Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About egalor

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • MSN
  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  • Yahoo
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Location
    Moscow, n/a, Russia
  1. Aha, like make the same amount of single shots or knife blows, for example.
  2. You mean that the amount of APs is NOT equal to the Agility Bonus, but everyone now has 4 APs? If this is so, then I'm disappointed. It's not different than having 2 APs, as in the DH. *** All in all, without even reading the beta, it seems that this version is going to a recycle bin, unless re-worked. What a pity - I eagerly awaited the new DH edition, not a bunch of absurd rules, inconsistencies and imbalanced figures. On a good note, it's still better than going the wfrp3 edition way.
  3. Man, this is ridiculous. FFG has stated that the beta had been playtested. I mean really? By who? Whoever playtested it, failed miserably. Almost anyone at these forums I see posting, could have alone done a way better job. So, the ones who playtested it are most likely not from here, meaning they are not listening to the actual players. Not good, really.
  4. There is no concept of "this can't be made untrained," instead the GM has total say in if a check is too complext to even attempt. Well, in DH1 all character did possess all the Basic Skills, so no new problem with the diversity here. But, what about Advanced Skills? Can I now roll against the language that I don't know? Or a Scholastic Lore? Or other skills which require knowledge to even make an attempt to succeed?
  5. Cheap advances (for example, as they are arranged in wfrp, or even DH1) allowed players to quickly reach stat values which are close to 100. And that's in a percentile system. Therefore, by reaching 5th rank (on average) in DH, combined with skills, talents, background traits, circumstances and other buffs, the Acolytes become far too good to be fun to play. I understand that this is an inherent problem of the d100 system, and I don't see any better solution other than to increase the advances cost. Obviously, FFG do neither.
  6. Thanks Plushy! I haven't read the rules yet, so it was quite insightful. My comments to some of your comments (which matter me most, so far): 1. I, for one, strongly advocate for the Action Points system. Despite the difficulties with the conversion, it was plainly retarted to start with, to give an equal amount half-actions (as half-actions are actually Action Points but named differently) to everyone regardless of the agility or other stats. It always baffled me how a drunk Administratum Clerk has rules-wise the same amount of 'action' as a Dark Eldar assassin? So, introducing APs is a big system improvement for me, really. 2. Toughness better than armor. If this is not yet fixed, this is very bad. This issue still stems as far as from the days of the wfrp 1st edition, and it has not been dealt with in any wfrp game until today. It makes me even think, whether it's a d100 system flaw, or it just a particular wfrp curse. NEEDS FIXING. 3. Untouchables nerfed - this is plain stupid. As I've already noted elsewhere, the new revision simply contradicts the 40k basics. This will be the first thing to houserule this out, if this makes its way to the final version. NEEDS FIXING. 4. Melee. As you put it, this is plain crazy. I would rather think that SB was omitted by pure error, than it's a intended game design decision. NEEDS FIXING.
  7. What? A mere 'bonus resistance' against Psychic Powers? This can't be serious. Whoever wrote this, did not know a thing about the untouchable concept in 40k. This is utter crap, sorry and needs to be fixed.
  8. As I haven't yet started reading rules, so far the situation, as described by you, needs change. It reminds me of those good old days of wfrp1 when a point blank shot from a crossbow at a naked dwarf could simply bounce off harmlessly in 2 cases out of 6. (4+D6 damage vs. Toughness = 7). This was ridiculous.
  9. I've just started browsing through this board, as I've just discovered DH 2.0 announcement. Action Points? Now, finally! That was stupid enough to give _everyone_ two action points (being those half-arsed half-actions) in the first place. That concept screamed for revision since it was first introduced in 2005 in WFRP 2.
  10. Again, again, again I stress this. Do not do v2 40k rulebooks. +++FFG, JUST DO A SINGLE UNIVERSAL 40K RPG RULEBOOK ALREADY!+++ Supplements could be used to expand on each separate aspect of the game (any of the available five).
  11. Gregorius21778 said: Damned Cities --> House of Dust & Ash (and abduct the at the end!) -->Tattered Fates ---> Dead Stars. Again, with some filler inbetween. Yeah, that's how many GMs handle this, incl. me. Minor SPOILER: Keep in mind though, by the end of the campaign the PCs will find themselves stuck in a very remote place, leaving which could make a separate adventure in itself.
  12. H.B.M.C. said: Big combat set pieces, dramatic 'boss fights', investigations and snooping around, stealth mission bits. And some bits can be played in alternate ways (so you don't have to stealth through an area - you can just shoot your way through it). Sounds cool. Let's see how it reads and plays out, then.
  13. Dok Martin said: Yeah. Investigations in Dark Heresy. When did that happen? Oops. I've forgot the word "no". So, I meant "there are NO investigations"?
  14. H.B.M.C. said: 4. The first bit, when you're part of a big frontal assault supporting Guard units, that's different to anything I've ever played in DH. The third section, which takes place aboard a ship, is great at building tension and providing a difficult challenge. The end, as I said, is very hard. The second bit has a lot of different 'activities' to do, but it's nothing like the town from Church of the Damned. Thanks. So, basically there are investigations, right? That's sad.
  • Create New...