FW/GW creative process

[zedmeister]

 

Look at the vicious arguments about whether FW was legal or not - and whether BL was canon before that. FW has always been legal. BL has always been canon. But the arguments raged for a decade. They raged even when people attached to the companies explained it. The closest I've ever come to PTSD was arguing about it a few years ago on 3++, trying to explain to frothing tournament players desperate to resist change that they weren't just wrong, they'd been wrong for a decade. They didn't want the truth. They didn't care about how other people had fun. They wanted their preferences to be globally right.

 

GWs problem recently has been communication. All it would of taken is a paragraph in White Dwarf to explain this, but it's not something they seem as wanting to do.

I'm sure it's frustrating for you knowing the intention within the company, they just need to communicate things a bit better to the customer base.

 

Thing is, they did right back in the original imperial armour releases that have since been disregarded by said tournament players and there have been plenty of entries in the recent imperial armour books with similar notes. The whole Forgeworld "Not legal" whinge from a certain subset of players really boils my blood.

[A D-B]

 

 

I remember Aaron mentioning the Octavia navigation orgasm scene getting edited. Don't think I miss it.

 

Yeah, that never made it to print, so no one will have ever read that. It was about as far from sexual and/or arousing as anyone can imagine, though. It certainly wasn't teh hawtness, shall we say. I liked it because it was Rogue Tradertastic in terms of body horror, but I don't miss it.

 

The most recent deletion I can recall (and this is before it hit print, obviously) was that when the crew of the Conqueror were flooding the hallways and panicking, at one point Khârn grabbed one of them by his (or her? I forget) long hair and uses the human as a flail to smash several more out of the way. That counts as abusing an innocent.

 

I'll be honest, if that went into the book, I would not care about the person in question being innocent, but the fact that someone is using a dude/dudette as a human flail with their hair. It kinda reminds me of a cartoon character.

 

Ran

 

 

Yes, well, it was hardly described like that. You don't talk about sword fights as "using bits of bendy metal to insert into dudes".

 

Either way, it's irrelevant. There are 8,000,000 things in first drafts that would never make it into print. We could be here all day pointing them out, and it's why authors rarely share them. 

 

EDIT: I sound annoyed. I'm not annoyed. I couldn't be less annoyed. 

[Bryan Blaire]

GWs problem recently has been communication. All it would of taken is a paragraph in White Dwarf to explain this, but it's not something they seem as wanting to do.

I'm sure it's frustrating for you knowing the intention within the company, they just need to communicate things a bit better to the customer base.

There was never anything wrong in GW's communication about ForgeWorld. It was right in the books that you were to discuss use with your opponents. It's the same company, so why people assumed that it wasn't "official" material has never made sense, and that people still think there is something to be communicated about it doesn't make sense. They said everything they needed to. That people didn't like what was said isn't really their fault.

 

However, problems occur when playing outside with strangers in clubs and shops, and they often have a different interpretation of the rules. Again simple communication with the customer base would solve this, re-starting issuing FAQs again would be a start.

There isn't a problem or need for additional communication. GW already gave all players a very specific rule for solving those problems, and it is in official communication about the game to all players playing. It is called "The Most Important Rule" and it is found on page 10 of The Rules. There is literally no need for any further communication from GW to anyone on it, because it is already literally (and literaturally) defined. Just because you don't like the answer doesn't mean the answer isn't already there and communicated.

[Ranwulf]

 

 

 

I remember Aaron mentioning the Octavia navigation orgasm scene getting edited. Don't think I miss it.

 

Yeah, that never made it to print, so no one will have ever read that. It was about as far from sexual and/or arousing as anyone can imagine, though. It certainly wasn't teh hawtness, shall we say. I liked it because it was Rogue Tradertastic in terms of body horror, but I don't miss it.

 

The most recent deletion I can recall (and this is before it hit print, obviously) was that when the crew of the Conqueror were flooding the hallways and panicking, at one point Khârn grabbed one of them by his (or her? I forget) long hair and uses the human as a flail to smash several more out of the way. That counts as abusing an innocent.

