You mean consulting one table, and only when the damage exceeds 10? Sounds like another system I know.

And not needing to consult it for non-important NPCs, such as standard antagonists in a combat situation.

One thing regarding this table: Is it also meant to be consulted for Xeno and Daemon enteties? Because I can see it working great for 'regular' human antagonists (Not mooks just human) but the same damage flavour for a bloodletter as for a ringleader of a smuggling ring?

You mean consulting one table, and only when the damage exceeds 10? Sounds like another system I know.

And not needing to consult it for non-important NPCs, such as standard antagonists in a combat situation.

One thing regarding this table: Is it also meant to be consulted for Xeno and Daemon enteties? Because I can see it working great for 'regular' human antagonists (Not mooks just human) but the same damage flavour for a bloodletter as for a ringleader of a smuggling ring?

The tables are written to account for any being that has "limbs" a "body" and a "head." As long as it has those things, the tables can be applied. Wording may need to be rephrased to account for particulars, but as long as it has discernable hit locations, should do the job. For limbs, it makes disticions between legs and arms by referencing if the limb is "supporting" the target (a leg) or is used to make attacks (an arm).

Most of the effects make decent enough sense for any humanoid enemy, and anything with resistances will, well, have resistances. It's only when you get into really weird enemy anatomy that things get a bit iffy.

Most of the effects make decent enough sense for any humanoid enemy, and anything with resistances will, well, have resistances. It's only when you get into really weird enemy anatomy that things get a bit iffy.

So what happens when the pc's go up against necrons? they have human shape but no organs. the crit table gets even wonkier if you can give concussions to something without a brain.

Most of the effects make decent enough sense for any humanoid enemy, and anything with resistances will, well, have resistances. It's only when you get into really weird enemy anatomy that things get a bit iffy.

So what happens when the pc's go up against necrons? they have human shape but no organs. the crit table gets even wonkier if you can give concussions to something without a brain.

Well it would be like the force of the blow knocks them back and they gotta spend time to recover.

At this very moment, I'm doing a pretty in depth examination of the crit tables (I'm going to see how they map out compared to each other/see if there is any way to simplify its presentation to a GM/streamline the process/allow for "comparable" results). I can say at least looking at limb damage, I can see these things coming into play against living/non-living things.

The big thing would be that certain enemy types are immune to certain conditions. And all that really might mean is that its a good idea to use a different damage type, or maybe even aim for a different location.

You mean consulting one table, and only when the damage exceeds 10? Sounds like another system I know.

And not needing to consult it for non-important NPCs, such as standard antagonists in a combat situation.

You weren't using Sudden Death Criticals? You know, the inspiration for 2E's simplification of damage to Novices (the main difference being that you could potentially one-shot grunts in 1E if you dealt enough damage)...?

The "Formations" rules in OW/ EoI worked in a similar fashion to novices in DH2 (Better in fact!). But the twice the defence value thing works.

I am very much liking the new system. I feel like a tight band around my skull has finally been removed.

I found the old system overwhelming and very hard to run intuitively. I'd see an epic pile of skills and talents and weapons qualities and my eyes would just glaze over. Every major NPC I'd create started giving me a headache and combat was an arduous process. I could never balance encounters. Everything feels a bit quicker and cleaner in the re-write and I can grab a bunch of enemies and add up their Threat Values and I know what ought to challenge them. Sure - it's handholding and I know I need to adjust from there depending on my party, but it's good handholding and I needed it.

I really like Action Points and I like the strategic element of whether to spend them all or not.

I really like Subtlety and that will play great in a real game. I can absolutely see this being a really fun aspect that affects how it is played.

Oh, why am I writing so much - I just think it's great all round! The reason I wanted to post was mainly to offer a different perspective. All of you people here (well, nearly all) are probably very experienced with all this, have a lot of expertise when it comes to analysing game systems, working things out, retaining details, etc. I just wanted to say from the point of view of someone who isn't a brilliant GM, isn't a quick mind with lots of rules and great memory, someone who basically isn't as good a technical GM as most of you, that the new edition feels much easier to run and manage.

It's simpler whilst still very much retaining the feel and danger of what WH40K universe is all about. I can't even say exactly what makes it simpler, it just feels that it is.

