Jump to content

MaliciousOnion

Members
  • Content Count

    142
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by MaliciousOnion

  1. I don't get it. Are women more predisposed to be on the cutting edge of traditional roleplaying game mechanics?
  2. Aptitudes don't give the power to the GM, they keep it within the ruleset. A GM saying no is a very different thing.
  3. Social skills can always be used to give bonuses to subsequent Influence tests, particularly for large things. Think of it as the haggling before the transaction.
  4. I want to point out that, statistically, a 50% chance to hit in TT (i.e. 4+) is exactly the same as a 50% chance to hit in DH, regardless of number of hits.
  5. C'mon, that was an easy one. Let me make this sarcasm thing easier for you to understand: next time I'm being sarcastic, I'll underline it. By the way, I really like your posting. (Seriously though, my point was that your attempt to JUDGE BY THIS THREAD was flawed and shouldn't have occurred.)
  6. I just did a census of every single person alive and can confirm that GauntZero and MILLANDSON are the only two people in the entire world who like the new presentation. (I like it, too.)
  7. I'm no game designer but I imagine there's potential problems in combat when adding psychic powers (including navigator powers) and/or vehicles (including space ships). Sure, these things work OK (mostly) in the individual rulesets but not so well together. I'm really confused as to how you think that FFG can just mash five separate rulesets together and call it a day.
  8. I just wanted to point out that I think this is a terrible idea, forcing prospective players (ie. us) to buy a minimum of two books just to play the game. Even if the individual books are cheaper, even if they're packaged in a starter bundle, there's a chance you'll alienate new players through perceived complexity. Ideally, you either have each module stand on its own (much like the current games as a whole, except have them work together properly), or you have a base core rulebook that is playable on its own across a broad but shallow range of settings, then additional splatbooks delve down into finer detail (like any single current game). Like cps says, it's not just a matter of fixing characteristics or psychic powers or advancement, etc. You need to make sure that every element works with every other element, for every possible scenario. It's not impossible, as I said, just very time- and resource-consuming. Which means FFG need to divert those resources from maintaining their current lines in order to create this hypothetical universal ruleset, and while they're doing that, they're not generating revenue from new products in the current lines.
  9. There's no way a unified system would work with either the system as it currently is, or a moderately modified system. It would require extensive re-writing of the rules, across all aspects. Then there'd be an inordinate amount of testing to ensure everything works properly and scales well. It's probably more effort than FFG's willing to dedicate for a system that may or may not be more profitable than what they've currently got - not to mention the costs involved in developing such a game.
  10. So you're judging the rules without having actually used them? Not to mention your argument is grossly subjective. Also, I'm not sure what you mean by an obduction report. According to the Oxford dictionary, obduction is "the sideways and upwards movement of the edge of a crustal plate over the margin of an adjacent plate".
  11. Exactly! What I think they should do is publicly release the rules in an unfinished state (let's call this a beta state, in honour of the alternative video format from the 1980s). Of course, to protect their intellectual property, they should only release it for a nominal fee, say $20. Concurrent to this they could run some sort of discussion group (to borrow from the ancient Romans, let's call it a forum). My idea is that prospective consumers can buy this beta version and test it out with their friends, then go to the forum (which could be made available online to facilitate global interaction) and discuss their thoughts and ideas. FFG could then take these discussions and make changes to the beta version, perhaps in incremental releases. What do you think?
  12. This is my opinion, and I stand beside it. If anyone takes insult from it, methinks they protest too loudly. I've always said that someone's opinion can't be wrong. I stand corrected.
  13. A loss of fluff potential? Before they had absolutely no character, they were just midless automatons bent on destroying everything. They could have easily been a grey goo type of threat and they would have had the same level of personality. Basically, by making a race of xenos unknowable, you're making it difficult for some people to define their motivations. By giving them character, a person can look at them and say, "ok, I know what they want and I know how I can use that." I'm not saying that everyone's going to face this problem of an unknowable xenos race but a lot more people will be able to understand a knowable one.
  14. Seconding MILLANDSON's anger at your posting. Had you ever considered that the alpha playtesters had broken the ruleset and had reported it to FFG, but FFG hadn't done anything about it?
