DH 1.5

I really don't understand how the lead designer has kept his job here. So far almost every release he's made has been non stop random tables, like he has no idea how to create a proper RPG, yet FFG keeps pushing these turds out.

DH 1.5

I really don't understand how the lead designer has kept his job here. So far almost every release he's made has been non stop random tables, like he has no idea how to create a proper RPG, yet FFG keeps pushing these turds out.

Leaving aside the unnecessary hostility and personal insult of your comment, first edition had plenty of random tables. So that seems like an odd thing to complain about.

Yeah, I don't think that the line deserves THAT particular level of hostility.

DH 1.0 Was not perfect, but we've played it for years and had tons of fun with it.

Some of the moments came from random mutation, insanity, psychic phenomena and perils tables.

Random tables keep everything unique- and when it didn't matter, it specifies that you don't really have to roll [homeworld superstition for example]

40k RPG, starting with Dark Heresy, was a very good ruleset from the get go.

I disagree. The further you got from starting acolytes the less well it worked.

Trust me, the scaling problems in DH before Ascension are nothing compared to WFRP 2e.

1.5

It all strikes me as very arbitrary changes.

like that, with minimal adjustment, I can drag enemies, NPCs, weapons, and Talents from Black Crusade to Only War and vice-versa. With a little more work, the same can be done with the other three lines. Doing so with DH 2e is a massive pain in the rear.

This new edition doesn't do much to address gripes people have had for a long time, and seems to go backwards in many regards. The already slow combat is now slower. Talent trees are back after being happily removed for two games. These two changes will most likely not be changed by this beta.

I don't get it, man. The majority of players would've been happy with an update to OW rules with a few tweaks and new subsystems. All I'm liking about this is the new CharGen and the Remembrance skill.

I'll stick to homebrew.

For Thrones sake, please do not tell me this is going to be the new Dark Heresy?

I had an very similar experience to the OP of this thread. Used to play WHFRP 2nd, and was completely turned off by the card-based (what is this Magic?) and wasted game that is 3rd edition. (It's akin to the old D&D split, that created Pathfinder. I'm Pathfinder obviously.)

All FFG has to do is polish up DH to work and still be a part of THE OTHER GAMES.

The whole premise of the game differences was the difference in overall 'power' of the characters you play.

Firstly, DH are the starting beginner characters. Low experience, hard to stay alive. Just some civilians and others 'conscripted' to be pawns.

Then came Rogue Trader, where no longer were you bound to the Imperium alone. And you were considered higher in relative power than a starting DH character.

Afterwards, enter Deathwatch, which is what every fan-boi was wanting. Super-powerful soldiers, stronger then the average Human.

With Black Crusade, they mixed it all together, and put it to the opposition. Icing on the cake.

Finally, they gave us what should have been the first game all along: Only War. Basically Dark Heresy characters, in the Deathwatch type warzones and settings. Being a unit and working (or mostly dying) to live another day in the meat grinder.

Now, putting all of that aside, what connects all of this even more, are a common set of crunchy bits...the rules. Not just the fantastic soft fluff, that is the WH40K universe, make one of these games inter-connected. Turning DH into something the others are not, leaves them alone and separate from the whole.

How are we supposed to keep any crossover going, for say a crusade campaign? An Imperial Guard unit, somehow assigned with an Inquisitor retinue, that is using (ie: highjacking) a Rogue Traders ship, and has requested Deathwatch aide as well. You've just kicked out any Inquisition play, as we have to spend time going...um...how does my acolyte keep up with the Guardsman who are supposed to be protecting him in his investigation, and how do the Space Marines investigate and clense the Inquisitors xenos mess? What if the acolytes go to the other side and become agents of chaos eventually? How can we keep a system in place for changes that won't make sense now?

So: 1.5 Please.

Why this company continues to push changes to games that are....well, not required at all, is confounding. (It's like FFG is the Empire. Chaos is eating it away, slowly, but steadily. Look how that's going for them? ;P)

I'll admit. I'd have a different outlook, if they were completely changing the whole entire WH40KRP system. I'd be erked that I'd have to buy all new books again, but I might embrace it if that's our only option. But they aren't and it isn't. So why create a headache and make Dark Heresy even more the bastard child, of the system that it is now? Don't change the wheel if it's not broken. Give it a nice finish. Bring Dark Heresy up to spec with the other products you've been giving us. I promise you, we'll shut up and give you our money anyways.

