signoftheserpent
-
Content Count
1,161 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by signoftheserpent
-
-
I got a cheap copy o fthis book and I'm curious about creating my own chapter so i had a look at that part. I see there's a table I can roll on to determine the parent chapter. That table includes a significant portion devoted to chapters that aren't in the rules. I'm told I have to re roll. Is this a joke? HOw can you possibly justify this as game design?
-
ok thansk for the help.
-
I still don't really understand. It seems like the word is being used superfluously just to mean 'advanced'. Why on the character sheet does the basic skill 'awareness' have both basic and trained boxes filled in for instance?
-
The FAQ doesn't say either way. What is the relevance of saying it's trained? What does that mean, it's going to have to be learned in order to use it if it's advanced so what is the relevance of that word?
-
I'm confused by what this means. Under the listing for Tac Marine it says they get Command as a Trained Advanced Skill. Command is listed as a Basic skill. What does it mean? Thanks.
-
Charmander said:
And FWIW, saying "Consequently fans want to believe it beyond its faults more than is perhaps practical, reasonable or even wise" is being snippy, or generally antagonistic.
No it isn't. It's an objective statement of fact. All people tend to be more forgiving of the faults of a thing if they are predisposed toward it as a whole.
-
And I did not say the forum was filled with aggressive trolls at all. Those are your words, and unpleasant they are too. Not cool!
-
I'd buy all the books if money wasn't an issue. It's not a case of dont want (beyond simple practical concerns of cross referncing multiple books and lugging them to and from game sessions), it's a case of can't afford. If Mark has everything, then great. But that has yet to be confirmed.
Of course people are happy with what's been released, because that's all there is.
and the quality of the books isn't in question.
-
Blood Pact said:
signoftheserpent said:
But a single book instead of the need for three, or four, such books, which could have covered the same information (as the background for these factions has already been quantified) would have been better. It would sell more and would be cross compatible.Are you suggesting that it's better to split this material into three books, at greater expense, which are then publishes separately over a long period of time?
A single book would be thicker than a **** phonebook, since there's still a lot of ground to cover even without something getting reprinted. And as others have said there are big differences between the game lines. Now, it has nothing to do with the whole theme of the games, or any of that bull. Dark Heresy isn't 'realistic' while Deathwatch is 'heroic', like some people around here continually go on about. But Hive Tyrants, Wraithlords, and other big nasty monsters aren't the sort of thing that an Inquisitor's Acolytes go charging toward.
Furthermore with the need to detail abso-*******-lutely everything, because as it's become painfully clear if they left any of the major races out (and then, the major units of that race) you'd still be here bitching and moaning, they wouldn't be able to cram the book full of cool unique antagonists like the ones seen in the Mark of Xenos previews so far. Oh yeah, and since there's Black Crusade, the book would need all kinds of Imperial antagonists too.
Oh, and then there's the simple fact that just making a single, larger book, isn't going to do anything but marginally reduce the price.
You're not going to save any money by theoretically squeezing it all in to one obscenely oversized book, knuckle-head. You're just too **** stubborn and shortsighted to realise that you can just buy Creatures Anathema, or my personal preference... shut the hell up and wait for Mark of the Xenos.
It wouldn't be thicker than a phonebook at all, as i've explained. There are only 6 factions in the setting other than Chaos and the Imperium, you could easily give 40 pages to each faction and come out with a 240p supplement. If FFG want to do fuerther books with their own aliens then that's fine. But the core races of the setting are not infinite or number in the thousands. Printing this one book would be cheaper than printing three, slightly smaller, books as is currenlty the case. Imperial antagonists, if they need to be covered, can exist in another 40 pages, if necessary - that's still only 280 pages.
Instead of being unpleasant and rude, you could respond to what i've said, not invent your own version of what I said. 240 pages is entirely doable; we don't need EVERYTHING, nor do we need the entire history of every single race. 40 pages is plenty, in fact less is probably more realistic.
-
I'm not insulting people for being defensive. I'm just stating that people can easily overlook what others can't because of it.
If noone cared about this game or the license as an rpg then we wouldn't be having these discussions from either side. If I didn't care about a good 40k game then I wouldn't even be heere at all.
-
Charmander said:
signoftheserpent said:
I'm not being snippy. The fact that the info required to complete the profile requires the acquisition of a second book and one whose only use to me (i have no interest in buying published adventure books per se) was a tiny portion of its content is precisely my point.
You kind of are dude, that's why people have been hostile towards you. If this incenses you so why do you buy their products and post on their forums?
I don't really think it's your place to tell me that I'm being snippy when i've made it clear that I wasn't and that i showed the person in question nothing but respect. In fact I think that's pretty rude.
It doesn't incense me. I'm not enraged or offended by it. I'm just trying to understand how FFG are handling their license and the reasons behind their decisions. I'm also well aware they may not wish to make that known, which is entirely their choice.
Like all things i weighed up the pros and cons of buying this game and decided it was worth giving it a go on balance. Whether that works out will remain to be seen, but that's my choice. It doesn't mean those cons don't exist or that they aren't worth discussing or even trying to remedy.
