Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Tarkand

Game Balance: In Hindsight

Recommended Posts

ak-73 said:

The theme as laid out is page 132, first paragraph of the 5E rulebook. If you want to go by current fluff, that is it. I find FFG does an adequate job of reflecting this fluff and balancing it against the needs of a RPG.
I find nothing on that page that in any way conflicts what GW has published in the previous years or what I myself have stated. The problem seems to be that some Marine players are not satisfied with "just" being the best, they also want that nobody will stand a chance against them, ever, regardless the numbers or circumstances. Which is a bit funny, considering the setting would probably look a lot less grimdark would the Astartes really be that unstoppable as you make them sound.

 

ak-73 said:

Question: do BL marines as in Iron Snakes (where a handful of Marines kill Orks in the hundreds) reflect that theme or not? I would say they do
And you do have the right to that opinion. ;)

 

Oh, and I just got my copy of WD 292 in the mail (I am in the process of expanding my collection on SoB fluff) - if anyone thinks that this passage from the RT rulebook is outdated, I recommend reading the designer's notes in that issue of White Dwarf, for Andy Hoare makes it sound differently there (as is also reflected in the actual codex and the aforementioned CJ article). Not that I expect people to change their views, but hey, I had to point it out.

 

As I said, I don't want to get drawn into an argument here. I know very well the opinion that a lot of posters here has on how awesome their precious Marines should be, regardless of the technical details or the descriptions of other factions that might fight at their side or against them. If you feel that this Movie Marines approach is worth sacrificing the compatibility with both the core descriptions in the studio material as well as any chance for proper crossovers like they do happen and, apparently, game balance as well ... go ahead and have fun. It's your game, after all.

If anyone is interested discussing fluff, feel free to drop me a message. I love talking about that stuff if the interest is genuine. But I won't get into another pillow-fight based purely on selective reading / hearsay (as evidenced in this very thread regarding the claims of the Movie Marines article) and personal preferences, for that will lead us nowhere and will be a pure waste of time, as we should all know by now. Cheery-bye!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lynata said:

ak-73 said:

The theme as laid out is page 132, first paragraph of the 5E rulebook. If you want to go by current fluff, that is it. I find FFG does an adequate job of reflecting this fluff and balancing it against the needs of a RPG.

I find nothing on that page that in any way conflicts what GW has published in the previous years or what I myself have stated. The problem seems to be that some Marine players are not satisfied with "just" being the best, they also want that nobody will stand a chance against them, ever, regardless the numbers or circumstances. Which is a bit funny, considering the setting would probably look a lot less grimdark would the Astartes really be that unstoppable as you make them sound.

 

I was referring to the discussion of "Why Marines? They ain't better" in this thread. It has been postulated that normal humans can be just as good. No Marines are not god-like but they are super-human.

Who wants to make them unstoppable? Not even Wolfie wants that, after all there need to be challenges in a RPG. He just wants 5 marines to stomp entire armies, taking worlds single-handedly. And noone else here would take it to such extremes.

That said, Lynata, you have to answer how much chance mortals should stand against a Marine before it becomes apparent to everyone that the process of creating a marine isn't worth the effort.

Lynata said:

ak-73 said:

Question: do BL marines as in Iron Snakes (where a handful of Marines kill Orks in the hundreds) reflect that theme or not? I would say they do

And you do have the right to that opinion. ;)

 

 

Oh, and I just got my copy of WD 292 in the mail (I am in the process of expanding my collection on SoB fluff) - if anyone thinks that this passage from the RT rulebook is outdated, I recommend reading the designer's notes in that issue of White Dwarf, for Andy Hoare makes it sound differently there (as is also reflected in the actual codex and the aforementioned CJ article). Not that I expect people to change their views, but hey, I had to point it out.

 

As I said, I don't want to get drawn into an argument here. I know very well the opinion that a lot of posters here has on how awesome their precious Marines should be, regardless of the technical details or the descriptions of other factions that might fight at their side or against them. If you feel that this Movie Marines approach is worth sacrificing the compatibility with both the core descriptions in the studio material as well as any chance for proper crossovers like they do happen and, apparently, game balance as well ... go ahead and have fun. It's your game, after all.

