it applies across the board) is compared to the rpg. The codex gives you a few pages (they aren't large books at all) describing the background, the society, how they function, etc. But when it comes the rpgs, FFG inexplicably sidestep this.

For example, the DE codex tells you their history, it tells you about Comorragh and it's districts, about Vect's rise to power, etc. A straightforward simple history. Black Crusade and, from what I've seen (i haven't brought it yet wiht Lathe Worlds and Tome of Fate releasing as well), Soul Reaver do neither.

signoftheserpent said:

Personally I'd rather see the splatbooks that I buy have more rules than more general fluff that isn't all THAT important for me to play the game and understand why and what the different races do. Seeing how the books apparently have very strict limits on pages/words "only a few pages" of extra fluff, which you can find in other places if you really want it, most likely is a quite big of a deal. So when they have to choose between "do we give more crunch/adventure seeds for this particular game" and "do we just copy&paste the fluff that is already available on the wikipedia/codices" I don't really see why they should go with the second one. Seeing how for example with the psychic powers in the core rulebook they had to combine some psychic powers into each other so that they could stay within the page limit.

I do understand what you are asking and why, but you gotta look at the bigger picture. For example, I haven't read the Newcron codex or the new lore about them, but I have enough of a idea of their society and where they come from in this edition of the fluff just from reading the FFG books to comfortably be able to use them in my campaigns. If I really want to take my lore knowledge deeper I can get the codex or just go to lexicanum and read it all up.

For example, you don't need to know everything about Comorragh and Vect if you want to play a DE in RT, unless you have a very DE heavy campaign with multiple players playing those careers and/or adventure time in Comorragh.

signoftheserpent said:

So you basically just want word-for-word copies of the codices, replacing all the wargame rules for RPG equivalents?

Honestly, I can't imagine anything more boring.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

In an rpg based on a licensed setting there will obviously be repetition of information. This is like arguing that the Star Wars game shouldn't explain thie history of the galactic civil war because it's in the movies.

Why would it need to be verbatim? If you are going to have the Necrons in an rpg based on a setting that has Necrons in it then there is a natural prerequisite to explain their history and background just as there is to provide stats for Necron units/adversaries.

I've honestly no clue as to what you are advocating.

signoftheserpent said:

Actually, the Saga Edition Star Wars RPG (the previous one, and the last one released by Wizards of the Coast) deliberately contained very little background information about the setting for exactly that reason. People already know what Star Wars is, so there isn't a pressing need to explain it to them. It's the same with every single licenced game I've looked at, owned, played or worked on.

When you're dealing with a game where the game's manuals themselves are the primary source of information, then comprehensive information is a high priority (though not always - Traveller books seldom contains setting info, yet there are no other sources for information on the "Third Imperium" setting other than Traveller books, because the game is often presented as generic). When you're dealing with a property where the game is one amongst many sources, then there isn't so urgent a requirement to explain everything, because that information can be easily obtained elsewhere.

I find it extraordinary that FFG should advise potential players not to buy their products, where they could include such material, but to go out and buy a codex for a completely different and incompatible game (the wargame is an entirely different product).

signoftheserpent said:

FFG haven't done anything. I don't speak for FFG. I don't speak for Margaret Weis Productions either, though I'm lined up to do work for them on the new Marvel RPG.

I don't speak for anyone but me. And I'm going on record here and stating that if you are so utterly repulsed by and vehemently opposed to the way that Fantasy Flight does things, then you're clearly not the target audience.

There is a fine line between "outspoken criticism" and "one-note rant". You seem to have not only crossed that line, but pole-vaulted past it.

You are ridiculous.

You continue to use needless flamebait hyperbole while deliberately missing the point.

This is a 40k. Consequently it needs to include evertying that's in the 40k setting. Simple.

"Everything" ? Really?

signoftheserpent said:

So you are still vehemently ranting about how FFG doesn't give info about the Necrons, even tho it has been clearly stated that books like Tome of Fate and Hand of Corruption give very good information on them? (like 11 pages of fluff and unit/necron type descriptions in ToF and nearly @SPOILERS@ 50 pages on how they and their tomb worlds work and awaken in Hand of Corruption @SPOILERS@ ). I guess its nice to have such invulnerable knowledge what is right and wrong in the universe

signoftheserpent said:

Lexicanum is free and more comprehensive than any codex, my friend. The FFG books always give us new fluff; why ask for that which can be found elsewhere?

H.B.M.C. said:

If it's too much work, then don't license such a detailed setting for a game.

Asoral said:

And then you can go back and read what I actually wrote, not what you think I wrote. You are another defensive little drone that cannot see past the end of his own nose out of fear that it will somehow anger GW and they will withdrtaw the license. Woe betide anyone criticise FFG for their appalling management and dreadful editing. It isn't the individual writers or the ideas that are the problem; it is the line managers (or whomoever) that decide what goes where and what should be used. These people do not understand the setting and they do not understand how to produce a supplement for an rpg. The best thing FFG can do is let them go. If you are suggesting that informatin about, for example, Necrons is best placed by putting half of it in an adventure book and the other half in a sourcebook about Tzeentch and his followers (one of four sort-of-player-guides, these could have easiuly been collapsed into one Rites of Battle size book) then you're very mistaken.

Plushy said:

signoftheserpent said:

Somewhat irrelevant, but I would love to play Eldar, Necrons, or Tau.

signoftheserpent said:

H.B.M.C. said:

You can't ask for all 40k fluff to be included in any game. There's more than 20 Black Library books that directly refer to chaos or CSM. Plus codices. Plus random stuff.

I'm not trying to defend FFG, I've even written a thread in this forum regarding the inadequate representation of CSM legions, but asking for everything to be included in a single game is too much. Plus, we haven't yet seen a BC xenos/ adversaries book.

Additionally, necrons are destined to be used as villains in BC. It is not particularly relevant to include a deep analysis of their society, history and culture, as is also the case for particular chapters of space marines, or the clades of the assassinorum, for example.

Things must be prioritised. A 1500-page-long rulebook including ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING isn't an rpg, it's an encyclopedia.

You are confusing fluff, fiction from the Black Library, with setting info. The individual codices only include about 10 pages at most of background info (the rest is stats, painting guides and rules). I don't want 1400 pages of fluff. I want the background to the faction being described.

Consdier the calixis sector. Instead of putting together all the material pertaining to the setting in one place, it's spread out across every single book. One sourcebook will mention something and a completely different book will expand on it or flesh it out. THat's not smart.

10 pages? Ignoring space for artwork, the Necron Codex has roughly 50 pages of background material, including, sometimes, two pages for a few special characters. A few statlines and special rules are rolled into that, but it's far, far, far in excess of 10 pages. Grey Knights was about 45 pages of background. Ditto for Dark Eldar.

These aren't the Codices of 3rd Ed, where they were virtually pamphlets with a bunch of rules and a paragraph of fluff in the margins for each unit. Things have changed.

BYE