Am I the only one who is in no way interested in a catch-all 40k book? I like games having a narrow, specific focus, and I think trying to do too many things would just mean it'd end up doing a lot of things poorly instead of a few things very well.

The problem being that the seams start to tear when you're doing crossovers, which is a very, very, very likely thing that you'll be doing one way or another in the 40k universe.

The vast majority of the rules are already interchangeable. A unified ruleset would just exist as tear-prevention, so to speak.

Narrow focuses to accommodate the facets of the galaxy would be what all the supplemental Campaign Scenarios would be for.

The issue I see with a unified system is the d100 mechanics of 40kRPG really don't scale spectacularly. Unless you use a mess of workarounds like Deathwatch did, Space Marines and Acolytes don't coexist well in the same ruleset. A major mechanical change might be needed.

Am I the only one who is in no way interested in a catch-all 40k book? I like games having a narrow, specific focus, and I think trying to do too many things would just mean it'd end up doing a lot of things poorly instead of a few things very well.

I wouldn't mind narrow, specific focus if the rules really reflected it well. As it stands, most compatibility issues between different lines stem from changes that are in no way setting-specific - I can use RT space combat rules no problem with Black Crusade, but I have to give some thought to handling psychic powers from both systems simultaneously.

This is rather irritating for me. As it stands, different games exist in a limbo between being truly compatible and being their own things. I'd rather they went one way or the other, and full compatibility is preferable due to having to deal with less repeated material.

Maybe it's that I only really play DH and a little bit of OW. I'm not really interested in the other settings that much.

Still, I don't see how you could build a d100 system to span the breadth of normal human to augmented supersoldier without some seriously weird kinks in it.

The issue I see with a unified system is the d100 mechanics of 40kRPG really don't scale spectacularly. Unless you use a mess of workarounds like Deathwatch did, Space Marines and Acolytes don't coexist well in the same ruleset. A major mechanical change might be needed.

Why, though?

I've still not heard a compelling argument for why d100 breaks down at really high levels. Assume that difficulties are scaled for a human level and then apply ridiculous penalties for ridiculous tasks.

I'm more than ready to concede this point (hell, I'm halfway assuming that I'm wrong, just because it seems I should be). Maybe I'm just missing the obvious.

It's just that I've asked several times now, and I've yet to hear anyone chime in with why it's a problem when characteristics hit 100.

The issue I see with a unified system is the d100 mechanics of 40kRPG really don't scale spectacularly. Unless you use a mess of workarounds like Deathwatch did, Space Marines and Acolytes don't coexist well in the same ruleset. A major mechanical change might be needed.

It just reminds me of the whole Force Sensitive/Jedi vs. Mundanes thing in Star Wars. Absolutely everything a regular human can do, a Space Marine can do better. Black Crusade, for example, completely breaks it for me, since I can't wrap my head around how this could ever make sense.

The issue I see with a unified system is the d100 mechanics of 40kRPG really don't scale spectacularly. Unless you use a mess of workarounds like Deathwatch did, Space Marines and Acolytes don't coexist well in the same ruleset. A major mechanical change might be needed.

Why, though?

I've still not heard a compelling argument for why d100 breaks down at really high levels. Assume that difficulties are scaled for a human level and then apply ridiculous penalties for ridiculous tasks.

I'm more than ready to concede this point (hell, I'm halfway assuming that I'm wrong, just because it seems I should be). Maybe I'm just missing the obvious.

It's just that I've asked several times now, and I've yet to hear anyone chime in with why it's a problem when characteristics hit 100.

So if you judge that a human would have a -90 modifier to rip open an airlock, then there's no reason to not impose that same penalty to Space Marines. The system only truly breaks down if you keep adjusting for what "makes sense" on an individual basis - but the point is.. that's what the regular stats are for.

Difficulties are difficulties for set tasks. Not how difficult it would be for a given individual. In my highly personal experience, people just don't use the difficulty modifiers properly.

It just reminds me of the whole Force Sensitive/Jedi vs. Mundanes thing in Star Wars. Absolutely everything a regular human can do, a Space Marine can do better. Black Crusade, for example, completely breaks it for me, since I can't wrap my head around how this could ever make sense.

