First to post this again. I think I'm following this closely...

Character Creation:

The new rules for Home Planet Fate Points are interesting. I'm still a bit skeptical on how balanced they make the Home Planets, since I don't think the special abilities really balance things out too well. I remain convinced that Games Workshop has made FFG sign a binding contract that Voidborn must always have the practically worthless Zero G ability.

Hooray for fixing the Mystic! The Astra Telepathica path is still pretty strongly tied to Psykers/having a psyker in the party, but it's an improvement.

Skills:

Seems like FFG is trying to weaken the First Aid use of Medicae a bit. I wonder if this is meant to in turn weaken Agility's usefulness, or is just meant to weaken the skill itself a bit?

Talents:

These all seem like pretty basic tweaks. The fix to Keen Intuition has shown up. I'm also glad to see Dual Wielder show up. Hooray for just letting people dual wield, **** it!

Armoury:

I imagine the change with Agility limits on armours will incite some debate. I like how they add a bit of balance to maxing out Agility by limiting it to 75. Also, Body Gloves FINALLY have some usefulness. Maybe it would help to give them a Body Armour of 3? Or would that be too much?

Combat:

I like Surprise mechanics better now, although there still seems to be a pretty good chance of high agility characters being able to completely avoid the effects of surprise. Would it really be too lethal to just have them lose all their AP for the turn?

The wound tables all seem to be fixed up to allow people to just use the effects as they wish and ignore the descriptions. I think this is a decent compromise for people wondering about the narrative effects.

There are some other changes (fixes to malignancies and insanities), but overall I think this is a pretty good update. I still believe that there are imbalances in character creation (home planet abilities/fate points, starting benefits of backgrounds, differing background skill xp totals based on role), but this is a pretty good step, I think.

I'm annoyed that Sanctioned isn't an option at least.

"Role" should not be tied to any organizational aligence or social standing. Mystic as a role should be capable of representing a rogue witch.

I'm mainly just hugely happy to see the change to Adeptus Astra Telepathica and Mystic which opens up character background for psyker characters substantially. I don't mind AAT being an advantageous background for Psykers, so long as it's not to the point that you're being punished for exploring a different character concept. The AAT bonus is nice, but so are those for some of the other backgrounds.

They've obviously noticed the furore on Wound Tables and I agree with you.

I noticed Dire Avengers are back down from "nightmare" level to "really horrible" level. Still nasty, but that's fine by me - love the Eldar!

That's my main feelings on the update this time around. It sounds from their blog post that they're saving larger changes for when they've had a chance to work through them further. That fills me with hope and dread.

They asked us to evaluate Vehicle and Psyker sections this time around. I'd not really looked that closely at the vehicle rules until just now, and there are a few things in there that concern me.

I'm annoyed that Sanctioned isn't an option at least.

"Role" should not be tied to any organizational aligence or social standing. Mystic as a role should be capable of representing a rogue witch.

It's very, very easy to just drop Sanctioned if a player wants. All that means, is they get a bit of extra Corruption. Which as a rogue witch, quite frankly they should have.

Quite frankly, the default for any psyker character in DH should be Sanctioned. The standard concept of the game is to play as Imperial agents. I agree that it should be flexible enough to accommodate playing heretics and the unclean, etc. but I think it is. It's a bit easier to just say: "I don't want to be sanctioned" than it is to start adjusting around backgrounds.

Really good job the devs did this time.

A lot of really good changes, which adress some of the most urgent topics.

- the AAT trouble is fixed in an elegant way

- the new armour agility limitation now is far better (although still a little high in value for some armours)

- keen intuition has been fixed

- first aid has been fixed in a very good way - it is still useable, but reasonably limited

- good change to takedown

- flexible weapon bug fixed

And many more smaller issues.

So, lets all together go on and continue fixing every single bug, until we cleaned this beta document with the Emperors light !

Wonky things do remain wonky. The change to armor's not bad, bugfixes are good... Acquisition seems okay for the most part.

They asked about psychic powers though, and had little choice but to give a piece of mind in the other thread regarding that. Far too much risk, for far too many rather uninspired powers.

Moving sanctioned to mystic was the wrong move. I don't care about anyones personal preferences on the freedom to build their psykers. Only psykers from the AAT are sanctioned. That's canon in 40k. Anyone else is rogue. That doesn't mean an inquisitor can't recruit a rogue psyker that was missed by the black ships.

Moving sanctioned to mystic was the wrong move. I don't care about anyones personal preferences on the freedom to build their psykers. Only psykers from the AAT are sanctioned. That's canon in 40k. Anyone else is rogue. That doesn't mean an inquisitor can't recruit a rogue psyker that was missed by the black ships.