You know my suggestion on how to bring things together. I don't see those sacrifice any of the above. Also proper is a highly subjective term. :)

Lynata said:

If anyone is interested discussing fluff, feel free to drop me a message. I love talking about that stuff if the interest is genuine. But I won't get into another pillow-fight based purely on selective reading / hearsay (as evidenced in this very thread regarding the claims of the Movie Marines article) and personal preferences, for that will lead us nowhere and will be a pure waste of time, as we should all know by now. Cheery-bye!

 

You avoided my question though: do Abnett's Iron Snakes "properly" reflect page 132 and page 5 of the Codex SM or not? Are novel marines in violation of current edition fluff? Are they too powerful? Probably not.

Your disagreement is with regards to the equipment of the Astartes in 40K RP. We are only 1 or 2 damage points apart there. You draw on established lore, I say that the increased detail of a RPG highlights some of the flaws in established lore.

Why not create 2 or 3  Guardsmen(Stormtroopers) in Power Armour with Boltgun rather than 1 Astartes?

Your established lore has to answer convincingly why one should bother to create Marines. Why is the superhuman aspect worth it when 3 Stormtroopers with PA and Godwyn can do the same. Or more.

 

Alex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I knew I shouldn't have posted here... But I guess I owe you an answer. :P

ak-73 said:

You avoided my question though: do Abnett's Iron Snakes "properly" reflect page 132 and page 5 of the Codex SM or not? Are novel marines in violation of current edition fluff? Are they too powerful? Probably not.
I have not read the novel, so I hesitate to comment on its portrayal of Marines. What I can say is that I know that Dan Abnett's Marines at least break studio canon in that they are much higher (I recommend listening to the 4th GW podcast - Jes Goodwin actually jokes about how novel writers make them bigger with every book) and that the internet thinks he has quite a reputation for taking liberties with the fluff.

But: a "handful" against "several hundred"? I would say it sounds fishy, at least if it's a straight "team vs army" and not stretched over several encounters. That's all I could really comment without reading the exact wording.

That said, I'm sure you know Rogal Dorn's saying: "Give me a hundred Space Marines, or a thousand other troops."

 

ak-73 said:

Your disagreement is with regards to the equipment of the Astartes in 40K RP. We are only 1 or 2 damage points apart there. You draw on established lore, I say that the increased detail of a RPG highlights some of the flaws in established lore.
Only that your increased detail of FFG's RPG is in contradiction with the increased detail of GW's own Inquisitor RPG, where such discrepancy is miraculously absent. Perhaps because decades of studio material have established equality? Maybe because someone like, say, an Inquisitor does have the resources and connections to requisition Astartes-level equipment? Because the Astartes technology is, in the end, coming from the very same source? And because the power and uniqueness comes from their biology, not the gear? ...

Also, we are not "only 1 or 2 damage points apart", as you well know.

Alas, I don't see the point in debating it. You know my suggestion on how to bring things together: Play like it was intended by GW. If you prefer sticking to DW's artificially increased gap because you enjoy being more badass than required as per the fluff, have fun playing Marines with nothing else but Marines, I guess. You wanted to have that cake, you gotta eat it too. Including all those apparently not-so-tasty chunks that have been touched upon in this thread and others, such as uncontrollable damage spikes or a certain difficulty to think of challenging encounters.

It's good that you at least admit that this RPG is not entirely in line with the studio canon, by the way. That's a huge step forward in our discussions and actually not more than I could ask for. As I said, we all have our preferences, and here we all have the opportunity to play the games how we want so that everybody can have their own fun.

 

ak-73 said:

Your established lore has to answer convincingly why one should bother to create Marines. Why is the superhuman aspect worth it when 3 Stormtroopers with PA and Godwyn can do the same. Or more.
Because the Space Marines, if you've read all of their background, specialize in applying the maximum amount of force on the smallest spot possible. They are shock troops, not line infantry. They are the scalpel, the Guard is the hammer. And at times, you just need someone who is badass enough to be individually superior in a one-on-one against the many horrors the enemies of Mankind have to offer.