I realise I'm typing heaps, but that's all I can do. Apologies for my lame rant. I'd just keen to have all of this great WH40K RP kept together and intertwined, so we can continue to enjoy it all.

Don't make a separate game out of just one aspect of the Imperium. I love it all. All we need are updates (or patches if this was a computer game.) We don't need a spin-off set that has little to do with the original that made it, especially while the original is still quite alive and kicking arse. Right?

All I can see is 2.0 is changes for changes sake to systems that weren't very important, and then a lot of things which have gone in the wrong direction and made things worse.

My gaming group won't even touch it except to laugh at how bad it is.

So yeah, 1.5 for me please, or at least not this 2.0

I would like to point out that the edition of WHFRP with the cards that several of you mention was 3rd Edition, and not 2nd Edition. WHFRP 2nd Edition was produced and distributed by Green Ronin under license with GW; at least here in the U.S.

With an update to Dark Heresy I was hoping to see something along the lines of a composite of the original and Black Crusade/ Only War rules, streamlining areas that have been addressed in the Erratas and FAQs. Hell, that's what the vocal forumites have been mostly clamoring for since Black Crusade .

-=Brother Praetus=-

I'm glad for DH 2.0. Considering how inter-compatible most of the older content is, it's stupidly easy to convert Dark Heresy over to the Only War system; heaps of people on these very forums have already done it.

The full system update allows them to make some changes for the better that wouldn't work otherwise. Action points are a welcome change from actions, in my book, things are much less ambiguous now. And the new wound system, while it definitely has its quirks, is much more interesting than what was essentially hit points with some cool effects before you die. I think, with some work to sort out the kinks, which is expected given this is a beta, this could be brilliant. I intend to use it.

1.5 as far as I'm concerned, or at least as cross-compatibility as possible while still adding new stuff. Action points aren't too big a deal (after all, if you translate the old actions into AP equivalents, they could simply be a streamlining of the previous system), but having radically different weapon stats, a different health system, etc. takes the changes too far for me to be interested in the swtich.

I'm glad for DH 2.0. Considering how inter-compatible most of the older content is, it's stupidly easy to convert Dark Heresy over to the Only War system; heaps of people on these very forums have already done it.

The full system update allows them to make some changes for the better that wouldn't work otherwise. Action points are a welcome change from actions, in my book, things are much less ambiguous now. And the new wound system, while it definitely has its quirks, is much more interesting than what was essentially hit points with some cool effects before you die. I think, with some work to sort out the kinks, which is expected given this is a beta, this could be brilliant. I intend to use it.

Did we download the same game?

I have to agree with Baron here, the Action point system, although less ambiguous, both removes the flexibility of varying RoF (especially post BC/OW where the bonus/penalties for each where more or less fixed) and, as written, the majority of the RoF and other stats are plain old wrong when you compare weapons (autoguns shooting as fast as lasguns? That's a pretty slow autogun. Autocannon being weaker than heavy bolters, and firing as fast? It's like they didn't even look at the fluff, the TT rules or the previous rules before making the stats). Melee weapons with RoF based on Ag are even worst; the (nearly nonexistent) balance in the system just collapses with melee weapons at high ranks. For anything that isn't attacks, it's pretty much the same as the half-action was, except sometimes you can now do two of them, which would have easily been solved by removing the overly constraining "half" and replacing it with "partial", and allowing more of them.

The wound system is a good idea in theory , although it adds a pile of bookkeeping, especially in long term campaigns where you PC's may slowly accumulate truly ridiculous amounts of different debilitating effects that remain after the wound has been treated. It is also currently completely imbalanced in favor of dual wielding, with full auto being a close second but still powerful alternative (it's just as good, except you can't finish the job yourself), and single shot being utterly useless. Because the only thing that matters right now is number of previous wounds to be able to get to the death options, there is also no practical scaling; a melta gun needs, on average, 5 hits to kill anyone, with a minimum of 3 hits; really tough opponents only increase this by 1. It will also destroy any vehicle in between 3 and 5 hits, no matter if it's a scooter or a Gargant. A sniper needs a minimum of 5 shots to kill someone, and rolling better on the first hits really doesn't change anything. Mooks die in two hits, be they by earthshaker shells or autopistol bullets; turning everybody into bullet sponges that die after a set number of bullets, no matter the weapon firing them, isn't a functional system, and it absolutely does not follow any previously established norms in the 40k universe.

