Hi all, Update #2 is now up:

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=4539

Some notes:

• Untouchables—some new rules for this week for folks to try out. These are not set in stone yet, so suggestions and feedback are very much desired.
• We have some new talents in the update as well, and feedback on them would be great. We’ve also tweaked some existing ones a bit too. Are there any talents essential to the core game experience that players feel we need to add?
• We would still like more feedback on Arbitrator starting with both Shock and Solid Projectile Weapon Training. We’re leaning towards doing this, but really want to make sure he isn’t too strong in initial generation.

Some things we’re working on:

• Expanding the Crafting Sidebar to give better coverage and examples for the Trade skill. Might not appear for a couple of updates, but it is in work.
• Reinforcements System: Feedback here is very welcome, and thanks for getting into it early (we’ll more formally tackle Chapter VIII: Narrative Tools later in the month). It's a brand new rules bit so it will need lots of attention. We’re looking over all aspects of this new rules system, especially the example characters. Please try them out in some games and let us know if they are working in both thematic and mechanical ways.

For the next week, the focus is on Chapter V: Armoury and Chapter VI: Psychic Powers. We’d like playtesters to review these chapters for completeness and usefulness. Are there any weapons, gear items, or Psychic Powers missing? Or ones that aren’t essential for the core game? Buy some new gear and powers for your characters and try them out in games to ensure they all are fun to use and add to the game experience. Also, look over vehicles (especially living steeds) too to make sure they work with the regular vehicle rules and perhaps try out some in games too!

As always, thanks everyone for all the suggestions, feedback, and testing.

-Tim

I'm not thrilled with dropping Characteristics to abstain of 20 instead of 25. I liked the idea of moving the agents of the Inquisition up to the base competency of a Rogue Trader's retinue.

Well... I would still prefer if Untouchables were simply immune to psychic powers altogether. The idea that their aura's can be "leveled up" to debuff psykers kind of makes me gnash my teeth, but it's something I can live with. At least the abilities scale now, so when my level 8 Untouchable meets the new Burning Princess equivalent with psy-rating 10, she isn't going to just laugh at my piddly -2 to her psy rating.

In fact, one could argue that with enough points put into warp disruption, Untouchables could actually be OVERpowered now against psykers, as before they were immune and had a slight debuff (-10 to their rolls) but otherwise didn't actively weaken psykers, whereas now if a psyker gets caught in the aura of a powerful enough Untouchable, they're boned. A psyker can not just "fly away" if need be (like the Burning Princess did when we encountered her the first time), nor could they even rely on the old telekinetic hurl. They're helpless.

That seems a little too strong. Frankly, I would rather turn the ability into a static "Psykers within aura X have their Psy-Rating lowered by Y" debuff that can not be leveled up, and in exchange Untouchables get their old immunity to psychic attacks back. Having psychic bonuses to resist mind-control and stuff is all well and good, but having a +99 to your resistance tests still won't do jack to protect you from molten beam, and that, frankly, is the fundamental issue I think. An Untouchable should giggle as molten beam bounces off of them harmlessly. That's like... basic Untouchable shenanigans. The class just won't feel right, imo, if that isn't apart of its features.

But that isn't to say that I want the class to be an exact replica of DH1's, it really doesn't have to be. So long as they're balanced, I think that any separate abilities made to the class (like the debuff aura, fellowship debuffs etc) are acceptable, but only under the premise that, at base, the Untouchable him/herself is completely immune to psychic abilities of any kind.

That's my two sense, anyway.

Edit- I would be open to keeping Untouchables as they currently are if the Deny the Witch mechanic from the tabletop was adopted in addition to its psychic powers. If you were able to negate any psychic power aimed at you on a successful willpower test, then I would have no problem with Untouchables having a crapton of bonuses to their Deny the Witch roll rather than straight up immunity.

EDIT- One other thing I'll say: I don't think the Untouchable's fellowship debuffs are good enough. As it currently stands, and this is the same issue the DH1 Untouchable suffered, the core weakness of the Untouchable (being hated by everyone) can be solved simply by the Untouchable... not saying anything. In pretty much all RPG's like this, there is always the party dynamic of their being "the DPS guy", the "Tank guy", the "skill-bot", and "the guy who does all the talking". So it isn't uncommon for the soldier class and all the classes who suck at FS to just not talk while the social butterfly takes all the FS tests. That's standard RPG-fare. Untouchables being ass at fellowship tests is, therefore, hardly a penalty. Especially if the base class you're playing (Guardsman, Tech-Priest), already sucks at Fellowship tests anyway.

