signoftheserpent
-
Content Count
1,161 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by signoftheserpent
-
-
N0-1_H3r3 said:
signoftheserpent said:
It will take a lot less time if you don't then decide to write other books at the same time.Well, it's a good job that we only write one book at a time, then; Edge of the Abyss was written after Into the Storm but before Battlefleet Koronus, so consequently that is the order in which they will be released.
signoftheserpent said:
Really this is a non-excuse. It's a matter of simple priority.Yes, it is. Fantasy Flight Games have decided that a setting book takes priority in the release schedule over a book on starships, hence the order in which they were developed.
What you consider to be a priority is not indicative of anything except your opinion, which is not shared by everyone.
Again, why is Edge considered more important than Battlefleet? I'm fully aware that people disagree, I can see that for myself. It doesn't tell me why the former is more important as a project than the latter. Especially to people that have taken the time on here to counsel, quite aggressively, that people who share my opinion should make up their own stuff. If that's the tack you wish to take then why do you want Edge to come out first. I have no problem with them writing such a book, only the prioritsation of projects.
-
MILLANDSON said:
signoftheserpent said:
Why is this book prioritised over Battlefleet Koronus or the Xeno Compendium?
Because presumably:
1) Balancing and writing xenos creatures/races/etc takes a while to do;
2) Writing and balancing starships, weapons, and other stuff takes a while to do;
3) Writing information mostly about factions, planets, etc, does not require as much balancing and testing;
4) Having planets to visit and exploit is more important than having more ways of arriving there and blowing it up.
Also, they're sort of following the same release plan as Dark Heresy. For Dark Heresy, after Inquisitor's Handbook (Into the Storm for Rogue Trader) they released Disciples of the Dark Gods (which would be Edge of the Abyss for Rogue Trader).
It will take a lot less time if you don't then decide to write other books at the same time.
Really this is a non-excuse. It's a matter of simple priority.
-
Wodan said:
Ironic that you people advocate gm's making stuff up themselves while simultaneously telling them they aren't allowed to play the game in certain ways.professor_kylan said:
Rogue Trader isn't about fighting these aliens, it's about ripping them off and making a profit. If you and your players want to play a game which is all about blowing thing up, play DH or DW. Trader works better when players find a better way to succeed than fighting. Fighting, after all, is expensive. Who wants to pay to repair armour plating when you can simply buy out or sell out all of your problems? Don't blame the game if you are trying to run something else with the same book.
Yes, you get it!
-
Wodan said:
Wow. Seriously?
Into the Storm is a great book full of useful material. It's not our fault you don't have any money to buy every supplement? Every supplement? LOL
This is better than the @!#$ who want female Space Marines.
Gimme, gimme, gimme.
Wow, seriously what?
I didn't mention female space marines, at all.
Why are the two scenario examples i posted so terrible? I would think they are exactly the sort of thing the average RT gm would write. Is wanting to use canon factions/antagonists not allowed then? If so then RT is not a 40k game.
-
Why is this book prioritised over Battlefleet Koronus or the Xeno Compendium?
-
You're still talking from the point of view of Koronus Expanse the RPG, not 40k.
-
Thulis said:
are you actually being serious?OMG dude, in the time and effort you've been harping on this, you could've easily made up stats for the various xenos/items you're complaining about being left out of the game. Endless harping is pointless.
Was the starship section in the main book a little underwhelming? Yes. There's a book coming out for that. Xenos a little sparse? Yeah. Go pick up creatures anathema or make things up yourself.
Endless bitching isn't productive. If things aren't represented in the official source material, use fan made supplements, make things up yourself, and do your job as a GM. FFG doesn't have the time or resources to spoon-feed every single person every single item they want in a universe as vast as the 40k one.
You obviously have a lot of time and energy on your hands to consistently post these huge whines... turn that time and energy into something productive. Or just find a new game if you think this one sucks so much.
-Thulis
-
Medhia Nox said:
Were we really expecting a universe as vast as the 40K universe to be condensed into a handful of books?
You want to know about Necron - grab the Codex - the information is the same. You can even use the powers - stats - etc. of all the various Necron, Tyrannids, etc. as inspiration for the Rogue Trader conversions.
