You're making a few assumptions, like that FFG has made a good business decision. I'm not saying they haven't, but we don't know and shouldn't assume.

Well answer me this then. Why would they put all that work into something they clearly wanted and all the suddenly scrap it off like it was nothing? There has to be some incredible reason why they are doing that.

Because in the end, the money made from this game isn't about the name of it, but player satisfaction.

I am new to this conversation because I did not pick up the Beta, as I assumed it was going to be just an errata fix. I am glad they tried to freshen it some, but I don't know how far. I will probably never pick up the beta as I am still trying to get some play out of the Edge of the Empire series.

That being said, I really enjoyed what Paizo, did with 3.x. They had a beta that differed away from 3.5 and then after playtesting, the final edition published had some flavor changes, but was still mostly compatible with 3.5.

So it looks like FFG did the same thing with DH. While the beta pulled away, the final edition will be more like 1.0, hopefully with enough changes to refresh the line.

...I do feel they are doing the wisest move they can do. OW is a proven system that works and works well. It is what most people wanted in the first place and those people are what Fantasy Flight want to cater too since they are the majority. If they were not the majority, then Fantasy Flight would not scrap the whole thing and to go back to OW.

I have to agree with this. The steadily-evolving WH40KRP system is a proven, reliable money-maker- exactly the kind of product that companies desire. The drastically re-written Beta would have been high-risk and questionable reward. From my observations here on the Forums, most of the people who say they only like the Beta certainly seem to be the 'fringe' of the RPG community (-If you flatly refuse to play any game with 'hit points', that rules out 90-something% of the RPG market; so how much $$ are you actually spending on RPGs? More than the average WH40KRP fan, or drastically less ?) rather than the 'base', so how much could FFG gain by courting that demographic over their proven consumers?

...I do feel they are doing the wisest move they can do. OW is a proven system that works and works well. It is what most people wanted in the first place and those people are what Fantasy Flight want to cater too since they are the majority. If they were not the majority, then Fantasy Flight would not scrap the whole thing and to go back to OW.

I have to agree with this. The steadily-evolving WH40KRP system is a proven, reliable money-maker- exactly the kind of product that companies desire. The drastically re-written Beta would have been high-risk and questionable reward. From my observations here on the Forums, most of the people who say they only like the Beta certainly seem to be the 'fringe' of the RPG community (-If you flatly refuse to play any game with 'hit points', that rules out 90-something% of the RPG market; so how much $$ are you actually spending on RPGs? More than the average WH40KRP fan, or drastically less ?) rather than the 'base', so how much could FFG gain by courting that demographic over their proven consumers?

This is quite the excellent point. It is rare that I had seen anyone complain about hit points at all. Most players that I know pretty much go and accept hit points. If our characters are hurting bad we role play it and nothing more. I saw nothing wrong with the old wound system. You got your buffer health which is you saying, "Oh that was just a scratch." Then you have your major damage health that leaves you screaming when your arm gets shot off. Fatigue was your none lethal health that if it runs out your were just knock out. Nothing wrong with that and no one in my table was arguing about it.

The new wounds system felt like to me as, "We want to be FATE Core!!!" Then completely failed at it because FATE Core's damage system which is no hp in it at all at least makes it interesting. Above all else they made it simple too. So DH 2.0 new wound system is the slower and more complicated system that loves to drag things out. No where near the fun, quick, and simple to understand no hp system of FATE. Yeah you can tell I hated the new wound system and I am happy they are going back to the old OW wound system.

The new wounds system felt like to me as, "We want to be FATE Core!!!" Then completely failed at it because FATE Core's damage system which is no hp in it at all at least makes it interesting. Above all else they made it simple too. So DH 2.0 new wound system is the slower and more complicated system that loves to drag things out. No where near the fun, quick, and simple to understand no hp system of FATE. Yeah you can tell I hated the new wound system and I am happy they are going back to the old OW wound system.

Huh, I'm pretty sure you still have the stress track in FATE Core, and it's a rather straightforward "hit points" mechanic by itself.

Well kinda. If you do 7 shifts of damage you skip right to the last box and if you don't take consequences you are taken out instantly. If you do take a consequence it reduces damage, but leaves a aspect that your foe can use against you. Not to mention it does take time to heal that damage.

Though you can say the same with the new wound system.

That's pretty inconsequential to what I'm getting at (no pun intended). At it's core (again, no pun), FATE still has hit points, it just has an interesting way of dealing with what happens after you lose them.

Still that doesn't change the fact that the new wound system was a slower, bulkier, complicated, and thus more time consuming system when compared to FATE Core. They both have the same goal in mind which is to describe the combat in perfect narration. Even through the wounds. It just FATE Core does it better.

We REALLY tried to make the beta work.

We abandoned it last week.

Good to see FFG are doing the same, but there are some good mechanics in there that should be retained.

Character creation.

Streamlined 'skills'

AP

We REALLY tried to make the beta work.

We abandoned it last week.

Good to see FFG are doing the same, but there are some good mechanics in there that should be retained.

Character creation.

Streamlined 'skills'

AP

Your not the only one that tried and felt the same way. Though yes character creation, the skills, and the ap is a must have. Just drop the filthy new rate of fire rules for the good old rate of fire rules. Less complicated and just generally better all around.

And kind of try to make a blend of the old and the new wound system.

Keeping the "wounds" with +5 would be nice.