What Untouchables really need is for their penalties to bring THE ENTIRE PARTY down. There needs to be a REASON, not just fluffwise but even mechanically, for the Untouchable to be despised by basically everyone around him, even the other players. I'm talking about something like, for example, " any NPC entering the Untouchable's aura for the first time takes a -20 to their disposition toward the party."

That would be a good rule, because that way an Untouchable's weaknesses can't be ignored. It can't be downplayed simply by playing them as if they were a Tech-Priest or Guardsman. Just by existing , the Untouchable is making life harder for everyone, including its own allies. And that , really, is what being an Untouchable is all about.

Well... that and being a thorn in a Psyker's side obviously.

If you read it, it actually gives you the option for either 20 or 25, like we were discussing in one of the threads.

I like the update quite a bit.

Very glad to see the power level down to 20+2d10 again. I know that it was an easy matter to change for a GM, but from my point of view, Heresy has always been about those brave few slightly above ordinary people, thrust into this world of horror that they could never hope to measure up too, without teamwork and careful planning. Having 20+2d10 lets new groups experience that. And the option is there inviting them to take it higher, if they want.

900 starting exp is great. Making a character with 500 and even 600 was very restricting, I found.

Letting Adeptus Telepathica choose between two Apitutes is a great idea I'd like to see spread across more backgrounds. It would make chargen much more diverse I think.
Homeworld seems like the best place to implement this. Each home world offers the choice of a characteristic or a regular aptitude.

About untouchables, I'm still a little leery about them fluff wise , but I'm fine with how they are mechanically. What Blaxican said about the Deny The Witch skill could be a good addition, but it would have to be expensive as hell for most people to acquire, so like Psyker + Something else uncommon. But this leaves Psykers with another good reason to stack Willpower like crazy. Hmmm.
Maybe Psykers can cause Warp Phenomenon if they roll doubles on their Deny the Witch roll? I dunno, probably too much extra stuff crammed in.
And if it is added, I reaaaally don't like the idea of all 3 evades being tied to one skill. No thank you.

Desperado Role bonus is great, something I could see myself using all the time if I rolled a Desperado. Being able to Sprint and Shoot, or other wacky things just sounds like fun.

On the matter of Inescapable Blows talent, I love it, but seems a little powerful when it comes to Full Auto/Lightning Attack, since if you win the opposed it means all your hits go off. Needs a little fix up maybe.

Double Tap is a really good, powerful talent. But it also makes you think a bit, since you need to ensure that first shot hits. I like it.

I like that delicate interrogation can even increase subtlety if done right. Coupled with a better Co-ordinated Interrogation, I foresee my players doing a lot of Good Acolyte, Bad Acolyte.

Changing Devastating Assault back to it's roots as Furious Assault is good. That extra attack is famous for letting Orks mop the floor with poor acolytes.

Talents I'd like back:
Paranoia! It's even mentioned in the book somewhere. But since it offers +2 to your initiative rolls, play up the sleeplessness. Combine it with the Talent Light Sleeper, and then during active investigations, or treacherous times, the Character regains Fatigue slower, or less at the time. Always wired, but always tired.

Blather. It was always weird as a skill, but nonetheless one of the most fun abilities. Have it be a test on a situation related Common Lore, or just straight fellowship. (Really anything the player can think of!)
Obviously it shouldn't work in combat, but when you need to save a moment, swipe something right in front of someone, steal that keychain from their belt, or even get the first surprise attack on them, it's golden.
And if they see through it, their disposition goes does down.

Concealed Cavity. Hiding things in weird body pouches just seems like such a 40k idea.

Disturbing Voice, Chem Geld, Decadence. All talents I'm a little more ambivalent about, but the more the merrier.

Cleanse and Purify, and all the amazing Hammer of the Emperor combat talents should see a comeback at some point, but they probably won't fit in this book, and I'm fine waiting for Inquisitors Handbook 2.0



Nice little touch up on Fire Bombs too. In my DH1 days they were the only grenade ever used, and abused to hell and back.

Good update, looking forward to the next one!

I'd rather 25 remained the baseline for stats, with 20 being an option for those who'd rather play random chumps. Admittedly, it's not a big complaint, but it will make a difference for many people.

Really, really not liking what's going on with the Untouchables at the moment. It's probably even worse than what we've had before, since it slaps them with a huge penalty and turns the EA into an even bigger exp sink in return.

If you're really hell-bent on not making untouchables actually untouchable (and what's wrong with this idea, really?), maybe reintroduce Rank as a thing and make those Talents scale automatically with it? Rank is still a thing in the encounter design rules you have, it's just not called that at the moment.