Er, yes. An RPG is exactly that - a handful of books. Any more and you are expecting me to lug several kilos of information to game sessions which I then have to cross reference. That's not good design.
If it's unreasonable to expect the 40k universe to be represented appropriately in rpg form then don't try it.
I don't want to know about the Necrons; i want to know about the Necrons in RT/DW/DH. Why should I buy a codex for the wargame how will that help me? It would be a pointless exercise that would yeild the same results as houseruling from scratch. That's FFG's job. If YOU want to house rule your own Necrons, good luck to you. I don't buy rpg's so major elements/parts/factions from the setting in hand are ignored wholesale. There is absolutely no word from FFG as to when Necrons etc will be properly treated if at all. At best the books cover bits and pieces of info in a random and wholly impractical fashion - am i going to buy Lure of the Expanse just for the snippets of eldar stuff? No, it makes no sense financially. Perhaps if money were no obkect i'd have the luxury to indulge. But that still doesn't change the core problem. At best Xeno Compendium is a year away and that's assuming it's better than CA. Really that is beyond stupid - a book covering antagonists not released until 2 years after the corebook. Inexcusable.
-
How do i run a game such as the two examples I gave?
How do I run a game where the players face off against Dark Eldar pirates? How about dealing with Comorragh?
How do i run a game where the players face Chaos sorcerers?
How do i deal with the Tau?
-
Cifer said:
1. a space hulk that the crew learn is full of treasure. They set out to find it only to discover it's full of tyrannids. No tyrannids in the rogue trader book. Very few spaceship rules (which is unforgiveable).
Tyranids are primarily located in the eastern parts of the galaxy, with only the merest splinters moving into Segmentum Obscurus As for the spaceship rules... you did notice they got their own chapter? Which was IIRC about as long as the chapter on general game mechanics? With a whole book purely on spaceships waiting in the wings?
2. a planet the crew learn has lots of treasure. They set out to find it only to discover said riches are stored within a necron tomb they risk unwittingly activating.
That one is pretty easy as well: you don't need stats for sleeping necrons which happens to cover pretty much all of them as of the time of RT. As soon as they wake up and the explorers don't immediately get back to base, you don't need stats to say "Gauss-beams fall, you all die" either.
Both necrons and tyrannids are core 40k antagonists. Why are they not properly covered? How can it make any sense to prioritise FFG's own creations over canon elements? If we don't need Necrons in our game then we need FFG's own ideas even less surely? On top of that the random nature by which info is portioned out is ridiculous: one Eldar stat in the mainbook (useless, frankly), a couple in the screen and scattered elsewhere. How can that make any sense? It's not convenioent from the point of view of referencing stuff - why not do an Eldar sourcebook? They've had enough time to put one out? It's hardly as if Eldar are a minority canon element.
You might not have noticed, but apart from the GM screen and the first published adventure (which has quite a few Eldar inside), there is a grand total of one (1) sourcebook published. Fanboys may disagree, but I consider Into The Storm a better choice for that one book than The Book Of Pansy Space-elves.
Of course, having a single corebook with the size of the Encyclopedia Britannica would have been interesting too, but then again... I both preferred it to come out in this decade and below a few thousand dollars. But maybe that's just me.
So, because of the arcane decision making of FFG i'm not entitled to include Tyrannids because Rogue Traders are only allowed to go into the Koronus Expanse which, conveniently, happens to be nowhere near ANY tyrnaid threat atl, despite Tyrands being a popular part of canon i would think a lot of prospective 40k players would liek to use. Extraordinary.
Spaceship rules don't cover enough and it's going to be almost 2 years before enough is provided - for a game based around starship travel.
YOU might not need stats, doesn't mean that I won't or that anyone else wanting to use the Necrons won't. RT covers NOTHING about the Necrons. No information on any aspect of their culture, never mind stats.
Your attitude in referring to a major part of the game's canon as pansy space elves misses the point so thoroughly as to be embarassing. NO one is suggesting you use Eldar, just that you have the option to use established parts of 40k canon without them being relegated to some bonus that few are entitled to.
