Alex Cube said:

If you mean comrades literally, as in the new rules for them, then no. Comrades exist to make the player better at what the player does. Mostly by making them better at killing stuff. They won't be filling in any gaps. That would be the minion system from BC, and to a lesser extent DW.

I've been thinking the same thing. Even taking an initial +5 boost in a characteristic you've not got both aptitudes for is hideously expensive. The only reason I can see for the costs to be the way they are is to advocate hyper specialisation since the double aptitude advances are so cheap in comparison, which will surely make characters from the same speciality quite homogenous.

HTMC said:

Except that, if you actually mess around with character creation, you will see that it dosen't work like that. Characters don't have the aptitudes to cover what they need for their own specialities, much less cover each other "gaps." The specialities overlap a lot, because they're all combat focused, and that leaves gaps that no one can cover… especially since with an average of 4 players, no group can take all the specialities. Also, there are some "basic" advances that everyone "needs" but can't take because the aptitude system prices them out of reach… Common Lore (Imperial Guard) and Nerves of Steel (which every Guardsman NPC profile has) spring instantly to mind.

Finally, and this is my opinion, I object to my players being forced to play the character the game designers want to play. I want my players to be able to play their own character. If someone wants to play a Weapon Specialist who is an ex-smuggler and black marketeer (based on one of the Gaunt's Ghosts characters… Major Rawne's lackey, I forget his name), I want my player to be able to do that and not be penalized for a creative and interesting character concept. This is a role playing game. Let's encourage a little roleplaying.

I've got to say I agree with most of the comments here regarding the cost of upgrades and the allocation of aptitudes.

To try and re-balance the Aptitude system a little (as I quite like the concept) I have made a version of my Aptitude calculator sheet to test the effects of lower experience. We are currently testing it within my gaming group and so far it seems to have the charcters at almost the same level of effectiveness as a DH character of the same experience.

I will post the link here as I would like some feed back, but also I because it is very easy to tweak the numbers on the calculations sheet to test different costs for upgrades.

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B2IY1aRP-1QRVDFrOGljSGhrRU0

Regards

Surak

LuciusT said:

Thanks for the answer. :) Already send some feedback, because I have the feeling that the doctrine costs in the regiment creation seems a bit off for some options.

I really like this change in Exp Cost. I'll probably implement this as a houserule if it doesn't become official (which it should). Good work.

LuciusT said:

If you re-read what I actually wrote, you'll see that I agreed with you: Aptitudes probably do need to be looked at and re-worked. It seems like either players need more options in terms of choosing the aptitudes they want at character creation, or character creation needs to be a bit more generous with the aptitudes it grants (or some combination of both). Most of my post was saying that I think the XP costs are fine, not that the Aptitudes themselves didn't need work. 

Maybe a relatively easy solution would be to make it possible to buy Aptitudes, something that's currently completely missing. Either that, or some way of swapping granted Aptitudes for others at character creation. Maybe even something in the GMs section for granting Aptitudes as quest rewards, or something. As I've said elsewhere, I do actually like how the classes are very specialized, but I do also agree with you that penalization for experimentation is bad. Hopefully there is a middle ground that can be reached.

Well, the more people who e-mail the devs about it through the onlywarbeta@fantasyflightgames.com address (might be worth adding a link to this thread), the greater the chance of them taking notice!

I don't know why they didn't use more stuff from BC, it was one of the best systems they've made. The xp costs here are hideous and it's difficult to make interesting characters. I think the comrade system is a bogus piece of crap compared to the minion system. They need to go back and grab more of the solid mechanics they've already made.

Comrades are much better than Minions for what the system tries to achieve. They help the team in a noticeable way, they put minimum strain on the players and GM, and they fill the role of randomly dying redshirts.

Minions are cool, but not quite for the kind of play that OW proposes.

Darklordofbunnies said:

If they just take everything wholesale from BC, then what's the point of making a new system? As Morangias pointed out, Comrades are suppose to be very different from Minions-- it's even in the name. If nothing else, even if Minions are more interesting on a certain level (they're certainly more customizable) if every player had a minion, that essentially doubles time in combat, since each player is controlling the equivalent of two PCs, with two different stat lines, abilities, etc.

OW explicitly mentions Comrades were designed to be lower maintenance in comparison, which helps keep combat moving smoothly. In addition, it helps satisfy both spectrums of the Guard people want to see: some people want to play the epic, unstoppable heroes that you see in novels like Gaunt's Ghosts, while others want an experience more akin to how IG are portrayed in, say, Space Marine novels, where they die in droves. Comrades provide a solid boost to PCs while still being there to die dramatically, helping limit PC deaths to a degree. 

Also, @Millardson, I'm guessing they're monitoring these forums just as much as the email (at least that's what the announcement said), so while I'm sure emailing them may also help, I'm also sure the forums are just as much a productive outlet :-P.  

HTMC said:

Never hurts to spread the will of the people, though

I've been suggesting a cost drop for a while, glad to see someone get support for it now.

Overall, there's very few specialties that can actually do their job without blowing off their own legs in 1/0 xp costs. Sergeants can't build up ballistic skill, commissars can only command half-assedly, and lores [including common ones that by all means they should start with] are way out there in cost.

Yes!!!!

Week Two update is up and experience costs are changed! I am a happy GM.

Great success!

I think I actually prefer these to the Black Crusade ones - fewer *50xp expenditures, and more round 100s - I approve!