You all who complained about the first version of the Second Edition rules are pathetic cry babies who threw a fit when exposed to something new. By the Emperor, none of you could really be creative or smart enough to understand the flexibility the first version gave to players and GMs?

You all needed a reprint of Only War rather then a setting that allowed GMs and players to uses skills as the situation fit (changing characteristics and the ability to rely on broader situation) and instead need to be hand-held into the narrow type of skills? This new version is worse then the old one, but hey, you all bitched for it and the real role players in this world have to see your sad little crap reprinted cause you all have to ***** and whine, "OH... we need Only War...wan...wan"

Gods, I would hate to play with any of you. You're all the same players who properly think the Dark Eldars make great characters cause they're Dark Eldar and you're all awful power gamers. Never does it cross your small minds that they create awful group dynamics, but hey, if you all thought you wouldn't have forced FFG to give you the same crap back.

When I though a game was going to be open-ended setting within the Imperium of Mankind, the community (you all) came along a ruined it.

FFG had to do this. Give the same old thing to you all, hand-hold and walk you all into the way you have to play. They have to make sales, and shut you all the hell up. So you all would throw money at the same old crap without thinking on your own.

None of you who complained the first time could use your imagination. Dam, turn on a video game and get the hell out of role playing. You can't think, nor do I bet ANY of you are a half-way decent story tellers. So just go back to your computers games where you get the same old crap (OMG God of War 13! Grand Theft Auto Whatever: THE SAME DAME THING AGAIN! Oh, got to buy that!) You all are ruining it.

I understand your frustration. I too am upset by the update. However, even though you're angry, it doesn't help us convey to FFG what we want by attacking those who like this version better. We should strive to come to some sort of compromise regarding the mechanics we like and the mechanics they like so FFG can implement something we all like.

Your tears brings me great joy.

Okay now something more serious. First off last I check every post I had seen about the skills in the old beta were warmly welcomed. In fact nobody complained about the skills at all from what I had seen. So I am still questioning why those were changed when clearly they work well and there was no complaint about them really.

What people were complaining about was the "woundless" combat system that for some reason still used wounds. Care to explain that one to everyone that is reading this forum? Not to mention it was bulky, cumbersome, and slowed down the game. It was so bad some people in my group fell asleep in combat. I had to switch over to minions, elites, and keep masters as plot devices.

While mind you AP wasn't bad in itself, but rate of fire ruin it. I had to spend a whole hour to explain and debate with people in how it work in the middle of combat. They all knew it was beta, but even they didn't want to spend all that time just to work out how to shoot a gun.

The combat system in the beta was broken and just garbage. They had to go to OW because it at least has a system that can function and proven to work. Now stop your crying, blaming, and except reality for what it is. Fantasy Flight made a system, release the beta to ask for input, got input, and then act on that input. Nothing more and nothing less.

I understand your frustration. I too am upset by the update. However, even though you're angry, it doesn't help us convey to FFG what we want by attacking those who like this version better. We should strive to come to some sort of compromise regarding the mechanics we like and the mechanics they like so FFG can implement something we all like.

I like your post because your being very reasonable and I can respect that.

Okay now something more serious. First off last I check every post I had seen about the skills in the old beta were warmly welcomed. In fact nobody complained about the skills at all from what I had seen. So I am still questioning why those were changed when clearly they work well and there was no complaint about them really.

I agree with you. I really enjoyed the flexibility each skill had. It differentiated between a person who could lift really heavy things (strength) and someone who could exert themselves for a long time (toughness) without being two different skills. It was tidy and neat.

What people were complaining about was the "woundless" combat system that for some reason still used wounds. Care to explain that one to everyone that is reading this forum? Not to mention it was bulky, cumbersome, and slowed down the game. It was so bad some people in my group fell asleep in combat. I had to switch over to minions, elites, and keep masters as plot devices.

I had lots of problems with the wound system. However , I loved the system idea behind it. To clarify: I disliked wound stacking and I thought the tables were over-complex and too large (the classic sniper shot to the head not killing a target problem). I, personally, wished they could have kept the idea, but simplified it. I houseruled something similar in my group.

My Wound Houserules: Every character has a Wound Threshold equal to their Toughness Bonus. Any time they take damage (after armor and all that) they divide that number by their Wound Threshold. The result is compared to a Wound Effect Table (typically 5 levels) and the Wound Effect is applied. This keeps the idea behind their system but is much simpler. In play its incredibly lethal, feels gritty and realistic, but doesn't slow us down and frees us from keeping track of health. The differentiation between Minion, Elite, and Master is irrelevant as their capacity to be killed is dependent on skill, talents, and traits, not an arbitrary wound ceiling. Minions who suck typically died to one or two well placed shots.

