Jump to content



Photo

Week 4 Update


  • Please log in to reply
38 replies to this topic

#21 Elior

Elior

    Member

  • Members
  • 523 posts

Posted 06 September 2013 - 04:34 PM

That's true. Power gamers always seem to find that obscure crack in the rules....



#22 Nimsim

Nimsim

    Member

  • Members
  • 919 posts

Posted 06 September 2013 - 05:09 PM

Funny how the people who keep having problems with power gamers are the same ones who keep wanting to introduce extra rules to be gamed. Almost like abstracting things and basing them on what makes narrative sense would counter power gaming more effectively...
;)

Edited by Nimsim, 06 September 2013 - 05:11 PM.

  • MaliciousOnion, Snowman0147 and Elior like this

#23 GauntZero

GauntZero

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,167 posts

Posted 07 September 2013 - 12:02 AM

If you have one or more power gamers, those have a different kind of thinking.

It is not like they are bad roleplayers, they just often are players that focus more on the tactical side of a rpg and sometimes a little less on the narrative and abstract ways.
Some have a tabletop background.

If there is a way to get benefits along with RAW by stretchingmits limits without breaking them, some would consider it dumb not to take them.
If a GM however then says they are not allowed to because of abstract narrative reasons, it is not much fun for them, as they act accourding to the rules and feel trested unfair.

Thats why rules have to be complete and clear in my oppinion, not to make the GM abstract too much, if he doesnt want to.
  • dholda likes this

Respect your brothers and you will also be respected.


#24 Kiton

Kiton

    Member

  • Members
  • 370 posts

Posted 07 September 2013 - 07:14 AM

 Bad players are bad players, whether they're good at the game or not. At least a power-gamer can be a boon to his party - not just as a powerful character, but by making recommendations on things like talent picks, explaining equipment differences and so on if he's a good player.

 

Then there's the opposite end of the spectrum; folks who actively believe that there HAS to be significantly inferior options in order for roleplaying to be possible. That if your character is not a mechanical port-o-john you're nothing but a min-maxing powergamer with no roleplaying intent or capability, [apparently crippling flaws are the only personality component in existence] and actively trying to snuff out the story and steal the spotlight from those who are.

 

Either way though, there's nothing better than a bunch of powergamers to pick out the balance issues when you're working on a system. Best to break things now, than once it's out and you can't take most of your errors back.

 

We're a strange, strange hobby sometimes.


  • dholda and Snowman0147 like this

#25 GauntZero

GauntZero

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,167 posts

Posted 07 September 2013 - 07:27 AM

Good point.

 

I have to deal with min/max gamers a lot, that is why I maybe am so persistent on exact rules in most cases.

 

Rules need to be as complete and clear as possible.

 

This is not so important for those who are more the we-dive-into-our-dreams-and-dont-want-so-much-numbers-to-care-about-guys.

 

But it is important for those who play more...lets say "tactical" ;)

What I mean by it is, those players that are very mission/task oriented and want to get the best for the job to be done.


  • Snowman0147 likes this

Respect your brothers and you will also be respected.


#26 Togath

Togath

    Member

  • Members
  • 184 posts

Posted 07 September 2013 - 09:50 AM

I do not mean to derail a useful discussion with people whining about power gamers or what they think of them. My group largely comes from a TT background, they all have college or graduate level education, several of them in math, statistics, physics, or economics. This means that our game style is different (as all games are). I wouldn't have it any other way. You do not have to feel threatened or judgmental about how my group does things, do your game your way, by all means.

 

I only meant to express that a running list of houserules/clarifications was not something I saw as avoidable (my players enjoy exploring a system and improving it to be honest). GauntZero is correct, we should work towards having the best rules we can under the circumstances before we take them each to our own interpretations of 40k and the storylines we stitch together. That is all. 



#27 GauntZero

GauntZero

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,167 posts

Posted 07 September 2013 - 09:55 AM

I do not mean to derail a useful discussion with people whining about power gamers or what they think of them. My group largely comes from a TT background, they all have college or graduate level education, several of them in math, statistics, physics, or economics. This means that our game style is different (as all games are). I wouldn't have it any other way. You do not have to feel threatened or judgmental about how my group does things, do your game your way, by all means.

 

I only meant to express that a running list of houserules/clarifications was not something I saw as avoidable (my players enjoy exploring a system and improving it to be honest). GauntZero is correct, we should work towards having the best rules we can under the circumstances before we take them each to our own interpretations of 40k and the storylines we stitch together. That is all. 

 

Sound a lot like my player group.

 

They are not bad roleplayers at all - they are just very mind-focussed and try to get the best out of the rules to optimize their characters, so they can serve the Emperor well. Good men with good intentions.

 

But they need clear rules, which make sense (otherwise they will discuss the whole evening with me instead of playing - believe me, I already had that kind of "playing sessions").


Respect your brothers and you will also be respected.


