This new Action Points system serves little purpose other than to confuse players who have been using a system for five gamelines and to inhibit conversion work.

The changes to weapon profiles are all useless.

The switch back to Talent trees after so much was made if how great Only War and Black Crusade are for doing the exact opposite is baffling.

I'm liking the cut down in skill bloat and the revision to character creation. Beyond that, trash it.

I'm afraid trashing it just might be the way to go. I've been trying to stay positive, but the lack of conversion opportunities was the real deal-breaker for me.

FFG, please listen to us. This hurts everything. We wanted a rules update, not a new game.

Geeze, I finally know how the World's Most Popular players felt.

I'm afraid trashing it just might be the way to go. I've been trying to stay positive, but the lack of conversion opportunities was the real deal-breaker for me.

FFG, please listen to us. This hurts everything. We wanted a rules update, not a new game.

Geeze, I finally know how the World's Most Popular players felt.

2nd that

I wanted a 1,5 edition where all the great things from the others settings where in the new edition and not to have a lot of book that now sound useless

Put out an Only War book called "Agents of the Inquisition."

Include new Specialties, rules for Acquisition and Influence, bring in the Assets system from Deathwatch, and there you go.

This new Action Points system serves little purpose other than to confuse players who have been using a system for five gamelines and to inhibit conversion work.

I've just started browsing through this board, as I've just discovered DH 2.0 announcement.

Action Points? Now, finally! That was stupid enough to give _everyone_ two action points (being those half-arsed half-actions) in the first place. That concept screamed for revision since it was first introduced in 2005 in WFRP 2.

I'm afraid trashing it just might be the way to go. I've been trying to stay positive, but the lack of conversion opportunities was the real deal-breaker for me.

FFG, please listen to us. This hurts everything. We wanted a rules update, not a new game.

Geeze, I finally know how the World's Most Popular players felt.

2nd that

I wanted a 1,5 edition where all the great things from the others settings where in the edition and not to have a lot of book that now sound useless

Yeah i can only agree to this. Only War made it very well. The new System is nothing that blasts me right away.

I am quite sure DH2 will continue to serve and sell for a long time to come. There is enough fresh ideas in there to raise the bar another notch. FFG knows the silent majority got their back!

I am quite sure DH2 will continue to serve and sell for a long time to come. There is enough fresh ideas in there to raise the bar another notch. FFG knows the silent majority got their back!

Given that these forums seem to be nothing but a chorus of " Why did they do this? Did anyone read this? " I'm not so sure I agree.

It's fairly well known that the most vocal group on a subject is usually the one that dislikes it.

I'm not saying there aren't issues, but you've got to consider that, not only are these forums not the only place people talk about 40k RPGs, but you'll also notice there's only a very small number of people that have actually posted here, they're just posting a lot. I'm not sure there are more than 20, maybe 30 people who have actually posted in this forum thus far. That's a tiny, tiny fragment of the overall consumer base.

Action Points? Now, finally! That was stupid enough to give _everyone_ two action points (being those half-arsed half-actions) in the first place. That concept screamed for revision since it was first introduced in 2005 in WFRP 2.

I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure the new rule is everyone gets four action points instead of two. How does that improve anything?

I am quite sure DH2 will continue to serve and sell for a long time to come. There is enough fresh ideas in there to raise the bar another notch. FFG knows the silent majority got their back!

Given that these forums seem to be nothing but a chorus of " Why did they do this? Did anyone read this? " I'm not so sure I agree.

I'm really trying to hold my horses, give the game a chance by reading it carefully and at least running some mock scenarios to see how it works, but so far almost everything I've read seems like a step backwards from DH 1e, let alone the later 40k systems.

Millianson has a point though, most people who are happy with something are...well, happy with it. People who dislike stuff tend to be vocal about it. For instance, although there is a positive and a negative thread on this forum the negative one will most likely be the most adressed. I liked alot of what I read in the positive thread, like more structured rules for investigation, overt operations etc. I might pick up the book for that alone.

Second, this is beta. People are supposed to talk about the bad stuff. The good stuff doesn't need fixing, the bad stuff does.

I have to say, I don't dislike DH2 because it's different from DH1. I disliked DH1 quite a bit. I dislike DH2 because I think, by themselves, the rules are bad. I think if I had picked this book up in a store and flipped through it, I would have put it back down and not bought it.

