I am not optimistic they are going to make enough changes to make this work. Its probably going to be the end of me buying the 40k books if they go ahead with this which is really annoying to me because I have bought all of them up to now.

o_0

Sadly, old pal, that says more about how bad this thing is than anything short of HBMC's distinct lack of enthusiasm about this.

To try and keep things in perspective, I think it's worth remembering that there are plenty of people on the forums and elsewhere that are enjoying the new system and are finding that it's working for them. That's not to say that things can't be tweaked or improved, just that it's hardly the death of dark heresy that some of the post seem to be making out.

To try and keep things in perspective, I think it's worth remembering that there are plenty of people on the forums and elsewhere that are enjoying the new system and are finding that it's working for them. That's not to say that things can't be tweaked or improved, just that it's hardly the death of dark heresy that some of the post seem to be making out.

Yuh. Some of those Positive Patties are PR plants.

To try and keep things in perspective, I think it's worth remembering that there are plenty of people on the forums and elsewhere that are enjoying the new system and are finding that it's working for them. That's not to say that things can't be tweaked or improved, just that it's hardly the death of dark heresy that some of the post seem to be making out.

Navi, please understand this: FFG's game testers declared me The Scathing Cynic because I tear apart 40k products. It's how I roll, because a lot of the time, you'll read these gushing, shill like reviews for even the worst 40k products (Finecast), and until I came along, there was never a counter voice that said 'Hey, this is bad and here's why'.

You will always have people claim that it's great and they enjoy it with a 40k product, and some of them it might even be true, but there's a portion of those that feel for whatever reason that they 'have' to defend 40k. A lot of geek subcultures are the same way. Write up how even the most reviled storyline is in a given comic and you'll still get a few guys writing in how they thing One More Day was a stroke of Genius.

What bothers me most about this whole thing is I have seen, sadly, MANY of the people who used to take me to task for my rather negative views on certain FFG and GW products Agreeing with me, or (bizarrely) taking an even harder line view than I am. Example, I don't think this product is entirely unsalvageable, but will require a serious overhaul to avoid alienating a large portion of the player base.

I think that FFG needs to look very hard at the fact that this seems to be alienating some of their oldest and best customers in a niche RPG.

Yuh. Some of those Positive Patties are PR plants.

Sadly there are those. the RT forum had a spate of people suddenly showing up in threads saying how great it would be if we had this exact product that we're now beta testing a few weeks before the announce. Real subtle guys.

To try and keep things in perspective, I think it's worth remembering that there are plenty of people on the forums and elsewhere that are enjoying the new system and are finding that it's working for them. That's not to say that things can't be tweaked or improved, just that it's hardly the death of dark heresy that some of the post seem to be making out.

Navi, please understand this: FFG's game testers declared me The Scathing Cynic because I tear apart 40k products. It's how I roll, because a lot of the time, you'll read these gushing, shill like reviews for even the worst 40k products (Finecast), and until I came along, there was never a counter voice that said 'Hey, this is bad and here's why'.

You will always have people claim that it's great and they enjoy it with a 40k product, and some of them it might even be true, but there's a portion of those that feel for whatever reason that they 'have' to defend 40k. A lot of geek subcultures are the same way. Write up how even the most reviled storyline is in a given comic and you'll still get a few guys writing in how they thing One More Day was a stroke of Genius.

What bothers me most about this whole thing is I have seen, sadly, MANY of the people who used to take me to task for my rather negative views on certain FFG and GW products Agreeing with me, or (bizarrely) taking an even harder line view than I am. Example, I don't think this product is entirely unsalvageable, but will require a serious overhaul to avoid alienating a large portion of the player base.

I think that FFG needs to look very hard at the fact that this seems to be alienating some of their oldest and best customers in a niche RPG.

I have no problem with this, every group needs someone to take a more negative view on things, keeps groups honest. But in the same way it bothers you that people can be overly positive about 40k products, it bothers me when people attempt to portray that because they don't like something, nobody does.