-
N0-1_H3r3 said:
The corebook doesn't allow me to run the following scenarios, neither of which are particularly unusual for the setting:signoftheserpent said:
I don't want to make up stuff that should be covered by the basic game. Why am i not entitled to a comment if i choose to play this way?You're entitled to comment. You're entitled to your opinion. However, you seem to have chosen to repeat the same opinion over and over again ad nauseam, that FFG are inherently and fundamentally wrong in their approach and that your way is the only right and proper way to do things.
Your preferences are not inherently those of anyone else, what you deem to be useless or a waste of space may be deemed worthwhile by another, and what you claim that FFG should do is nothing other than a single opinion in the crowd. That you choose to use the anonymity of the internet to be brusque about the matter earns you nothing whatsoever.
Personally, both as someone who plays these games and as someone who helps produce them, I'm actually much more interested in things I haven't already seen in a codex than just rehashing the familiar. It's more useful for me as a GM to be able to provide adversaries that are unknown to people with a decade or two of experience with the tabletop game, and a setting that contains its own specific details rather than a shallow and generic overview of the entire Imperium that only contains the basic details about forces described in a Codex. It's more interesting for me as a writer to be able to examine something new and specific and detailed rather than being constantly forced to hedge my bets and be unable to give any real detail because the setting is too big to make generalisations.
To Rogue Trader in particular: there are only two sourcebooks published so far, which is a limited amount of space at the best of times. Unless you'd prefer only the vaguest detail, I don't see that there is the room to put all the things that you're demanding from a 40k RPG within the page space already available. So, in that regard, yes the speed at which the books can be produced is part of the issue. That you seem to harbour an irrational loathing for any material beyond what you define as 'the essentials' is a completely distinct issue, and one that I really have no interest in.
1. a space hulk that the crew learn is full of treasure. They set out to find it only to discover it's full of tyrannids. No tyrannids in the rogue trader book. Very few spaceship rules (which is unforgiveable).
2. a planet the crew learn has lots of treasure. They set out to find it only to discover said riches are stored within a necron tomb they risk unwittingly activating.
Both necrons and tyrannids are core 40k antagonists. Why are they not properly covered? How can it make any sense to prioritise FFG's own creations over canon elements? If we don't need Necrons in our game then we need FFG's own ideas even less surely? On top of that the random nature by which info is portioned out is ridiculous: one Eldar stat in the mainbook (useless, frankly), a couple in the screen and scattered elsewhere. How can that make any sense? It's not convenioent from the point of view of referencing stuff - why not do an Eldar sourcebook? They've had enough time to put one out? It's hardly as if Eldar are a minority canon element.
This is the problem. Rogue Trader is a mess. The book is all over the place, covers nothing in enough detail and leaves out huge swathes of canon detail. FFG seem to have gone out their way to create something that ignores most of what's actually in the setting with the argument that it's up to me to fill int he blanks.
Well why bother wihth the game at all?
-
Peacekeeper_b said:
I don't want to make up stuff that should be covered by the basic game. Why am i not entitled to a comment if i choose to play this way?signoftheserpent said:
I must have missed something, what suggestion did you make?
Makng up your own stuff. Using fan made stuff. Altering existing stuff and so forth.
-
Peacekeeper_b said:
Deadline247 said:
signoftheserpent said:
With respect i'm not interested in fan based supplements. There's little point buying the game at all if that's the way to go. FFG should be covering this stuff and they have failed to do so. it's not really good enough to exopect fans to take up the slack.
Even if i could afford Deathwatch, I really shouldn't have to - and that's assuming it offers what I need. And they aren't interchangeable enough.
I think you are missing the point here.
Oh, I think we all get the point just fine. FFG's 40K roleplaying games don't conform to your narrow definition of what they should be, and you've got your panties in a bunch and insist on telling us all about it over, and over, and over, and over. Oh, and we also get the point that you can't afford every book they put out...even though you hate them all.
Did I miss anything?
Deadline247 said:
signoftheserpent said:
With respect i'm not interested in fan based supplements. There's little point buying the game at all if that's the way to go. FFG should be covering this stuff and they have failed to do so. it's not really good enough to exopect fans to take up the slack.