 

I'll be honest, if that went into the book, I would not care about the person in question being innocent, but the fact that someone is using a dude/dudette as a human flail with their hair. It kinda reminds me of a cartoon character.

 

Ran

 

 

Yes, well, it was hardly described like that. You don't talk about sword fights as "using bits of bendy metal to insert into dudes".

 

Either way, it's irrelevant. There are 8,000,000 things in first drafts that would never make it into print. We could be here all day pointing them out, and it's why authors rarely share them. 

 

Execution is everything. I mean, the World Eaters themselves were kinda cartoony on how ANGRY ALL THE TIME they were before Betrayer. Still angry, but within reason. 

 

Ran

[Wade Garrett]

I'm a bit bewildered that Erebus can have a whole room full of Legion serfs explode into strawberry jello and that's okay, but Khârn uses one Legion serf as an improvised weapon and that's "abusing the innocent".

 

Not that I feel Betrayer is ruined forever by lack of the crucial "Khârn beats a :cuss with another :cuss " scene, which was clearly the emotional heart of the novel ;) , but it seems the line for what is and what isn't acceptable is vague and non intuitive.

[Nova_chron]

This has been an interesting thread to read I have to admit that there are times I scratch my head when I look at rules and read the books I like some more than others... However having been in similar spots to men like A D-B and Laurie where an individual is convinced they are right and you are wrong,(automotive service calls are beautiful) I have nothing but respect for you guys and the absolutely massive ball of rage the Internet can become in fandoms from time to time.

 

All I'm saying is you guys produce fantastic fluff for what has been a hobby of mine since I was about 10 years old.

[Hergrmir]

That doesn't sound like too convincing an editorial line to me.

 

Kurtha Sedd and his goons literally turn innocents they stumble across in Calth's underground into altars of bone and muscle that are still alive and in torment, etc. etc. Heck, the intro scene has Sedd tearing apart a group of refugees huddling in a church on Monarchia.

 

It was, as depictions of the Word Bearers go, good stuff on Annandale's part, but it's hardly like fusing living humans together into furniture for your weird jollies isn't abusing innocents.

[1000 Sons]

There must be some give and take.  An editor picks 10 scenes that are questionable, then maybe pulls the 5 worst and the rest go through.  If there are too many scenes like that they might just blur and be easily forgotten but when you only allow a few it stands out more, and becomes a scene that might stay in your head instead of being passed over for the next crazy scene.

[Brother Heinrich]

I understand the need to edit certain things and cut this or that scene. The only thing that ever irks me is when people trot out the "this for children" line. It's so easy to disprove that it's not even funny. Just call it like it is, a grim brutal a Sci-fi future based on some of the most horrendous periods in human history. You're gonna have horrible atrocities, murder, beat, etc. but you'll also have moments of shining humanity and selfless heroism in the face of impossible odds. That's an awesome setting, it's a setting that has drawn in pretty much everyone here. So don't do it a disservice by trying to say that it's kid friendly or that you have to do something for "the children" when it's really just to satisfy the arbitrary measurements of what's "okay" set forth by upper management and western society as a whole.

 

Murder millions and no one bats an eye. Sculpt one nipple though, and suddenly you're a monster.

 

Edit: Lol didn't know that "non-consented sex" is a cuss word now. This is what I'm talking about.

[Hesh Kadesh]

 

GWs problem recently has been communication. All it would of taken is a paragraph in White Dwarf to explain this, but it's not something they seem as wanting to do.

I'm sure it's frustrating for you knowing the intention within the company, they just need to communicate things a bit better to the customer base.

There was never anything wrong in GW's communication about ForgeWorld. It was right in the books that you were to discuss use with your opponents. It's the same company, so why people assumed that it wasn't "official" material has never made sense, and that people still think there is something to be communicated about it doesn't make sense. They said everything they needed to. That people didn't like what was said isn't really their fault.

 

However, problems occur when playing outside with strangers in clubs and shops, and they often have a different interpretation of the rules. Again simple communication with the customer base would solve this, re-starting issuing FAQs again would be a start.