  15. This is where an online ruleset would come into its own, but we've done that argument.
  16. Maybe I should've said objectively, rather than empirically. My fault. If these forums have taught me one thing (they haven't), it's that the success of the 2e ruleset vs the 1e ruleset is entirely dependent on the perception and opinion of the players. I'm not sure a new ruleset could ever be objectively better, only subjectively. I agree with the rest of your post, though.
  17. Sorry, but in all honesty despite how much I hated the wound system in the beta I still dislike how things just switch to Only War. It is just company got to do what a company got to do. Fantasy Flight wanted to do this system, but found out it was not going to be a wise investment so they switch back to OW which is proven to work. My response was aimed at the original poster of this thread because he refuses to get it. Instead of just accepting it and moving forward like any reasonable person would had done for a game this guy decided to be a whiny spoiled brat. While acting like a whiny spoiled brat he demanded that can never happen. He has the beta and the updates. He got every thing he need. Sorry it didn't pan out the way that a lot of people wanted it which includes myself, but he has no reason to post this thread at all. He is just being a baby. Surprisingly, the only person whining about anything, and acting like a child, are those complaining about the OP. If you disagree, just ignore the thread. With the beta effectively stalled until the end of November, people are becoming bored and restless. I agree with the sentiment of the OP, though I found it passive-agressive whiny. The content is all there for someone with a bit of time to compile into their very own version. I've already partly done so, although I won't be sharing.
  18. You've obviously never been to a football match. edit: \/ I'm pretty sure there's been Nurgle orks, too.
  19. I don't think it's really an accurate analysis of the problem. Personally, I'd give up on backwards compatibility without much fuss if it meant playing a better, slicker game. The problem is, instead of that, I was offered something that looked like FFG found it scribbled on the napkins of a deceased Rolemaster writer and hastily put together into a semblance of a game. Exact opposite of "better, slicker game" if you ask me, and they still expected I give up backwards compatibility for that. No can do, sir, I'm not giving up everything for nothing. If FFG comes up with a new engine that I find good, I'll gladly play it, even if it means my previous collection of 1e books become nothing more than shelf decoration. Since they don't seem to be up to the task, I'd much rather play the game I know is good for me and my group. It is your opinion that 2e is worse; it is not empirically worse than 1e. That is exactly what I said. I didn't say anything about backwards compatibility (incidentally, I think the argument for backwards compatibility is a fallacious cop-out).
  20. Don't joke about this. It's a serious affliction that too many people suffer from. While there are a lot of similarities between D&D and DH, two key differences stand out to me: Fantasy Flight Games aren't being morons about releasing 2e. Sure, people might think the ruleset is bad for reasons, but I don't think anyone's saying FFG are acting maliciously The Intellectual Property of Warhammer 40,000 ultimately belongs to Games Workshop and only they decide who gets to publish content for it. To date, FFG's track record with the IP has been pretty good[citation needed] and I can't see GW deciding to let a second company run a competing game against FFG. Personally, I generally like what FFG have done with 2e, with a few exceptions. I don't agree that there should be change for the sake of change; however, I also don't agree that FFG should simply release Only War: Dark Heresy edition. Like others have said, why would I purchase something I've already got? Much of the debate as to whether the current 2e rules are successful come down to personal preference, and much of that personal preference comes down to whether you like the idea of change or not.
  21. I think I've thought of some suitable rules, tell me what you think. First, whenever handling paper, a character will need to make a Trivial (+60) Agility test to see if they get cut. If they do, they take special damage as per a table that lists paper sharpness (e.g. normal paper deals 1 damage, premium Administratum paper deals 2 damage); this damage will be tracked separately. For every (10 x Toughness) wounds they receive, they gain the Blood Loss (X) condition, where X is the number of paper cut wounds they've received divided by (10 x Toughness), rounded down. Paper cut wounds can be healed through a Trivial (+60) First Aid test, with the number of wounds removed being equal to the DoS on the test.
  22. Considering the maul is already Sapping (2), I'd say it's not too powerful. Personally, I'd prefer if the effect was more powerful. edit: oops, forgot to sign my post so you can all tell who wrote this masterpiece of prose. -MaliciousOnion
×
×
  • Create New...