By the logic you just proposed, the Imperial Guard could just as well not bother with the training and equipment necessary to equip 10.000 Storm Troopers if the same task can be completed by 100.000 conscripts.

But this ties in with what I have commented on before. The extremely narrow angle in which many Marine players seem to look at the discrepancies, in that they only see two things: AP value and damage. This is not what the equipment is about, and it's not what makes the difference. If you have to simplify it so much that you ignore all those nifty tools and gadgets - not to mention the genetical enhancements and the implants - that may be useful to the Marine and that give him an edge in the appropriate situations, then it's no wonder that crossovers seem like a bad idea. If you insist that Space Marines need to be better at everything, in everything, at all times and in all situations, the two of us are just not working on the same basis.

 

That's all I can say on the subject, really, so this will be my last post in this thread. I would not want to drag it out to an endless debate similar to the bolter discussion (even though I have found new canon arguments in the meantime for that one as well :P) because it's just not worth it, for any of us. I should probably admit that these posts here were directed more towards readers who are new to the material and as such may be easily misled by false claims like "Movie Marines = accurate", given that they likely do not have access to the original source (hint: it can easily be found on the web). I'm fairly sure that the two of us will not move an inch from the positions we have taken.

Still, I bid you a nice day and enjoyable games.

 

PS: For the sake of completion, here's a bit from the Codex Angels of Death:

"The most important element in the construction of a suit of Space Marine power armour is the large ceramite plates which provide the main form of protection against enemy attack. Individual plates can be up to an inch thick and have a special 'honeycomb' design which helps to dissipate energy and localise any damage suffered by the suit. Against most small arms, the armour reduces the chance of injury by between 50-85%, and it provides some form of protection against all except the most powerful weapons encountered on the battlefields of the 41st millennium."

But I guess this material will be considered too old by you, despite it never having been retconned. So ... enjoy your invulnerability against AP3 Hellguns. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing stops you from running a game with homebrew rules where Sisters of Battler have Astartes grade equipment Lynata. Even as a player, I'm sure most GMs would relent before your reasoning steeped in established lore. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lynata said:

 

But: a "handful" against "several hundred"? I would say it sounds fishy, at least if it's a straight "team vs army" and not stretched over several encounters. That's all I could really comment without reading the exact wording.

 

Wow.You really hate marines, don't you? 

There have been literally *hundreds* of engagements in human history where a handful of men whupped several hundred. And yet gift them with the finest weapons and armour, train them since childhood, supercharge their physique and give them a few hundred years practice, and such a performance becomes 'fishy'? Absurd.

And is it really everyone else who has an inflexible opinion?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should add that quite a few of those ultimately ended with the handful being killed to the last man or come pretty close to it. And a certain group of 300 warriors also had a few thousand soldiers lending them a hand... they were all still critically outnumbered though. :P

That said, Astartes also have armor, weapons and tactics that revolve around that same notion, that they'll be almost always outnumbered by the enemy. It's not like they win 100% of the time either, chapters are known to die out or become critically undermaned on occasion due to last stands gone incredibly wrong. Thinking of them as Mary Sues clad in plot power armor with overpowered guns is selling them a bit short.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lynata said:

I knew I shouldn't have posted here... But I guess I owe you an answer. :P

ak-73 said:

You avoided my question though: do Abnett's Iron Snakes "properly" reflect page 132 and page 5 of the Codex SM or not? Are novel marines in violation of current edition fluff? Are they too powerful? Probably not.

I have not read the novel, so I hesitate to comment on its portrayal of Marines. What I can say is that I know that Dan Abnett's Marines at least break studio canon in that they are much higher (I recommend listening to the 4th GW podcast - Jes Goodwin actually jokes about how novel writers make them bigger with every book) and that the internet thinks he has quite a reputation for taking liberties with the fluff.

 

But: a "handful" against "several hundred"? I would say it sounds fishy, at least if it's a straight "team vs army" and not stretched over several encounters. That's all I could really comment without reading the exact wording.

That said, I'm sure you know Rogal Dorn's saying: "Give me a hundred Space Marines, or a thousand other troops."