Even if i could afford Deathwatch, I really shouldn't have to - and that's assuming it offers what I need. And they aren't interchangeable enough.
I think you are missing the point here.
Oh, I think we all get the point just fine. FFG's 40K roleplaying games don't conform to your narrow definition of what they should be, and you've got your panties in a bunch and insist on telling us all about it over, and over, and over, and over. Oh, and we also get the point that you can't afford every book they put out...even though you hate them all.
Did I miss anything?
Oh, and that even when people offer suggestions to help him out, he doesmt want their help and would rather just tell them that they just dont understand or get the point.
And I thought I was a stubborn S.O.B. (no not sister of battle)
I must have missed something, what suggestion did you make?
-
Deadline247 said:
Obviously you don't get the point since it's hardly narrow to expect the makers of a 40k rpg to include the stuff that comprises the setting in a timely and concise fashion. FFG haven't done that and no amount of hurt is going to alter the fact. If you enjoy their products, that's great, but don't pretend they have put together an rpg that eoncompasses the elements of the setting. RT itself has a single Eldar stat. If i want more i need to buy Lure of the EXopanse which has about five pages of stuff (the rest is then wasted) covering the Eldar and still you don't get enough. Now, if you think that's the best way to approach the setting, itself well defined, then i think you are gravely mistaken. Throwing a little hissy fit because someone dares to criticse FFG's approach just makes you look childish.signoftheserpent said:
With respect i'm not interested in fan based supplements. There's little point buying the game at all if that's the way to go. FFG should be covering this stuff and they have failed to do so. it's not really good enough to exopect fans to take up the slack.
Even if i could afford Deathwatch, I really shouldn't have to - and that's assuming it offers what I need. And they aren't interchangeable enough.
I think you are missing the point here.
Oh, I think we all get the point just fine. FFG's 40K roleplaying games don't conform to your narrow definition of what they should be, and you've got your panties in a bunch and insist on telling us all about it over, and over, and over, and over. Oh, and we also get the point that you can't afford every book they put out...even though you hate them all.
Did I miss anything?
-
Peacekeeper_b said:
Well there are plenty of fan made rules and supplements that do cover necrons and other basic ideas of 40K. I personally wouldnt mind seeing some more generalized releases that are supplemental for all three games.
And despite the three games being "different" RPGS, they really are not different. Different character creation and progression rules and different psy power rules, but in general, interchangable games.
And then there is the old fiat of making your own stuff. I did it when DH was first published, making Dark Eldar, Hrud, Necron, Commissar, Ork and other rules. Check Dark Reign for other works. You seem to think you know what is right and proper for a 40K RPG so make it up yourself and be on with it.
But the Sabbat World's Crusade guide fromGW, stat up your own stuff and have fun in the GW parts.
With respect i'm not interested in fan based supplements. There's little point buying the game at all if that's the way to go. FFG should be covering this stuff and they have failed to do so. it's not really good enough to exopect fans to take up the slack.
Even if i could afford Deathwatch, I really shouldn't have to - and that's assuming it offers what I need. And they aren't interchangeable enough.
I think you are missing the point here.
-
Peacekeeper_b said:
Deatwatch is a separate game with a different stat scale, and even then there's some question as to how much detail will be featured. I doubt they include Tau ships. The fact that Vespids are in a separate product again demonstrates the totally random approach FFG have taken. This is not the way to go at all. Necrons are not active yet? Says who - FFG? Necrons have been part of the 40k setting for years now and have been, like all elements of the setting, properly codified - it's not as if they are vague and unquantifiable elements FFG has to guess about. Really this again is the problem. How many RT gm's have thought 'wouldn't it be cool if the crew stumbled across a planet full of treasure to find it's a necron tomb'? I bet I'm not the only one.signoftheserpent said:
N0-1_H3r3 said:
signoftheserpent said:
A year on from RT and still only Kroot and Ork?
What were you expecting? It's the first non-adventure sourcebook in the line, and it isn't a quick process to produce these books.