Wasn't a dig at anyone specifically, just want to say by 2 pence that I personally have been enjoying the new system (plus obviously the PR money I'm getting from FFG is sweetening the deal).

I have no problem with this, every group needs someone to take a more negative view on things, keeps groups honest. But in the same way it bothers you that people can be overly positive about 40k products, it bothers me when people attempt to portray that because they don't like something, nobody does.

Wasn't a dig at anyone specifically, just want to say by 2 pence that I personally have been enjoying the new system

Never said no one was enjoying it. Some parts of it I enjoy myself. But the complaints I've been reading are both numerous and consistent, and coming from some very unexpected corners. I think that when they announced a new edition, many players were hoping for a fixed and updated version of the old game, not an entirely new one with the old game's name,

To try and keep things in perspective, I think it's worth remembering that there are plenty of people on the forums and elsewhere that are enjoying the new system and are finding that it's working for them. That's not to say that things can't be tweaked or improved, just that it's hardly the death of dark heresy that some of the post seem to be making out.

I see some potential in the new rules, If they fix most of the problems I have with it I'll probably get it even though its not the thing I really want. I'm just not confident that they will make the pretty drastic changes to many of the systems to make them really work. I am not heartened by the way that the developers have not addressed critism at this point. If the board if being flooded with negative comments they should really be doing some damage control, talking to the people posting and making assurances about the things that are being complained about.

Groups can have fun playing almost any RPG system if the players and the GM are good so people having fun with this isn't a useful measure for me.

I don't want to seem like I am complaining for no reason, I have considered what I feel about it but posting all of my complaints and issues in a thought out manner would take alot of time which I actually need to write notes for my next DH session funnily enough. I have a You Tube channel and if I can get my friends together I am hoping to run the back of the book scenario over skype and record it and we can hopefully make our feelings known that way.

One thing while I'm already on it is that I don't feel that the new damage system works. I feel that the increase of Stats is a mistake in a long run with the line making larger enemies impossible to work in. I think while wounds are a gamey mechanic they are a useful one which allows for large enemies to be modelled better than simply being tougher, an Elephant for example is tough but would also have alot of wounds as there is alot of mass to it. I also feel the way wounds work in the new system rewards the person who gets the last shot and not the one that did all the work wounding the person which feels like bad game mechanics to me.

Our group tends to modify for increased lethality and we already run a system of straight to crit damage where any wounds taken over TB (after reductions for defence) cause critical results to happen. We also play with the RF tuned on for everyone to prevent weapons becoming useless at higher ranks. Enemies divide that number by their "wound bonus" which makes marines and other big monsters pretty immune to small hits and while the arguement can be made that it overpowers toughness its not generally been an issue for us. There is no way I can get that sort of system back in the new rules which to me do a much worse job of modelling the range of 40k enemies than our fairly simple house rule. BTW our houserule passes your headshot test baron on average bolt pistol damage (1d10+5 tearing gives an average of 7+5=12 damage which is 9 wounds on a T3 character and 6 explosive insta crits to head which is dead).

That isn't my only or in fact main complaint with the new rules but should maybe demonstate why I am not to happy with the new rules changes that make that sort of thing impossible.

Ok that was long incoherant and ranty but I am a fairly passionate 40k fan and I dont like it when I feel that my opinions as a long standing supporter of the line (every book remember) are viewed as invalid because I am not in favor of the new thing.

Kaihlik

Never said no one was enjoying it. Some parts of it I enjoy myself. But the complaints I've been reading are both numerous and consistent, and coming from some very unexpected corners. I think that when they announced a new edition, many players were hoping for a fixed and updated version of the old game, not an entirely new one with the old game's name,

I think the most telling fact is that many distinct complaints are both very frequent and almost universally very similar. This means that among what is probably the most hardcore Wh40kRP community (the few who play the game, know the old ones, feel that they should help the new one be good and bother to post on the official forums), which, admittedly, might be somewhat biased, there is a near consensus on important issues, and on why those things are issues. This indicates that these issues are, in most probability, not solely based on the subjectivity of the individuals, but on the objective quality of the rules. It's one thing to have a beta that doesn't satisfy everyone due to diverging ideas of what it should achieve (see d&d Next, although many will tell you it's plain bad ), it's another to have elements that are disliked by almost everyone. One can demonstrates a schism in the user base, and can usually be solved by newcomer sales (who don't have strong feelings towards or knowledge of other possible system for any concept), the other shows a core issue with the product, which newcomers are also likely to discover from the get go, or nearly so.

