Bazleebub said:

It's not nasty given the person it's directed at. Dezmond doesn't discuss things, he comes in and says that no one understands that the game should only about 40 foot daiklaves weilded by 10 foot marines (yes, this is a direct statement by him in a different thread). It is DEZMOND that says HE knows what people want and it ISN'T DH or RT.

I'm sorry, but Dezmond is the least productive and most useless poster I've ever encountered because he doesn't discuss things, only condescends to people about how they'll eventually understand it's all about marines killing things with their pinkies rather than anything else. There is no point actually making an argument with him, of spending half an hour on a response to a statement, because he will ignore it and state 'it's all about the marines' and then post some random hyperbolic picture to prove it. The fact that these forums offer absolutely NOTHING for him and yet he is still here proves beyonf a doubt he does this for fun. Some ego stroking to see people get angry at what he says.

So, Dezmond deserves everything he gets because he is nothing but a juvenile troll with no regard for discussion, only pushing people to anger through condescension, hyperbole and ridicule. He doesn't need a Cinematic Dark Heresy forum, he needs a PLAYPEN. When he grows up enough to discuss rather than condescend and TELL, then perhaps he can join in. Until then his drivel does nothing but cause problems. There was a reason he was banned fom Black Industries Forums. He probably would be here too, if they were moderated as well as BI's were (nothing against the mods, BI had a much smaller set of forums compared to these).

Hellebore

I would like to point out that it is exceedingly tempting to lay into him (I've been doing it myself of late, and for that I apologize), but this is way too much bandwidth to devote to him (again, I'm implicating myself in this).  While it would be absurdly useful to have an ignore function, and it would also be absurdly useful for FFG to remove somebody from the forum who posts twenty times per day about how much one of FFG's top-line games is horrible and not emblematic of its setting, we need to return to manually ignoring him.

Let me point out that yes my post was nasty and it was juvenile.  Let me also point out that Dezmond has the right to play whatever style of game he wants to play.  Its his gaming style let him.

What I also want to point out though is that his continue crusade to make everyone play his style of gameplay got on my nerves, when combined with his uncalled for statement about one-legged retards.  It doesn't make what I did right however.  That said, I'm going to side that sometimes Dezmond, when he puts his mind to it, can come up with some awesomely thought provoking statements, and some really good points, like his point in another thread of the British Captain fighting the Spainish Fleet.

I choose not to ignore him because while I disagree with many of his points, and I definatly disagree with the way he goes about making them, many of his points at the least do cause certain problems with the Dark Heresy system to come to light.  Its just that on occasion, okay more then occasionally, he can push the wrong buttons for everyone and cause flair ups.

Pneumonica said:

Well said.  After Dezmond's one comment about 'one legged retards' I have decided to just ignore the guy.  Good advice, Pneumonica.

Hes currently banned from Dark Reign too...

I don't like to comment about other posters specifically as its jolly bad form really, but i've come out of the woodwork here to offer some advice; or rather to explain how i personally cope after having been drawn into his troll-traps many moons ago.

Bad luck guys, you've been drawn in.  Just look at this thread...totally derailed and destroyed so that all you're doing now is moaning about Dezmond/Erik.

Its what he does. 

Every thread, every forum i've ever seen him on.

I ignore him. 

Any and everything he posts. 

Its not that hard actually since whatever the thread topic he basically posts the same thing so once you've read it you pretty much know what he'll say next.

So my advice put simply (or rather, advice on how i personally cope with him)?  Never respond to his facile posts.  If possible try not to read them, as he's a master at baiting.  If you do actually read one by accident, relax, count to 10 and don't respond.

Just my thoughts and experience on the issue. 

Right, where's that cider jug...

It isn't just me.

+++My problem is that the WarHammer RPGs don't match the badassery of the fluff from the wargame. Don't get me wrong, I love the low-rent soulcrushing dystopia aspect. But sometimes I think it'd be fun to play a completely over-the-top insanely metal game, with Space Marines and psykers that blow up tanks and Orks with crazy vehicles and all that other wackiness.+++

++Eventually there will be Deathwatch, we must have patience.++

+...why?

This has always been my issue. I mean, sure, all us "real roleplayers" have talked about the dark and gritty world of 40K. Yet, the big seller of this game--that is to say, 9 out of 12 armies you can play, including the big bad obvious seller of them all, the Space Marines--I have to wait what, three years before I can play?

I mean, really, if D&D can do farm boy to demigod, and Exalted can go demigod to terrible deity, and if WW can pull off mortals to elders to anything else...what was the business model hoping that I buy three books that each cost quite a hefty sum (thanks to their beauty and splendor, true)? Especially when Book 1 is "nothing at all like what you probably expect in 40K", and book 2 is "barely tied to what you probably know in 40K!"+

Hesse said:

I for one will be starting PCs afresh in RT rather than 'advancing DH PCs'.  I think Ascension will be taking the DH characters forwards towards their eventual uber-powered Inquisitorhood, so i'd rather make the clean break and kick off new PCs within RT.

How about you?