I have also noticed there is a very defensive attitude regarding these games, perhaps due to the fact this is the only (and there will likley never be another) 40k rpg project that's official. Consequently fans want to believe it beyond its faults more than is perhaps practical, reasonable or even wise.
-
Blood Pact said:
But a single book instead of the need for three, or four, such books, which could have covered the same information (as the background for these factions has already been quantified) would have been better. It would sell more and would be cross compatible.signoftheserpent said:
I get that FFG can't please everyone nor can they release books every five minutes to cover everything. But you are not going to convine me that a book on the other factions in the setting, a Xeno Compendium (you coudl even include Chaos and make it complete if you like), wouldn't rank in the top 3 books of the vast majority of players. There isn't a single 40k player that wouldn't want this information - and FFG have had a good few years now to work on something like this. I would like to know why they haven't decided to do this.
DEATHWATCH is less than a year old and Mark of the Xenos will be the 4th book out, and that's only if you count the core book.
Dark Heresy had both Disciples of the Dark Gods and Creatures Anathema. I think there were like the 3rd and 5th out, respectively.
Granted, it's been a long time coming for Rogue Trader, I will give you that. But all the complaints you've been making here really are absolutely baseless. Expecting way more than there is reasonable.
Are you suggesting that it's better to split this material into three books, at greater expense, which are then publishes separately over a long period of time?
-
I get that FFG can't please everyone nor can they release books every five minutes to cover everything. But you are not going to convine me that a book on the other factions in the setting, a Xeno Compendium (you coudl even include Chaos and make it complete if you like), wouldn't rank in the top 3 books of the vast majority of players. There isn't a single 40k player that wouldn't want this information - and FFG have had a good few years now to work on something like this. I would like to know why they haven't decided to do this.
-
I'm not being snippy. The fact that the info required to complete the profile requires the acquisition of a second book and one whose only use to me (i have no interest in buying published adventure books per se) was a tiny portion of its content is precisely my point.
Look, if money was no object then i'd happily buy the lot, but it isn't and these books are by no means cheap - irrespective of quality. Or if someone offered me the lot i'd chew their arm off to get that. But that's not practical and it's not realistic.
You might call it pedantic, but it isn't. Those are two separate books and I don't think it's remotely reasonable to just expect me to buy TEP solely for some Necron info - especailly as thats money that could be spent on something overall more useful, like RoB.
So, instead of putting some bits and pieces for the Xeno races randomly across books all over the entire 40k rpg lines, would ffg not have been better writing a straight up Xeno Compendium and covering all the races: Eldar, Ork, Tau (and client races), Necron, Dark Eldar, and Tyrannid? YOu can't tell me that's not feasible, even at 40 pages per faction tht's still 240p only, and you can't tell me it wouldn't be popular - the fact people have lapped up your own creations in this area tells me that there is clearly a demand. That one book would replace the cost for CA, MoX and the RT book that's due, with the cost of a single book and easily sell as much. Your work is great, but why are you having to do what FFG ought to be doing (which doesn't preclude people from doing it their way instead either, it just gives them the option).
And if need be FFG could follow them up with compendiums fo their own Xenos, like the Slaught for instance.
-
N0-1_H3r3 said:
Forgive me, but the answer is then no you didn't as the Emperor Protects is a separate book. I was referring to DW the book, not the complete line as it currently exists.signoftheserpent said:
Did you base your Necrons on material solely within DW?
Ruleswise, entirely, right down to using the profile for the Flayer Rifle from The Emperor Protects for the Gauss Flayer, and using the Tomb Spyder and Wraith profiles in that book as a point of comparison to keep them consistent in terms of common abilities.
Background-wise, I'm working from the Necron Codex, the 2nd edition Necron rules, and the novels Dead Men Walking and Fall of Damnos.
-
Did you base your Necrons on material solely within DW?
-
Arkhan said:
Is there a need for the attitude? I've not been rude to you, so knock it off.signoftheserpent said:
Right, I get that eldar and marines don't match 1 on 1. But that doesn't help me build them as a credible threat for a Kill Team, and I really don't think that jsut guessing is the answer. This isn't about common sense or judgement, it's about strict application of mechanics. Make them too hard and the game stalls and the players get upset, make them too easy and they lose their value.
That's ridiculus. As if statting an enemy is some kind of rocket-engineering which requires you to have three Ph.D.s. What group of autistic morons would cry out in agony if the Ork boss now has 61 strength and not 62? "Oh no! He is too weak! The game's broken!".
Honestly, do you really believe in what you write? Then perhaps stay with TableTop or Card Games or whatever, but keep your hand off RPGs, because they require a certain degree of creativity and flexibility, regarding story as well as regarding rules.
I didn't say it was rocket science, I said it was mechanical. Statting enemies and creating abilities for them or otherwise approximating them requires knowledge of the system. Some people are good at that, others are not. Does that make them stupid? Does that warrant abuse like this, or patronising comments such as 'stay with card games or whatever'? Good grief, grow up!