As a Crimson Fist player I surely do. That said, it's old fluff. Let's look at current fluff:

Codex Space Marines:
"A Space Marine is no mere man. He is a superhuman being, born of scientific manipulation and genetic modification, as different from humankind as steel is from iron. Through years of the most exhaustive and rigorous training, the rough firmament of the Space Marine's mind and body are forged into that of a warrior supreme, with battle-skills and faculty of reason that far surpass those of the common man. Thus transfigured, the Space Marine is forevermore separate from those he protects. He is no longer mortal in the truest sense, for a part of his heritage is now that of the immortal Emperor, and a spark of that same majesty flows within his veins."

5E rulebook:
"The Adeptus Astartes are the most powerful of all human warriors. In many respects they are not really human at all, but superhuman beings forged by genetic modification, arduous training and the rigours of strict discipline. Space Marines are the embodiment of the Emperor's will - their roaring boltguns bring death to the enemies of Mankind, their presence in battle the difference between life and death. They are the Angels of Death, and none can stand against them."

And:

"...Though they are few in number, the valour dand dedication of the Space Marines is as without measure as the superhuman might they wield - without them humanity would have long since fallen into darkness."

 

Superhuman. If one Space Marine was really as good as 10 normal soliders only, there was no point in having a million of them. This is all good and fine for a tabletop where the backstory is just a trapping. In a RPG it's a vital part of the game and logical inconsistencies become a painful issue.

 

 

Lynata said:

ak-73 said:

Your disagreement is with regards to the equipment of the Astartes in 40K RP. We are only 1 or 2 damage points apart there. You draw on established lore, I say that the increased detail of a RPG highlights some of the flaws in established lore.

Only that your increased detail of FFG's RPG is in contradiction with the increased detail of GW's own Inquisitor RPG, where such discrepancy is miraculously absent.

Different game, different interpretation.

Lynata said:

Perhaps because decades of studio material have established equality? Maybe because someone like, say, an Inquisitor does have the resources and connections to requisition Astartes-level equipment? Because the Astartes technology is, in the end, coming from the very same source? And because the power and uniqueness comes from their biology, not the gear? ...

We have been there before and the arguments have been exchanged.

Lynata said:

 

Also, we are not "only 1 or 2 damage points apart", as you well know.

 

You might want to check if your memory does not fail you here.

Lynata said:

Alas, I don't see the point in debating it. You know my suggestion on how to bring things together: Play like it was intended by GW. If you prefer sticking to DW's artificially increased gap because you enjoy being more badass than required as per the fluff, have fun playing Marines with nothing else but Marines, I guess.

 

All over the globe people are playing with FFG rules and they do include non-Astartes in their parties. Take a look at various internet forums, platforms, etc.

 

Lynata said:

You wanted to have that cake, you gotta eat it too. Including all those apparently not-so-tasty chunks that have been touched upon in this thread and others, such as uncontrollable damage spikes or a certain difficulty to think of challenging encounters.

That's the result of a system not being designed from the get-go with such high power levels in mind. Ross Watson didn't have the time to scale the games properly, as far as I can deduce - because that stuff does cost a lot of time play-testing. Now after a year issues have become apparent. Does that mean the original vision of Marine power levels was mad? No, just that the implementation was not well callibrated.

 

Lynata said:

It's good that you at least admit that this RPG is not entirely in line with the studio canon, by the way. That's a huge step forward in our discussions and actually not more than I could ask for. As I said, we all have our preferences, and here we all have the opportunity to play the games how we want so that everybody can have their own fun.

May I be honest? You come across as a bit embittered by our previous discussion. Now that impression might be totally false, it's just an impression after all, but if so it was certainly not my intention to hurt your feelings. I would like you to know that.

That said, let me add that I still don't believe in there being a strict 40K canon; it's subject to interpretation and re-interpretation, changing depending on the demands of the medium. There is a core that can't be violated.

One thing is certain: according to Games Workshop SoBs having the exact same gear quality as Space Marines is not part of untouchable canon. They have been giving their consent to FFG introducing a different 40K interpretation namely one with Astartes and mortal weapon levels.

