H.B.M.C. said: signoftheserpent said: THe JR should be a backdrop for GM;'s work with, not a dictatorial tool. Why just a backdrop? The Inner Sphere has been BattleTech’s backdrop for 25 years and it’s story has been advancing that entire time (the original date was 3025, it’s not sitting at 3082-ish). You can pick any period of time and do anything you want within this background, and at no point does it become dictatorial. The idea of the Jericho Reach being a living breathing story that develops over time is so much better than a static background that is naught but a framework for games. BYE Do you want to create that story or do you want FFG to do it for you? Why bother with supplements at all, you might as well just release scenario books over and over each with just enough rules for the monster and situations within?

Kain McDogal said: signoftheserpent said: And yes there is a Harlequin in Emperor Protexts. He isn't given stats, but he is in one of the scenarios as some kind of prisoner or something. I thumbed through the book in the shop. Kinda makes a mockery of the idea that there are no Eldar in the JR. Yes, there is and it might be a hint for something big going on with Eldar in the JR, but not for NOW! As I've said earlier the book is written buy it or leave it, you can't complain about today's weather either. Metaplots are, at best, contentious in rpg's. On balance they are rarely popular and most GM's prefer to be given the tools rather than have their game dictated to by the publisher. FFG would be making a bad decision by choosing to include Eldar in the JR but not until some unannounced date in the future.THe JR should be a backdrop for GM;'s work with, not a dictatorial tool.

deinol said: I hate to re-open the Eldar debate, but nobody even seemed to have blinked when I mentioned the RT Xenos Compendium coming in a few months which will contain (hopefully a ton of) Eldar stats. Are there any of you wanting Eldar stats that won't pick up the book just because it doesn't have the DW logo? I mean, I understand the outcry if FFG said they'd never publish Eldar ever. But they already have a book announced that is going to fill in more Eldar info. I think it is smart for them to try and have minimal overlap between the different lines, so people don't complain about the opposite problem. There's already enough grumbling over how often the genestealer has appeared, although I'm kind of surprised they weren't in the main book. But that means A) having to wait for the release of XC and B) haveing to spend another £25 on buying it, presumably just for the Eldar. There won't be much else in there that will be relevant. Perhaps it might have Dark Eldar? Possible. It won't have Necrons. Possibly you might want the Rak'Gol and the Stryxis stuff. Possibly it might have more Kroot and Orks. But they wil be focussed around the RT game/ships and pirate types. All well and good, but is this really the best way that FFg could have gone about this? A single book might have been better and cheaper. MoX (and presumably XC) are not big books, but they are, because of the production values, expensive. And yes there is a Harlequin in Emperor Protexts. He isn't given stats, but he is in one of the scenarios as some kind of prisoner or something. I thumbed through the book in the shop. Kinda makes a mockery of the idea that there are no Eldar in the JR.

Is there any truth in this, which claims Leadership to be overpowered?

Mighty Jim said: 1 Core set gives you 4 decks each of about 30 cards, one for each sphere. With these decks you can play the first quest (the easy one) solo, and the other two with 2 or more players. You can also build enough in the way of multi-sphere decks to stand a decent chance agains tthe harder scenarios by yourself. There are significant gaps though. Key attachments or event cards are only 1x or 2x, and there are only 4 Gandalfs, despite the fact that you can put 3 in each deck. If you want to really experiment with deck-building/have better odds of getting the right cards out once you've got a 50-card deck, a 2nd core set is probably a good idea. about 12-13 usable cards per sphere, plus extra Gandalfs. a Third core set is probably only for completists/tournament players- you'll get about a dozen cards tops that you can actually use unless you're building multiple decks using the same sphere to run simultaneously. There are lists outt here of exactly which cards are 1x, 2x, 3x, as well as details of what they do, but I don't have one. Hope that helps a bit. Ok this doesn't at all sound like good value for money.Why would the other two quests (making one that's really easy may sound great for tutorial purposes, but it sounds like a waste of money to me - if it's that easy there's no replay value). Im really only interested in this as a solo game, if the other two quests can't be done solo then there's no point in buying this unfortunately. Are the different sphere's incompatible? Why can you have 4 Gandalfs and 3 of everything else? That seems inconsistent; or have I missed the point? Thanks for the replies.