I think the BC balancing caveat is that CSM cannot blend in or be subtle at all. Regular BC PCs can pass for anything, but CSM are unmistakeable. Of course, this requires the GM to work this into the plot somehow, otherwise its just CSM rolling over everything the other characters have a hard time with.

Then again, most of the games of BC I've seen have been all CSM or all normals as a GM precondition, so you're not alone in having an issue mixing PC archetypes.

It just reminds me of the whole Force Sensitive/Jedi vs. Mundanes thing in Star Wars. Absolutely everything a regular human can do, a Space Marine can do better. Black Crusade, for example, completely breaks it for me, since I can't wrap my head around how this could ever make sense.

I think the BC balancing caveat is that CSM cannot blend in or be subtle at all. Regular BC PCs can pass for anything, but CSM are unmistakeable. Of course, this requires the GM to work this into the plot somehow, otherwise its just CSM rolling over everything the other characters have a hard time with.

Then again, most of the games of BC I've seen have been all CSM or all normals as a GM precondition, so you're not alone in having an issue mixing PC archetypes.

The only time humans stand up to CSMs is when they are psykers, or the players heavily game the system to get things like Machine (10) at character creation.

The issue I see with a unified system is the d100 mechanics of 40kRPG really don't scale spectacularly. Unless you use a mess of workarounds like Deathwatch did, Space Marines and Acolytes don't coexist well in the same ruleset. A major mechanical change might be needed.

Why, though?

I've still not heard a compelling argument for why d100 breaks down at really high levels. Assume that difficulties are scaled for a human level and then apply ridiculous penalties for ridiculous tasks.

I'm more than ready to concede this point (hell, I'm halfway assuming that I'm wrong, just because it seems I should be). Maybe I'm just missing the obvious.

It's just that I've asked several times now, and I've yet to hear anyone chime in with why it's a problem when characteristics hit 100.

Because when stats hit 100 it gets really dumb to be playing a game where its about simply burning away peoples dodges until you instant kill them with your stack of hits. I don't know if you've played DW or not but being able to just atomise targets with a heavy bolter at rank 1 is pretty nonsensical. So either you need every target is be an ungodly stack of wounds or the game is about who wins initiative and kills each other with their auto-hit abilities.

When the combat resolution mechanic is about whether you can hit your target or not, the entire dynamic changes changes massively when you are able to constantly hit your target.

The issue I see with a unified system is the d100 mechanics of 40kRPG really don't scale spectacularly. Unless you use a mess of workarounds like Deathwatch did, Space Marines and Acolytes don't coexist well in the same ruleset. A major mechanical change might be needed.

I also see no problem in this.

This is an illusion created by the oppinion that a d% ends at 100.

With test difficulties differing, even a 110 characteristics test might be challenging at -40.

If a test has no chance of failing then it is simply no test that the character has to take - he auto-passes easy tasks as he is superhuman.

ok, now that the thread has been completely derailed, where do we start a petition for a "Warhammer 40K RPG"?

Because when stats hit 100 it gets really dumb to be playing a game where its about simply burning away peoples dodges until you instant kill them with your stack of hits. I don't know if you've played DW or not but being able to just atomise targets with a heavy bolter at rank 1 is pretty nonsensical . So either you need every target is be an ungodly stack of wounds or the game is about who wins initiative and kills each other with their auto-hit abilities.

The issue I see with a unified system is the d100 mechanics of 40kRPG really don't scale spectacularly. Unless you use a mess of workarounds like Deathwatch did, Space Marines and Acolytes don't coexist well in the same ruleset. A major mechanical change might be needed.

Why, though?

I've still not heard a compelling argument for why d100 breaks down at really high levels. Assume that difficulties are scaled for a human level and then apply ridiculous penalties for ridiculous tasks.

I'm more than ready to concede this point (hell, I'm halfway assuming that I'm wrong, just because it seems I should be). Maybe I'm just missing the obvious.

It's just that I've asked several times now, and I've yet to hear anyone chime in with why it's a problem when characteristics hit 100.