Moving the sanctioned to Mystic doesnt mean that the character has not been sanctioned by the AAT.

It just means that another station in his life had more impact on him than his stay at the AAT to be sanctioned.

So an Imperial Guard Psyker with Role mystic has also been at the AAT for sanctioning, but after that he was in the guard for years which had a much huger impact on his personal life.

Wonky things do remain wonky. The change to armor's not bad, bugfixes are good... Acquisition seems okay for the most part.

They asked about psychic powers though, and had little choice but to give a piece of mind in the other thread regarding that. Far too much risk, for far too many rather uninspired powers.

I agree that the powers are often uninspired yet, or worse, even doubled

Also, a lot of good powers from DH1 are missing...

But I do not agree that the risk is too high.

I would rather consider it too low, especially from AAT.

Using psychic powers should bear a hogh risk and give a good benefit.

It is always dangerous to call the powers of the warp and this should be felt as a high risk.

GauntZero, on 29 Aug 2013 - 08:14 AM, said:

jalittrell, on 29 Aug 2013 - 07:36 AM, said:

Moving sanctioned to mystic was the wrong move. I don't care about anyones personal preferences on the freedom to build their psykers. Only psykers from the AAT are sanctioned. That's canon in 40k. Anyone else is rogue. That doesn't mean an inquisitor can't recruit a rogue psyker that was missed by the black ships.

Moving the sanctioned to Mystic doesnt mean that the character has not been sanctioned by the AAT.

It just means that another station in his life had more impact on him than his stay at the AAT to be sanctioned.

So an Imperial Guard Psyker with Role mystic has also been at the AAT for sanctioning, but after that he was in the guard for years which had a much huger impact on his personal life.

My complaint was never that a mystic can't be sanctioned with a different background than AAT. That just necessitates a different solution. But a mystic should not be considered sanctioned as default. A mystic could start with the Outcast background and be a rogue psyker recruited by an inquisitor.

The solution would be that the AAT background grants sanctioning. And that the mystic role with an imperial guard background should grant sanctioning as well, as psykers in the guard are seconded from the AAT.

The AAT sanctioned psyker is always true. The mystic role as sanctioned is only sometimes true.

@Jalittrell

The issue is still that there could be psyker characters (like IG psykers), who were more heaviliy influenced by their IG background than their time with the AAT.

Personally, I feel that Sanctioned should be a 200xp elite advance and left at that.

It allows for the rogue witch mystic, it allows for the IG psyker.

Maybe give the option of the current new bonus from AAT or Psyker.

The issue though, is that not all characters with the AAT background are psykers. That needs to be accounted for as well.

On a completely unrelated note, but I feel is worth mentioning, due to a lack of clarity:

When is characteristic decay applied with respect to the new Agility maximum on armour? It seems most naturally to apply to the characteristic first, then applying the maximum, but I could consider in my head the notion that the max is applied first, then the decay.

Some clarity would help.

I was working on this for Rogue Trader as it bothered me that players had no reason to use less than their max fettered level when manifesting. My fix was going to be to give each power a risk modifier as well as a manifest modifier.

That or make AAT a homeworld.

@Jalittrell

The issue is still that there could be psyker characters (like IG psykers), who were more heaviliy influenced by their IG background than their time with the AAT.

Personally, I feel that Sanctioned should be a 200xp elite advance and left at that.

The issue though, is that not all characters with the AAT background are psykers. That needs to be accounted for as well.

I addressed all of these issues, albeit in a slightly different way. All characters with the AAT background inherently have psychic ability otherwise they wouldn't be sent to the AAT. Any of those that don't make the cut are sacrificed, so all AAT regardless of role would be sanctioned. Otherwise they're soul food.

The solution would be that the AAT background grants sanctioning. And that the mystic role with an imperial guard background should grant sanctioning as well, as psykers in the guard are seconded from the AAT.

Your idea to make an advance for 200 xp is not a bad idea in terms of a limited set of different backgrounds than AAT, inasmuch as the advance should be required at character creation. So an AAT character get sanctioned for free. An IG mystic has access to the advance at character creation. No outcast mystic should have the option for sanctioned. But a psyker in the arbites could conceivably be sanctioned.

Or any AAT background, and the mystic role with an IG background, get it free. I can't think of any instance in fluff in which sanctioned psykers are seconded to the Administratum, Munitorum, Ministorum, or Mechanicus, and definitely not for free.

Either solution would work. Personally I think an IG psyker or anyone with the AAT background should get it without any additional xp cost. The administratum, ministorum, and the arbites I can see as necessitating the xp expenditure.