Gabryl said: If by enough, you mean 3 of every card... no. The Core Set includes 1-4 cards of each type... So (in theory) a player could need three copies of the core set if they really wanted to build a deck with the max of the cards of which only one is included... But realistically, the one core set is pretty good at providing enough for making Tournament legal MIXED decks. (Almost all cards in the game (the only exception right now is the Gandalf Ally) are of one of four "flavors" there are 29 cards of each flavor included... so if you want to make a single flavor (ie very focused) deck you do need TWO core sets. But very good decks can be made by using the core set alone... albeit they will be decks of two or three flavors. (Four flavors is possible, but rather silly at this point.) Can you elaborate on this? I don't really understand what is in the core set. 1-4 copies? HOw does that work. presumably the card limit is 4 of a given card.People will say that it's playable from a single core, but really how playable? I'm not interested in tournaments, but I am interested in playing the game well. Not just random draw based on a single copy of vital cards.

Does the core set give enough of each of the cards?

As a prospective player I have a couple of questions: 1. The Hunt for Gollum quest cards, do you need all of them from each of the packs or is each useable alone. 2. Do the packs contain enough multiples of each card (i don't know if LotR has a 3x each card limit or whatever). Thanks

N0-1_H3r3 said: signoftheserpent said: Why? They use the same stats, traits and talents and powers (with a few extras) as the PC's. They use the same rules. Why would they need to be rough. Everything is scaled in the same way (otheriwse the rules wouldn't work at all). The biggest issue here is that Player Characters in any of the 40kRP games don't level up in a predictable, uniform manner. 1000xp can be spent on a wide variety of different things depending on the speciality/career path and current rank of the character. It's not like D&D where characters of the same class are all essentially the same except for the attacks they possess, with easily predictable values for attack rolls, approximate damage dealt, armour class and hit points. It doesn't matter how players spend their XP. They will spend it the same way as the GM would for purchasing talents and traits to represent the increased power level of a monster. D&D has no bearing on this at all and is completely irrelevant. Obviously DW is a didffernt system.It won't matter how the PC spends his XP because that isn't what determines rank, just how much XP he's spent. Therefore it should be entirely possible to build monsters and enemies in the same way. MoX just provides static blocks of characteristics and lists of abilities with no apparent provision as to how to change, improve or alter those to match the PC's as they themselves rank up.

My copy arrived today from the excellent service of Infinity Games, UK.

Brand said: At best, I think that would equate to a really, really, REALLY rough guideline. Why? They use the same stats, traits and talents and powers (with a few extras) as the PC's. They use the same rules. Why would they need to be rough. Everything is scaled in the same way (otheriwse the rules wouldn't work at all). So it should be extremely easy to provide rules for levelling up adversaries accordingly. If its possible to create ranks for pc's then it's just as possible to do so for enemies, be they chaos space marines, orks or tyranids. If nothing else surely you just total up the XP cost of a given enemy build and then go from there. So if, plucking a number out the air, it costs 15000 for a rank 1 Chaos Sorcerer, and 12000 for a rank 1 space marine, you can go from there. Provide xp costs for the unique traits that each enemy might have and you're good to go. Where's the problem?

Shaun said: 7) Chaos Marines just don't seem designed to stack up against DW characters as they advance. Surely that's true of every enemy stat block. The game needs some way to help the GM advance the adversaries in line with the players' own otherwise things will just get silly.

Siranui said: signoftheserpent said: A book covering all the non-imp factions could easily be done and wouldn't need to be bigger than the core rulebook format. Easily. There is absolutely no reason why that's not possible. I like this game, but that's in spite of some pretty glaring errors in judgement. There is simply no reason, at all, why Eldar can't be covered. In fact i'd argue they should take precedence over stuff FFG make up, like diablodons or the other FFG-created Jericho Reach xeno material. Someone who actually works in the trade and writes for FFG is telling you that it isn't. They probably know about the subject in more depth that you do. How about you write and tell them directly, instead of repeatedly making the same complaints to the audience? I'd argue that new material has massive priority. We've had ten years of GW jerking us around, doing nothing new with the game or the timeline. FFG comes along and we now have THREE nicely detailed sectors, masses of new plot and plot teasers, and a bunch of NEW xenos races. What FFG have done with the 40k universe is excellent, and far more useful than just converting codexes into RPG stats for people who can't be bothered to do it themselves. How about you respect my opinion instead of continually accusing me of trolling. Complaining about lack of Xeno material in response to a book solely about xenos on the forum for the game that deals with xenos is precisely the right place to post and you have zero right to tell me what I can and cannot say. I don't do that to you, so show me the same courtesy. It is peffectly possible to produce a book covering 7 antagonist factions. 50 pages per faction is 350 pages. The size of the DW book is almost 400. How then is that not possible? The warhammer codices are extremely short - and filled with pictures, photos and painting advice. Where is the problem? You are incorrect in saying they can't do this; clearly they don't want to. 40k isn't an open ended setting in canon terms. There are finite factions and finite resources within (units, gear, etc), all of which would be very easy to translate into the rpg. New material isn't the priority: established canon material has to come first. There is no sensible alternative. If you don't want canon material, then you are wasting money buying a 40k game as you are clearly looking for something else. If you want to take canon material and twist it into your own thing, well, and again, that's entirely your choice as a gm. Whether GW are jerking you areound has nothing to do with it. The quality of FFG's own material is similarly not the issue. But to actively argue against the inclusion of canon elements is completely irrational and those doing so are doing the product more harm than anyon arguing for the inclusion of, for example, Eldar. There isn't even a discussion as to what the Eldar are in the game. The only section on antagonists covers 3 factions with not even a cursory mention of the other forces in the universe.

