Jump to content



Photo

Good way of doing DH 2.0


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 Alox

Alox

    Member

  • Members
  • 284 posts

Posted 05 April 2012 - 09:40 PM

Am I the only one that thinks this is a good way of doing a DH 2.0 without invalidating all the old books? If the character advancement in Only War is like black crusade maybe we can get rid of the broken career rank system and apply the rules easily to our dark heresy setting without having to throw out all our DH supplements.

As long as they keep Dark Heresy in mind when they construct the rules, so its possible to steal the system to a home made DH 2.0, I am happy.

 



#2 borithan

borithan

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,149 posts

Posted 05 April 2012 - 10:36 PM

It has "Specialities" so I don't think it will be anywhere near as free as Black Crusade. I expect something more like Deathwatch, but possibly a bit more freedom. I also think so much freedom is much less justifiable within the Imperium than it is without.

How was the old career rank system broken? A bit wonky in some places, yes, but I wouldn't call it broken.



#3 H.B.M.C.

H.B.M.C.

    Freelance Writer/Play-Tester

  • Members
  • 1,371 posts

Posted 05 April 2012 - 10:49 PM

I really like the career tree system from DH. It's one of the unique things about DH that I'd always keep (I think the A-to-B-to-C-to-D-to... RT method is kinda stale).

BYE



#4 Cifer

Cifer

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,790 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 12:10 AM

 @borithan

The trouble was that with so many skills and talents, there were always some that sound like they should be logically available to the character, but aren't. Starting with Marksmen that don't get Marksman.



#5 borithan

borithan

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,149 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 12:15 AM

Which is what I mean by them being a bit wonky in some places. I don't think it means it is broken.



#6 Radwraith

Radwraith

    Member

  • Members
  • 695 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 08:31 PM

H.B.M.C. said:

I really like the career tree system from DH. It's one of the unique things about DH that I'd always keep (I think the A-to-B-to-C-to-D-to... RT method is kinda stale).

BYE

@ H.B.M.C. :

I really hope that's a tease as to how OW will be structured since I know you were involved in the project. I do respectfully disagree about RT though. I think RT's advancement scheme is entirely appropriate for the type of characters relatively narrow environment (They are all Officers and command crew on a Voidship.). Since DH's characters focus on a broader swath of imperial society the advancement tree scheme is more appropriate. Characters may all start in roughly the same place but their choices and experiences in life could lead to vastly different outcomes. I'm thinking the "tree" scheme would be more appropriate to guardsmen since they were all recruits ('Conscripts' was the term in DH) at some point.



#7 H.B.M.C.

H.B.M.C.

    Freelance Writer/Play-Tester

  • Members
  • 1,371 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 11:30 PM

Hi there,

It's not a tease of anything, just how I feel about RT's character progression system. Granted, RT is the game I am the least familiar with, so my opinion could change with experience. Coming from Dark Heresy, with its tree system that I like quite a lot, I felt the RT system was too limiting. Then Ascension had the same system, and I wasn't too happy about all choice being removed in future products. Thankfully that wasn't the case, as each game since then has had a new style of doing character creation/progression, with DW's multiple tables, and with BC's completely open tiered advance system. I really like the idea of each game doing things differently, so I can put up with (so to speak) the A-to-B-to-C-to-etc. Rogue Trader method, because it's really the only game that has that so far. Finally, character creation/progression were not the sections of the book I worked on, so I can't speak for what's happening with those.

BYE



#8 borithan

borithan

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,149 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 11:45 PM

I had heard that for some reason FFG didn't like the caree tree method. Now, I can't vouch for that (purely a rumour) and I have no idea why (though with subsequent approaches I suspect they may have felt it limited characters too much to what was available in their particular branch), but that is what I heard.

 

I also found the Rogue Trader progression a bit flat, and I liked the approach for the Space Marine ones too.



