So this thread is about the issue of the setting of the WH40k universe (not the specific game Dark Heresy).  

It seems that there are many things in WH40K as it exists now that make it relatively unwieldy as an RPG setting. The rampant xenophobia, the utterly oppressive society, etc.

Would you enjoy playing in the setting as it is now?

For my part, the setting I fell in love with was the setting as it was presented in the original Rogue Trader game; ie. the Warhammer setting in Space, where it was assumed that characters of different races could interact more readily, there were halflings, and while the Empire was a pretty rotten place, it was still a place that left you a lot of room to maneuver.

How would you change the setting, if you were to play an RPG campaign in it?

RPGPundit

I think for the RPG to work they have to have the game set in a slightly different world then the tabletop verison.  They need to keep a similar feel to the 40k rpg  that would be closer to the original Rogue Trader version.   It's much the same way as the WFRP rpg is not the same feel as the WFB game.

Oh and I don't ever remember halflings beeing in Rogue Trader.  There were grunts but they were Dwarfs.

I think the Dan Abnett books present a society that I'd be happy to roleplay in myself. There's a lot of variety mixed in with the "only War" stuff there. If I take those as the starting point, rather than the wargame, then I'm fine.

I think there is plnty in the Imperium that's RP worthy.

If you want mixed race groups, the Tau Empire is the way to go. They're xenomaniacs, as long as th xeno's submit to Tau total-tarianism(sp?).

Quote from: kryystI think for the RPG to work they have to have the game set in a slightly different world then the tabletop verison.  They need to keep a similar feel to the 40k rpg  that would be closer to the original Rogue Trader version.   It's much the same way as the WFRP rpg is not the same feel as the WFB game.

Oh and I don't ever remember halflings beeing in Rogue Trader.  There were grunts but they were Dwarfs.

Weren't Dwarfs in the WH40K universe called Squats?

Quote from: kryystOh and I don't ever remember halflings beeing in Rogue Trader.  There were grunts but they were Dwarfs.

Halflings still exist - ratling snipers for the IG are still canon right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratling#Ratlings

I would run a campaign during the Horus Heresy. It seems the most dramatic of eras capable of sustaining a wide variety of "adventures". Also I doubt I'd have to worry much about the other races, although I'm not too hip to this particular period of 40K lore, so I may have a lot to worry about when it comes to the other races....

Regards,
David R

Quote from: RPGPunditSo this thread is about the issue of the setting of the WH40k universe (not the specific game Dark Heresy).  

It seems that there are many things in WH40K as it exists now that make it relatively unwieldy as an RPG setting. The rampant xenophobia, the utterly oppressive society, etc.

Would you enjoy playing in the setting as it is now?

How would you change the setting, if you were to play an RPG campaign in it?

RPGPundit

The 40k Universe has been the way it is for at least 15 years.

I tried to tell you that it is not feasible for a RPG setting, at least a general generic one.

That's why they made Dark Heresy.

If you don't like that, wait for the publisher to change and you'll get your Rogue Trader.

Or you could play something else - like the original Rogue Trader you all seem to be so in love with, blind to the fact that it wasn't that much different.

This is like purporting to be a fan of Dark Sun, Planescape or Ravenloft - so you buy all those supplements, only to complain about the setting and how it should be more like Greyhawk and how it's not generic enough.

I expected a little more from you - oh wait that's a similar situation to the one I just described.

As an aside, Squats are no longer canon (though they may see a revival with the Demiurg), though Ratlings and Ogryns remain.

Quote from: BlackhandThe 40k Universe has been the way it is for at least 15 years.

I tried to tell you that it is not feasible for a RPG setting, at least a general generic one.

That's why they made Dark Heresy.

If you don't like that, wait for the publisher to change and you'll get your Rogue Trader.

Or you could play something else - like the original Rogue Trader you all seem to be so in love with, blind to the fact that it wasn't that much different.

This is like purporting to be a fan of Dark Sun, Planescape or Ravenloft - so you buy all those supplements, only to complain about the setting and how it should be more like Greyhawk and how it's not generic enough.

I expected a little more from you - oh wait that's a similar situation to the one I just described.

As an aside, Squats are no longer canon (though they may see a revival with the Demiurg), though Ratlings and Ogryns remain.

See, this last statement here? It basically invalidates any righteous indignation you might feel about people re-interpreting the setting.  When GW itself essentially wipes entire races out of existence by declaring them to suddenly be "non-canon", but may return them as canon later; that means that GW themselves have no bearing on what is or is not the WH40K universe. They've given up that right for anything other than what they might use in official WH tournaments or something like that.

For everyone else, the door is now wide open for everyone to have their own version of what they're going to like from WH40K. And it seems that the majority of roleplayers think that the early original Rogue Trader universe was by far the best one.

RPGPundit

Get rid of chaos. It was absent from 1st edition and that gave it, IMO, much greater scope. The xenophobia and oppressive society I didn't mind so much - the game has always indicated that even if that was the case for 99% of the galaxy, that 1% leaves lots of potential but chaos closes some of that down.