H.B.M.C. said: As an actual question for those who have the book, can you please post the stats for: Sonic Blaster Blast Master Doom Siren My group are interested to see how they came out in the end... BYE Well you could buy MoX, or you could make up your own!

N0-1_H3r3 said: Consider that the Eldar rules I've written take up more than 18,000 words - approximately 23 pages, going by FFG's standard layout, assuming the normal quantity of art - and it is neither particularly detailed nor does it cover the full range of potential Eldar enemies, and it certainly doesn't have the quantity of support material (background, plot hooks, GM advice, etc) I'd expect from an official book, which collectively could easily double that word count. Now, repeat that for every faction - more than 36,000 words per faction on each of the Eldar, Orks, Dark Eldar, Tyranids, Tau, Chaos Space Marines, Chaos Daemons (both are large factions, it's appropriate to consider them separately here) and Necrons, before considering Imperial NPCs or other servants of Chaos not counted as Chaos Marines or Daemons. That's easily a book bigger than any one of the core rulebooks just spent translating across armylist entries. Such a tome takes a large number of writers and artists to produce, and it cannot be done quickly, nor can it be done cheaply, and during that production time, it will be taking up resources and attention that could otherwise be spent on other books... A book covering all the non-imp factions could easily be done and wouldn't need to be bigger than the core rulebook format. Easily. There is absolutely no reason why that's not possible. And it doesn't even need to include EVERY piece of info for those factions. You only need to have the most important stuff, the rest can be followed up later. DW doesn't have every space marine chapter, it has enough. Again these are all excuses. There is no good reason why eldar are not part of the JR setting. Especially in a game that already makes use of them (the relic that's been mentioned). Where was FFG's editing and continuity when that was being proposed? I like this game, but that's in spite of some pretty glaring errors in judgement. There is simply no reason, at all, why Eldar can't be covered. In fact i'd argue they should take precedence over stuff FFG make up, like diablodons or the other FFG-created Jericho Reach xeno material. I'm sure it's all wonderful, but the priority has to go to established material. Once you've done that then go for it and if it's as good as some people suggest then it's going to sell as well. If FFG omit the Eldar from the one game above all else where they are most appropriate (ie DW) then there is something very wrong in their decision making. I'm not here to knock FFG for the sake of criticism, but seriously what 40k game ignores the Eldar?

Balodek said: signoftheserpent said: Balodek said: MikeN said: I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that a 40k rpg based around fighting a range of alien enemies would include one of the most prominent alien races in the setting. It does, there are 3 chapters dedicated to Tau, Tyranids, and Chaos. But Chaos are not Xenos. That's fair, although they are one of the major antagonists of the setting. Of course, and the Eldar predate it's existence within 40k. Both should be included. Really there's no good reason why not.

Balodek said: MikeN said: I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that a 40k rpg based around fighting a range of alien enemies would include one of the most prominent alien races in the setting. It does, there are 3 chapters dedicated to Tau, Tyranids, and Chaos. But Chaos are not Xenos.

Balodek said: I think we're not really going to get any farther than we have on the Eldar discussion. It's fairly obvious at this point that almost everybody understands and accepts why Eldar are not present in this book. I would like to second Kain's question for anybody that has the book, are the weapons in line with the optional rules in the 1.1 Errata, or will we need to look for a 1.2 Errata to include the weapons from MoX? I would guess not, since MoX would have been written a long time before it eventually got printed, published and shipped.

Siranui said: To play devil's advocate on you playing devil's advocate; no purchase is required. #1's net-published work is far superior to the Eldar iterations in other FFG products. Saying 'it's not there, I want it, but I don't want to write it myself and I don't want to pay for it or wait for FFG to print it somewhere' already has a blindingly obvious solution. You keep missing the point, and I never said that I don't intend to pay for it. I'm quite happy to buy MoX. Please stop filling your posts with misrepresentations of what I've said.