Not everyone in the AAT is a psyker. I have to believe some of them would be the types that aid in the hunting and identification of psykers. Those that are there to maintain their security.

GauntZero, on 29 Aug 2013 - 08:14 AM, said:

jalittrell, on 29 Aug 2013 - 07:36 AM, said:

Moving sanctioned to mystic was the wrong move. I don't care about anyones personal preferences on the freedom to build their psykers. Only psykers from the AAT are sanctioned. That's canon in 40k. Anyone else is rogue. That doesn't mean an inquisitor can't recruit a rogue psyker that was missed by the black ships.

Moving the sanctioned to Mystic doesnt mean that the character has not been sanctioned by the AAT.

It just means that another station in his life had more impact on him than his stay at the AAT to be sanctioned.

So an Imperial Guard Psyker with Role mystic has also been at the AAT for sanctioning, but after that he was in the guard for years which had a much huger impact on his personal life.

That's missing the point. They moved sanctioning from AAT to mystic. Only the AAT can sanction a psyker, so removing the sanctioned trait from the AAT background invalidates any other roles that may have the AAT background and they become unsanctioned. Which is inherently false. My NPC inquisitor has the AAT background, but was seconded to the Inquisition and has a role as a seeker. Why should he be considered unsanctioned just because he gravitated towards a role other than mystic? Eisenhorn is a sanctioned psyker that is not necessarily the mystic, but more of a seeker. Ravenor is a sanctioned psyker that fits the mystic role.

My complaint was never that a mystic can't be sanctioned with a different background than AAT. That just necessitates a different solution. But a mystic should not be considered sanctioned as default. A mystic could start with the Outcast background and be a rogue psyker recruited by an inquisitor.

The solution would be that the AAT background grants sanctioning. And that the mystic role with an imperial guard background should grant sanctioning as well, as psykers in the guard are seconded from the AAT.

The AAT sanctioned psyker is always true. The mystic role as sanctioned is only sometimes true.

Disagree. Very strongly. You don't have to have the AAT background to have been sanctioned. A psyker in the Imperial Guard or elsewhere might easily have been on the Black Ships and received the AAT seal of approval (probably branded into their forehead. ) But they wont necessarily have been trained up by the AAT. They could have spent years as an IG trooper before they manifested - been shipped off and back again. We need a way to differentiate between a psyker like that and a psyker who has spent their time with the AAT proper.

Also, not all members of the AAT are psykers. It's a (typically in the Imperium) colossal organization. There are a tonne or service personnel, clerks, people in charge (who need not be psykers), etc.

Basically, this adds flexibility. Previously, you pretty much had to be from the AAT if you wanted to be a psyker and respect the fluff (or else expect to be hunted down). You can still do that, so your options haven't been reduced. However, you now have additional options in a way that you didn't before.

I didn't like the previous state of affairs because it restricted my ability to stay within the fluff.

Given the premise of the game - agents of the Imperium - and the devastating effects of being unsanctioned, it is correct that being sanctioned should be the default. This lets that be the case without restricting the background unnecessarily.

If someone wants to play a non-sanctioned psyker (rather riskly imo), then they can elect not to have it, img. That's an easier fix than re-balancing backgrounds on the fly, imo.

I also think you're being unnecessarily restrictive. Maybe I have a character concept that Outcast suits but which still would be sanctioned. Maybe a young, recent returnee from Holy Terra got assigned to some world, didn't like it, and fled. They could be living rogue for years, but still have that sanctioning. Might be hunted down for other reasons, but not for that. Sanctioning is a big deal - should be available to everyone unless the player wants to be persecuted and in danger.

GauntZero, on 29 Aug 2013 - 08:14 AM, said:

jalittrell, on 29 Aug 2013 - 07:36 AM, said:

Moving sanctioned to mystic was the wrong move. I don't care about anyones personal preferences on the freedom to build their psykers. Only psykers from the AAT are sanctioned. That's canon in 40k. Anyone else is rogue. That doesn't mean an inquisitor can't recruit a rogue psyker that was missed by the black ships.

Moving the sanctioned to Mystic doesnt mean that the character has not been sanctioned by the AAT.

It just means that another station in his life had more impact on him than his stay at the AAT to be sanctioned.

So an Imperial Guard Psyker with Role mystic has also been at the AAT for sanctioning, but after that he was in the guard for years which had a much huger impact on his personal life.