With chaos it seems almost everything in the universe relates to it which is a lot more oppressive than the social set up. In 1st edition for example the warp was full of nasty beasties that would eat your mind sure enough, if you were sensitive enough, but without chaos the Eye of Terror was simply a place of awful warp storms that prevented easy travel and enabled the area to become to become a place where people fled imperial rule, not a zone where no one could live bar some one dimensional monsters.

It also makes the oppressive society a bit more nuanced. With chaos then pretty much anything is justifiable as long as it stops chaos (even when there are very contradictory elements such as nuking entire planets which surely helps chaos?). Without it then the society is much more open to question. Sure humanity may have needed the emperor when the threat of the warp was not understood and psychics were beacons for warp creatures but now, perhaps less so.

Chaos was NEVER absent from Warhammer.  Ever.  Get a job, NiallS, or at least do enough research that when you open your mouth your entire foot doesn't go into it.

Yeah, Pundit if you want to make up your own game and call it Warhammer 40k go right ahead.  Nobody is stopping you.  Just don't expect anyone beyond your lackeys on this board to support you or 'your version' of Warhammer.

However, you as an RPG'r are in the minority when it comes to Warhammer.  I'd say GW has complete control over what is canon.  Try to publish something using that name and we can let the courts decide who has the right to say what is what about Warhammer.

Lets try it with Star Wars.

Hey, Lucasarts gave up the right to Jawas.  They are no longer canon when Lucas decided to wipe them off of Tattooine because they were a really stupid idea.

Also, lets get rid of the Force.  The Force wasn't in the first movie and it's really stupid magic hokus pokus.

Ignorance of the setting is what you are displaying.  If you want a different game you should play one.

We can also do it with Star Trek.

Hey, Roddenberry lost all right to decide anything about Star Trek when he came up with Klingons.  Black men in space.  What the fuck?  Black men would never get to space. I can decide whatever I want about this setting and then let other people know what I think about it even though it's completely erroneous and geek-bigoted.

Also, lets get rid of the Federation.  The Federation was never in the original series and it's really getting kinda old.  I mean how many Federation stories do we need to plow through before that schtick gets old?

You people amaze me with your capacity for delusion.  I guess you should probably read at least as much Warhammer material as you have whatever woman's magazine you've been reading to make you think you can decide what is or isn't canon in an IP that you don't own and profess to hate.

Also, you might have more credibility if you looked into GW's actual business practice.  Other than what they might use at official Warhammer tournaments?  How ignorant that statement - because the tournament circuit is the only reason that we even have as much Warhammer as we do these days.  Maybe you should show up at the next 'ard Boyz league somewhere, and I can meet you in person.

Quote from: RPGPunditSee, this last statement here? It basically invalidates any righteous indignation you might feel about people re-interpreting the setting.  When GW itself essentially wipes entire races out of existence by declaring them to suddenly be "non-canon", but may return them as canon later; that means that GW themselves have no bearing on what is or is not the WH40K universe. They've given up that right for anything other than what they might use in official WH tournaments or something like that.

For everyone else, the door is now wide open for everyone to have their own version of what they're going to like from WH40K. And it seems that the majority of roleplayers think that the early original Rogue Trader universe was by far the best one.

RPGPundit

Who's the majority of roleplayers? You and Rotwang?


I like and enjoy the current Warhammer 40,000 Universe. It was not a universe designed with RPG's in mind, even Rogue-Trader gonzoness would be difficult to create a RPG out of. It really is a difficult design challenge to create an RPG set in the WH40k universe and I think the way the Black Library handled it was genius.

I'm not the only one, as the original print run sold out before the game was released.

However, that's not to say that if YOU are running a WH40k game, it can be any iteration, modification, or determination you want.

Quote from: BlackhandChaos was NEVER absent from Warhammer.  Ever.  Get a job, NiallS, or at least do enough research that when you open your mouth your entire foot doesn't go into it.

1st edition WH40k had no mention of chaos. The warp most certainly and horrible monsters but the 4 chaos powers et al. They came about when the Realms of Chaos books were written and effectively tied together what to GE was the core linking of WFB and WH40k. The wikipedia page third paragraph outlines this. I know that's not a lot of time difference but it definetly gave 1st edition a different feel.

GW, as with Lucas, has a long history of re-writing canon to suit their wargaming sales and that's not a criticism of them, they've made a lot of money out of being willing to come up with new stuff and ditch the old and some of the new stuff is great - I really like the Tau, from what I've read of them. But speaking personally the banality of GW's chaos powers does serve to detract from the setting.

However I don't think anyone other than yourself is really thinking that the term 'can it be fixed' means anything other than 'what are your personal gripes with the setting and how would you change it'. Some people might object to the idea that anything is broken and that, as Krakajak says, the game is big enough to run any iteration you might want. My version would not feature any of the chaos powers, just warp nasties as I think the chaos powers. However if you think that a game can only be played according to the rules and setting as set out in the most current version of the rulebook then I suspect you are out on a limb on this one.