I would expect a clearer vision for the line, a game that covers all that it needs to cover and be scaled properly with the companion games from the same universe (as that's the design choice made), and information that covers the actual 40k setting and the things that make people want to play in it. Not just FFG's invention of the koronus expanse et. all. Why is Into The Storm such a hodge podge of random information? Why is there no dedicated book covering the alien races - ork? kroot? That's ridiculous - why no eldar, or dark eldar (they are pirates after all), no information on spacehulks, necron tombship or such like, no tau, no chaos. The main book has nothing save a couple of stats which is ridiculous.
The speed of which books can be produced is really not the issue. FFG has chosen an approach that makes no sense at all. It's a year on and still nowhere near enough on starships!
While I hate to defend the Rogue Trader line, as I have been dissappointed in it snce I got my CE last year, I feel I must, as facts are facts.
Tau are being covered in Deathwatch (with Vespids in the DW GMs Kit). Necrons are not active yet so why cover them? Or at least they are not very active. Chaos is plenty well covered in Dark Heresy (and from what I hear, they are in Deathwatch as well). I do agree that the Rogue Trader line of books (and recent Dark Heresy ones as well) hae been more haphazardly stitched together. Other then Lure of the Expanse I have found the RT line boring and uninteresting.
However, I like the fact that FFG (and BI before them) are making their own sections of 40K to explore, as it allows the GM some control of the setting without players knowing everything.
FFG can create their own sections fo the 40k unvirse so long as they detail the key elements first. This they are not doing. I'm sure it's all good stuff, but it's not what i want. I don't want their aliens and their planets I want what's essential to 40k and necrons are part of that. To exclude Dark Eldar as well, for another example, is just baffling. They ar epirates after all.
It's this thinking that has spoilt the game line for me, and i certainly don't have the money to buy full price supplements, one after the other, for a drip drip of randomly organised information of 40k setting elements that are at the core of the setting. I could really care less about The Slaught, for instance when i could have stats for playing Eldar or facing Dark Eldar ships, Spacehulks, and so on.
-
N0-1_H3r3 said:
I would expect a clearer vision for the line, a game that covers all that it needs to cover and be scaled properly with the companion games from the same universe (as that's the design choice made), and information that covers the actual 40k setting and the things that make people want to play in it. Not just FFG's invention of the koronus expanse et. all. Why is Into The Storm such a hodge podge of random information? Why is there no dedicated book covering the alien races - ork? kroot? That's ridiculous - why no eldar, or dark eldar (they are pirates after all), no information on spacehulks, necron tombship or such like, no tau, no chaos. The main book has nothing save a couple of stats which is ridiculous.signoftheserpent said:
A year on from RT and still only Kroot and Ork?
What were you expecting? It's the first non-adventure sourcebook in the line, and it isn't a quick process to produce these books.
The speed of which books can be produced is really not the issue. FFG has chosen an approach that makes no sense at all. It's a year on and still nowhere near enough on starships!
-
A year on from RT and still only Kroot and Ork?
-
Very poor.
I've lost faith in FFG's handling of the 40k universe really. It's such a shame, they do great quality work, but, unless the terms of their license are such (i don't really believe that), they are making very very poor decisions. The whole 40k project could have been much much better handled and I really now feel i've wasted money on the books I have. Ork freebooterz may appeal to some on some level, I don't deny that, but when publishers have to prioritise that which gets released for obvious reasons, this kind of choice (out of 2 available pc choices iirc) just sucks. Very very poor decision making. Orks are ciompletely unsuitable as a first choice. An Ork sourcebook is fine, I wouldn't buy it, but that's how it should be done. Limiting player xeno choices to only 2 is unacceptable and to make one of them an Ork is crazy.
-
N0-1_H3r3 said:
Charming attitude.signoftheserpent said:
I took it to mean that the person speaking was doing so on behalf of the company producing the books.I realise there are NDA's etc, but those are set by FFG who can change or disregard them at will.
There's a big difference between speaking on behalf of a company, and setting policy for it. If you're not willing to accept that, then clearly there's no getting through to you.
What is the point of posting to a board to say stuff is being worked on but refusing to even say what. Seems like a waste of time. Either the policy is to say nothing until the point of release or not. Random posts from someone who may or may not have the authority to diseminate information is really pointless.
I'm afraid I can't accord that post any credence. Sorry.