Wow! Head still spinning! Ok... For starters, I have to say that it is entirely unfair to start calling ffg names because they apparently had to rethink their design process! If you've ever put a lot of time in preparing for a game then you know how much it must have hurt for the "brass" at ffg to suddenly reverse course and say "go back to the drawing board"! As others have noted; There had to be an overwhelmingly negative reaction from the customer base in numerous formats for them to do that! My hat's off to Tim and all the rest of the staff for making what had to be a VERY hard choice! That is NOT cowardice! It's quite the opposite. The easy thing to do would have been to drive the beta through production and then if sales failed? "Oh well! Not our fault! We did what we were told!". Instead, They have chosen to take the feedback and see if they can come up with something more viable. BTW: No where in their message did FFG say they were dropping anything specific. They just said they were going to make it more compatible with the rest of the line. I know I was a "no" vote on the beta along with many others. I tried really hard not to make personal attacks on the designers or the other posters for their opinions! Now FFG is trying a different approach. I applaud this! I applaud the fact that they acted before this went into production and had potentially ruinous sales losses. I do not know what November will bring but I am looking forward to finding out! As one poster likes to put it: P.E.A.C.H. (Please Evaluate And Critique Honestly). I hope there will be further evolutions in the system! I'm sure some of the ideas from the beta will find a new home in november! At least I'll be looking forward to seeing what's there!

I'm on FFG's side here. They released it as a BETA to get feedback, and they actually listened to it. New system was neat, but ultimately, the system got in the way of the game rather then enhancing it. I'm very glad they are ditching it and trying something else as we ended up doing the same.

I'm glad to hear FFG decided to rethink their plans. Now, to make me REALLY happy, they could also scrap this idea of making a Dark Heresy 2, and instead make a "Warhammer 40,000 - the RPG" book.

Just one set of rules to use with all the "settings" (DH, RT, DW, BC, OW), then they can make setting books / adventures / additional rules for each line.

I'm glad to hear FFG decided to rethink their plans. Now, to make me REALLY happy, they could also scrap this idea of making a Dark Heresy 2, and instead make a "Warhammer 40,000 - the RPG" book.

Just one set of rules to use with all the "settings" (DH, RT, DW, BC, OW), then they can make setting books / adventures / additional rules for each line.

This!

+1

Da Capo!

As great as it would be, it's pretty unlikely that they'd scrap all five of their games at once to start from scratch.

As great as it would be, it's pretty unlikely that they'd scrap all five of their games at once to start from scratch.

Well, it wouldn't really be like that. The Core Rules will just be the updated version of the ruleset that all the lines are already using. This is probably what gamers already do, they buy the latest "Core" (like Only War), and use the updated rules in their own game, be it DH, RT, or what else.

Think something like nWoD, and the various Vampire, Werewolf, etc. Or even DnD and the various settings. One solid book with basic rules that won't need to be repeated over and over + "line" books for those that want to play a specific type of game.

This "Core WH40K" could be the most sold RPG book ever (ok, I'm exaggerating, but why not?).

A universal core book for 40K rpgs is needed. That way you got things that are compatible with each other. I would totally buy player's guide, gm guide, and a bestiary.

A universal core book for 40K rpgs is needed. That way you got things that are compatible with each other.

This would be my ideal, too- but I don't see it happening. Core rulebooks sell much better than supplements in the WH40KRP line, so I think FFG is 'locked in' to an ever-expanding series of stand-alone Core books.

A universal core book for 40K rpgs is needed. That way you got things that are compatible with each other.

This would be my ideal, too- but I don't see it happening. Core rulebooks sell much better than supplements in the WH40KRP line, so I think FFG is 'locked in' to an ever-expanding series of stand-alone Core books.

Yeah, also try telling the management of FFG that you'd rather sell one bestiary book than five.

One bestiary? Don't you mean Xenos 1, Xenos 2, Heretics 1, Heretics 2, Daemons 1 and Daemons 2? Xenos 3 coming this fall!

If there's a will, there's a way.

Yeah, also try telling the management of FFG that you'd rather sell one bestiary book than five.

A universal core book for 40K rpgs is needed. That way you got things that are compatible with each other.

This would be my ideal, too- but I don't see it happening. Core rulebooks sell much better than supplements in the WH40KRP line, so I think FFG is 'locked in' to an ever-expanding series of stand-alone Core books.

You could still sell five, though.

I would argue that if you made one generalized ruleset, with a single CORE rulebook, you could then sell a huge number of alternative "Core" rulebooks, with additional rules for additional things that might not be possible to cover in a single core rulebook.

Really, I think that it wouldn't just be good for the players, I think a unified system would make things easier for FFG as well, but more importantly, they'd be able to push up a metric ton of "Campaign Setting" books (that would stay relevant to everyone, because it's all part of one overreaching setting), as well as tons of variant rules for various perspectives, additional vehicle and ship rules, archetypical ships for Deathwatch, the Imperial Navy supplement, the Navy Support Book for the Imperial Guard, etc, etc, etc.

Giving full crossover compatibility means that every single rulebook supplement remains relevant to every single player in every single Campaign Scenario (I'm going to start using "Campaign Scenario" as terminology for the various lines, Only War, Rogue Trader, Black Crusade, etc; because they are all actually the same setting.. either way, you know what I mean!).

How this could possibly be a bad thing sales-wise, I have no idea.

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.