Hi all,

Just thought I'd share a response I got from FFG when I emailed them on my views on the new version of the Beta, both good and bad. I touched on a number of subjects already present on the forums including that I missed the ability of mixing and matching skills and attributes from the previous Beta...

This was the response.

Hi **** and thanks for your comments.

Thanks for posting the response!

Thanks a lot.

Anyway - they mainly said: "We preferd to copy OW" blahblah "houserule it yourself" blahblah.

It is mainly about 5 Skills, isnt it ?

Intimidate / Interrogate --> intimidate (could be social, WP or Str)

Dodge / Parry --> Evade (could be defence, perception)

Lores --> Remembrance (+ Specialist Talents; aptitudes General, Intelligence)

Sleight of hand / security --> Subterfuge (could be agility, fieldcraft)

Awareness / Scrutiny --> Observe (could be Fieldcraft, Perception)

Oh yes, and inquiry was renamed investigate - but thats not mattering much.

Even with the new aptitudes, it cant be that hard to merge it like in beta1.

This whole "more in line with OW" seems to become just a poor excuse for copying OW 1:1.

This isn't even new to DH 2nd beta 1.0, I want to point that you have missed this in Corerulebooks.

DH, RT, DW, BC & OW has had this little box hidden somewhere in its pages where this has been written.

So they aren't per se saying that you just house rule it. It has been there as an optional rule.

So if someone wants me to point on what pages this is, First I have to get home from work and then go through my books.

The aggregation of said skills was new to Beta1 compared to OW.

It was a good evolution of the rules imo.

But besides that it only shows even more that they just copied stuff in these past 2 months.

The aggregation of said skills was new to Beta1 compared to OW.

It was a good evolution of the rules imo.

But besides that it only shows even more that they just copied stuff in these past 2 months.

I think the first beta's approach to Skills was almost universally regarded as an improvement. Maybe not every detail, but the system itself was a step up. This "well we've got a sidebar thing about alternate characteristic usage" thing is a cop out. That **** was in Inquisitor's Handbook (or one of the other early DH1 books). We need rules improvements coming from FFG, not suggestions for possible rules improvements should your GM agree.

Good post OP. I'd like to encourage more people to engage FFG in this way and post their response. One of my biggest problems with this forum is FFG's totally hands-off approach. If they came in and said what they're working on, the direction they're taking, and so on, I think our conversations could be a little more directed.

I quoted GZ because I agree with him here - a sign of what must surely be the coming End Times.

The aggregation of said skills was new to Beta1 compared to OW.

It was a good evolution of the rules imo.

But besides that it only shows even more that they just copied stuff in these past 2 months.

Well in that your correct, but I was more answering the thing about using different Characteristic with some Skills.

Off-topic: the aggregation of skills in Pathfinder was one of the selling point to me when Paizo published it. With many other things of course.

The aggregation of said skills was new to Beta1 compared to OW.

It was a good evolution of the rules imo.

But besides that it only shows even more that they just copied stuff in these past 2 months.

I think the first beta's approach to Skills was almost universally regarded as an improvement. Maybe not every detail, but the system itself was a step up. This "well we've got a sidebar thing about alternate characteristic usage" thing is a cop out. That **** was in Inquisitor's Handbook (or one of the other early DH1 books). We need rules improvements coming from FFG, not suggestions for possible rules improvements should your GM agree.

Good post OP. I'd like to encourage more people to engage FFG in this way and post their response. One of my biggest problems with this forum is FFG's totally hands-off approach. If they came in and said what they're working on, the direction they're taking, and so on, I think our conversations could be a little more directed.

I quoted GZ because I agree with him here - a sign of what must surely be the coming End Times.

If 2012 wouldnt yet have passed...I'd be scared by now.

The aggregation of said skills was new to Beta1 compared to OW.

It was a good evolution of the rules imo.

But besides that it only shows even more that they just copied stuff in these past 2 months.

I think the first beta's approach to Skills was almost universally regarded as an improvement. Maybe not every detail, but the system itself was a step up. This "well we've got a sidebar thing about alternate characteristic usage" thing is a cop out. That **** was in Inquisitor's Handbook (or one of the other early DH1 books). We need rules improvements coming from FFG, not suggestions for possible rules improvements should your GM agree.

Good post OP. I'd like to encourage more people to engage FFG in this way and post their response. One of my biggest problems with this forum is FFG's totally hands-off approach. If they came in and said what they're working on, the direction they're taking, and so on, I think our conversations could be a little more directed.

I quoted GZ because I agree with him here - a sign of what must surely be the coming End Times.

If 2012 wouldnt yet have passed...I'd be scared by now.

Lol, best comment seen in a while GZ.

Imo, DH2 is being released, to be an improvement of the DH1 system, not OW. That said, i understand they want it to work with OW.. but that f***** up the "improvement" state... There is no improvements in copy and s*** ..

Pardon my language..