#28 Snowman0147

Snowman0147

    Member

  • Members
  • 222 posts

Posted 08 September 2013 - 11:20 AM

I had that discussion last night.  Three elites attack the group and the entire coversation was about rate of fire.  Think it took a half a hour to a hour to get through that.



#29 Togath

Togath

    Member

  • Members
  • 184 posts

Posted 08 September 2013 - 11:27 AM

Did you have fun? If so, success. Don't get hung up on making forward progress I say. The point is the fun, the progress is merely a vehicle.


  • seanpp likes this

#30 Kiton

Kiton

    Member

  • Members
  • 370 posts

Posted 08 September 2013 - 02:19 PM

Though if he means ROF sparked a half hour debate on its use, there's still a bit of adjusting to be done there.

Probably the fractionals vs statics vs the ability-based?



#31 PhilOfCalth

PhilOfCalth

    Member

  • Members
  • 109 posts

Posted 09 September 2013 - 07:56 AM

I have to say that I'm a bit disappointed in the interaction between the beta testers and FFGs staff during this beta. Their first update did indeed target issues that we flagged, but since then there have been very few changes in the updates.

 

According to this page:

http://www.fantasyfl...eidm=243&esem=1

 

When do I need to submit my feedback?

The deadline for all feedback on this beta test is September 11, 2013.

 

 

 

So that means we get no-more updates and all our hard work has basically been ignored. I have tried my best to not be someone who has been overly negative during the beta, which has lead to me just keeping quiet and hoping for a fix in the near future. I'm not sure how FFG plan to move forward after the deadline. Will they continue to make fixes based on old feedback? I hope so because at the moment the game is far too full of bugs for my liking. We have all done our best to make intuative and simple suggestions for bug fixes, it would be nice to see them implemented.


Edited by PhilOfCalth, 09 September 2013 - 07:56 AM.


#32 MagnusPihl

MagnusPihl

    Member

  • Members
  • 219 posts

Posted 09 September 2013 - 08:20 AM

I've been very positive about the second edition - and I still am - but I'll also be the first to say that it's not "ready".

There's a lot left to be fixed. Much of it has been covered on this forum, but I doubt we've reached in very far yet.

 

Sticking to the September 11th deadline would be a huge mistake. DH2 could be great, but if released in its current state, I'm going to have to house-rule lots of things immediately - which is exactly what I wanted to avoid by getting a new edition.

 

This beta needs at least another month. Preferably two.



#33 cps

cps

    Member

  • Members
  • 987 posts

Posted 09 September 2013 - 08:27 AM

I would be really surprised if FFG did not extend the beta. They've skipped 2 updates, and releasing one final update and then a day later ending the beta would mean there wouldn't be time to playtest the update, which is self-defeating.



#34 PhilOfCalth

PhilOfCalth

    Member

  • Members
  • 109 posts

Posted 09 September 2013 - 08:30 AM

With the exception of some spellchecking I haven't noticed any of the updates containing changes that were suggested by beta testers. Is it that they never wanted said suggestions, or am I to believe that every one of the suggestions are not up to scratch?



#35 KommissarK

KommissarK

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,500 posts

Posted 09 September 2013 - 08:32 AM

With the exception of some spellchecking I haven't noticed any of the updates containing changes that were suggested by beta testers. Is it that they never wanted said suggestions, or am I to believe that every one of the suggestions are not up to scratch?

You're just not looking close enough at the changes that players have been requesting.

 

Felling to apply to Nimble was initially suggested by players here.



#36 PhilOfCalth

PhilOfCalth

    Member

  • Members
  • 109 posts

Posted 09 September 2013 - 08:35 AM

Admittedly I have not checked every post. I have been reading every update though. I only said that I have not noticed any. Please forgive my wrongness!



#37 MagnusPihl

MagnusPihl

    Member

  • Members
  • 219 posts

Posted 09 September 2013 - 08:39 AM

With the exception of some spellchecking I haven't noticed any of the updates containing changes that were suggested by beta testers. Is it that they never wanted said suggestions, or am I to believe that every one of the suggestions are not up to scratch?

 

Apart from the lackluster 2nd update, I felt every update was spot-on for what we asked for. For the third update, I felt they were implementing changes that I (and others) had suggested almost verbatim.

 

I think the back-and-forth (apart from the canceled updates) has been great. The updates show great promise. I just fear we won't get enough of them.



#38 PhilOfCalth

PhilOfCalth

    Member

  • Members
  • 109 posts

Posted 09 September 2013 - 08:49 AM

I just had another look at update 3 and I can't say I agree. Very few of the topics I see coming up repeatedly seem to have been dealt with. Perhaps, it's just that they're dealing with areas that don't peak my interest, or it's that those who post more get more weight put behind their opinion *shrugs*

 

Well I'll cross my fingers for more updates.


Edited by PhilOfCalth, 09 September 2013 - 08:49 AM.


#39 GauntZero

GauntZero

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,167 posts

Posted 09 September 2013 - 10:47 AM

Well - lets all hope for a soon update to come...

 

>The Emperor updates<


Respect your brothers and you will also be respected.





© 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