Jump to content

Badlapje

Members
  • Content Count

    355
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

About Badlapje

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    -
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    Eeklo, Oost-Vlaanderen, Belgium
  1. ItsUncertainWho said: 4E is a very divisive system, one where I fall squarely in the "it's a steaming pile" camp. I found it to be nothing but a mind-numbingly boring, overly long and drawn out grind of combat that was built for power gamers not interested in anything but re-enacting WoW on the table top. Combats in DH/RT/DW I find to be fast paced, engaging, and exciting. +1 to all the above & Pathfinder ftw. As to WoW, never liked it myself. Boring as hell, it's far to much like my job: a lot of repetition with near zero thought or involvement. Just gathering shinies. "Oooh, look: a flashlight!"
  2. In all honesty, i do see Kain's point, just as i do see Nathan's point. Both are arguing two different sides of a coin in my mind. While i agree with Nathan that you shouldn't sacrifice everything for game-balance purposes, it shouldn't be so little either. There shouldn't be a conflict. Several of the very cool ideas (which often seem to originate with Nathan), just aren't playtested enough to my liking. I've pointed it out before: 40k needs a lot more playtesting before books hit the market. If i now read above that Nathan looses all contact once he's turned in his manuscript, i'm sorry but that's ridiculous. Even if he puts a ton of background info on everything he writes, it's still daft x1000 that you don't at least let the original author proofread what's become of the script he turned in. And i agree very strongly with Kain that there are far to many houserules needed for any GM who buys FFG 40k books. If the idea of the universe wasn't so strong, i wouldn't buy any of these books at all. There's a lot of points where FFG could be doing better business. Unfortunately however: the only one of them who seems interested to respond is Nathan who seems to have very little say in the endproduct. I love that he replies and clarifies. But i hate how FFG treats the community which gives them their money.
  3. For the love of god don't port in D&D rules to 40k. Are you barking mad? The whole feel of 40k goes out of the window if your PCs can't die from a single shot. I LOVE how that is possible, even if it took me a couple of sessions to clue on to the why of it (used to play D&D a lot myself, then pathfinder which btw is a lot better then 4E). 40k combat has a gritty realism to it which makes it so appealing. D&D runs of not being realistic at all, 40k runs of being realistic in a very dystopian way. It does not make sense that you can easily survive a hit from a lascannon. Those things are designed to punch through tanks, and you want your player to be able to take it not just once but several times? I'm sorry but to me you appear to simply not appreciate the setting and you're trying to blame it on the system. Yes PCs are heroes who are capable of extraordinary things, especially in DW. But even so, they are only mortal genhanced men. Take that idea and run with for Emperors sake. I'm hooked on 40k because i can die easily. I've no need for another rpg where your characters are so ridiculously damage-resistant that you need an entire A4 sheet (front and back) to keep track of your wounds during a session. We already got those, and it's fine. I should also point out that to nerf the system as you suggest would go entirely counter to the published fluff so far. Yes, SM can in fact die from a single hit. It's a big part of what makes them such great and convincing heroes. Best of the best, and yet still you can't just clumsily stumble in and expect to not die. Making stat blocks easier to read is fine by me, nerfing the system as you suggest: HELL NO!
  4. i can upload it for you if you want, send me an email at badlapje@yahoo.com and i'll host it at my site.
  5. jah, real helpful reply there. Sure he didn't think of that at all. Here's what you are looking for (note these aren't made by me, just rehosting them since megaupload is down): BFG paper ships Eldar Imperial Ork Minis
  6. are these available still somewhere? Megaupload being down and all...
  7. till it comes out it's impossible to judge. Yah, their sales pitch sounds the same, but i reserve judgement till i actually have the book in my hands and read it back to front. I'm definitely hoping it'll not be another mark of the xenos from DW though. If it's a mix between disciples of the dark gods and creatures anathema i'll be very happy. (at least: if they don't rehash what's printed elsewhere indeed).
  8. in the PbP run by bobh we were at PF 150 just before we set out again, we burned a lot of it to expand the fleet though, not sure where we are now, but at least 50 has gone, and i think it was more.
  9. that's how i took it, and i share the sentiment!
  10. reply from FFG: "You are correct, the reference to "Ferocious Assault" in the advancement table for the Furioso Librarian in First Founding was, indeed, intended to be "Furious Assault." We appreciate you bringing that to our attention. "
  11. i'm hoping you were sarcastic there The FFG reply to that question (i asked it in a followup mail was): "I can't give any specifics, unfortunately, simply because I don't know. Sorry I can't be more helpful on the matter of a timetable." So hopefully that'll be soon, but with the above answer in mind i'm not inclined to be all that hopeful.
  12. can you upload them elsewhere too? Megaupload is down atm
  13. to be honest, i doubt it. I asked when it was due and no information could be given... in my experience that tends to mean not any time soon. Tad annoying as my question didn't get answered.
  14. got this reply today: "Good eye, and good question. This information will be included in the next edition of the Rogue Trader Errata."
  15. got this reply to a rules question today: "Good eye, and good question. This information will be included in the next edition of the Rogue Trader Errata."
×
×
  • Create New...