That's missing the point. They moved sanctioning from AAT to mystic. Only the AAT can sanction a psyker, so removing the sanctioned trait from the AAT background invalidates any other roles that may have the AAT background and they become unsanctioned. Which is inherently false. My NPC inquisitor has the AAT background, but was seconded to the Inquisition and has a role as a seeker. Why should he be considered unsanctioned just because he gravitated towards a role other than mystic? Eisenhorn is a sanctioned psyker that is not necessarily the mystic, but more of a seeker. Ravenor is a sanctioned psyker that fits the mystic role.

My complaint was never that a mystic can't be sanctioned with a different background than AAT. That just necessitates a different solution. But a mystic should not be considered sanctioned as default. A mystic could start with the Outcast background and be a rogue psyker recruited by an inquisitor.

The solution would be that the AAT background grants sanctioning. And that the mystic role with an imperial guard background should grant sanctioning as well, as psykers in the guard are seconded from the AAT.

The AAT sanctioned psyker is always true. The mystic role as sanctioned is only sometimes true.

Disagree. Very strongly. You don't have to have the AAT background to have been sanctioned. A psyker in the Imperial Guard or elsewhere might easily have been on the Black Ships and received the AAT seal of approval (probably branded into their forehead. ) But they wont necessarily have been trained up by the AAT. They could have spent years as an IG trooper before they manifested - been shipped off and back again. We need a way to differentiate between a psyker like that and a psyker who has spent their time with the AAT proper.

Also, not all members of the AAT are psykers. It's a (typically in the Imperium) colossal organization. There are a tonne or service personnel, clerks, people in charge (who need not be psykers), etc.

Basically, this adds flexibility. Previously, you pretty much had to be from the AAT if you wanted to be a psyker and respect the fluff (or else expect to be hunted down). You can still do that, so your options haven't been reduced. However, you now have additional options in a way that you didn't before.

I didn't like the previous state of affairs because it restricted my ability to stay within the fluff.

Given the premise of the game - agents of the Imperium - and the devastating effects of being unsanctioned, it is correct that being sanctioned should be the default. This lets that be the case without restricting the background unnecessarily.

If someone wants to play a non-sanctioned psyker (rather riskly imo), then they can elect not to have it, img. That's an easier fix than re-balancing backgrounds on the fly, imo.

I also think you're being unnecessarily restrictive. Maybe I have a character concept that Outcast suits but which still would be sanctioned. Maybe a young, recent returnee from Holy Terra got assigned to some world, didn't like it, and fled. They could be living rogue for years, but still have that sanctioning. Might be hunted down for other reasons, but not for that. Sanctioning is a big deal - should be available to everyone unless the player wants to be persecuted and in danger.

Disagree all you want. Doesn't mean I'm not right. To be sanctioned, a psyker trains in the AAT, the Scholastia Psykana. That's the definition of a sanctioned psyker. End of story. From there, the psyker gets seconded to another organization. A AAT psyker whose primary role might be a sage, should still be sanctioned. Someone with the IG background and the mystic role could still be sanctioned. I never said that wasn't the case. So you want your IG mystic to be sanctioned. Completely valid. As IG psykers are seconded from the AAT, and it's completely understandable that the time spent in the IG might mean more to that character thus the background. It's equally plausible that the IG psyker did not manifest until later and never went on a black ship. Unsanctioned.

We know, as dictated by 40k canon, that the AAT is the only organization that sanctions psykers in the Imperium. So the statement I made, which seems completely ignored, is valid. Sanctioned psykers, by the AAT, is always true, whereas the mystic role being sanctioned is only sometimes true.

Any menials, clerks within the AAT are most likely from the Administratum. That's their purpose. Sisters of Battle serving on Black Ships or as security are also not of the AAT, but the Adeptus Sororitas. Serving the AAT doesn't mean that's their background. And even if they aren't of the Administratum, and are not psykers, any sanctioning granted by the AAT background would just be irrelevant. Taking the sanctioning trait away from the background that's sole purpose is sanctioning psykers is completely illogical.

I'm not being restrictive. The nature of sanctioning in the Imperium is, by nature, restrictive. Coming up with a compelling backstory for a character having sanction is GM fiat in working with a player. You're argument for an outcast psyker is valid and I would amend my comment about an outcast mystic not being sanctioned. In which case, the solution I derived from KommissarK would be appropriate.

C'mon - dont stretch my very thin patience.

We are NOT saying, that a psyker can be sanctioned anywhere else than at the AAT.

BUT: the chosen background is NOT THE ONLY station in a characters life.

It is just the station that had the impact on his character / personality / life

This means an Imperial Guard background psyker who is sanctioned HAS ALSO BEEN at tje AAT, but his time at tje guard was more influential than his time at the AAT and therefore Imperial guard is chosen as his background and not AAT, even if both have been stations in his life.