Siranui said: As to 'Eldar should be in every 40k game'... Erm...do you want an Eldar Space Hulk expansion? Necromunda? Gorkamorka? Clearly Eldar do not belong in every game, because not every game is set where there are Eldar under every rock. And as to RPGs, it's nobody's place to announce what 'should' be in every GM's game. That is precisely what i've said. YOu criticise me but you don't actually read what i've said. I've made it very clear, several times, that the provision of eldar material doesn't mean GM's are obliged to use it anymore than the provision of tyranid, chaos or tau information.

Face Eater said: Well Eldar won't be in the new Space Marine game from THQ. And that's fine. Why? Because that game's story, which is what we are referring to (i don't know how the multiplery part works), is one adventure. I have not suggested that people include eldar in every DW adventure anymore than I have said that every GM MUST use eldar at all - it is their choice. There's the difference.

Stormast said: Yet you're not trying. He's talking about Deathwatch, not THE Deathwatch. Of course, if there are Eldars cruising nearby, the Deathwatch, as the chamber militant of the Ordo Xenos, is quite clearly going to go kick their bottoms. The thing, here, is that Deathwatch, the RPG written by FFG, does not have Eldars cruising nearby. Unless a GM decides to have them do so, which he has any right to do so. Nobody denies you the right to want Eldars in your stories. Nobody said Eldars weren't that old, or were Chaos worshippers, or were useless to the setting, or anything you're throwing at us. What was said, however, was that in the present time, in the Deathwatch (the RPG, not the organisation) setting, there were no Eldars nearby, and therefore no need for stats for them. What's more, you didn't even take into account the arguments about the size of books and the fact that you can't put everything in it and choices have to be made. You disapprove, OK, that's your right, but don't go around shouting that anybody who approves is a mindless idiot when all your arguments, while not untrue, are completely off in the discussion. PS: Yes, we know about that Relic...But you're just being an obvious troll here. And you're just being offensive.We know full well that Eldar aren't in the game. That's painfully obvious, even if you didn't feel the need to repeat it every two seconds in the most patronising way possible. You are still missing the point: why is game content included that has no function because the people it works on are not supported by the game. Your attitude's a joke. I've been more than fair with the ridiculous comments made on here by people that, for no other reason than the sake of argument it seems, want to argue that the sky is green and grass is blue. Eldar should be in every 40k game. There is no good reason why they shouldn't be. That they are excluded from a game that, not only includes things that key off of them, but is about the very people that deal with them is a massive error of judgement. You dont like that because you feel threatened by it. But if you want the gloves to come off and you want to be rude and condescending then deal with the truth of it.

Rites of Battle p.160-161 The Rememberance Shield. I won't type the entry out, suffice to say that it's a pretty pointless Relic to have in a setting where Eldar aren't present at all. Ok, so Eldar shouldn't be in the JR nor in your games of DW - so why include the thing?

H.B.M.C. said: In the meantime though the Eldar don’t belong in Deathwatch. I'm sorry but that just makes no sense. The DW is the Space Marine faction tasked with fighting Xenos. Eldar are Xenos. That argument holds no water.

Balodek said: signoftheserpent said: We can argue it either way till the cows come home. But every argument has an equal counter argument. This is a logical fallacy, as not all views are equal or valid. That's a straw man. Balodek said: You claim the Eldar are fundamental to the system without supporting it, and change your argument to avoid confronting this simple fact. The Eldar are not included because FFG has not written the Eldar into the Jericho Reach. While this does not exclude the possibility that they will introduce them, it doesn't mean they have to include them at this time. No i said they were fundamental to the setting, which is obvious to anyone that is familiar with the history of the setting. The fall of the Eldar created notonly the Dark Eldar but also Slaanesh. They are ancient and fundamentally opposed to chaos for this reason. They represent aspects of the setting that would be foolish to ignore. Tyranids, for example, don't. I don't understand why you feel it necessary to continue repeating that the eldar don't exist in the JR because FFG have said so. That much is obvious (even if it's already been contradicted by evidence presented elsewhere in this thread). You are continually trying to fidn reasons why FFG - in a 40k game - should exclude fundamental elements of that setting. Again, if you don't want eldar in your game then don't have them. Why should - or even why would - FFG make that decision for me? Balodek said: It isn't even as easy as you claim to just add them. There is a multi-page discussion on these boards about whether a bolter fires 3 shots or 4. Can you imagine how much work it would be to introduce an entire new race, especially one as complicated as the Eldar. In fact one could point out that the inclusion of the Tyranids is done to give both FFG and GMs a race of xenos that are not overly complicated. If it's easy for people to create their own Eldar rules, then it's no problem for the people paid to do that for a living. Really that's a poor excuse.