Jump to content



Photo

The Setting ....?


  • Please log in to reply
39 replies to this topic

#21 Dulahan

Dulahan

    Member

  • Members
  • 630 posts

Posted 27 February 2011 - 08:41 AM

If by 'robust enough' you mean why not just a sourcebook?  I'd agree... I'd rather it be that way even.

 

Hell, even ideal.  Release a 'corebook size' supplement.  And have that much more room for splats and setting.  You could darn near combine a Rites of Battle style sourcebook with the 'group specific' rules in such a book.  since as is most of us are getting all the books (Except deathwatch, there's a lot who only get that).  So why buy the rules EVERY time.



#22 George Labour

George Labour

    Member

  • Members
  • 238 posts

Posted 27 February 2011 - 09:50 AM

I'll have to agree that a big book of optional campaigns for xenos, and other alternatives would be very desirable. However, if they went such a route, it'd likely end up being multiple smaller books in the vein of Blood of Martyrs, the upcoming Imperial Guard book or the gun and careers supplement each line gets. So one for all ork games, one for Tau empire games, etc.

 



#23 Dulahan

Dulahan

    Member

  • Members
  • 630 posts

Posted 27 February 2011 - 09:54 AM

I don't know.  I'd think it would need to be bigger than Blood.  Rites of Battle or Inquisitor's Handbook style minimum to do Orks or Eldar justice.  Especially Eldar with all their Aspects (And no doubt at least one FFG Craftworld Specific original Aspect)



#24 Targetlock

Targetlock

    Member

  • Members
  • 70 posts

Posted 27 February 2011 - 12:27 PM

xenos themed source-books would be a great idea, i have to agree on that i would happily buy an ork one and a eldar one, though i bought the into the storm book mainly for the ork stuff (planning a one-off ork adventure as a tester), i know silly :)



#25 Cynical Cat

Cynical Cat

    Member

  • Members
  • 647 posts

Posted 27 February 2011 - 02:25 PM

For Xenos expansions Eldar make the most sense.  That isn't to say that the others aren't doable but the Eldar have the most going for them.

1) Large fan base. 

2) Lots of cool gear, weapons, and psychic abilities.

3) They already have a built in rational.  The Outcast paths, which include Harlequins, pirates, rangers, and mercenaries already wander around the non-Eldar parts of the universe and get into trouble.  Add in requests from Farseers "these guys over here need to be taken out before things get bad for us" and you've got easy adventure construction with lots of variation in character types.

4) Warp gates are great from a GM point of view.  They allow easy transit from places the GM wants the players to be to places the GM wants the players to go.

Orks can wander around and get into trouble and the Tau can have a special trouble shooting team that gets sent to hot spots so yes, those games are doable but the Eldar already have a lot of game friendly material and big fan base.  Orks carry the burden of being the comic relief race and Tau are lightning rods.  Most people either like them or loath them and for a game you want as wide a customer base as possible.

 



#26 MILLANDSON

MILLANDSON

    Playtester

  • Members
  • 3,378 posts

Posted 27 February 2011 - 04:49 PM

I doubt there will be any games for individual xenos races, for a few reasons.

No. 1 - Orks already have rules in Rogue Trader, they won't then make an entire game for them when those rules suffice.

No. 2 - Eldar are sneaky, and no one knows what they are doing half the time. I don't see GW allowing FFG to write a fair chunk of the Eldar fluff for a stand-alone RPG. Rules in Rogue Trader for Eldar? That'd be more realistic an expectation.

No. 3 - 40k is pretty much all about the Imperium of Man. Chaos is doable because the Imperium is it's main opponent, it's the other side of the coin. That doesn't work as well when applied to a xenos stand-alone RPG.

I just don't see it, sorry


~Yea, Tho I Walk Through The Valley Of The Shadow Of Death, I Shall Fear No Evil~

 

Posts/views/opinions are in no way representative of FFG, and are entirely my own.


#27 Dulahan

Dulahan

    Member

  • Members
  • 630 posts

Posted 27 February 2011 - 05:29 PM

MILLANDSON said:

I doubt there will be any games for individual xenos races, for a few reasons.

No. 1 - Orks already have rules in Rogue Trader, they won't then make an entire game for them when those rules suffice.