When the combat resolution mechanic is about whether you can hit your target or not, the entire dynamic changes changes massively when you are able to constantly hit your target.

Nonsensical?

Now, Deathwatch is not my cup of tea. I love Warhammer 40k, but I don't enjoy being over-the-top ridiculous - at least not if I haven't deserved it somehow. But nonsensical? That is an accurate portrayal of Space Marines. That's how it's supposed to function.

What would be nonsensical - that is, make no sense - was if the Space Marines DIDN'T atomize their opponents at "Rank 1".

Besides, there's a lot more facets to combat than just getting hit or not.

Edit: As for Dodge, Dodge is broken because it is (or was) a flat test. This was always dumb, but it's not an inherent issue with the d100 system.

Space Marines should by all means tear things apart according to fluff, but it's not necessarily something that makes for a very compelling game.

ok, now that the thread has been completely derailed , where do we start a petition for a "Warhammer 40K RPG"?

Why do people keep bringing this up when the OP was literally "I half-read the announcement and wanted to be the first to start a thread about it"?

Because when stats hit 100 it gets really dumb to be playing a game where its about simply burning away peoples dodges until you instant kill them with your stack of hits. I don't know if you've played DW or not but being able to just atomise targets with a heavy bolter at rank 1 is pretty nonsensical . So either you need every target is be an ungodly stack of wounds or the game is about who wins initiative and kills each other with their auto-hit abilities.

The issue I see with a unified system is the d100 mechanics of 40kRPG really don't scale spectacularly. Unless you use a mess of workarounds like Deathwatch did, Space Marines and Acolytes don't coexist well in the same ruleset. A major mechanical change might be needed.

Why, though?

I've still not heard a compelling argument for why d100 breaks down at really high levels. Assume that difficulties are scaled for a human level and then apply ridiculous penalties for ridiculous tasks.

I'm more than ready to concede this point (hell, I'm halfway assuming that I'm wrong, just because it seems I should be). Maybe I'm just missing the obvious.

It's just that I've asked several times now, and I've yet to hear anyone chime in with why it's a problem when characteristics hit 100.

When the combat resolution mechanic is about whether you can hit your target or not, the entire dynamic changes changes massively when you are able to constantly hit your target.

Nonsensical?

Now, Deathwatch is not my cup of tea. I love Warhammer 40k, but I don't enjoy being over-the-top ridiculous - at least not if I haven't deserved it somehow. But nonsensical? That is an accurate portrayal of Space Marines. That's how it's supposed to function.

What would be nonsensical - that is, make no sense - was if the Space Marines DIDN'T atomize their opponents at "Rank 1".

Besides, there's a lot more facets to combat than just getting hit or not.

I don't think you understand. Prior to the errata, a Rank 1 Devastator Marine armed with standard issue Heavy Bolter could kill 2 Hive Tyrants in one burst. Hive Tyrants, as in the thing that in fluff tore Marneus Calgar a new one. I'm pretty sure that's nonsensical even for Space Marines. I've seen that happen in game (there were 2 Hive Tyrants there because the GM was kinda stupid - in another session he threw 4 Daemon Princes at us, the first two also went down in one round thanks to the very same Devastator).

Because when stats hit 100 it gets really dumb to be playing a game where its about simply burning away peoples dodges until you instant kill them with your stack of hits. I don't know if you've played DW or not but being able to just atomise targets with a heavy bolter at rank 1 is pretty nonsensical . So either you need every target is be an ungodly stack of wounds or the game is about who wins initiative and kills each other with their auto-hit abilities.

The issue I see with a unified system is the d100 mechanics of 40kRPG really don't scale spectacularly. Unless you use a mess of workarounds like Deathwatch did, Space Marines and Acolytes don't coexist well in the same ruleset. A major mechanical change might be needed.

Why, though?

I've still not heard a compelling argument for why d100 breaks down at really high levels. Assume that difficulties are scaled for a human level and then apply ridiculous penalties for ridiculous tasks.

I'm more than ready to concede this point (hell, I'm halfway assuming that I'm wrong, just because it seems I should be). Maybe I'm just missing the obvious.