Some notes:

• We would still like more feedback on Arbitrator starting with both Shock and Solid Projectile Weapon Training. We’re leaning towards doing this, but really want to make sure he isn’t too strong in initial generation.

For what it's worth, I consider the 'social power' of law enforcement "rights" even while not an acolyte to be far more valuable than a couple of mine weapon training talents.

Don't worry about those

As long as both starts (+20 and +25) are official options, I am ok with that. But in no way it should go back on +20 only !

Untouchables feel better now...lets see how it plays out.

The looks of disappointment i got from my player when i told them to remove 5 from their stats to the 25 base, so I'm glad the update allows it still at my discretion, the xp will also come in handy as they all had to scrim for advances to start.

Yes, the xp boost is a good thing.

Maybe +20 and +25 should be mentioned as choices on the same level (rather than +25 being just a side option) - but in general I am really really happy they kept the +25 in the rules.

My opinion on the updates:

- The changes in starting characteristics and starting xp are welcomed. Though personally, I would have lifted the starting xp to even higher (1000xp at minimum, 1500xp at optimum).

- On this note, the characteristic generation should be a little bit more fool-proof. Say, roll 11x2D10, discard the lowest score then distribute the rest amongst the characteristics as you wish. As it now stands, the players can't plan ahead because they can end up with characteristics unfit for their character conception (and that single re-roll doesn't help that much). +/- characteristics could be simple +5/-5 bonuses/penalties to the given characteristics.

- The abundance of Lore starting skills is good, but the 1.0 Remembrance+Specialist system would be much-much better.

- And no, the SP+Shock starting Weapon training for the Arbites is not overpowered at all. Both weapon classes have the tendency to slip into the 'meh' category after the first few sessions (especially Shock) and the Outcast has Chain and SP/Las. The only thing that is kinda' inconvenient for the Arbites is the Inquiry/Interrogation selection. I think Interrogation should be the basic skills and the selection should be Inquiry/Intimidate ("peaceful" investigator/"aggressive" field officer).

- The Desperado is now officially the bestest general role. Just strap some Intelligence/Fieldcraft/Willpower/Social Aptitudes to it from Home World/Background and you are good to go.

- The "Psyker" (I guess this guy is meant to be the Mystic) though is still underwhelming. Especially now, as the Psyker Elite Advancement confers a free extra Psyker Aptitude. Maybe its Intelligence Aptitude should be changed to Toughness and its Knowledge to Finesse/Fieldcraft (or Knowledge/Fieldcraft).

- Oh, and the extra Aptitude from the Psyker Elite Advancement is ridiculous. This Elite Advancement is getting out of control. For a meager 300xp, you gain a pretty cool Aptitude and access to a whole array of cool powers. It should cost at least 600xp or it should force the player to exchange one of his Aptitudes for Psyker.

- We are going to test the heck out of the new Untouchable Elite Advancement . It looks promising!

- I think it would be simpler to make the Psyker Aptitude a pre-requirement for the Psyniscience Skill. So if the character has the Psyker Aptitude, he can take this skill; if he doesn't, the he can't.

- On this note, the characteristic generation should be a little bit more fool-proof. Say, roll 11x2D10, discard the lowest score then distribute the rest amongst the characteristics as you wish. As it now stands, the players can't plan ahead because they can end up with characteristics unfit for their character conception (and that single re-roll doesn't help that much). +/- characteristics could be simple +5/-5 bonuses/penalties to the given characteristics.

The way my group has always done characteristics was we rolled 9x2D10, and assigned the values to the characteristic you wanted.

One easy way to avoid worrying about weapon aptitude imbalance would be to gut the useless DnD relics that they are from the system entirely. They really don't contribute much of anything to the game except an XP sink.

I like the changes to Generating Characteristics. However the is a huge error, at least I hope it's an error, in the Allocating Points sidebar. With a base of 20 and 60 points to distribute , an Acolyte using point allocation has an average characteristic of 26 where one using random generation has an average characteristic of 31. I think they forgot that, under Allocating Points, the base characteristics where 5 points higher. They either need to reset the base to 25/30 or give 110 points for allocation.

- On this note, the characteristic generation should be a little bit more fool-proof. Say, roll 11x2D10, discard the lowest score then distribute the rest amongst the characteristics as you wish. As it now stands, the players can't plan ahead because they can end up with characteristics unfit for their character conception (and that single re-roll doesn't help that much). +/- characteristics could be simple +5/-5 bonuses/penalties to the given characteristics.

The way my group has always done characteristics was we rolled 9x2D10, and assigned the values to the characteristic you wanted.