Lynata said:

ak-73 said:

Your established lore has to answer convincingly why one should bother to create Marines. Why is the superhuman aspect worth it when 3 Stormtroopers with PA and Godwyn can do the same. Or more.

Because the Space Marines, if you've read all of their background, specialize in applying the maximum amount of force on the smallest spot possible. They are shock troops, not line infantry. They are the scalpel, the Guard is the hammer. And at times, you just need someone who is badass enough to be individually superior in a one-on-one against the many horrors the enemies of Mankind have to offer.

That's not an answer and you know it. Why fly in 3 squads of Astartes instead of a company of Stormtroopers or SoBs in Power Armour wielding the same Godwyn patterns?

As a side remark, and I touched on this briefly before, which impact can 30 Astartes have in a ground conflict where the enemy has its 50 million solider stretched out over a frontline of 4,000 km length and where HQ has installed redundant communication systems, a decentralized command structure and is ready to overwhelm the outnumbered loyalist forces through a general advance.

Let me be honest: the impact of any single special forces unit in a World War are bound to be negligible in most circumstances. (That's because fiction authors have no sense of scale.) The whole thing is a bit retarded. 40K is based on teenage boyish fantasies of battlefield glory. Tell a WW2 veteran about it and they'll go "Yeah, right". Look at the destruction that allied bombings did to Germany. And still Germany kept on fighting spread all over Europe.

But that's just as a side remark.

 

Lynata said:

 

By the logic you just proposed, the Imperial Guard could just as well not bother with the training and equipment necessary to equip 10.000 Storm Troopers if the same task can be completed by 100.000 conscripts.

If it can and it doesn't cost more ressources, then yes.

Lynata said:

But this ties in with what I have commented on before. The extremely narrow angle in which many Marine players seem to look at the discrepancies, in that they only see two things: AP value and damage. This is not what the equipment is about, and it's not what makes the difference. If you have to simplify it so much that you ignore all those nifty tools and gadgets - not to mention the genetical enhancements and the implants - that may be useful to the Marine and that give him an edge in the appropriate situations, then it's no wonder that crossovers seem like a bad idea. If you insist that Space Marines need to be better at everything, in everything, at all times and in all situations, the two of us are just not working on the same basis.


 

Better than a normal human warrior? Yes. At everything and in everything. After all they have "faculty of reason that far surpass those of the common man" (given that Astartes should get an additional +10 to Int). (The point is that non-Astartes PCs shouldn't be normal human warriors but Black Library protagonist tier characters.)

Otoh, Stormtroopers can also be given "nifty tools and gadgets". Then you compensate for the lack of organs through increased numbers. 3 Stormtroopers instead of 1 Marine. Done.

Lynata said:

That's all I can say on the subject, really, so this will be my last post in this thread. I would not want to drag it out to an endless debate similar to the bolter discussion (even though I have found new canon arguments in the meantime for that one as well :P) because it's just not worth it, for any of us. I should probably admit that these posts here were directed more towards readers who are new to the material and as such may be easily misled by false claims like "Movie Marines = accurate", given that they likely do not have access to the original source (hint: it can easily be found on the web). I'm fairly sure that the two of us will not move an inch from the positions we have taken.

I have given 3 quotes from current Space Marine fluff on the current vision GW has of its Space Marines. Super-humans. Based on that you will have to live with that claim: Movie Marines are not 'accurate' (because there is no fixed definition how good Astartes really are in GW's vision/fluff) but they are much closer to the current fluff on Marines than TT Marines.

Lynata said:

Still, I bid you a nice day and enjoyable games.

And the same to you, Lynata. :)

Lynata said:

 

PS: For the sake of completion, here's a bit from the Codex Angels of Death:

"The most important element in the construction of a suit of Space Marine power armour is the large ceramite plates which provide the main form of protection against enemy attack. Individual plates can be up to an inch thick and have a special 'honeycomb' design which helps to dissipate energy and localise any damage suffered by the suit. Against most small arms, the armour reduces the chance of injury by between 50-85%, and it provides some form of protection against all except the most powerful weapons encountered on the battlefields of the 41st millennium."