One can demonstrates a schism in the user base, and can usually be solved by newcomer sales (who don't have strong feelings towards or knowledge of other possible system for any concept), the other shows a core issue with the product, which newcomers are also likely to discover from the get go, or nearly so.

Well, remember this is a niche game, so even a schism is bad for it, as there is not a big potential 'newcomer' audience. A lot of people inside FFG urged caution with this as, from a publishing standpoint, this is a very risky move with not a lot of obvious reward for it.

I don't think they've changed enough to alienate people, and frankly bringing things up to Only War standards wouldn't justify the purchase of a new rulebook. Anyone can make that conversion if they open up the DH and OW core books and sit down with them for fifteen minutes. The changes they've made are worthwhile. they just need a **** lot of polish before the system is fully playable.

I wouldn't compare this to the shift between Dnd 3.5 and 4. And really, as far as I know 4e has only shown WotC a **** lot of profits. Got a source on these supposed losses?

Howdy,

Talk to people at WotC over drinks at GenCon.... You can also look at the Hasbro earning reports and the WotC release schedule.

D&D 4e was a bomb. It made money initially, but many of the players fled to other systems (i.e. Pathfinder, affectionately referred to as "D&D 3.75"). WotC pulled planned 4e releases and there are NO 4e releases for over 2 years until the next edition. This is why we have seen an *explosion* of releases by WotC of different previous editions of D&D - ANYTHING to make money with minimal outlay. As explained to me by an employee - "If Hasbro ever found out how little D&D (tabletop) brings into their coffers (relatively speaking), they would break us up and sell us off in a heartbeat...."

Cheers,

Ken

One can demonstrates a schism in the user base, and can usually be solved by newcomer sales (who don't have strong feelings towards or knowledge of other possible system for any concept), the other shows a core issue with the product, which newcomers are also likely to discover from the get go, or nearly so.

Well, remember this is a niche game, so even a schism is bad for it, as there is not a big potential 'newcomer' audience. A lot of people inside FFG urged caution with this as, from a publishing standpoint, this is a very risky move with not a lot of obvious reward for it.

Howdy,

What we are going to see is a schism like we saw with WHFRP 2nd versus 3rd edition - some people making the change, and others buying the PDFs of the older edition. I am sure that DH 2.0 will have some players, as I am sure that others will buy DH 1.0 from DriveThruRPG for the previously published supps as well as crossover games with the other 40k lines (RT/DW/BC/OW).

Cheers,

Ken

Howdy,

Talk to people at WotC over drinks at GenCon....

Gencon and Comicon drinks are always the best. Don't bother asking Stephen King though, he's been too good to drink with everyone else ever since his name got bigger than the title of the book.

Put your mind at ease. The D&D4E example is totally inapplicable. There is no OGL here. There is no Paizo (a company that suddenly found itself with nothing to do but compete with WotC). The better comparison is with WFRP3E and that should not give you much cause for concern. WFRP3E was a truly radical change from WFRP2E. While DH2E is significantly different from DH1E and BC/OW, the changes are nowhere near so dramatic.

Like I said above, due to the publishing cycle of the 40k rpg, they are in direct competition with the new DH2. This was not the case for WHFRP, where the 2e was for all intents and purposes dead, and had been for a while, so it was not competing with 3e when it came out. Moreover, as it came out a few years after 2e was largely discontinued, some WFRP 2e players had already moved on, and where willing to come back to a new, supported WFRP. This is not the same situation here, where the DH2 stuff, being somewhat incompatible with the rest of the systems, isn't very attractive for people who mostly play one of the other WH40k systems because it's difficult to make use of it as anything but the basis of a similar in purpose, but mechanically different, system in the old WH40k system, unlike the current situation where any new splatbook can be interesting for players of any of the lines because they are easily compatible with a few tweaks, especially in the wake of the improvements and general standardization that came with BC and OW.

