Hello guys,

This is a mess in my opinion.

Linguistics needs to be paid for each language, which seems rather expensive, given how often you'll need another specific language than Low or High Gothic.

Wouldnt it make more sense to tie the languages you are able to speak, understand and write to your Lores ?

E.g.:

Common Lore (IG) is able to use special IG codes

Forbidden Lore (Inquisition) may use Ciphers (Inquisition)

Scholastic Lore (Cryptology) doesnt really state what kind of ciphers you can handle, or what you need in addition to be compatible. How does that go along with linguistics in general ? Can I decipher without linguistic skill ?

Logic says it can break ciphers, which is the only clear function for me.

So we pay for specific languages, but not for specific lores? Makes no sense.

What I wanted to say is: why not tie languages to knowledge (lores).

If someone has FL (Orks), he could get orkish language abilities etc.

That actually makes a lot of sense. Languages come up pretty infrequently, and it's unlikely you'd learn a language without learning anything about the speakers anyway.

One of the reasons I liked the specialist talent. Knowledge should represent more than just being a walking encyclopaedia.

I also am not sure if we really need a separation into Scholastic Lore and Forbidden Lore.

I mean...both are rather theoretical, and very often, there do not exist both.

So, "Lore"(Inquisition) is usually always forbidden and secret. And so is knowledge about daemons, xenos and such.

Also the aptitudes are the same.

In general I also really liked the specialist talents as a cumulative knowledge package that made sense.

With languages this is really a good thing, as currently I would have to buy (and level up) several skills if I just want to speak several languages. Thats a whole lot of XP that rarely will have any real use outside of very specialized campaigns.

Forbidden Lore and Scholastic Lore would be fine separate if they actually did different things mechanically, somehow.

DH2e actually tried this by basing them on different characteristics and suggesting tying corruption gains to forbidden lore checks.

Something which doesnt make sense in many circumstances.

Xenos-knowledge doesnt corrupt you necessarily, other forbiden knowledge, like about Astartes, doesnt corrupt at all (in same rare cases it might, but thats not a usual case).

I'd prefer Remembrance/Lingusitics + Specialist Talent

Or at least merging Scholastic & Forbidden into something like "theoretical" Lore (I am sure a better name can be found).

You could easily cover xenos lore by making it an insanity gain instead of a corruption gain. I kinda like the idea that accessing the really proscribed material has lasting side effects. Hard to implement well though.

I think such things, as being too specific and depending on the kind of lore, would better remain a GM decision.

Never the less, I still think Remembrance/Linguistics + Specialist was a very elegant and sophisticated way to solve this issue.

You get a package of knowledge that makes sense together with a talent, and your general ability and knowledge level is described by 1 remembrance and 1 linguistics skill.

This is a very good example of why the specialist system in Beta 1 was so much better.

And why would i ever need scholastic lore cryptology, if i have logic (can also de-cipher) ?

The only problem with the specialist thing in beta v1 was - in my opinion - that lack of sense of progress in the development. once you have pushed remembrance to max, then the new knowledges which you couldn't even attempt to think of before just popped into your mind (as having it for +30 immediately) as you bought the talent. otherwise it was light years better than this, with the doubling amount of lores from common to forbidden, not to mention the cipher, linguist etc..

Remembrance was a stupid skill. Specialist was cool though