But I guess this material will be considered too old by you, despite it never having been retconned. So ... enjoy your invulnerability against AP3 Hellguns. ;)

I do not know what the quote is supposed to tell me. But I can tell you that I have my own conversion chart for converting stats from 40K TT to 40K RP. If there is a significant deviation from it, it will get simply adapted:

www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp

According to that the Hellgun should have around AP 8 (AP 7-9; and that's how I would run it). It's not a super duper Marine killer but it cuts through PA as if it was not there. Now do you blame FFG for the weapon not getting properly statted with DW in mind?

 

Alex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jkilla41 said:

I just think Lynata and Ak-73 just like to fight alot.

-J

 

Well, she's on my friend list and as far as I am concerned she is staying there. Don't know how she feels about it though.

 

Alex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LockLock said:

I should add that quite a few of those ultimately ended with the handful being killed to the last man or come pretty close to it. And a certain group of 300 warriors also had a few thousand soldiers lending them a hand... they were all still critically outnumbered though. :P

That said, Astartes also have armor, weapons and tactics that revolve around that same notion, that they'll be almost always outnumbered by the enemy. It's not like they win 100% of the time either, chapters are known to die out or become critically undermaned on occasion due to last stands gone incredibly wrong. Thinking of them as Mary Sues clad in plot power armor with overpowered guns is selling them a bit short.

LockLock said:

I should add that quite a few of those ultimately ended with the handful being killed to the last man or come pretty close to it. And a certain group of 300 warriors also had a few thousand soldiers lending them a hand... they were all still critically outnumbered though. :P

That said, Astartes also have armor, weapons and tactics that revolve around that same notion, that they'll be almost always outnumbered by the enemy. It's not like they win 100% of the time either, chapters are known to die out or become critically undermaned on occasion due to last stands gone incredibly wrong. Thinking of them as Mary Sues clad in plot power armor with overpowered guns is selling them a bit short.

Keep in mind that, had the Greeks not been betrayed, there's a very good chance that the Persians would not have been able to take Thermopylae even with their overwhelming numbers advantage.

For an example of a fight where a handful of soldiers held off a vastly superior force, check out the story of Yakov Pavlov and his platoon holding off the German army during the Battle of Stalingrad.

Space Marines aren't perfect and they can certainly die, but they should be the toughest people in any fight (toughest humans, anyway) apart from some elite psyker or other special person.  I know realism doesn't play a great role in 40k, but I just don't see the Imperium going to the trouble of keeping the Astartes around if they aren't seriously ahead of the rest of humanity's forces.  The risk (not to mention potential losses) are just too great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brand said:

 

Keep in mind that, had the Greeks not been betrayed, there's a very good chance that the Persians would not have been able to take Thermopylae even with their overwhelming numbers advantage.

For an example of a fight where a handful of soldiers held off a vastly superior force, check out the story of Yakov Pavlov and his platoon holding off the German army during the Battle of Stalingrad.

Space Marines aren't perfect and they can certainly die, but they should be the toughest people in any fight (toughest humans, anyway) apart from some elite psyker or other special person.  I know realism doesn't play a great role in 40k, but I just don't see the Imperium going to the trouble of keeping the Astartes around if they aren't seriously ahead of the rest of humanity's forces.  The risk (not to mention potential losses) are just too great.

True, the Greeks were betrayed, but remember that such deceitful tactics are also a part of warfare. It's a testament to their strategical acumen and fighting prowess that the Persians were forced to "play smart" though. ;)

And I'll be sure to check that story out, as despite my remarks I really enjoy reading about "heroic last stands". :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LockLock said:

Brand said:

 

 

Keep in mind that, had the Greeks not been betrayed, there's a very good chance that the Persians would not have been able to take Thermopylae even with their overwhelming numbers advantage.

For an example of a fight where a handful of soldiers held off a vastly superior force, check out the story of Yakov Pavlov and his platoon holding off the German army during the Battle of Stalingrad.

Space Marines aren't perfect and they can certainly die, but they should be the toughest people in any fight (toughest humans, anyway) apart from some elite psyker or other special person.  I know realism doesn't play a great role in 40k, but I just don't see the Imperium going to the trouble of keeping the Astartes around if they aren't seriously ahead of the rest of humanity's forces.  The risk (not to mention potential losses) are just too great.