Actually, there were 2 or 3 publications for WHFRP 2Ed within one year of the license transferring from Green Ronin to FFG and WHFRP 3Ed being announced - the last one being the Career Compendium, which was both produced by GR and FFG for a short period. I know, as I got into WHFRP 2Ed only a couple of years before the switch over and was playing both "catch-up" and "keep-up" simultaneously.

-=Brother Praetus=-

Actually, there were 2 or 3 publications for WHFRP 2Ed within one year of the license transferring from Green Ronin to FFG and WHFRP 3Ed being announced - the last one being the Career Compendium, which was both produced by GR and FFG for a short period. I know, as I got into WHFRP 2Ed only a couple of years before the switch over and was playing both "catch-up" and "keep-up" simultaneously.

-=Brother Praetus=-

There where some publications up to the release of 3e, but the last "real" supplement by BI was in 2007, and, even there, a part from the Tome of Salvation, the year did not have nearly as much "important" supplements as 2005-6. This was a whole 2 years before the release of 3e.

After that, an adventure (1000 Thrones) was released in 2008, and Shades of Empire in 2009, describing a few institutions, but not adding a lot of meat, and that year the Career Compendium also came out, but that was in reaction to people complaining to have to look through their 10+ books to find all the careers, and, by that point, the career succession was pretty much in shambles. For all intents and purposes, there was a 2 year off time between 2 and 3e, without real releases.

Yuh. Some of those Positive Patties are PR plants.

Sadly there are those. the RT forum had a spate of people suddenly showing up in threads saying how great it would be if we had this exact product that we're now beta testing a few weeks before the announce. Real subtle guys.

If it was any playtesters, they should be kicked off for breach of NDA. Otherwise, proof would be nice - some people might just like this direction, it's not like people haven't already been saying they tweaked the original DH to use the critical damage table a lot more.

I mean, I quite like it, but then I hate the gamist idea of 'hit points'. It needs a hell of a lot of work, but I like the basic concept.

Howdy,

Talk to people at WotC over drinks at GenCon....

Gencon and Comicon drinks are always the best. Don't bother asking Stephen King though, he's been too good to drink with everyone else ever since his name got bigger than the title of the book.

Howdy,

King has been in AA since the late 80s, so it would have to be juice with him...

When GenCon was in Milwaukee, company crews used to hang out at the Bombay Bicycle Club at the Mark Plaza - GREAT place for industry scuttlebutt, although the Safe House was a close second. Since Indy, there are a couple of good places to find gossip, but they tend to rotate.

Cheers,

Ken

Yuh. Some of those Positive Patties are PR plants.

Sadly there are those. the RT forum had a spate of people suddenly showing up in threads saying how great it would be if we had this exact product that we're now beta testing a few weeks before the announce. Real subtle guys.

If it was any playtesters, they should be kicked off for breach of NDA. Otherwise, proof would be nice - some people might just like this direction, it's not like people haven't already been saying they tweaked the original DH to use the critical damage table a lot more.

I mean, I quite like it, but then I hate the gamist idea of 'hit points'. It needs a hell of a lot of work, but I like the basic concept.

@Millandson: You obviously were a playtester so it seems you've stepped into the lion's den here. For my own part I don't want this to degenerate to personal attacks so I'll say in advance; None are intended here. I agree with you that the hit pointless system is intriguing but this, you have to admit, went pretty far afield. They could have done almost everything else they have done and left the OW combat system in place and saved about ninety percent of the negative chatter that I've seen so far.

For me; The lack of combatibility is a HUGE issue! For those of you that were in the alpha stage, did NONE of you bring this up? I know, I know...NDA. But come on! All of us have been gaming for a lot of years and this has been the doom of more than one game! I personally gave up on both D&D and Mechwarrior/Battletech for this very reason! Another point is that people who obviously had input into the product comment on these sites! I hope you're paying attention! The Idea of a Beta test is meant to identify if anything is majorly broken before product release. Well it is! If FFG wanted to try out a no wound system they could easily have done so without rewriting the entire combat/gear section!