I think this is how most reasonable groups do it. Unfortunately, RAW, FFG has you rolling characteristics straight down the line with the generous caveat that you get to reroll one of them. I really think the rules need to be re-written to explicitly allow players to allocate as desired. I've played in some grognardy games that had us roll in order and it is severely limited. I'd rather those groups not have that justification of enforcing their unfun way of doing things.

One easy way to avoid worrying about weapon aptitude imbalance would be to gut the useless DnD relics that they are from the system entirely. They really don't contribute much of anything to the game except an XP sink.

This. Weapon Proficiencies are a relic that I would personally be totally fine with doing away with. They're an XP tax - nothing more. Want to use Interesting Weapon X? Got to pay the cool-factor tax.

I like the changes to Generating Characteristics. However the is a huge error, at least I hope it's an error, in the Allocating Points sidebar. With a base of 20 and 60 points to distribute , an Acolyte using point allocation has an average characteristic of 26 where one using random generation has an average characteristic of 31. I think they forgot that, under Allocating Points, the base characteristics where 5 points higher. They either need to reset the base to 25/30 or give 110 points for allocation.

This is kind of a big deal and it doesn't speak well of FFG that they overlooked this.

I hadn't even picked up on the difference in the average result with the point buy, but your correct an avg roll would give 300 points to "spent", while the base 20 on point buy has 265 spent.

- On this note, the characteristic generation should be a little bit more fool-proof. Say, roll 11x2D10, discard the lowest score then distribute the rest amongst the characteristics as you wish. As it now stands, the players can't plan ahead because they can end up with characteristics unfit for their character conception (and that single re-roll doesn't help that much). +/- characteristics could be simple +5/-5 bonuses/penalties to the given characteristics.

The way my group has always done characteristics was we rolled 9x2D10, and assigned the values to the characteristic you wanted.

I think this is how most reasonable groups do it. Unfortunately, RAW, FFG has you rolling characteristics straight down the line with the generous caveat that you get to reroll one of them. I really think the rules need to be re-written to explicitly allow players to allocate as desired. I've played in some grognardy games that had us roll in order and it is severely limited.

Also, half my RT players seems to have just assumed that how I wanted them to do it, and I barely care how they generate stats

My groups first game is happening tomorrow. We generated our chars using the 30 base +60 spread , after a discussion , both the gm and the players decided to leave the base at 30. The alternative seemed too low without extra points to spend to back it up.

The general feel with untouchable in our group is that if there is at least a Psyker in the group their game will be ruined by the untouchable. The drawback of being in a party with a psy rating lowering machine just outweigh the potential for drama(the good kind).

While I welcome to change to how Psykers work, I feel that the powers are a little ... bland ? A lot of what made them great and the "oomph" they had seems not there anymore , but that might be due to game mechanics being different now and me not having played yet. I understand that part of this is that the risks are slightly lower so the rewards should be adjusted , I get that.

I really look forward to next week with regards to the update.

I know this is coming a bit late, but does anyone else think it's kinda silly that the one thing that all Arbites do well is shoot walls really good?

I think this is how most reasonable groups do it. Unfortunately, RAW, FFG has you rolling characteristics straight down the line with the generous caveat that you get to reroll one of them. I really think the rules need to be re-written to explicitly allow players to allocate as desired. I've played in some grognardy games that had us roll in order and it is severely limited. I'd rather those groups not have that justification of enforcing their unfun way of doing things.

Who cares how the rules tell you to roll for statistics. It's a minor issue considering optional rules, a side bar, or just a plain ol' different preference.

Why shouldn't the "grognardy" groups not be able to have their fun. It doesn't need to be one way or the other.

The issue is that whatever is presented as the 'main' option in the book is invariably what most people will go with.

I know this is coming a bit late, but does anyone else think it's kinda silly that the one thing that all Arbites do well is shoot walls really good?

When the walls in question often provide better protection than tank armor... not so much.

The issue is that whatever is presented as the 'main' option in the book is invariably what most people will go with.

Its to do with how people think , the rules presented in side bars and books will most definitely be the ones that are used as a baseline , going bellow them will be seen as nerfing and above will be seen as buffing.

I know this is coming a bit late, but does anyone else think it's kinda silly that the one thing that all Arbites do well is shoot walls really good?

I personally think it's a breathtakingly stupid special rule, but I've been so focused on other things I've been overlooking it.

It does have a benefit though. An Arbite can essentially force the enemy from cover or kill them through the cover faster than anyone else in a gun fight. It's an especially valuable skill with high damaging weaponry as there would be no place one could hide.......at least not for long.

I know it has a benefit, but it seems more like a talent that might be of interest to an Arbites rather than something that every Arbitrator is good at. Why the hell would an Arbites Sage have special training in the destruction of inanimate objects?