#9 C1d

C1d

    Member

  • Members
  • 5 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 02:33 AM

Overall I have found the Black Crusade mechanics to be the most intuitive. (full auto and lightning attack are my primary examples) I hope that this brings together what I love about DH with updates to some of the odd clunky things that were present on the first outing. DH 2.0 it is time



#10 Sister Callidia

Sister Callidia

    Member

  • Members
  • 459 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 08:43 AM

I have mixed feelings about the BC method of advancing a character. I liked the way DH handled these despite its flaws. I like progressive slow advancements. With the BC system, you can just concentrate on obtaining a view powerful abilities that in DH would only be available for higher level characters. Fearless for example, it should not be available to any character who just happened to survive his first adventure. There need to be put limitations into the game that makes sure that the good stuff takes a lot of time to obtain.



#11 Dulahan

Dulahan

    Member

  • Members
  • 630 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 08:55 AM

C1d said:

Overall I have found the Black Crusade mechanics to be the most intuitive. (full auto and lightning attack are my primary examples) I hope that this brings together what I love about DH with updates to some of the odd clunky things that were present on the first outing. DH 2.0 it is time

 

I'm hoping for some analog of Black Crusade's version myself, freeform is the way to go, even if it is just your specialty represents the costs, get rid of 'ranks' and let things progress and you take skills as you want/need them.  Far more realistic and interesting that way.  Not to mention helpful in a game which might otherwise have some nasty combat casualties, let you tweak to be bad ass or general as you want.



#12 Morangias

Morangias

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,477 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 09:11 AM

If the career options are right, it might be able to play a DH game using OW rules with minimal house ruling.

If the base rules of OW keep all the good changes made in BC and introduce further improvements, house-ruling in certain career options, powers and items will be vastly preferable to playing DH.


There is no truth in flesh, only betrayal.

There is no strenght in flesh, only weakness.
There is no constancy in flesh, only decay.
There is no certainty in flesh but death.


#13 DJSunhammer

DJSunhammer

    Member

  • Members
  • 602 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 04:08 PM

borithan said:

 

It has "Specialities" so I don't think it will be anywhere near as free as Black Crusade. I expect something more like Deathwatch, but possibly a bit more freedom. I also think so much freedom is much less justifiable within the Imperium than it is without.

How was the old career rank system broken? A bit wonky in some places, yes, but I wouldn't call it broken.

 

 

BC has 'Specialties' too. Though they really only determine a starting ability and some gear and talents.

 

Realism isn't really a concern for someone designing a character progression system. Unless they are trying for realism.

I'm hoping for something more free form than DH, RT and DW as well.



#14 borithan

borithan

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,149 posts

Posted 09 April 2012 - 10:16 PM

I thought they were called "Archetypes" or something in Black Crusade?



#15 Dark Bunny Lord

Dark Bunny Lord

    Member

  • Members
  • 165 posts

Posted 10 April 2012 - 06:10 AM

I enjoy a multiple table progression path as well, however I think the thing many people are ignoring about Rogue trader is that it doesn't stick to just a single table path if you buy nigh any of the expansion books as they used the alternate career charts that allowed for the same type of progression. Now given, DH offers both and I do find the more options the better, but where RT falls a bit short on that it does expand on what the players can do (ie instead of being limited to working for someone else you work for yourself and set out for far vast adventures.)
That said I do hope OW does use the multiple chart progression as the somewhat more rigid mission structure needs that to make the players feel less rail-roady.



#16 Morangias

Morangias

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,477 posts

Posted 10 April 2012 - 10:48 AM

I really hope they don't go the BC route with this one. Freeform worked quite alright in BC, but what's good for Chaos isn't equally good for the true sons of the Emperor.

Some variation on DW's multi-table system would be nice, if they find a way to make specialties less bland and less artificially restricted.


There is no truth in flesh, only betrayal.

There is no strenght in flesh, only weakness.
There is no constancy in flesh, only decay.
There is no certainty in flesh but death.


#17 coolzyg

coolzyg

    Member

  • Members
  • 122 posts

Posted 10 April 2012 - 12:23 PM

Dunno if you're right Morangias, BC is first system for the Wh40k line, where I've really enjoyed pc advancement . RT&DH were too limited for me. When we would get bored with our current PC (heretics BC) we will probably try playing inquisition routine. I think that it will go smoothly without too much changing. Dunno about DW as I never played this system so I don't really know how those multiple advance table really work.






© 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