While mind you AP wasn't bad in itself, but rate of fire ruin it. I had to spend a whole hour to explain and debate with people in how it work in the middle of combat. They all knew it was beta, but even they didn't want to spend all that time just to work out how to shoot a gun.

The combat system in the beta was broken and just garbage. They had to go to OW because it at least has a system that can function and proven to work. Now stop your crying, blaming, and except reality for what it is. Fantasy Flight made a system, release the beta to ask for input, got input, and then act on that input. Nothing more and nothing less.

I, too, liked AP, and I agree that rate of fire and rate of attack were confusing. Even once you had everyone on the same page regarding the difference between the two weapons had silly RoF values. Aside from that, though, I really enjoyed players having a "budget" from which they could perform actions. It was elegant. Defensive players could save more AP for Evades and offensive players could blow it all to make a devastating attack, hell take the consequences. It forced you to be more thoughtful, as opposed to half-action: aim, half-action: fire, reaction: dodge. Finally, the conversion, fully, to OW combat makes sense, as the whole book is essentially an OW conversion. They were, if nothing else, consistent.

What would had saved AP is if they just used the rate of fire system in BC and OW. Just take a +10 (single shot), no modifier (semi-shot), or take a -10 (auto shot). Short, clean, and very simple. It doesn't take any time to go explain that.

Also again the skills really should had been left alone. I loved the fact you can use different characteristics for them, but I can house rule that easily.

Now on wounds I am going to disagree with you, but that is the matter of my taste and frankly I never found any problem with it. That is how I feel when it comes to the rules.

Edit: Though I will say this SublimeShadow. Your wound system is clearly better than the first beta. Far better I will say.

Although you're response is notably radical, I can't help but agree with you on a number of these points.

You want to start up a page on Dark Reign? I'm involved in a campaign for DH2b1 and would love to become an active member of that community. PM me if you're interested.

What would had saved AP is if they just used the rate of fire system in BC and OW. Just take a +10 (single shot), no modifier (semi-shot), or take a -10 (auto shot). Short, clean, and very simple. It doesn't take any time to go explain that.

Also again the skills really should had been left alone. I loved the fact you can use different characteristics for them, but I can house rule that easily.

Now on wounds I am going to disagree with you, but that is the matter of my taste and frankly I never found any problem with it. That is how I feel when it comes to the rules.

Just out of curiosity, would you accept any changes to the wound system?

Well I did put in a edit saying your system is better.

Let me put it this way if I had TB 4 and got shot with 9 damage from a bolter. That means I get hit for 2 damage, or 3 damage if you round up? I prefer a round down so that way if the TB 4 character gets hit with 1 damage he can shrug it off as a petty attack. Hell I am willing to accept a talent for that.

I don't think it's really a good idea to kick off this round of beta testing by accusing half the population of "whining". Some concerns were raised in the previous beta that you personally may or may not agree with, but clearly the developers agreed enough with them to take the whole thing back to the drawing board.

What's done is done.Instigating fights isn't going to be terrible useful for anyone.

The op is basically the funniest person on this forum.

Well I did put in a edit saying your system is better.

Let me put it this way if I had TB 4 and got shot with 9 damage from a bolter. That means I get hit for 2 damage, or 3 damage if you round up? I prefer a round down so that way if the TB 4 character gets hit with 1 damage he can shrug it off as a petty attack. Hell I am willing to accept a talent for that.

The "2" would be wound effect 2. Probably lots of blood loss, maybe dazed for a few rounds. If a character takes less damage than Wound Threshold (in your case less than 4) its essentially ignored.

I can see something like that. Just keep the crit tables and scale it from there.

I can see something like that. Just keep the crit tables and scale it from there.

Exactly. When a bullet, laser, knife, etc. gets through your armor it does something, rather than subtract from a health bar. The effects are fairly simple so they're easy to keep track of.

So this is like 10 crits per limb, or 10 crits per damage source per limb? Like say with the former if you took 1 energy, 2 rending, and 3 impact it all counts as 6 crits to that one limb. The later being you took 1 energy, 3 impact, 2 rending, and 2 exploding that don't add up together at all.

Its more along the lines of straight damage. Say you take have a Toughness of 41, and a Defense Value (from armor) of 2 everywhere but on the head. Thus your Wound Threshold is 4. Let me outline some combat.

1. The character finds him/herself standing in the open, and out of AP.
2. An npc shoots and hits, in the leg.
3. They roll 8 Damage.
4. The damage that gets through (their armor) is 6.
5. 6/4 (rounding down) is 1 (with a remainder).
6. Thus you go look at the appropriate Wound Effect table and consult the 1 row.
7. Being low on the table its probably something not too bad (like Weakened (1) for 1 round).
8. Then someone throws a grenade (which goes off close by)
9. They roll 16 for Damage
10. The 14 that gets through turns into a 3 (14/4).
11. Then you consult wound effect 3 on the explosion table (to the body) which is pretty nasty.