There isn't a problem or need for additional communication. GW already gave all players a very specific rule for solving those problems, and it is in official communication about the game to all players playing. It is called "The Most Important Rule" and it is found on page 10 of The Rules. There is literally no need for any further communication from GW to anyone on it, because it is already literally (and literaturally) defined. Just because you don't like the answer doesn't mean the answer isn't already there and communicated.

 

No.

 

This doesn't count. Self admitting that your rules are non functional and then saying "ah well, cba spending 20 minutes to check up the rule in question, and then updating the FAQ which takes all of 2 minutes, so just roll it off yourself" doesn't count as "solving problems".

 

That is brushing it under a carpet.

 

The problem comes because the writers don't know how to play their own game. There's a reason Beta tests are, or should be done by the public, or a group of select people from outside the organisation. I work in contracts law. When I'm drawing up contracts, I have a guy under me, who double checks everything I've done. I'm more senior - I'm better at it, and have been doing it longer, know more potential get outs and legal hangups, and how to closed them off, but that doesn't mean that I've not missed something minor, and he's there to double check that, as well as learn. The same applies here. There's no outside balancing factor that gets applied. 

 

Case in point. The new Leviathan Dreadnought. It has a Graviton Weapon, with a super powerful effect based on the original rules, but due to it baisically being 6 Graviton Cannons (?) duct taped together, it needs to be a bit more powerful than a standard Cannon. So, they gave it a rule which made it more powerful, with a similar effect - a Characteristic Test taken on two dice, and when it deals Hull Point damage, it does double damage, and it also has an AP value of note in an MEQ heavy game, as well as the usual difficult and dangerous terrain applications. The problem comes from the mechanism of dealing Hull Point Damage. The original Weapon has the Haywire special rule. This? Rolls 3d6 added together, but because there's no Strength value, it can't scratch a Rhino half the time. 

 

Now, this leads to several conclusions. Is this intentional? If so, why aren't other Graviton Weapons similarly updated, all it takes is an FAQ to state that any weapon with the Graviton Pulse special rule loses Haywire, and instead rolls 3d6 for armour penetration. Having said that, so much for Fortress Breacher. It possibly can - presuming that a fortress allows it to get within Rifle shot of its walls, and spend all day shooting at it, hoping to roll in the top 10th percentile twice. Alternatively, it's a messed up.

 

But why is it a messed up?

 

It literally would have taken the rules writers SECONDS to open up a copy of the rulebook, and check for the effects of the Graviton rule.  This continuity is a serious problem. Is it a case of, like the Red Books containing stealth errata, to differences in weapon profiles across different books (as above), where we're being asked to pay for updates to rules that the FW team cannot be bothered "fact" checking? It's not like it's a novel of 100,000 words with many nuanced and half hidden easter eggs that need to be kept concurrent, but a defined, easily written and identified rule. Or do FW prevent staff access to their books?

 

The rules are poor. Very, very poor, considering the amount of time and effort that goes into making the finished product, and to have it put down to eh, see if your opponent lets you use the rules as you THINK it may be, if not, roll a dice, and see where either one person or the other gets miffed at the result. How's about the team actually put a modicum of effort into supporting this otherwise incredible product, and learn how to play, or ship it out to fans, and then making the changes available.

 

I literally spent £120 on picking up 3 books in the current setting, to then, not only learn the week after that they were producing a set of the rules, but that they contained hidden rules updates is pretty despicable practise, in my eyes. That these rules could have either been avoided by the FW team actually a; proof reading their rules (tell me what it means for Breachers to have "Veteran Upgrade") or b; stress testing them with people such as myself who will stress test things and not play things like they should be played (the seminal and supposedly archetypal Death Guard Rite of War sucking until you play it with units that aren't actually notable death guard units for example), to the extent that it requires a rules update is not only annoying, but then being asked to pay for an FAQ is damn insulting.

 

Yes, I did pay for it though, because they have you over a barrel.