 

 

True, the Greeks were betrayed, but remember that such deceitful tactics are also a part of warfare. It's a testament to their strategical acumen and fighting prowess that the Persians were forced to "play smart" though. ;)

And I'll be sure to check that story out, as despite my remarks I really enjoy reading about "heroic last stands". :D

 

Sorry for going slightly off topic but heroic last stands...Battle of Mirbat is an interesting tale:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Mirbat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lynata said:

That said, licensed material such as novels isn't "canon", as much as lots of people (and I've been one of them for quite some time) believe this. See my current signature or this thread where I'm throwing in a couple more quotes from people who actually work/ed for the company.

 

Which is entirely wrong according to several other quotes and threads spread across the internet, as people in positions of authority at Games Workshop have previously said that anything and everything written for and licensed by GW is canon.

That includes Black Library and FFG products.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GW is full of it, they also say that their codex are balanced!

Yeah the new army so always over par and then gets nurfed as sson a the New army is out...

in the end it's an Epic scale game, it makes little realistic sense but it's just a game.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MILLANDSON said:

Lynata said:

That said, licensed material such as novels isn't "canon", as much as lots of people (and I've been one of them for quite some time) believe this. See my current signature or this thread where I'm throwing in a couple more quotes from people who actually work/ed for the company.

 

 

 

 

Which is entirely wrong according to several other quotes and threads spread across the internet, as people in positions of authority at Games Workshop have previously said that anything and everything written for and licensed by GW is canon.

That includes Black Library and FFG products.

 

Actually the novels are not Cannon. We have a couple quotes from former GW employees which may or may not be relevant to prove that. However the Black industries stuff is arguably cannon. As they probably didn't operate the same way that the black library does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RogalDorn said:

MILLANDSON said:

 

Lynata said:

That said, licensed material such as novels isn't "canon", as much as lots of people (and I've been one of them for quite some time) believe this. See my current signature or this thread where I'm throwing in a couple more quotes from people who actually work/ed for the company.

 

 

 

 

Which is entirely wrong according to several other quotes and threads spread across the internet, as people in positions of authority at Games Workshop have previously said that anything and everything written for and licensed by GW is canon.

That includes Black Library and FFG products.

 

 

 

Actually the novels are not Cannon. We have a couple quotes from former GW employees which may or may not be relevant to prove that. However the Black industries stuff is arguably cannon. As they probably didn't operate the same way that the black library does.

Yes, they are.  At least in as much as there isn't a single "canon" that can be supported.  Everything is lies and propaganda, and what one person (or player) holds true may not be the same as what someone else does...and everyone might be wrong.  Basically, it's an excuse for why official material can be contradicting.

"Keep in mind Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000 are worlds where half truths, lies, propaganda, politics, legends and myths exist. The absolute truth which is implied when you talk about "canonical background" will never be known because of this. Everything we know about these worlds is from the viewpoints of people in them which are as a result incomplete and even sometimes incorrect. The truth is mutable, debatable and lost as the victors write the history...

Here's our standard line: Yes it's all official, but remember that we're reporting back from a time where stories aren't always true, or at least 100% accurate. if it has the 40K logo on it, it exists in the 40K universe. Or it was a legend that may well have happened. Or a rumour that may or may not have any truth behind it.

Let's put it another way: anything with a 40K logo on it is as official as any Codex... and at least as crammed full of rumours, distorted legends and half-truths."

Full quote here: carpealea.blogspot.com/2011/01/warhammer-40k-canon-or-conspiracy.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ak-73 said:

My thoughts precisely. And that is actually the part of GW that I like the most, much to the detriment of canon worshippers.

 

Alex

Same here, actually - it allows you to tweak your own individual games to the exact style and themes you want.

But yea, people going "it's not canon because of 'whatever reason they come up with because they don't like a novel/codex/etc'" - you are wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the picking and choosing of canon and selective quoting that makes me think that there's no point in arguing any more. Lynata basically doesn't like Space Marines being what they clearly are in the game universe (The best. By a considerable margin), and nothing is going to change that short of SoBs getting a stat-line that equals that of an Astartes and a formal statement from GW that says that Astartes aren't as good as any of the hype that they've had over the course of the 40+ books about them.