I'll be going for the seperate 'verses too, possibly using freshly made (and slightly advanced) DH characters for the odd "lower decks" mission in Rogue Trader.

tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LowerDeckEpisode

Otherwise, Inquisition stays Inquisition and Rogue Trader stays Rogue Trader - and its a good thing those two seldom meet...

Although I think there may be a place for DH Careers in RT and vice versa, I think the focus of the games themselves are totally different, so definitely an RT game needs to be seperate from a DH game.  Inquisitors don't really have a place in "neutral space", or Fra'al space, or Squat space, etc.  And I can't resist at least alluding to Inquisitors having Squats to do. 

I love you Luddite.   Has been my philosophy as well on... previous derailment topic.

Anyway, someone earlier in this thread said FFG would continue to support Dark Heresy "for a while" after Rogue Trader came out.

My impression was that all three games (once we reach Deathwatch) would continue to live as active games in the same universe.  Is that not the case?  Has something to the contrary been said to indicate the lower level games will eventually be ended in favor of the higher level ones?

The license is probably limited, so they're likely only planning a limited number of supplements since they can only guarantee a certain amount of time they'll have it.  This doesn't mean that it won't be continued, merely that nobody knows if it will.

aethel said:

No they haven't said that they would be ended in favor of the higher level ones, nor have they said though that they will all continue indefinatly.  Dark Heresy will continue on at least until Deathwatch comes out. since they'll probably do an Ascention II book to bring Dark Heresy characters to the level of Inquisitors.

But you'll probably see a major scaling back in the number of books FFG puts out to support Dark Heresy after Rogue Trader comes out.  Its all about the writing talent and the funds, and the fact that since all the games will be compatable with other games, why bring out a Dark Heresy Xenos book and a Rogue Trader Xenos book.

The problem is that right now they're listing Rogue Trader and Dark Heresy as two seperate game lines, which are compatable.  So while you'll see a Xenos book for Rogue Trader under the Rogue Trader brand label, it'll be obviously useful for any Dark Heresy Character, especially those who work for Ordo Xenos.  But you'll have to track two seperate game lines, and understand which ones are compatable and which ones are more specific for a game line.

Personally if I was FFG, which I'm not, I'd combine Dark Heresy, Rogue Trader, and Death Watch all under some kind of generic title, like Warhammer 40k Roleplaying, and then release titles in support of Warhammer 40k Roleplaying in general.  Keep the three core books as core books, relase adventures to support the core books, but many books can be released in general for all three storylines at the exact same time.  One Xenos book to rule them all.  Obviously I'd move many of the Xenos heresies from Dark heresy and the Xenos Creatures from Creatures Anathema (a Dark Heresy book) out into my Rogue Trader games.  Why reprint all the critters from the Dark Heresy main rule book again in the Rogue Trader rule book (for example Daemonspawn).  And why should I have to track two seperate webpages for all the supporting material for all three games, and hopefully they don't reprint too many things between game lines so that when I buy Creatures Anathema II for my Dark Heresy game, I don't see Xenos from the Rogue Trader Xenos Handbook.  Streamline the process would save money, time, and effort, and make it more easy for us dumb folk to figure out crossovers.

To make it easier each gameline could have a "symbol" that is placed on the back of the book to let you know what game it supports.  So a Rogue Trader game maybe would only have a symbol of a ship's wheel on the corner, while Creatures Anathema 2 and Xenos Tech would get a Aquilla standing for the entire WH40kRPG line, while the Ascention book would have a symbol of the =][= symbol on it, and so on and so on.

So right now the question keeps popping up like this, will Dark Heresy continue to be supported, and the answer is a resounding yes, but you may need to drag things from Rogue Trader and Death Watch in order to support it if they continue to market this as three seperate (but compatable) game lines.

I think it bears mentioning that the nature of the trinary game line isn't up to FFG - it's a GW desicion.  While I'm not disagreeing with what you say, let's not blame FFG for GW's decision, since GW owns the IP.

EDIT:  Although I will say this - one core book for all three games would be a clunker.  I'm not sure how well that would work out overall.  And a single book for game system without things like complete (or even semi-complete) character creation would get its own set of complaints.

Pneumonica said:

Completely agree with you.   I know it may not be FFG's fault, but its still a hell of a clunky way to find information when half my Xenos information for my Ordo Xenos Inquisitor is in the Rogue Trader line, instead of a general WH40KRPG line which they all share.

And totally agree with the edit.  Rogue Trader, Deathwatch and Dark Heresy should be completely different games with different core rulebooks, but the shared information should be shared in a simply streamlined way amongst all three and not spread out across three seperate marketting lines.  Core books and adventures should be game specific, but the background info like orcs and such should be sold generically.

I also think it makes more sense to combine them under a common banner for marketing purposes.  (Regardless of whether or not they are able to manage a combined core rulebook eventually.)  Frankly, I was very surprised to see the Rogue Trader forum created separately.  When the announcement was first made, I had just ASSUMED they would re-purpose and re-organize the existing Dark Heresy forums.

I guess we'll see!