Ok..Catch breath! I just find it frustrating when there are reams of forum data that actually spoke to what the customer base ACTUALLY WANTED and it feels like no one is listening!

But come on! All of us have been gaming for a lot of years and this has been the doom of more than one game! I personally gave up on both D&D and Mechwarrior/Battletech for this very reason! Another point is that people who obviously had input into the product comment on these sites! I hope you're paying attention! The Idea of a Beta test is meant to identify if anything is majorly broken before product release. Well it is! If FFG wanted to try out a no wound system they could easily have done so without rewriting the entire combat/gear section!

This is a good point. Is there any game system that has had a radical rules re-write that actually succeeded? 2e D&D to 3e D&D is the only one I can really think of. People like change. Just not too much of it all at once, and not without good reason.

Exactly! I got drug kicking and screaming into 3e by a friend. I continued with 3e (and 3.5) because it was a remarkably better system! 4e was not (by a long shot!) and thus ended my purchase history with wizards! This new DH is majorly different but certainly NOT a major improvement! I really hope ffg is listening!

This is a good point. Is there any game system that has had a radical rules re-write that actually succeeded? 2e D&D to 3e D&D is the only one I can really think of. People like change. Just not too much of it all at once, and not without good reason.

The New World of Darkness eventually succeeded, but not before the White Wolf nearly went bankrupt and was bought out by CCP, and the major changes there was fluff more than mechanics.

I just find it frustrating when there are reams of forum data that actually spoke to what the customer base ACTUALLY WANTED and it feels like no one is listening!

This has been a point of frustration in other FFG forums as well, specifically WFRP 3rd. I'd like to see some (any) participation on these boards by the FFG folks making these crucial types of decisions. Like Radwaith I'm not sure they actually read these forums.

I don't know why, but everyone time I see someone express this particular feeling- I have to reinforce it. Even though I am fairly certain that my opinion on the matter has been clear. Several times.

Check out the transparency topic-

Any word, at all- from a spokesperson or a person in charge, would be great.

Just great.

Heck, just a "Hello, were listening."

If it was any playtesters, they should be kicked off for breach of NDA. Otherwise, proof would be nice - some people might just like this direction, it's not like people haven't already been saying they tweaked the original DH to use the critical damage table a lot more.

Missed this post, so I went back and gave it a quick look see to try and find it but couldn't find the thread I remembered seeing it in. It was an OT post in the thread, and I think the guy had an ork avatar. But that's about the best I can remember at 2am.

Shadowrun 4 was a major shift rules and fluff wise, and it was fairly successful as far as I know, even if it drew a lot of grognard tears. People always react violently to change, regardless of whether or not it's positive.

Shadowrun 4 was a major shift rules and fluff wise, and it was fairly successful as far as I know, even if it drew a lot of grognard tears. People always react violently to change, regardless of whether or not it's positive.

SR 4 mostly suffered from the aesthetic changes; it went from early, on the street and pretty much hopeless, chrome and shades Cyberpunk to late, futuristic, dystopian but with some hope for change, clean cyber and regular looking dudes and dudettes Cyberpunk with major elements of transhumanism. That, and the loss of the wired Matrix; it doesn't matter that it was archaic, it was a defining element of the SRverse, and losing it almost entirely (while also making everything hackable) in an effort to make the decker hacker more relevant in the run just doesn't make sense; why would people use wireless cyberware when they can get hacked; you are getting chopped up anyways, might as well get it hardwired. The major thematic shift attracted more grognards than anything related to the rules themselves.

The same is true for WoD; the fluff for nWoD is just bad compared to the old one in many places, especially Mage, and butchering established fluff is the most surefire way of antagonizing your player base (look at the 4e version of Forgotten Realms, they pulled the Spellplague out of nowhere to restructure the setting and butchered it to include the new 4e races, and it's a mess. And people hate it.)