I am still not buying into this beta until people start telling me about a combat system running faster and simpler than 1e.

I am still a newbe to Dark Heresy and Rogue Trader, but I never liked the Warhammer combat system with it's hit locations and different armour values for each hit location. I would have hoped that a new edition would do away with that.

Replacing HP with a number of different effects seems like a slow down and a bad move, but I have to admit, I have not seen the beta myself - only read the comments in this forum.

I am very much liking the new system. I feel like a tight band around my skull has finally been removed.

I found the old system overwhelming and very hard to run intuitively. I'd see an epic pile of skills and talents and weapons qualities and my eyes would just glaze over. Every major NPC I'd create started giving me a headache and combat was an arduous process. I could never balance encounters. Everything feels a bit quicker and cleaner in the re-write and I can grab a bunch of enemies and add up their Threat Values and I know what ought to challenge them. Sure - it's handholding and I know I need to adjust from there depending on my party, but it's good handholding and I needed it.

I really like Action Points and I like the strategic element of whether to spend them all or not.

I really like Subtlety and that will play great in a real game. I can absolutely see this being a really fun aspect that affects how it is played.

Oh, why am I writing so much - I just think it's great all round! The reason I wanted to post was mainly to offer a different perspective. All of you people here (well, nearly all) are probably very experienced with all this, have a lot of expertise when it comes to analysing game systems, working things out, retaining details, etc. I just wanted to say from the point of view of someone who isn't a brilliant GM, isn't a quick mind with lots of rules and great memory, someone who basically isn't as good a technical GM as most of you, that the new edition feels much easier to run and manage.

It's simpler whilst still very much retaining the feel and danger of what WH40K universe is all about. I can't even say exactly what makes it simpler, it just feels that it is.

I am very much liking the new system. I feel like a tight band around my skull has finally been removed.

I found the old system overwhelming and very hard to run intuitively. I'd see an epic pile of skills and talents and weapons qualities and my eyes would just glaze over. Every major NPC I'd create started giving me a headache and combat was an arduous process. I could never balance encounters. Everything feels a bit quicker and cleaner in the re-write and I can grab a bunch of enemies and add up their Threat Values and I know what ought to challenge them. Sure - it's handholding and I know I need to adjust from there depending on my party, but it's good handholding and I needed it.

I really like Action Points and I like the strategic element of whether to spend them all or not.

I really like Subtlety and that will play great in a real game. I can absolutely see this being a really fun aspect that affects how it is played.

Oh, why am I writing so much - I just think it's great all round! The reason I wanted to post was mainly to offer a different perspective. All of you people here (well, nearly all) are probably very experienced with all this, have a lot of expertise when it comes to analysing game systems, working things out, retaining details, etc. I just wanted to say from the point of view of someone who isn't a brilliant GM, isn't a quick mind with lots of rules and great memory, someone who basically isn't as good a technical GM as most of you, that the new edition feels much easier to run and manage.

It's simpler whilst still very much retaining the feel and danger of what WH40K universe is all about. I can't even say exactly what makes it simpler, it just feels that it is.

While I understand your concern with being a new Gm, 4th ed. D&D was also "Easier" then it's predecessors! In the process Wizards so alienated their customer base that Paizo's "Pathfinder" (A variant of the 3.5 D&D system) basically snatched away half of their customer base! The same could happen here! While their is no OGL for another company to use the other 4 40k RPG's still exist. (OW just announced another supplement as a matter of fact!). This could put FFG in the unpleasant position of it's other lines critically undermining the new product. Knasserl, I think most of us "Grognards" would have bought into a new system if it was either vastly superior to (As in D&D 3rd vs, 2nd ed.) or at least compatible with the existing line! It is neither! Having the rules simplified does not mean you couldn't have made them compatible! BTW; The new system isn't any simpler than the old. Just different. While most of the non-combat stuff I like the combat system is... frustrating in 2e!

You know there's still a lot of people who cling to second edition and claim third edition was a move in a terrible direction, right? A surprising amount of them. Every edition of every RPG pisses people off.

Most of the effects make decent enough sense for any humanoid enemy, and anything with resistances will, well, have resistances. It's only when you get into really weird enemy anatomy that things get a bit iffy.