It's just that I've asked several times now, and I've yet to hear anyone chime in with why it's a problem when characteristics hit 100.

When the combat resolution mechanic is about whether you can hit your target or not, the entire dynamic changes changes massively when you are able to constantly hit your target.

Nonsensical?

Now, Deathwatch is not my cup of tea. I love Warhammer 40k, but I don't enjoy being over-the-top ridiculous - at least not if I haven't deserved it somehow. But nonsensical? That is an accurate portrayal of Space Marines. That's how it's supposed to function.

What would be nonsensical - that is, make no sense - was if the Space Marines DIDN'T atomize their opponents at "Rank 1".

Besides, there's a lot more facets to combat than just getting hit or not.

I don't think you understand. Prior to the errata, a Rank 1 Devastator Marine armed with standard issue Heavy Bolter could kill 2 Hive Tyrants in one burst. Hive Tyrants, as in the thing that in fluff tore Marneus Calgar a new one. I'm pretty sure that's nonsensical even for Space Marines. I've seen that happen in game (there were 2 Hive Tyrants there because the GM was kinda stupid - in another session he threw 4 Daemon Princes at us, the first two also went down in one round thanks to the very same Devastator).

Why are we using the poor balancing of Deathwatch (especially pre-errata..?) to argue why 100+ characteristics wouldn't work? Deathwatch didn't even have characteristics at 100+.

Deathwatch had many problems. I don't think the chance to hit was one of them (or, at least, that was only a problem because of the ridiculous modifiers you could get in first edition - something I was happy to see rectified in DH2).

Running characters that can't really fail is boring, and there's little point in first allowing stats above 100% and then handling a ton of modifiers so these characters don't just auto-pass when the same can be achieved within the constrains of the 100 points scale.

Because when stats hit 100 it gets really dumb to be playing a game where its about simply burning away peoples dodges until you instant kill them with your stack of hits. I don't know if you've played DW or not but being able to just atomise targets with a heavy bolter at rank 1 is pretty nonsensical . So either you need every target is be an ungodly stack of wounds or the game is about who wins initiative and kills each other with their auto-hit abilities.

The issue I see with a unified system is the d100 mechanics of 40kRPG really don't scale spectacularly. Unless you use a mess of workarounds like Deathwatch did, Space Marines and Acolytes don't coexist well in the same ruleset. A major mechanical change might be needed.

Why, though?

I've still not heard a compelling argument for why d100 breaks down at really high levels. Assume that difficulties are scaled for a human level and then apply ridiculous penalties for ridiculous tasks.

I'm more than ready to concede this point (hell, I'm halfway assuming that I'm wrong, just because it seems I should be). Maybe I'm just missing the obvious.

It's just that I've asked several times now, and I've yet to hear anyone chime in with why it's a problem when characteristics hit 100.

When the combat resolution mechanic is about whether you can hit your target or not, the entire dynamic changes changes massively when you are able to constantly hit your target.

Nonsensical?

Now, Deathwatch is not my cup of tea. I love Warhammer 40k, but I don't enjoy being over-the-top ridiculous - at least not if I haven't deserved it somehow. But nonsensical? That is an accurate portrayal of Space Marines. That's how it's supposed to function.

What would be nonsensical - that is, make no sense - was if the Space Marines DIDN'T atomize their opponents at "Rank 1".

Besides, there's a lot more facets to combat than just getting hit or not.

I don't think you understand. Prior to the errata, a Rank 1 Devastator Marine armed with standard issue Heavy Bolter could kill 2 Hive Tyrants in one burst. Hive Tyrants, as in the thing that in fluff tore Marneus Calgar a new one. I'm pretty sure that's nonsensical even for Space Marines. I've seen that happen in game (there were 2 Hive Tyrants there because the GM was kinda stupid - in another session he threw 4 Daemon Princes at us, the first two also went down in one round thanks to the very same Devastator).

That said, I don't see how the poor balance of Deathwatch is representative of the breakdown of the d100 system at higher relative powerlevels.

Space Marines should by all means tear things apart according to fluff, but it's not necessarily something that makes for a very compelling game.