And if this topic is only mentioned one more time in a disbelieving and doibtful way, I will get out my bolt pistol and carry out my Emperor given rights.

I've a problem with the Mystic.

It may as well be renamed 'Sanctioned Psyker'. However, it doesn't really allow for Warrior-psykers, such as the Templar Calix and Guard Psykers.

For previous jobs, I'd simply take the AAT background and rename it 'Sanctioned Psyker', giving the Sanctioned Trait and Psy Rating 1.

Mystic could give a bonus to certain Psychic powers, whereas Warrior, Seeker etc would be good for specialised Psykers.

Another option is this:

Make 'Sanctioned' a talent!

Right, some backgrounds could give it at creation (AAT). Others, if they want to be a Guard Psyker, for example, could take Guard>Warrior and spend starting XP on 'Sanctioned' and Psy Rating.

Now, this means rogue Psykers could buy Sanctioning! Representing a late-blooming Psyker getting Sanctioned (like an Inquisitor who got powers, then Sanctioned). Of course, if taken out of creation, it takes a long time (downtime or such?).

Now, if a character *doesn't* have Sanctioning, he can gain CP every time he increases his Psy Rating.

Honestly. I am the last person defending anyone.

Really. I think I am the first one to get out his bolter if he think that something is really odd.

But in this case it would be a waste of ammunition.

I am not the greatest fan of this solution (I think it better be a sub-option of the psyker elite package), but it is something I can go with.

Just saying how background packages ever were meant.

Also in DH1, you could only take 1 background package, as only the most important station i na characters life was explizitely taken.

That never meant that it was the only station - only that it was the most important for him personally.

With that in mind, I have no problem with it.

In my eyes there are far worse logical issues still there, above all else:

> no range modifiers in combat anymore

--> makes absolutely no sens in my oppinion, as even size IS considered.

So, shooting on a big target 100m away from you is easier than to shoot on a regular target point blank.

Yeah...sure.

I definitely will houserule that, if it is not changed till the final version.

No way, I will give 10m shots the same % as 100m shots

But I do not agree that the risk is too high.

I would rather consider it too low, especially from AAT.

Using psychic powers should bear a hogh risk and give a good benefit.

It is always dangerous to call the powers of the warp and this should be felt as a high risk.

AAT's ability is a fate expender. Fine for "you rolled perils? fate point to reroll phenomena table", less fine here. First off you're probably better off using the point on a reroll, either the power's OR the 2d10 if it turns out bad.

This isn't an issue for a PR1 divination, but makes the attack and shielding powers basically unviable, as you have to pump some power into them if they're to be an option equal to even your own rifle.

Take a PR4 [whether it's a rookie that just got there, or a Rating 10 that's toning it down]: He pulls out, poor him, a Biomancy power. 10% of the time he'll get a result between 6 and 26, or 5 and 15 if he spends a fate point. So on average, five percent of the time, he suffers weakness if he's lucky, else a bit of insanity or corruption, or, if he didn't spend one of his precious few fate points, damages items around [and on, especially on] him or he and sometimes his buddies eat 1d5 corruption.

If you ask me that's pretty brutal for a guy just trying to fire something equal to his hellgun but with less range.

The point many people are missing is that this "hellgun" can always be carried with you, even where other weapons cannot be taken (taken into custody, moving in a secure area, being subtle...).

Also, this "hellgun" is viable against denizens of the warp and similar.

Regarding the re-roll, I think you are right...the ability should be changed as standard fate effectively makes it obsolete.

Also all of the "use fate to win" abilities of backgrounds and such should be changed. I dont like that

The solution would be that the AAT background grants sanctioning. And that the mystic role with an imperial guard background should grant sanctioning as well, as psykers in the guard are seconded from the AAT.

The AAT sanctioned psyker is always true. The mystic role as sanctioned is only sometimes true.

That seems reasonable to me. So, include the following sentence in both the AAT and Mystic descriptions: "The character may take the Sanctioned trait, if they choose. Doing so represents that the character received their psyker training from the Adeptus Astra Telepathica at some point in their past."

I duplicate posted by mistake. My apologies. Webmasters, please delete this post.

The bigger issue is that you don't WANT a trained psyker in the party, and the more powerful he gets, the worse the results.

A fully trained, primaris psyker, is the worst idea the imperium could have - with the current mechanics, because it's a flat PR+2d10, NOT training them is the way to avoid the whole "he turned into demons/warpgate" issue in the first place.

The psyker becomes more and more of a liability as his ability rises. A Librarian's only use under this system would be bolter practice before he dares use a power on the enemies of the emperor, while some rogue nobody - what's supposed to be one of the big problems, can't ever hope to actually cause the troubles they're known to be.