 

No.  they don't.  They suffice for one VERY small side of Orkdom.  Freebooters.  They don't allow anything even approaching the way Orks are as a whole.  It's like saying the Corebook of Dark Heresy's handling of the Guard was enough to allow an entire game for Imperial Guard PCs.   Maybe in such a hands off in need of multiple houserules matter it's not even funny.  But not even close to enough for a full game.

 

And Eldar are no less understandable than elves in any other game.



#28 Blood Pact

Blood Pact

    Member

  • Members
  • 890 posts

Posted 27 February 2011 - 06:05 PM

George Labour said:

An Ork themed RPG might also work. Heck, it almost writes itself.

the title would also be the simplest of all the FFG 40k RPGs. WAAAGH! There, new RPG has a name, that's also a nob to the early days of table top 40k.

Though I could also see a Tau themed game before Eldar, as the tau are more understandable and have a lot of kew toys to play with. Eldar would take a bit of work to do right.

An Adeptus Mechanicus themed add on and or stand alone might also be fun. Players could be skitarii, Knight titan pilots, and Magos all working for the omnissiah's benefits. It's be similar to the Tau RPG, only it explores an even more mysterious and less well known part of the 40k universe.

Yeah but here's the thing, while all of those are great ideas, they're also extremely nichey ideas. Especially the Mechanicus one.

Look at Into the Storm. Between one career and two advanced ranks (and tribe and birth-specialty), you can pretty much make any type of Ork that you want. I'm not sure if that's something you could really take to make in to something that isn't just Rogue Trader with Orks.



#29 Dulahan

Dulahan

    Member

  • Members
  • 630 posts

Posted 27 February 2011 - 06:09 PM

I almost guarantee we'll get a "Blood of Martyrs" style Mechanicus book.  We're getting them for all the other DH splats... no reason that won't be coming.



#30 Blood Pact

Blood Pact

    Member

  • Members
  • 890 posts

Posted 27 February 2011 - 07:03 PM

Adam France said:

Endless sub-games, each getting their own expensive corebook sounds like the worst way to go with the 40k rpg line to me.

Aren't the games that already exist robust enough for people to play Eldar? Or Tau, or whatever? If not, why not? This to me is madness.

On the other side of the coin, if you had to buy the Rogue Trader book to play an Eldar, it'd be rather annoying, and espensive in its own way, wouldn't it? This is of course assuming that you weren't already going to buy RT anyway.

But to be clear, I'm speaking in terms of a whole book devoted to playing Eldar (or whatever), as opposed to something more like what we got in Into the Storm for Orks or Kroot, where it's not really built to support an all Ork/Kroot game (though nothing is stopping you).

Dulahan said:

I almost guarantee we'll get a "Blood of Martyrs" style Mechanicus book. We're getting them for all the other DH splats... no reason that won't be coming.

Oh I'm sure we'll get something like that. Though I doubt we'll get a whole new line for just the Mechanicus.



#31 Cifer

Cifer

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,799 posts

Posted 27 February 2011 - 11:46 PM

 @Dulahan

No. they don't. They suffice for one VERY small side of Orkdom. Freebooters. They don't allow anything even approaching the way Orks are as a whole. It's like saying the Corebook of Dark Heresy's handling of the Guard was enough to allow an entire game for Imperial Guard PCs.

Technically, it was - or I don't know how we played two short campaigns of IG using DH.



#32 Polaria

Polaria

    Member

  • Members
  • 734 posts

Posted 28 February 2011 - 12:46 AM

Wilfred Owen said:

Cifer said:

 

 Huh. I thought the Screaming Vortex would be some reference to the Eye of Terror.

I'd say "good catch", but...

 

That reminds me: An interesting question might not only be "where" but "when". There are two pictures with Necron elements (a scarab and a lord). Either they wake up a little sooner in the Vortex than in the rest of the galaxy (and for some reason, Chaos isn't interested in telling the Imperium) or FFG advances the timeline.

 

 

 

There is nothing to say that the Necrons cannot awake before the incident at Sanctuary 101. You could argue previous sightings were unreported.  Besides, as I have always said, the Deceiver has been active for a long time and there are Necrons who have infiltrated the Imperium.  I guess then that we would have some active tombs already.

Indeed. The only comprehensive source on Necrons, even though a bit old and possibly out of date, is the Codex: Necrons, which also tells us about Sanctuary 101 incident. However, the very same book tells of half-a-dozen EARLIER contacts with Necrons made by various expeditions, Inquistorial forces and Rogue Traders, some of these actually predate the Sanctuary 101 incident by several millenia...