-
Blood Pact said:
Right, I get that eldar and marines don't match 1 on 1. But that doesn't help me build them as a credible threat for a Kill Team, and I really don't think that jsut guessing is the answer. This isn't about common sense or judgement, it's about strict application of mechanics. Make them too hard and the game stalls and the players get upset, make them too easy and they lose their value.No, they really shouldn't.
No 'normal' Eldar is the equal of a Space Marine. The Astartes were basically made to butcher the galaxy afterall. There aren't many things that are capable of standing up to a space marine, one-on-one, about the only thing that can is another Space Marine. A Guardian, or Kabalite Warrior, certainly aren't one of the things. Even Aspect Warriors are woefully outmatched in any area but their own little specialty.
-
Chastity said:
This is getting a bit silly now.signoftheserpent said:
Are units that would be comparable in the wargame thus in this system?
It's not good designing an eldar kill team, if you like, to face off against the players if they turn out to be weak as kittens and no challenge at all. I'm not talking about Hordes. I'm talking about unit for unit.Pretty much no - DW Marines are Fluff-style not TT-style (that is to say, they're actually statted as superhuman warriors, not just-slightly-better-than-guardsmen)
I understand the Marines are tough. But I should be able to build an Eldar squad of warriors powerful enough to be their equal (ie without them losing in one round making the whole thing a massive anticlimax) without resorting to a Horde.
Even then the point still remains. How do you balance the Eldar from CA, for instance, so they are useable in DW given the power of the Marines?
-
Arkhan said:
So we are right back at the beginning again. A new GM, someone experientially unfamiliaar with the rules, is going to struggle using enemies from other books because of the different stat/power levels. Couldn't FFG give players advice on how to process this? It may be the easiest thing in the world - or it may not.Well basically you have to tweak and upgrade most of the enemies (including Eldar and Orks) in the CA book in order to make their threat-level fit the fluff. Without they would be too weak compared to the W40K background.
But as I said, there has already been a huge discussion about that, me arguing that FFG could have prevented that by designing space marines to be compatible, but the majority of users who posted in that thread disagreed with me there.
If you're interested, this is the thread, which conveniently also features stats for Orks and Eldar that have been player-tweaked to work with DW
http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=214&efcid=3&efidt=435365
-
Are units that would be comparable in the wargame thus in this system?
It's not good designing an eldar kill team, if you like, to face off against the players if they turn out to be weak as kittens and no challenge at all. I'm not talking about Hordes. I'm talking about unit for unit. -
Arkhan said:
Reagarding CA and later publications:
In this case I agree, I found it odd too that FFG did not develop the DW core rules so that they were compatible with the prior publications. But I discussed that extensively in another thread.
So the Eldar from CA are not scaled to suit DW level characters using these rules?
-
What supplement, if any, covers Tau Ethereals?
-
Charmander said:
Successful troll is succesful.
Come on dude, really? You're going to stat out creatures for every goddamn critter in the universe and then screw yourself over when you come out with RT, Ascension, and DW which are scaled to different power levels? That's a brilliant plan.
But that problem must already exist so I don't get your point. CA came out before Ascension and serves the same purpose. I don't recall seeing any rules for different power level characters, as per Ascension, there, so what's your point?
Bigger Adversaries
in Deathwatch
Posted
I read the rules part for complications during Missions and the choice for adding extra/harder Adversaries mentions that using a Daemonhost or a Tyranid Lictor would be a good choice. Sounds fine except neither are in the rulebook. So here we are again. I don't understand this at all. The rest of the book goes into such detail with all sorts of cool stuff and yet the section on what the Space Marines have to face is almost an afterthought.
So if I want Daemonhosts I need to buy an entirely separate game, Dark Heresy (which I'ms ure is great, but not really the point).
And if I want Lictors I need Creatues Anathema, which is £27 for 3 pages worth of info.
On top of that, while I'd love to own those books I notice that the entry for Lictors (having browsed it) is fairly hefty. Now in play this means i'm going to need to either know what all his many (many) talents and traits do by heart, or I'm going to need to cross reference with the main rules. The game is already fairly detailed and the books already fairly hefty. What if i need further info? Daemonhosts will have their own rules within Dark Heresy and cross referncing that and Deathwatch at the tabel (along with whatever other books i might use, such as Rites of Battle) is getting crazy! That's on top of the steep learning curve - i'm sure it's great once you know it.
Finally there's the problem of balance: using the Lictor as an example Dark Heresy is scaled at a third the power level, initially, that DW is. That's the difference in character power levels, using XP as a guide (I don't know how else you'd do it). Lictors are presetned as enemies for Acolytes. I have absolutely no way of judging how tough a Lictor is compared to a Space Marine (or indeed anyone, since there doesn't seem tobe any objective explicit measurement system and I have no idea how many xp was used to build the Lictor). They look tough, but compared to what? If i set a single Lictor against a Kill Team will it mow them down like grass or go down like a sack of spuds? On top of that I have no idea what the average Kill Team is supposed to look like, in terms of numbers. The average gaming group is likely 3 or 4 (i'm not sure DW could work with a two man kill team but that's beside the point) so how do you guage threat sizes against player numbers as well as XP levels?