-
N0-1_H3r3 said:
That depends on what you define as "FFG".
Well, this is what i'm responding to:
The Spaniard said:
All,
FFG does not announce our releases until we know when they can be released, and until we can speak intelligently about what will go in them.
The fear that FFG will not be supporting RT is unfounded, we have several books in the works and we have full time staff working every day to bring those products to you.
The Emperor Protects.
cP
FFGI took it to mean that the person speaking was doing so on behalf of the company producing the books.
I realise there are NDA's etc, but those are set by FFG who can change or disregard them at will.
If FFG can say there are books coming out, then saying what they are isn't really a step too far.
-
Jenk said:
This thread has started down a tangent it seems. Whether or not the Creatures Anathema is strictly compatible or not doesn't really matter. What does matter is the fact that the Creatures Anathema is a useful book for Rogue Trader players, and even if I lacked Dark Heresy I would still purchase it.
Once again I would like to say thanks to those involved in the production of the game for stopping by and giving us what information you are allowed to pass on. It is always great to see you all involved in the community.
Signoftheserpent, I don't wish to offend.... but you are becoming a bit of a one man band, and the music isn't that good.... I understand your want for information (I certainly share it!), but sometimes you just need to be patient.
Patient?
FFG just posted comitting themselves to their customers saying they are working on material.
But they can't tell us what that material is?
That doesn't ring true at all.
-
What is your point exactly?
-
Wow. Just...wow.
Noone is ranting. I am simply stating a fact. I don't really see the relevance or use of talking about what is the exact and precise definition of the word. It's fairly clear what I mean. CA requires the rules within DH. The rules within RT are not completely compatible with the systems that CA uses, thus it's not...compatible. Some stuff within might be, but that's not the same as saying that I can use CA with RT because that implies both RT and DH use the same systems. They don't. I have no idea why, but they don't. They might share a lot of stuff, but again that isn't the same thing.
The Vampire comparison isn't really accurate either because you are referring to the systems that separate the two games: ie vampires and werewolves have different abilites and thus different systems accordingly. That would be like saying that psykers and navigators should have the exact same powers. But the two games have two different systems for psychic powers. So there wont' be compatibility referencing RT for rules that call for DH in CA, for example.
So it's not accurate to say that DH books are compatible with RT or that both games are compatible.
They should be. I'm not sure what's going to happen when DW comes out with potentially a third fragmentation of the core systems. You woudl think having one set of rules between each game would be the smart way forward - 1 set of psychic rules for instance. But that's not what seems to be happening. Consequently support for each game wil necessarily be separate. (And that doesn't factor in the scaling between XP and costs for each type of character that plenty of others have commented on).
Announcing the next Rogue Trader book: Edge of the Abyss
in Rogue Trader
Posted
HappyDaze said:
signoftheserpent said:
N0-1_H3r3 said:
signoftheserpent said:
Well, it's a good job that we only write one book at a time, then; Edge of the Abyss was written after Into the Storm but before Battlefleet Koronus, so consequently that is the order in which they will be released.
signoftheserpent said:
Yes, it is. Fantasy Flight Games have decided that a setting book takes priority in the release schedule over a book on starships, hence the order in which they were developed.
What you consider to be a priority is not indicative of anything except your opinion, which is not shared by everyone.
Again, why is Edge considered more important than Battlefleet? I'm fully aware that people disagree, I can see that for myself. It doesn't tell me why the former is more important as a project than the latter. Especially to people that have taken the time on here to counsel, quite aggressively, that people who share my opinion should make up their own stuff. If that's the tack you wish to take then why do you want Edge to come out first. I have no problem with them writing such a book, only the prioritsation of projects.
Wait until it's closer to release and we see previews. At that point you'll see articles pop up where the FFG guys express a bit of the "why's" that went into the product. If their answers don't satisfy you, then you're on your own - they really have no need to explain what they produce, and if you agree or disagree with them you can show it with your purchasing or not purchasing of the product.
I find it extraordinary FFG are making decisions like this. They seem to lack a basic grasp of 40k, it's canon, and what their games are about. RT involves starship travel and combat. The core book provided as little as possible in this area. Why on earth would you marginalise a supplement covering this area?