Why Friday?

Can we hear from ffg as to when we'll get our full stock allocation. If is because of the weather then fair enough, but at least some idea on what's what. That would be appreciated. Thanks.

No doubt O'Reilly is arguing it's more evidence there's no such thing as man made global warming. Anyway, i'm talking about supplies to Esdevium who are the distributor over here for FFG product. According to the FLGS there's a chance they might not get all they ordered at once because of shipping problemes due to the weather. I'm just seeking clarification on this. If product is delayed, then it's delayed. Can't fight snow storms!

According to the local shop here in the UK, Esdevium (the distributor) has been short shipped on wave 5 product due to bad weather in the states. Is this true? I have no idea of the weather over there and there's no mention on their release sheets of problems (though the seets could have been prepared in advance).

Why is this necessary? I don't understand this at all. Granted it's a long way off yet, but it means that I will buy cards that will be forcibly redundant if I want to play seriously? Way to waste my money.

Sorry I didn't see the question below.

Are both players supposed to use their own damage decks, as opposed to share one?

Thanks, will do. Will try and arrange something soon.

North Somerset, just with, but the other side, of Bristol.

Is there anybody out there? I've yet to play the game. I've got a full playset and brought into the game as a fan of40k and someone who really thought it would be popular here. That forms seem to be the case. Frustratingly, a few people have picked it up but they aren't communicating our can't be reached. I've spammed the Internet to the point of meltdown trying to find players but no luck. If theta anyone local reading, let's play!

Well seeing as it only devolves into that if you bother with worrying about those rules then you'll be fine there. then why include them?Why bother buying rules if you intend to ignore them.

Good to know, thanks

Encumbrance IS a restriction, it restricts the amount of stuff people can carry. Also, anything that happens adds to a story, even restrictions. However, you shouldn't be calculating weight all the time, only do so when it actually matters. So what do you expect? A more gradual "restriction" making it more "realistic"? Like no clear boundaries, you just gradually become worse at everything the more you carry? That will just overcomplicate stuff and make it even more restrictive. You can do your item slots, but then you're also restricting players and on top that you'll probably get a bunch of borderline cases because of the discrete solution you've picked. So a solution with a bunch of exceptions most likely. Let's say you're decked out, all your item slots filled. But then you need to add a small pack of gummybears. Sorry dude, no more slots available for you to do that. Or the total realistic weight amount in your items slots fall far below the amount a normal person would be able to carry. What i expect is a systtem that doesnt devolve the game into an eercise of weights and measures. Encumbrance systems like this are tedious. I don't play 40k games for tedium, there's plenty of that in real life. All you need is a simple soluution or the apllication of common sense: you can carry a couple of pistols, or a rifle, but you can' carry rifles, pistols, carbines, and a massive cannon. It's not really rocket science!

I'm sorry but this issue of attacking developers is nonsense. Aside from the fact that noone actually is, if you're charging people to playtest YOUR work - and then you still put out a product that's broken complete with dreadful editing (copypasta etc), then you need broader shoulders when dealing with the people that have paid for the fnal product in that state. That's just the way it is.

Particularly after charging people to access the beta to begin with. I find tha spectacularly cavalier.They really haven't covered themselves in glory here, though we won't see any response from them. Unfortunately the podcast community that gets interviews with the developers is domonated by people that simply, for whatever reason, don't see the problems with this new edition.

If Colonel Jendon assigns an ally a target lock, is that sky considered to have acquired it also?

Is it unbalanced because you don't agree with the conclusion? That's the thrust of your post. You concede he's made a fair point of view, but you crticise him for a lack of balance anyway. I'm not sure that's reasonable. Seriously, you are going to traduce his review, fairly long as it is, by dismissing the author on the baseless assumption he hasn't read it? That's pretty lazy dude! There are issues with the review (as there are most reviews) to be sure: I think he oversells the problems inherent in the system. But his appraisal of the problems with DH2 are on the money IMO. Saying that picking a Mechanicus background doesn't mean you're a Tech Priest is sort of the point he's making: that the background is nothing more than a phrase. It doesn't confer anything unique or illustrative of being part of that organisation, whether or not as a Tech Priest or a Secutor or whatever. At least the classes and packages from 1e and it's supplements had that sense of character. Whether they will produce similar things for 2e remains to be seen, but the point is made in the review that not providing this in the 2e is regressive. What does it mean to be a Mechanicus Sage as opposed to a Mechanicus Desperado other than a different ability? You may love aptitudes, which is entirely your choice, but they are not efficient and don't really fix the problem they exist to solve. The cost of talents/skills/characteristics is so onerous for characters that don't have the right aptitudes that it's not worth bothering with. Either limit choices, through classes, or don't bother at all. Aptitudes are a messy fudge, not a compromise. They can't be changed either. I don't think one slight error (and he isn't technically wrong) is indicative of having not read it at all. It's 400+ pages foer gods sake! The problem with the copypasta is that it refers to stuff that isn't in DH2e. If that isn't lazy development, what is?

