The spell rules are appallingly written.

Why does the game tell the player to move to the entrance upon successfully competing an adventure. What's the point?

And how does he know? FFG don't tell people release dates so he has no idea when it will be released.

KhorniteBloodReaver said: Halla-freakin-lulla so the rumors of the dead game curse are false! Like the filthy lies spread form the imperium it comes to us as chaos must! Well not quite; it still says 'expected august'. No word on when it's actually due.

So FFG still can't tell us when this book is released. Isn't this getting a bit ridiculous now?

So we still (afaict) don't know the release date?

I find the game has limited appeal: there isn't enough variety at all. 4 unit types and a few neutral cards isn't a great deal to work with. The sheer number of card types is too much as well. It could have been condensed and expanded, fewer scenarios, with no need to scenario specific events, and a focus instead perhaps on competitive play. The mechanics are reasonably sound however, but the rules are appallingly presented and very unclear. I'm disappointed. As usual the production values are there, but I regret my purchase (as I did with LotR LCG, ironically). I'd be happy to sell it on, if anyone in the UK is interested.

Control said: Plus the gen con copies will cause more hype for when the big release happens. I think that's what they would liek to think, but I suspect it simply isn't true. The people that are going to buy the game already know about it and their only concern is how soon can they buy it. Anyone else isn't itnerested. If there are some few that are undecided then they probably aren't going to be at gencon waiting in line and competing with those that are for copies thereof. So really, just get the thing printed earlier so it can come out at this time. A month's difference really isn't an issue (assuming a september release and not another FFG farce).

I don't get why there needs to be a gap between gencon and actual release. Why not just print the thing in time for gencon and release at the same time?

Since the game is printed (presumably, as it's on sale at Gencon), when will it be available in the shops?

Why on earth would anyone need a degree to playtest games?

bobh said: Does the OP work for another publishing company? I've never seen someone so furiously attack a publisher for the lack of a monster manual, I think this is just pointless provocation.

N0-1_H3r3 said: Playtesting isn't infallible, it isn't perfect, and it will not catch every mistake, error or issue. To assume that it will demonstrates naive and unrealistic expectations. Well, no. We aren't playtesting the Infinite Computer Program. We are talking about simple maths in a roleplaying game. These problems can and should have been spotted. To imply they are terrifyingly complicated is really just nonsense. And if FFG thinks Xenos Compendium isn't something worth releasing earlier - given the lack of antagonists in the main book then they really don't know what they are doing and shoudl really take some time to figure out what they are trying to acheive. Edge of the Abyss could have had a lot more of this kind of content instead of an adventure and a list of rogue traders. It's thsi kind of half assed thinking that sells the line short.

Criticising the opinion that says there was a lack of playtesting in the face of actual errata and faqs would seem contradictory. The whole point of plattesting is that you don't then need to fix things afterward (assuming such fixes work). Noone has suggested playtesting is, per se, easy. But it can and should be done. If you choose a fairly in depth crunchy game design then you must accept the requisite amount of playtesting - and it's hard to imagine a shortage of volunteers. If the issue is time, well perhaps adopting such a heavy duty schedule (3, soon to be 4, game lines) then you really should have known better. If you don't have the resources to put out Xenos Compendium within even the first 2 years of the game's existence then you are not doing your job and have probably not got enough people on the case.

It is important to me that the Expanse is large, dangerous and mysterious. Not just the equivalent of a municipal district (which essentially is what Calixis is). Therefore size is important.

As a setting it is unique in that it has to be both defined (to a degree) and undefined (so it can be explored). But how big is it? Is it the size of the solar system (i presume it encompasses many systems). Is it the size of the Jericho Reach? Roughly what scale are we talking. Does it count as a sector or a sub sector for the purpose of astropathic communication?

N0-1_H3r3 said: signoftheserpent said: Was it really necessary? I'm sure it's a very good adventure, but it's really of no use. If you don't know how to play the game in terms of running creating adventures by that point then that one won't help you. So... you expect people to create their own adventures, but expect someone else to do all the work and provide all the NPCs you'll ever need for those "self-created" adventures? Bit of a double standard, really... if someone hasn't figured out how to create their own NPCs, how can they be expected to create adventures? I didn't ask FFG to provide me with NPC's. NPCs are not the same thing as stats for antagonists; a list of traits and stats for Eldar and eldar equiopment, for example, is not the same as me using them to create a specific Eldar npc. The rules don't give you information on how to create Eldar. They are not the same as the characters you can create in the rules so in order to represent them accurately we need the tools to do so, however complex or not those might be. I really do not understand why people defend these things. Do you actively protest against the existence of such things? If so, why bother buying the game at all. Why not just make up your own 40k rogue trader rules and then everything will be to your standard. Arguing that people, buying a professionally produced rpg, should not expect that rpg line to cover all the things in the license is insane. And you have misused the word expect. I don't expect. I merely suggested.

Badlapje said: If i see the amount of people on eg. Dark Reign and other 40k fansites that are trashing the FFG RPG system then i know that they could have made a lot more money if they'd have put more thought into it. I'd wager to state that FFG made/makes so much money despite their choices rather then because of it. I agree with this entirely. FFG just arne't making any sense. And i think it very likely the RT books, such as HA, have been pushed backs because they now have Black Crusade to promote and release so that, at the very least, has to be given some measure of precedence. More info on Xenos could have been put in Edge of the Abyss by removing the adventure within. Was it really necessary? I'm sure it's a very good adventure, but it's really of no use. If you don't know how to play the game in terms of running creating adventures by that point then that one won't help you. This haphazard scattershot approach is crazy.

MILLANDSON said: signoftheserpent said: I don't think that's true at all. It also makes no sense. Well, it has been true for a very large number of RPGs I've played. Also, what makes no sense? Those who prefer written adventures are sucked right in from the start with material available for them to run right from the off, and those who don't need them quite so much are often able to work things out for themselves until books come in to fill out other parts later down the line. It certainly seems to have worked in FFG's case, given the sheer numbers of sales the 40k RPG have been making (enough that they were beating White Wolf and Wizards of the Coast at some points (such as sales of DH+RT a year and a bit ago)). I have no idea what the sales figures for the game are. I'm not aware they've been made public, but I don't think you can put too much stock in them since the greater draw isn't so much the quality of the game itself (ie the design of the rules, or perhaps the choices for supplements) as it is the fact that it's 40k.

I don't think that's true at all. It also makes no sense.

not only that, but you have different power levels within each as well. So surely you release a Xeno book early on. Later you can release scenario books.

And yet it looks like we're going to need Black Crusade if we want Dark Eldar at least. I find FFG's approach inexplicable. I like these games in spite of them, that's the problem. For example: Dark Eldar are by nature pirates, that's their role in the 40k universe. They are raiders. Therefore perfect foes for the RT game. Yet no presence in any of the books I have (which are all of them save the adventure books + screen).

2 years for the book that gives you antagonists is one hell of a wait.

Any word on what's happening with this?

What is a reasonable lifespan for a Rogue Trader?