Quote from: One Horse TownAlthough i'm not involved in 40k, i would presume that this will not be the case. I very much doubt that you will be limited to playing one kind of character with each game. I would think that as each one is released it will add a layer to the setting. Thus as Rogue Trader comes out, you will be able to play traders and inquisitors in the same game, as you will have the in-depth info at your disposal. I don't believe that they will be vastly different games, just have a different focus. The central mechanics will remain through the three lines i would think, with bits bolted on to take into account the vast difference in power levels between all the elements that make up the 40k universe.

At the end of the game, if you're allowed to make a half-dozen or dozen- or thirty or two hundred Inquisitor-related careers in the "inquisitor game" you're still creating a game that is crippled by limiting it to one very specific experience within the setting, just because that's what the designers feel you ought to be doing.
Its like releasing a Star Wars game where the only thing you can play is gas miners and gas-mining-related characters on Bespin. Or you can ONLY play imperial soldiers/stormtroopers. Wanted to play the rebels? Sorry, bad luck.
Jedi? Nope, not allowed.
And trust me, this is for the best for you, because we the designers know that a game where you can only play Bespin gas miners is going to be superior because it will be more "focused", even if you never really gave a shit about Bespin Gas miners.

QuoteI also suspect that the plan came direct from Games Workshop, not from the developers. Developers do what they're told.

I suspect, given GW's handling of the WFRP rpg thus far, that they don't give a sacred shit what BI does with the game. I find it almost impossible to believe that they're telling them how to make the game.
Shit, GW doesn't even SELL the game in their own stores. That's how much they give a fuck.

And it is only if that is not true with WH40KRPG, btw, that this crippled piece of shit stands a chance of being a successful experiment, and then only because selling it in GW stores would massively up the initial sales figures.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditI suspect, given GW's handling of the WFRP rpg thus far, that they don't give a sacred shit what BI does with the game. I find it almost impossible to believe that they're telling them how to make the game.
Shit, GW doesn't even SELL the game in their own stores. That's how much they give a fuck.

RPGPundit

Believe me, everything goes through the GW IP department. As for strategy, i would be surprised if the publishing strategy isn't heavily affected by GW.

As for not selling WFRP in GW stores, i suspect that is simply not to take sales away from figures and army books, which is GW's main source of income after all.

Stop ranting and start thinking Pundit. You might surprise yourself.

QuoteBelieve me, everything goes through the GW IP department. As for strategy, i would be surprised if the publishing strategy isn't heavily affected by GW.

Good point.

QuoteAs for not selling WFRP in GW stores, i suspect that is simply not to take sales away from figures and army books, which is GW's main source of income after all.

Weak point.

Quote from: One Horse TownBelieve me, everything goes through the GW IP department. As for strategy, i would be surprised if the publishing strategy isn't heavily affected by GW.

That it "goes through" in the sense that GW assidiously checks everything BI writes to make sure that nothing in there challenges GW's vision of "canon" I find believable, given that GW makes a big deal about that sort of shit.
But I don't believe for a second that they TOLD BI or GR that they had to make WH40k in this particular format.

RPGPundit

It reminds me a bit of the strategy LUG used with their Star Trek RPG.

I dread to think about the levels of rule bloat that will be necessary to make it worthwhile to buy all three books.

On the plus side they might well be quite small books.

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalOn the plus side they might well be quite small books.

Sure. Quite small $40 hardcover books.
That just makes it all the more appealing... :rolleyes:

RPGPundit

Sounds pretty stupid.

I guess you'll just have to... not buy it.

I mean, I've taken a look at Fate 3, and compared to the potential of Fate 2, it sucks. So hey, I stick with #2.

If I ever played D&D again, it'd be AD&D 2e, this 3.5 is just way too much fuckarsing about.

Why is anyone obliged to buy and play a new edition of a game? Does the old edition spontaneously combust when the new one comes out? Or are you a helpless drooling fanboy who has to buy EVERYTHING the company comes out with, just so you can whinge about it?

:enw:

Quote from: JimBobOzSounds pretty stupid.

I guess you'll just have to... not buy it.

I mean, I've taken a look at Fate 3, and compared to the potential of Fate 2, it sucks. So hey, I stick with #2.

If I ever played D&D again, it'd be AD&D 2e, this 3.5 is just way too much fuckarsing about.

Why is anyone obliged to buy and play a new edition of a game? Does the old edition spontaneously combust when the new one comes out? Or are you a helpless drooling fanboy who has to buy EVERYTHING the company comes out with, just so you can whinge about it?

:enw:

I wasn't aware that there was ever a first edition of a Warhammer 40,000 roleplaying game, unless you count Inquisitor.

Rogue Trader!

I actually kind of agree.  I've never seen the point in licensed products... why not just run a game with a system you own?

This one-in-three strategy is the single best argument I can make for spending the money to get an out-of-print copy of Rogue Trader.  Last I checked that went for less than $120 on eBay.

That's not even a roleplaying game though, is it?

It has rpging stats.

What about character creation?

Check, AFAIK.
We have a copy in the rpg-club library. Will check it out someday.