LockLock said:

I should add that quite a few of those ultimately ended with the handful being killed to the last man or come pretty close to it. And a certain group of 300 warriors also had a few thousand soldiers lending them a hand... they were all still critically outnumbered though. :P

Personal rant point:

Most crucially, the 700 Thespians who refused to leave with the other Greeks and stayed with the Spartans on the final day and were killed to a man. The Spartans went there knowing that they would die. They were full-time soldiers, and the best there was. The Thespians were none of these things, which -to my mind- made them far braver and greater heroes than the Spartans ever were. We all remember the Spartans, but to me it was the Thespians who had the most testicular fortitude.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Siranui said:

It's the picking and choosing of canon and selective quoting that makes me think that there's no point in arguing any more. Lynata basically doesn't like Space Marines being what they clearly are in the game universe (The best. By a considerable margin), and nothing is going to change that short of SoBs getting a stat-line that equals that of an Astartes and a formal statement from GW that says that Astartes aren't as good as any of the hype that they've had over the course of the 40+ books about them.

Agree 100%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find Lynata's viewpoint valid, to be honest, even though my preference is different.

Also it does create some conflicts with fluff: for example why should the Blood Ravens "acquire" a Bolt Pistol from Inquistion (implying strongly that it is a mortal-grade weapon)? Not a biggie but it's the kind of stuff that makes me go hmmm...

Really, my solution is and remains that Inq/IG Officer/SoB bolt weapons should be only a notch worse than Astartes grade weapons. Satisfies established lore well enough and takes into account Astartes really being able to handle simply bigger and more powerful weaponry.

 

Alex

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ak-73 said:

Also it does create some conflicts with fluff: for example why should the Blood Ravens "acquire" a Bolt Pistol from Inquistion (implying strongly that it is a mortal-grade weapon)? Not a biggie but it's the kind of stuff that makes me go hmmm... 

That's because:

1) The video games are a different source of canon than the RPG; and

2) Of all the sources of canon, the video games are the ones that tend to care least for the actual source material - notice how the Blood Ravens seem to have looted all of their relics and equipment from other chapters. It's got to the point that /tg/ have turned it into a meme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MILLANDSON said:

ak-73 said:

 

Also it does create some conflicts with fluff: for example why should the Blood Ravens "acquire" a Bolt Pistol from Inquistion (implying strongly that it is a mortal-grade weapon)? Not a biggie but it's the kind of stuff that makes me go hmmm... 

 

 

That's because:

1) The video games are a different source of canon than the RPG; and

2) Of all the sources of canon, the video games are the ones that tend to care least for the actual source material - notice how the Blood Ravens seem to have looted all of their relics and equipment from other chapters. It's got to the point that /tg/ have turned it into a meme.

 

You are not getting around that the DH 1d10+5 Bolter would have to be classified as S3 in the tabletop though, no? Which is why my suggestion would be to raise it by 2 points or so. Astartes are still better but now it could be seen as a S4 class weapon. Keep the 1d10+5 Bolters for cheap on the street stuff. Consider them poor quality if you will.

I don't buy that the Boltguns that my Scum can easily acquire at the next corner of the Sybellus underhive have even near the same quality as that of SoB standard issue.

S3 weapons hover around 1d10+4. S4 weapons hover around 2d10+4 or 1d10+9/10.

 

Alex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Not In Sample

You know which other warhammer products feel beholden to the wargame rules?

Thats right, none of them.

We should concentrate on making the coolest, most awesome Marines possible, and to hell with anyone or anything that gets in the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AluminiumWolf said:

You know which other warhammer products feel beholden to the wargame rules?

Thats right, none of them.

Exactly - the fluff from the novels, and the majority of the other 40k licence games, don't use the wargame as a basis for abilities or rules because the wargame only barely represents the true fluff, due to the nature of having to be restricted to results revolving around six-sided dice.

Using that as an argument, that the RPG should follow the wargame, is a bit of a straw man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...