That said, I have bought it and I do intend to give it a spin. However, take one the face of it, I don't expect to buy this game or future releases in the 40k-RP2 line if they remain like this one.

It's fairly well known that the most vocal group on a subject is usually the one that dislikes it.

I'm not saying there aren't issues, but you've got to consider that, not only are these forums not the only place people talk about 40k RPGs, but you'll also notice there's only a very small number of people that have actually posted here, they're just posting a lot. I'm not sure there are more than 20, maybe 30 people who have actually posted in this forum thus far. That's a tiny, tiny fragment of the overall consumer base.

There's also the fact that some people will scream and shout and drag their heels at a change just because it is change. Only a small percentage of the player base actually post in this forum. They aren't going to change anything because we complain and stamp our feet. They would be foolish to do so.

On the other hand, well reasoned criticism is something they are more likely to pay attention to. Don't just say something is bad, explain why you think it is bad. That's much more likely to have an impact.

On the other hand, well reasoned criticism is something they are more likely to pay attention to. Don't just say something is bad, explain why you think it is bad. That's much more likely to have an impact.

I agree. My issue is that what I am hearing folks like Millandson saying is that well reasoned criticism to the effect that the system is fundamentally flawed will be ignored and is a waste of time. It shouldn't be.

FFG shouldn't scrap the new rules because a few people (or even a lot of people) on these forums gripe and moan about them. However, if a significant portion of the feedback from this playtest consists of well reasoned criticism to the effect that certain of the major changes are fundamentally flawed then FFG should be willing to listen. The suggest is that they will not be. That is a bad.

It's fairly well known that the most vocal group on a subject is usually the one that dislikes it. I'm not saying there aren't issues, but you've got to consider that, not only are these forums not the only place people talk about 40k RPGs, but you'll also notice there's only a very small number of people that have actually posted here, they're just posting a lot. I'm not sure there are more than 20, maybe 30 people who have actually posted in this forum thus far. That's a tiny, tiny fragment of the overall consumer base.

There's also the fact that some people will scream and shout and drag their heels at a change just because it is change. Only a small percentage of the player base actually post in this forum. They aren't going to change anything because we complain and stamp our feet. They would be foolish to do so. On the other hand, well reasoned criticism is something they are more likely to pay attention to. Don't just say something is bad, explain why you think it is bad. That's much more likely to have an impact.

Exactly my point. It's fine, even good to criticise the rules, as long as it's constructive. "I don't like it" is going to be ignored, but "I don't like it, this is why, and here's my suggestion to make it better" will, because then they have something solid to work on.

The fact that the game is, for all intents and purpose, useless when trying to incorporate it into the other systems tells me right off the bat that I will not be buying this product line. I would rather do FFG's job of update DH (which is what I wanted from them) than buy a product that the exact opposite of what I wanted. This is true of every player that I personally know that plays WH40k RPG's.

In a nutshell, I don't want a re-make I want an update.

The fact that the game is, for all intents and purpose, useless when trying to incorporate it into the other systems tells me right off the bat that I will not be buying this product line. I would rather do FFG's job of update DH (which is what I wanted from them) than buy a product that the exact opposite of what I wanted. This is true of every player that I personally know that plays WH40k RPG's.

In a nutshell, I don't want a re-make I want an update.

Howdy,

Exactly. Why *would* you want to make SO much material incompatible with your new game?

This move has everyone in the local (Rhode Island & southern Massachusetts) 40K RPG scene scratching their heads. I think my old Toronto crew was incredulous, but they only played Deathwatch.

Cheers,

Ken

In a nutshell, I don't want a re-make I want an update.

I feel that this is the primary issue right now; instead of further iterating on what is by now a proven formula, they decided to scrap nearly everything and start from scratch, ignoring all the progress made in BC and OW.

More notably however, is that the system doesn't feel like Wh40k right now, especially the combat. Force fields that reduce success instead of being invulnerable saves (that's how they work in the fluff and on the TT), Untouchables that are barely resistant to psychic powers, autocannons that do less damage than heavy bolters (lol wut, one is made to take out heavy infantry, the other light vehicles), melta weapons that can't pierce flak armor unless they are point blank, and barely pierce light power armor even then (how will this interact with vehicle armor?). The balance is also all over the place, with autoguns being now nearly useless (weaker and more expensive than lasguns, same rate of fire and the overcharge makes most special ammo on the autogun redundant).