So what happens when the pc's go up against necrons? they have human shape but no organs. the crit table gets even wonkier if you can give concussions to something without a brain.

Well it would be like the force of the blow knocks them back and they gotta spend time to recover.

At this very moment, I'm doing a pretty in depth examination of the crit tables (I'm going to see how they map out compared to each other/see if there is any way to simplify its presentation to a GM/streamline the process/allow for "comparable" results). I can say at least looking at limb damage, I can see these things coming into play against living/non-living things.

The big thing would be that certain enemy types are immune to certain conditions. And all that really might mean is that its a good idea to use a different damage type, or maybe even aim for a different location.

One thought I had was: if I have to look up a crit effect anyway, why not tie the wound effect modifier (+5/+10) to the crit? Why the same wound effect modifier for every crit of a certain type? Moving it into the crit description does give the game designer a greater degree of freedom in calibrating the system.

Alex

Replacing HP with a number of different effects seems like a slow down and a bad move, but I have to admit, I have not seen the beta myself - only read the comments in this forum.

It will only be slow if you don't have the tables bookmarked. Though the wound tables really should be on the GM screen.

At the very least, the wound effects show that FFG is trying to move away from the same HP system that almost every RPG uses.

While I understand your concern with being a new Gm, 4th ed. D&D was also "Easier" then it's predecessors! In the process Wizards so alienated their customer base that Paizo's "Pathfinder" (A variant of the 3.5 D&D system) basically snatched away half of their customer base! The same could happen here! While their is no OGL for another company to use the other 4 40k RPG's still exist. (OW just announced another supplement as a matter of fact!). This could put FFG in the unpleasant position of it's other lines critically undermining the new product. Knasserl, I think most of us "Grognards" would have bought into a new system if it was either vastly superior to (As in D&D 3rd vs, 2nd ed.) or at least compatible with the existing line! It is neither! Having the rules simplified does not mean you couldn't have made them compatible! BTW; The new system isn't any simpler than the old. Just different. While most of the non-combat stuff I like the combat system is... frustrating in 2e!

Similarly, I understand the concern of those who have invested a lot of time (and money!) in the existing system. I'm not saying I'm right. I'm just adding one more voice but one which I think is maybe usefully different to most on this forum who will all be better GMs by far, than I am. It's interesting you brought up 4e D&D and how it alienated players, because actually I was one of the ones that was alienated. But the reason I was alienated by 4e was because it dragged out and murdered everything non-combat in the game and reduced it, in many ways, to a squad-level wargame. It also squished down all the different powers and effects to be the same, just with different flavour text. Sorceror, Ranger or Rogue - choose what colour your power is painted!

The point is that I wasn't alienated by the rules changes in 4e, so much as I was by how they butchered other aspects of the game such as non-combat and realism. Yes, I know realism is an odd charge to use with D&D, but when you have a halfling with twice the strength of a minotaur because the combat system is built about attribute bonuses; or an octogenarian wizard bouncing up and down Caradras like a mountain goat because he happens to have obtained Paragon level, you're not changing how a game does something so much as you're changing what it actually conveys and accomplishes this.

That's the chief difference with DH to me. DH1 presented a gritty game where death was always near and DH2 also does that. They may do it in different ways, but so long as the flavour and the role-playing and the risk of death and corruption are close between the editions, then I'm fine with mechanical changes that make things simpler. Which for me, I'm finding.

Again, this is only my take on things and I fully get disappointment from others. That's entirely fair. I just think for some of us who are less invested, it's a real move in the right direction. This forum is going to be mostly populated by expert and experienced players and GMs of DH. As someone who is quite honestly not that good with complex rules, I'm just saying that I'm finding this much easier.

I've always like the setting of WH40K and I love the gritty and risky balance of DH. I've always been slightly discouraged from running it often because it's felt like a lot of work for me.

EDIT: About the combat not actually being simpler, I respect your view, but it feels a little quicker. Maybe I'm just looking less up or something.

I am still a newbe to Dark Heresy and Rogue Trader, but I never liked the Warhammer combat system with it's hit locations and different armour values for each hit location. I would have hoped that a new edition would do away with that.

On the flip side, I really like the DH1 combat system and am glad that it's not changing more than it is.