You are missing the point. You're also missing the point. It being, it's much easier for you to discard the encumbrance rules than it is for someone who likes encumbrance rules to make their own when they're missing from the book. Now you're being childish. It's not a game of 'i know you are but what am i'. The point of creating rules is not that they are to be ignored. This is a dubious position to design from. If i have to change or ignore rules then something has gone wrong. There shouldn't be a problem to have to fix to begin with. Arguing that there is no problem because I can ignore rules is fallacious at best.

You are missing the point.

The old dark heresy wasn't perfect either; it was better though. Surely the best approach would be to design something that actually is better. It's a poor system and that's unfortunate. The argum,ent is always that it corresponds to the fluff. But it's more important to have a system that works. If the game experience allows a character to die at the whim of a dice roll because manifesting warp powers actually killed him and everyone around him then...something has gone wrong at the drawing board. This isn't how a system should work, regarldess of how accurate it is. In the Mongoose Traveller Judge Dredd rpg it is possible to die during character creation. This is because, like in the comics, cadet judges undertake a harsh field evaluation in a live fire environment. Some die. Here agian the rules of the game mirror the source material. Here again the game collapses; would you want to die in character creation and be forced to start all over again? Aren't there better ways to achieve the same result?

I don't grant you that assertion. There's nop reason to assume they would be useless. Buying a rulebook full of rules I don't want to use is not an ideal condition. The rules are inefficient because they are clunky and convoluted. Yes YMMV, that goes without saying, however it is hard to argue cogently these are objectively efficient rules. If they didn't include them, you'll have people going wtf, they don't even take weight and encumbrance into account. Realism !? !? Whatever FFG does, some people will be displeased. Why do you assume that? Can't a simple common sense rule be employed? PC's can't carry 100 rifles or lift Rhino transports. Simple. Do you really need the rules in a game where the board is that of the players' imaginations to need this kind of detail? As a GM I have found it a real chore. With the phrase "Full battle rattle" having entered the public consciousness as a result of the wars in Iraq and Afganistan, I think encumbrance is even more relevant in 2014. I don't see how at all.

Those are very different games. Yes the books are huge, but you don't really want for material. That's the difference, the adversary section is pretty complete (not perfect). This is because the rules don't require as much space as they do for Dark Heresy, and that's the problem.

Conversion requires that you more or less start again. There is no direct method because the changes are not always mathematical. The new system of roles requires that the player decide which best represents his character and so I ran character creation from scratch with a view to keeping, as far as possible, the stats and talents of old. We got as far as spending experience before running out of time for the evening. At that point continuing would have worn us all out since i had to explain the Aptitude system, then each player would have had to take turns looking up the tables and cross referenceing their Aptitudes for the cost of whatever skills/talents etc they would like. That's before we get to choosing starting equipment and picking psyker powers. It isn't extremely different. It's not the same, but it is really not a second edition per se. 1.5 is probably a fair assessment. The problem with the rules re: page count is the rules necessitate a lot of pages which means less space to give over to things like adversaries and vehicles, for example. Both are thus given short shrift indeed. It's just poor planning and limited thinking. What is here isn't per se 'bad', it's just convoluted and wholly inefficient. The fluff is great, the new setting (once you get past the capital) is interesting and the production values (print issues aside) are excellent. I just wish the game rules were more progressive and less staid and irrelevant. Do i really need, in 2014, to have rules for weight and encumbrance? Really?

The powers are boring. Not much more so than 1e, but the powers the psyker player had are no longer available. This means I have to convince him to play a version of a system that kleaves him with a character worse off than his original idea. That, imo, is creative suicide. You cannot expect a positive response when you put players in that situation. I still have no idea what Unnatural Senses actually does, since it doesn't say, and afaik, ffg has offered no explanation. The problem with the rules is the pushing/psychic phenomena aspect. Your skill at using powers has no bearing on whether they will produce a bad consequence. Conversely if you push, which is pointless, your chance of success actually decreases, making it self defeating, and your chance of producing a bad consequence inverts meaning that you will almost always produce phenomena. Again it has no bearing on your skill. The system is different from both 1e and all the other games created since. I don't understand why this is, nor why they needed to engineer so broken a solution.

Most paper and pen games run between 250-400 pages for their core books. =/ This is the average of the genre. What are you on about? There's a world of difference between even250 pages, which is far from the minimum, and the size of DH2e