That's the gist of it.

Okay so it never stacks. You just look at the damage and check the result. I think I got it. You have to get one hell of a shot to get to crit 10 though. At least 40 damage at TB 4 with no armor.

The table caps at 5 (instantly lethal), righteous fury bumps up the number by 1.

I don't think it's really a good idea to kick off this round of beta testing by accusing half the population of "whining". Some concerns were raised in the previous beta that you personally may or may not agree with, but clearly the developers agreed enough with them to take the whole thing back to the drawing board.

What's done is done.Instigating fights isn't going to be terrible useful for anyone.

Especially when we don't know why FFG changed their mind. We only get to see the feedback on the forum.

We don't know what the feedback sent in by email was like. We don't know how FFG accounted for the fact that people who are unhappy are more likely to say something than the people who are happy.

We don't know if these changes were FFGs choice, or if someone who is usually uninvolved in game development but has influence over the DH2 team (GW, higher ups in FFG) ordered the changes.

All we know is that FFG changed it.

I'm not even sure if FFG is reading these forums or not.

You all who complained about the first version of the Second Edition rules are pathetic cry babies who threw a fit when exposed to something new. By the Emperor, none of you could really be creative or smart enough to understand the flexibility the first version gave to players and GMs?

You all needed a reprint of Only War rather then a setting that allowed GMs and players to uses skills as the situation fit (changing characteristics and the ability to rely on broader situation) and instead need to be hand-held into the narrow type of skills? This new version is worse then the old one, but hey, you all bitched for it and the real role players in this world have to see your sad little crap reprinted cause you all have to ***** and whine, "OH... we need Only War...wan...wan"

Gods, I would hate to play with any of you. You're all the same players who properly think the Dark Eldars make great characters cause they're Dark Eldar and you're all awful power gamers. Never does it cross your small minds that they create awful group dynamics, but hey, if you all thought you wouldn't have forced FFG to give you the same crap back.

When I though a game was going to be open-ended setting within the Imperium of Mankind, the community (you all) came along a ruined it.

FFG had to do this. Give the same old thing to you all, hand-hold and walk you all into the way you have to play. They have to make sales, and shut you all the hell up. So you all would throw money at the same old crap without thinking on your own.

None of you who complained the first time could use your imagination. Dam, turn on a video game and get the hell out of role playing. You can't think, nor do I bet ANY of you are a half-way decent story tellers. So just go back to your computers games where you get the same old crap (OMG God of War 13! Grand Theft Auto Whatever: THE SAME DAME THING AGAIN! Oh, got to buy that!) You all are ruining it.

What you call "whining" I call "strong prayers to the Emperor".

AND IT WORKED!

None of you who complained the first time could use your imagination. Dam, turn on a video game and get the hell out of role playing. You can't think, nor do I bet ANY of you are a half-way decent story tellers. So just go back to your computers games where you get the same old crap (OMG God of War 13! Grand Theft Auto Whatever: THE SAME DAME THING AGAIN! Oh, got to buy that!) You all are ruining it.

Absolutely agree.

The complaints that the system of the Beta are clunky, while not baseless, shouldn't lead us to conclude that we need to scrap any changes entirely. The Beta needs work, that doesn't mean that we need to go back to D&D.

The complaints that the system is not reverse-compatible are exactly as full of crap as you mentioned. Can't think up a way to use a weapon/piece of gear/campaign setting from a previous edition in the Beta? That's not FFG's fault. Put some work into it, work out some numbers.

I really do not understand how people had so much difficulty with the new wound and AP systems. My group got the hang of these almost immediately. If you don't like how it works in a particular situation, make an executive call and change the wound effects in that situation. It's not that difficult. The only reason one would be incapable of doing so would be if you cannot come up with the originality to describe what you want to have happen. If you can't do that, you probably shouldn't sit at the head of the table.

The op is basically the funniest person on this forum.

Eh. Gaunt is funnier.

The op is basically the funniest person on this forum.

Eh. Gaunt is funnier.

Depends on which definition of 'funny' you're using. I don't think he tries to be funny.

[...]

I'm not even sure if FFG is reading these forums or not.

The forums sometimes suffers from a painful lack of moderation, and they could do well with having a dedicated community manager - but in the end, those things aren't always good either, so I guess you take some you lose some. But they do read the forums.

As much as I like doing rules work and such, I would probably hate working for FFG on a permanent basis, since there would be so much I would like to say, but couldn't, and it would prevent me from interacting on a social level due to professional standards, and if I did participate in the discussions, I'd be swamped with ad hominems, accusations of favouritism and people either sucking up or throwing dirt at me ( that's not mud! ).

They're here, they do listen, they do sometimes probably even participate, but they're not going to announce it.

Depends on which definition of 'funny' you're using. I don't think he tries to be funny.