 

So, talking of that. Betrayal lists Librarians as having access to Manifester Level 3. Cool. Roll off, you get to keep it on a 4+. But, because you didn't tell me beforehand, you've wasted 20pts.

 

Oh, your Graviton Cannons? Eh, they've lost their haywire rule, and they roll 3d6 for Penetration now. What do you mean you wouldn't have taken them if they were so crap? Not my problem, Games Workshop have a rule for this that solves all problems, and sucks to be you, we rolled a 1-3 when you needed a 4+ to do so.

 

What do you mean your Predator Executioners and Infernus' iSquadrons intercept? That's been out of the game for over a year now! So now because you rolled a 4+, my entire drop pod army is invalidated. Excellent. Good show.

 

So, you say communication is key. That leads to one of two circumstances - either I put up a list of rules which affirms each and every book that is available for use, and houserule in play - there are a lot, we (my gaming group) current have a list that's about 17 pages long that we can refer to, basically a rulebook in itself, or we agree before the game, listing each of those individualities. Let's not get onto the discussions over how units interact in 

 

So, you tell me. What's it better to do? To have FW on top of their ability to write rules, or to follow up on the GW's acknowledgement that their rules aren't perfect, and take half an hour a day adding the questions that come up through the week via email or phone, and add them to the FAQ which gets released on the first monday of every month.

 

Or expect people to spend another £55 on top of the £210 they've already done so just to play the rules without having to sit through 17 pages of stuff that's otherwise easily answered?

 

I mean, if you don't play, or don't care about it in particular, and just enjoy the feel of throwing dice and pushing models around, fair enough. But that's like saying that a model should be shodily made and shoddily cast, because some people are terrible painters anyway and would ruin it, or are at the opposite end of the scale and can fix the models themselves. People who play Call of Duty don't appreciate feeling being cheated out of legitimately doing well due to bugs in the system, it makes the game un fun for them.

 

The same applies here. The game is functional, but is looser than the proverbial wizards sleeve.

[Kol Saresk]

That doesn't sound like too convincing an editorial line to me.

 

Kurtha Sedd and his goons literally turn innocents they stumble across in Calth's underground into altars of bone and muscle that are still alive and in torment, etc. etc. Heck, the intro scene has Sedd tearing apart a group of refugees huddling in a church on Monarchia.

 

It was, as depictions of the Word Bearers go, good stuff on Annandale's part, but it's hardly like fusing living humans together into furniture for your weird jollies isn't abusing innocents.

It's a matter of detail. It's one thing to say, make statues out of people depicting how they died, and it's another to describe in clinical detail how you brutally tortured and murdered someone in such a way that the reader becomes mentally scarred by it.

 

One is suggestive whereas the other is descriptive.

[Bryan Blaire]

Sorry Hesh (and others), just because you don't like how it is resolved doesn't mean that anything more needs to be done.

 

I don't like how GW does it either all the time, but the rules are there to deal with any situation you encounter. Whining about it on the Internet doesn't get games played.

[1000 Sons]

I understand the need to edit certain things and cut this or that scene. The only thing that ever irks me is when people trot out the "this for children" line. It's so easy to disprove that it's not even funny. Just call it like it is, a grim brutal a Sci-fi future based on some of the most horrendous periods in human history. You're gonna have horrible atrocities, murder, crush, etc. but you'll also have moments of shining humanity and selfless heroism in the face of impossible odds. That's an awesome setting, it's a setting that has drawn in pretty much everyone here. So don't do it a disservice by trying to say that it's kid friendly or that you have to do something for "the children" when it's really just to satisfy the arbitrary measurements of what's "okay" set forth by upper management and western society as a whole.

 

Murder millions and no one bats an eye. Sculpt one nipple though, and suddenly you're a monster.

 

Edit: Lol didn't know that "non-consented sex" is a cuss word now. This is what I'm talking about.

I don't think it is done to appease upper management and western society but more a marketing tool. The beginner gamer is usually in the 13-18 age group and can't buy these on there own. The game needs to be exciting and cool enough for kids to like, while not crazy and graphic that parents won't pay for it.

[Flint13]

++ Locked pending clean up ++