But it is an accurate portrayal, overall. And I believe that when people that do want to play Space Marines play Space Marines, that's what they want, and the rules should be in line with that. In this case, as Morangias mentioned, it is quite a bit off on the overpowered-side of things, but yeah.

Right, but when you try to make a system where normal humans and space marines are both valid player options, the d100 system breaks down due to the wide gulf between the two. Having a complete game where the players are space marine and one where they're normal people allows you to use the d100 to its fullest extent within the conceits of the game (so a space marine could have 40 strength and a normal could have 40 strength and those would mean completely different things in the context of their games because they're entirely separate systems).

As long as you don't want a cross over.

That said, I don't see how the poor balance of Deathwatch is representative of the breakdown of the d100 system at higher relative powerlevels.

I didn't really mean it in that sense, just refuting your point about Deathwatch's overpowered nature being intended.

On the actual topic of stats going up to 100+, let me put it that way: I've played WFRP 2e, where there were no Unnatural Characteristics and stats could go ridiculously high (not quite above 100, but in some cases it was possible to approach that value), and I've played 40kRP, where there are Unnatural Characteristics but the actual values of stats don't go quite as high (at least not all of them across the board as it happened in Fantasy), and the former framework tended to blow up in my face quite more often, as well as being more difficult to introduce new stuff. Hence, I prefer the latter.

I for my part never liked the concept of Unnatural characteristics.

It makes no sense that the bonus value gets higher without giving an equal effect on tests. Thats just strange.

And regarding a Space Marines High characteristics - this mainly concerns strength and toughness - not soooo much the other ones.

So an auto-pass for non-difficult strength and toughness tests for space marines with a certain experience is absolutely ok for me.

You know this is why they made unnatural characteristics in the first place. Though I would prefer a mixture of the old and new. Like the new I prefer the +s over the multipliers. However, I like how the old unnatural handle dice mechanics.

Here is what I am thinking...

For every +2 you get the following to single rolls. A decrease to difficulty. So at strength +4 means what would be hellish for a normal human it would be only be treated as a -40 task to space marines.

Contested rolls for every +2 we have a bonus degree of success. So if a +4 space marine arm wrestles a normal human the space marine gets a +2 degrees of success over said human.

Where do you get the Idea that a DW Marine can get a stat of 100 at R1? Starting stats are 2d10+30 which leaves a max of 50. Chapter mods usually come in about the + 5 flavor. Even Max advancement in the system is (I believe) +20. So that leaves a max ability score of approx 70-75! And yes, The SM is SUPERHUMAN! That's the point of them! Whether you like playing them or not is a different argument altogether, but, unplayable? Not so much. As a rule I tend to have my games run to either the Superhuman or the normal with interactions being limited to role playing/Narrative (Where 'normals actually have the advantage.) This is the part that players all to often miss as well: Space Marines are combat monsters (As the Emperor intended ). Normal humans are actually considerably more flexible in the narrative role playing department. If the GM always runs a "Kick the door in" type game then their players will naturally want to play SM's! But if they run a more balanced game where exploration, research and interaction are equally important than those same Sm's will be at a significant disadvantage!

I for my part never liked the concept of Unnatural characteristics.

It makes no sense that the bonus value gets higher without giving an equal effect on tests. Thats just strange.

And regarding a Space Marines High characteristics - this mainly concerns strength and toughness - not soooo much the other ones.

So an auto-pass for non-difficult strength and toughness tests for space marines with a certain experience is absolutely ok for me.

I always just imagined that Unnatural Characteristics was.. well.. unnatural, so it made sense. For example, Unnatural Strength didn't increase the strength of your muscles as much as it increased your... "bulk". So while it would help with certain things such as carrying, it doesn't increase how much your arms can take before breaking, and so on.

All it does is increase a characteristic of your strength (or what-have-you), not the actual strength (or, again, what-have-you) or such. And I think both the system and fluff makes sense, if you think of it like that.

So for example, Unnatural Intelligence would help with the aspect of your intelligence that handles organization, which is why the increased Intelligence Bonus would help you use Medicae on a lot of people, but wouldn't actually make you smarter (and thus not help with a Logic Test).

At least that's my rationalization.