Parting words... why I feel DH2 is fundamentally a bad game:

To my mind in a roleplaying session, once I have a handle on the rules, I should have to open the rulebook maybe once or twice in a session. At most. In an ideal session, I should never have to crack the book. I never liked the critical hit tables or the psychic phenomena tables from DH1 for the simple reason that they were tables that I had to reference too often. DH2 has not only more tables I need to reference but tables I need to reference almost every single session (or at least every session with combat). This would require me to spend a lot of time in sessions flipping through the books saying " wait a sec guys, let me find the chart I need. " That is a bad roleplaying experience, from my point of view.

Therefore, I will never approve of the current direction of this edition. If I want to play a role playing game... I want to roleplay, not look up charts.

Good night everybody.

Parting words... why I feel DH2 is fundamentally a bad game:

To my mind in a roleplaying session, once I have a handle on the rules, I should have to open the rulebook maybe once or twice in a session. At most. In an ideal session, I should never have to crack the book. I never liked the critical hit tables or the psychic phenomena tables from DH1 for the simple reason that they were tables that I had to reference too often. DH2 has not only more tables I need to reference but tables I need to reference almost every single session (or at least every session with combat). This would require me to spend a lot of time in sessions flipping through the books saying " wait a sec guys, let me find the chart I need. " That is a bad roleplaying experience, from my point of view.

Therefore, I will never approve of the current direction of this edition. If I want to play a role playing game... I want to roleplay, not look up charts.

Good night everybody.

More importantly is the amount of condition bloat involved. You potentially have to track conditions on 9 different tables, conditions that explicitly don't necessarily remove themselves when the wounds are treated. Sure, it may be realistic that after a few firefights your character is so damaged that he can barely do anything, but you shouldn't have to track 7 different wounds to do so.

More importantly is the amount of condition bloat involved. You potentially have to track conditions on 9 different tables, conditions that explicitly don't necessarily remove themselves when the wounds are treated. Sure, it may be realistic that after a few firefights your character is so damaged that he can barely do anything, but you shouldn't have to track 7 different wounds to do so.

"I'm at Impact 2 on my Right Arm, Energy 7 on my Head, and Rending 21 to my Body... I'm at Blood Loss (5) and Fatigue 3, I'm Stunned, I'm Nauseated, I'm Blinded for two rounds..."

It'll be a pain.

In a nutshell, I don't want a re-make I want an update.

To be fair, there'd be very little point in them restarting the line just to introduce a few minor tweaks.

I was actually pretty sure it's going to be a big change when they announced it as second edition. I just somehow expected the change to be... I don't know, really, but definitely not in the direction they took it.

Parting words... why I feel DH2 is fundamentally a bad game:

To my mind in a roleplaying session, once I have a handle on the rules, I should have to open the rulebook maybe once or twice in a session. At most. In an ideal session, I should never have to crack the book. I never liked the critical hit tables or the psychic phenomena tables from DH1 for the simple reason that they were tables that I had to reference too often.

I actually didn't mind the critical tables, exactly because their use was sporadic - it was a disruption of a game flow, but only occurred from time to time and generally caused fun things, so I was fine with it.

But overall, I agree with you wholeheartedly. The biggest change I'm seeing in this edition so far is a lot more bookkeeping, which is directly contrary to my idea of system improvement. I don't want to resolve five ongoing status effects per actor and keep close track of power durations counted in turns, this actively detracts from my enjoyment of combat, even if it also brings unparalleled tactical depth (which, honestly, I don't think it does).

More importantly is the amount of condition bloat involved. You potentially have to track conditions on 9 different tables, conditions that explicitly don't necessarily remove themselves when the wounds are treated. Sure, it may be realistic that after a few firefights your character is so damaged that he can barely do anything, but you shouldn't have to track 7 different wounds to do so.

"I'm at Impact 2 on my Right Arm, Energy 7 on my Head, and Rending 21 to my Body... I'm at Blood Loss (5) and Fatigue 3, I'm Stunned, I'm Nauseated, I'm Blinded for two rounds..."

It'll be a pain.

Exactly. Depth and breadth are nice, but why FFG felt they had to go this far is beyond me. I know there are a couple of people in my own gaming group that need to work to keep up with things at present; the sheer amount of stuff we'll have to watch out for with this is insane.