Absolutely love the new version - character creation is much more interesting and flexible, stats enable characters to be more capable, armor and weapons are more sensible, and most importantly Dodges are not the end all be all of defense as they used to be for combat.

Do I like the new addition? Honestly, no.

Weapon stats are Way off. Gang leathers stopping bullets. Combat seems bloated with book keeping and if you like deadly combat for both pc and npc, this system sucks. I/We dislike mook rules and have never used them, but with this system you HAVE to or the book keeping Will kill you.

Future products will not be compatible with those 3 feet of books you already bought. (Serious deal breaker)

Psykers seem less interesting ( i'm a fan of DH1 psyker mechanics)

And several other things, but I don't wanna rant more than i've already done.

There are of cause bright spots (char gen) but it's just not good enough.

And since I seriously doubt there will be radical systems changes ( a lot of people do like it) I fear this is the end of the line for me. And that is truly disapointing

/rant

Do I like the new addition? Honestly, no.

Weapon stats are Way off. Gang leathers stopping bullets.

I think the fatal distinction people are failing to make is that there's a difference between stopping a bullet and reducing the impact . Gang leathers will barely stop any modern weapon completely. The only guns that can be totally stopped by leathers are the autopistol, shotgun, laspistol and lasgun, and that's on pathetically low damage rolls. Anything else WILL bypass the armour, just with slightly diminished damage. Which makes sense.

Combat seems bloated with book keeping and if you like deadly combat for both pc and npc, this system sucks.

I don't see your point at all. Sure, the first hit or two with weak weapons CAN be pretty pathetic, but things quickly escalate into loss of limb and life. Much faster than they ever did in Dark Heresy 1e.

We dislike mook rules and have never used them, but with this system you HAVE to or the book keeping Will kill you.

It's fair enough that you dislike them, but you haven't provided any reason why they're actually bad. There's no accounting for taste.

Future products will not be compatible with those 3 feet of books you already bought.

Yes, just like how every new edition of every RPG works. Anyway, the Dark Heresy 1e line was already over long before this edition was announced. You weren't getting extra books. Plus, the old system lives on in the continued support of Rogue Trader, Deathwatch, Black Crusade and Only War. You're not losing anything.

Psykers seem less interesting ( i'm a fan of DH1 psyker mechanics)

I will agree the mechanics are a little dry compared to DH1, but now we've got a good risk/reward system going, whereas DH1 was a good example of how to scare a Psyker into never using their powers (if they could even manage to manifest the higher level ones.). Sure, that's fluff accurate, but fun? Debatable.

Tom Cruise >> Not gonna debate my opinion.. it's my opinion, nothing more, nothing less.

To touch on a single point or two though... (heheh)

Gangleathers should barely register as any kind of armour against a modern weapon.. A knife, yes. ut not against a high powered rifle. And Power armour is 6 points, with leathers being 3 is just straight up idiotic (Might still be changed, beta after all)

I want people to get one-shotted, and I want the system to be able to carry it without "mook" rules or any other special takes. Shoot a guy in the head with a long las = pretty good chance he dies or get severely wounded. In this system, the enemy will get shaken a bit, nothing severe. EVERY TIME... Players will eventually begin taking chances based on the system, like "Karlson: I will jump in front of the plasma shot, I haven't had any closed calls... but they nearly hit Angela 3 times (less than 10 wounds) so she'll be obliterated. (it's the pin-prick explosion again)

Combat just feels wrong and fake...

And without Mook rules, I have to cross reference 3-6 times pr opponent in combat.

And no, mook rules are not a solution, if you want gritty grim dark, because mook rules turns the players into specially fated emperor blessed singularily unique snowflakes... which they are not. Not in my games. not in a universe of untold billions. They have fate.. thats it.

We try for realism, workable gamey realism ofc, but we try.

And I know it's Beta, but I'm not impressed so far...

And without sounding to harsh, you properbly won't change my opinion (as it is now) by arguing about it.

FFG can change my opinion by changing the game.

Might wanna read the errata with regards to armour, everything's been rebalanced significantly. Didn't realise you hadn't looked at it.

Admitted. I've Downloaded it but havn't had the time to go over it. " Beta is beta"

And I gleefully accept more lethality.