Quote from: NiallS1st edition WH40k had no mention of chaos. The warp most certainly and horrible monsters but the 4 chaos powers et al. They came about when the Realms of Chaos books were written and effectively tied together what to GE was the core linking of WFB and WH40k. The wikipedia page third paragraph outlines this. I know that's not a lot of time difference but it definetly gave 1st edition a different feel.

GW, as with Lucas, has a long history of re-writing canon to suit their wargaming sales and that's not a criticism of them, they've made a lot of money out of being willing to come up with new stuff and ditch the old and some of the new stuff is great - I really like the Tau, from what I've read of them. But speaking personally the banality of GW's chaos powers does serve to detract from the setting.

However I don't think anyone other than yourself is really thinking that the term 'can it be fixed' means anything other than 'what are your personal gripes with the setting and how would you change it'. Some people might object to the idea that anything is broken and that, as Krakajak says, the game is big enough to run any iteration you might want. My version would not feature any of the chaos powers, just warp nasties as I think the chaos powers. However if you think that a game can only be played according to the rules and setting as set out in the most current version of the rulebook then I suspect you are out on a limb on this one.

Hmm, well it seems perhaps you should have chose your words more carefully, and so should Pundit, if this wasn't the point you were trying to make. 'Fixing' it makes it sound like - well, exactly what it sounds like.

We don't need either Dark Heresy or Warhammer 40k's background to be 'fixed'.  Just because it doesn't conform to your expectations of how you perceive the background from a 20 year old manual doesn't mean the fans of Warhammer 40k, either veterans or new players, didn't have their expectations met or even exceeded.  As Kraka pointed out, it's hard to put an RPG in this universe and BI did an exemplar job.

Maybe we can 'fix' your game too.  I'm sure there's all kinds of stuff we could 'fix' in FTA! (lol).  I mean, if I cared enough or, as I'm sure is Pundit's case - that I thought anyone would give a shit about my half baked ideas about a game system / setting I only half read and didn't experiment with.

And by the way, just so you know, Realm of Chaos was 1st edition, because it sure as fuck wasn't 2nd Ed.  I can't believe you actually said that.  You're 'out on a limb' and we don't need you to provide any more 'facts'.  

Chaos was indeed in 1st edition and the article you linked said so.  Read it a little more carefully:

One major expansion for Rogue Trader was the book Chapter Approved which gave army lists for the Space Marines and Eldar, albeit of a temporary, primitive form. Another major expansion was the two-volume Realm of Chaos (1988 and 1990) book which introduced the Horus Heresy and the Chaotic powers.

That's the paragraph you cited.

The second edition of "Warhammer 40,000" was published in late 1993.

From a few paragraphs down.  However, I already knew this since I still have the damned box it came in.

But then, you'd have to know more about it than that 1st Ed was called Rogue Trader.  It was published late in the year, and Realm of Chaos was one of the first ever tomes of material for Warhammer 40k.

You could be more clear.  You'll probably retract this statement (if you have sense) and claim that what you meant was the Rogue Trader rulebook alone - which is still incorrect, since the Warp is pretty much the basis for the whole backstory.  Your statement that Chaos wasn't present doesn't actually say anything except about your ignorance of the setting, once again.  

Maybe you just mean the addition of the 4 published greater Chaos gods, which was all actually intended to be in the original manual, they just didn't have space for all of it.  Hence two Realm of Chaos books.

I encourage you to 'fix' it before you play.  Maybe this is why as a rule roleplayers don't get along with wargamers.  You want it to be what you want it to be at the expense of the world at large (your own little microcosm), while wargamers want it to be somewhere we can all meet to have a friendly game.  The background provides us with endless war, which is what we want.  It wasn't created with an RPG in mind and you really need to accept that. We don't need an overbearing GM 'rper' to 'interpret' the setting for us because, as a rule, we have a better grip on it than you do.

If the Chaos powers are too 'banal' for you, you're missing the point and should play Star Wars instead. 40k isn't space opera, it's gothic horror.

You could even play in one of the eras where they have tons of backflipping Jedi with tiny, personal FTL craft that can jaunt around the universe however and whenever they want.

If you do, I want to play one of the Hutts as a Jedi, or better yet one of those flittering flapping things that are immune to the Force - whatever Watto was.  As a Jedi.

I have to agree with Blackhand for the most part (about the WH40K universe that is, not his comments about people who want to change it).

The WH40K universe hasn't changed a whole lot from Rogue Trader to its current incarnation.  The game has certainly changed (for the worse, IMO).  But not so much with the universe (except for dropping Squats and adding Tau / Necrons).

Rogue Trader had the same advantages and disadvantages that most first editions from those days had (e.g., AD&D) - a ton of flavor, some interesting nuggets of goodness, but a rather cluttered mess overall with rules that drastically needed streamlining.

I do think that free intermixing of races does tend to go against the grain of the WH40K world, and that people would be better served with Traveller or Star Wars if that's where their interests lie.  Which is not to say you couldn't still have that on a rogue trader ship (they are rogues after all), just that it should be an unusual situation.