I quess Sancuary 101 was simply the incident that made Imperium as a whole realize there are evil metal things afoot.



#33 CaptainSabutai

CaptainSabutai

    Member

  • Members
  • 23 posts

Posted 28 February 2011 - 02:53 AM

I don't really get the obsession with Necrons in an RPG. They'd make good one off combat encounters for powerful PCs, but the only ones who'd engage in anything other then 'appear & kill 'em all' would be C'tan like the Deceiver, who would be so far above the power level of even DW characters it'd be unfair, and once you've done 'ZOMG, teh base has a necron tomb under it!' once the shtick would get old very quickly...if they do appear i'd rather they kept it as small a section as possible and concentrated on antagonists who have more variety in how they confound the PCs. This is why Chaos make such great Black Library ( and 40k RPG) protagonists and antagonists, their motivations are human and susceptible to negotiation and deceit as opposed to pure combat monsters...



#34 Adam France

Adam France

    Member

  • Members
  • 392 posts

Posted 28 February 2011 - 04:02 AM

CaptainSabutai said:

I don't really get the obsession with Necrons in an RPG. They'd make good one off combat encounters for powerful PCs, but the only ones who'd engage in anything other then 'appear & kill 'em all' would be C'tan like the Deceiver, who would be so far above the power level of even DW characters it'd be unfair, and once you've done 'ZOMG, teh base has a necron tomb under it!' once the shtick would get old very quickly...if they do appear i'd rather they kept it as small a section as possible and concentrated on antagonists who have more variety in how they confound the PCs. This is why Chaos make such great Black Library ( and 40k RPG) protagonists and antagonists, their motivations are human and susceptible to negotiation and deceit as opposed to pure combat monsters...

I prefer Necrons to Tyranids for rpg use. (Though I agree both present problems, as they are rather too combat oriented and need a bit of tweaking for rpg use imo.)



#35 CaptainSabutai

CaptainSabutai

    Member

  • Members
  • 23 posts

Posted 28 February 2011 - 04:19 AM

Adam France said:

CaptainSabutai said:

 

I don't really get the obsession with Necrons in an RPG. They'd make good one off combat encounters for powerful PCs, but the only ones who'd engage in anything other then 'appear & kill 'em all' would be C'tan like the Deceiver, who would be so far above the power level of even DW characters it'd be unfair, and once you've done 'ZOMG, teh base has a necron tomb under it!' once the shtick would get old very quickly...if they do appear i'd rather they kept it as small a section as possible and concentrated on antagonists who have more variety in how they confound the PCs. This is why Chaos make such great Black Library ( and 40k RPG) protagonists and antagonists, their motivations are human and susceptible to negotiation and deceit as opposed to pure combat monsters...

 

 

I prefer Necrons to Tyranids for rpg use. (Though I agree both present problems, as they are rather too combat oriented and need a bit of tweaking for rpg use imo.)

 

Tyranids are very difficult to use in a varied way I agree, theres only so many times you can reenact the film Aliens! Unless you like all the old Genestealer cult stuff from the early days of the TT 40k wargame, that could be a very interesting game, but Necrons don't even have that-they could do with something like a 'Cult of the Living Steel', maybe a heretical Mechanicus offshoot...



#36 Dulahan

Dulahan

    Member

  • Members
  • 630 posts

Posted 28 February 2011 - 04:58 AM

How are Necrons any different from Skeletons and the unintelligent Undead, or Golems, or any other number of random unintelligent monsters in D&D?  You could make a darned good campaign with them and Chaos trying to figure out what they are.

 

No, they won't be the only enemy.  But a random force that throws a pretty big monkey wrench into plans?  A scary thing that shows up occasionally?  And slowly needs to be investigated (Even if possibly at times where the game is slowing down and something needs to happen, Necrons Materialize!).  Culminating late in a Crusade campaign in taking on a C'Tan as Daemon Princes or something.  That could be awesome.



#37 CaptainSabutai

CaptainSabutai

    Member

  • Members
  • 23 posts

Posted 28 February 2011 - 05:10 AM

Dulahan said:

How are Necrons any different from Skeletons and the unintelligent Undead, or Golems, or any other number of random unintelligent monsters in D&D?  