Sure, the systems could be patched into something workable, but that doesn't make them better than what we had before.

Howdy,

It seems that DH 2.0 was change-for-change's-sake (a votive act for Tzeentch?). The mechanics are different, but not really an *improvement* - I don't understand the push for this.

The fact that DH 2.0 will never be easily compatible with the rest of the 40K line is a real head-scratcher.

Cheers,

Ken

@MorioMortis - That is exactly my problem with the new combat system. I have been wanting to type that up at some point but you have just said exactly what I wanted to say.

Howdy,

It seems that DH 2.0 was change-for-change's-sake (a votive act for Tzeentch?). The mechanics are different, but not really an *improvement* - I don't understand the push for this.

The fact that DH 2.0 will never be easily compatible with the rest of the 40K line is a real head-scratcher.

Cheers,

Ken

It's like they tried to make the combat as non-compatible as possible, but without making the system itself radically different like WFRP 2-3e or D&D 3-4e. The combat is pretty much the only thing that isn't more or less compatible with the rest of the lines, and, because of that, the easiest (and often most useful for any game) things to import or export (the mobs and the gear) can't be. Moreover, the main issue with the system is the combat; the new Influence and Subtlety systems are great, and can easily be ported, while people with issues with the current, extremely harsh insanity and corruption system (myself included) can just directly port the old one, and the people who dislike the new talent system can just free them up into Tiers like in BC/OW or stacked pools (where all the skills in 1 tier for any tree are in a given pool, and you need a skill from the tier 1 pool to get access to the tier 2 pool from a given skill set).

I'm in the 1.5 camp with this.

while i do like a lot of things i'm seeing in the DH2 beta, i have to say that one of the biggest selling points for me in the 40k rpg line was it's cross setting compatibilities.

I always hoped for a second edition to DH you see, but one that would bring it in to line with the other books, rather than send it spiraling off in another direction entirely.
This new version is firmly -not- compatable with the other games.
That strikes me as a mistep.

So of the 3 pages that's 2 votes for the beta and all the others for a 1.5 update? I really hope FFG is paying attention to this sort of stuff. I'll go ahead add another 1.5 vote.

One more vote for 1.5. I like what they've done with character creation but otherwise I'm unimpressed.

One more vote for 1.5. I like what they've done with character creation but otherwise I'm unimpressed.

I will add my voice to this, saying that I really liked what I saw up until I got to about page 63, the Elite Advance section of the rules. The Untouchable chart in particular made me wonder if the rules were written by someone complete unfamiliar with the setting. Character Creation was very promising, but everything after it was really offputting to me.

I will add my voice to this, saying that I really liked what I saw up until I got to about page 63, the Elite Advance section of the rules. The Untouchable chart in particular made me wonder if the rules were written by someone complete unfamiliar with the setting. Character Creation was very promising, but everything after it was really offputting to me.

I had that feeling with Fischer way back with Stars of Inequity and his Xeno/Archeotech tables that let you find Necron Power armor. It hasn't gotten any better.

Can we please not delude ourselves into thinking this poll has any meaning at all?

Can we please not delude ourselves into thinking this poll has any meaning at all?

It makes people feel better to express thier opinion, even if they know that even if every single FFG customer past, present and future walked up to their offices and shouted 'No', they'd still try and put this pig in play, if for no other reason than to write off the development costs as a loss on their taxes.

Can we please not delude ourselves into thinking this poll has any meaning at all?

Of course it has meaning. If you mean FFG is unlikely to care about it, that's true. But the overwhelming consensus is that a 1.5 edition is preferred to this beta release. That means something, whether it ultimately impacts product design or not.

Whatever lets you sleep better, man.

It makes people feel better to express thier opinion, even if they know that even if every single FFG customer past, present and future walked up to their offices and shouted 'No', they'd still try and put this pig in play, if for no other reason than to write off the development costs as a loss on their taxes.

Actually, it could have worked if we could do that.

Or if we started an online petition and gathered over a thousand signatures under it...

Or if we started an online petition and gathered over a thousand signatures under it...

Sadly, that's been laughed off by several companies in the past, so pardon if I don't see that one as viable. The general publisher mentality is that there are always more customers... until there aren't. And then they start trying to blame people.