 

 

That is indeed their primary problem, too much like mindless D&D bundles of hit points and powers, no personality, individuality or variation, i'd hate to play a whole campaign where the only time I get to speak to the main enemy and discover what drives them is the last battle against the C'Tan boss, and if I was launching a Black crusade against them I'd probably stand off and nuke wherever they were located from orbit rather then attempt to engage them personally anyway! They're a good one off shoot 'em up opponent but have little roleplaying appeal IMHO...



#38 Polaria

Polaria

    Member

  • Members
  • 734 posts

Posted 28 February 2011 - 08:03 AM

Dulahan said:

 

How are Necrons any different from Skeletons and the unintelligent Undead, or Golems, or any other number of random unintelligent monsters in D&D? 

 

 

Read the sources, I say :)

Necron Warriors and other "basic goon" -types are not much different... Lords and Pariahs, however, are a whole other ballgame. Lords have enough intelligence and personality to infiltrate inside Inquisition and turn humans against each other (as described in Xenology) and Pariahs can do pretty much everything any human can (as shown in Dawn of War). Moreover Necrons have several human and non-human cults dedicated in their worship (as described in Codex Necrons). So, in actuality, they are extremely viable RP opponents once you read all the sources and get over the "OMG they are all stoopid zombies" -stereotype.



#39 Dulahan

Dulahan

    Member

  • Members
  • 630 posts

Posted 28 February 2011 - 08:11 AM

Polaria said:

 

Read the sources, I say :)

Necron Warriors and other "basic goon" -types are not much different... Lords and Pariahs, however, are a whole other ballgame. Lords have enough intelligence and personality to infiltrate inside Inquisition and turn humans against each other (as described in Xenology) and Pariahs can do pretty much everything any human can (as shown in Dawn of War). Moreover Necrons have several human and non-human cults dedicated in their worship (as described in Codex Necrons). So, in actuality, they are extremely viable RP opponents once you read all the sources and get over the "OMG they are all stoopid zombies" -stereotype.

 

Exactly my point.  Just because the mooks aren't, doesn't mean there aren't agencies tied to them who aren't too.  And those agencies are the sort of thing that makes even the Chaos Gods a bit uneasy.  Unstoppable, seemingly endless mechanical things that are a mystery?  Yeah, you bet your britches I can think of a lot of good games to run revolving around them.  Especially for Chaos.  The Dark Mechanicum should have a lot of fun with those. ;)



#40 RedMike

RedMike

    Member

  • Members
  • 173 posts

Posted 28 February 2011 - 09:01 AM

Dulahan said:

Polaria said:

 

 

Read the sources, I say :)

Necron Warriors and other "basic goon" -types are not much different... Lords and Pariahs, however, are a whole other ballgame. Lords have enough intelligence and personality to infiltrate inside Inquisition and turn humans against each other (as described in Xenology) and Pariahs can do pretty much everything any human can (as shown in Dawn of War). Moreover Necrons have several human and non-human cults dedicated in their worship (as described in Codex Necrons). So, in actuality, they are extremely viable RP opponents once you read all the sources and get over the "OMG they are all stoopid zombies" -stereotype.

 

 

 

Exactly my point.  Just because the mooks aren't, doesn't mean there aren't agencies tied to them who aren't too.  And those agencies are the sort of thing that makes even the Chaos Gods a bit uneasy.  Unstoppable, seemingly endless mechanical things that are a mystery?  Yeah, you bet your britches I can think of a lot of good games to run revolving around them.  Especially for Chaos.  The Dark Mechanicum should have a lot of fun with those. ;)

First up, I fully endorse these points here, and as a Necron TT player already, have a soft spot for these evil rust-buckets too.  The villain in Xenology was a real eye-opener to the potential of Necrons as viable and really nasty villains - awesomely intelligent, able to 'take on the flesh' of humans, using the kinds of technologies and mind tricks that can undermine an Inquisitor and play to the foolish desires and wants of humans, and utterly without compassion.

If you are looking for a villain for an apocalyptically themed game (actually most 40K games are pretty apocalyptic!) then I really like the idea of a Necron baddie.  Nids are pretty ordinary in comparison - they do not have this level of subterfuge - but 'Crons, with their anti-chaos / warp technology are very scary - they have influence over elements of the Mechanicus, use technologies that are virtually unknown in the 41st Millenium, and pre-date / are possibly superior to that possessed by the Eldar, invalidate the technologies of Callidus assassins (I think that's right), have played with the Pariah gene and mastered the art of fusing Necron and human together - and they serve the nastiest bunch of bad guys in the galaxy.

What's not to like?






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS