Rant: Black Crusade etc.
By Exxar on March 2nd, 2011
http://www.rpgcentar.com/cms/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/black_crusade_splash_575.jpg“>
http://www.rpgcentar.com/cms/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/black_crusade_splash_575.jpg” alt=”" width=”575″ height=”187″ />
Being out of the loop for the last week or two, it is only today that I noticed FFG announcing Black Crusade, a new game in the Warhammer 40,000 Roleplay line. As much as I like those games (and indeed I like them VERY much), I cannot help myself and not view this as FFG milking the cash cow, among other things.
http://www.rpgcentar.com/cms/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/announcement_250.png“>http://www.rpgcentar.com/cms/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/announcement_250.png” alt=”" width=”250″ height=”366″ />The Black Crusade RPG gives players the opportunity to experience roleplaying in the grim darkness of the 41st millenium from a different perspective. Where they once battled against the forces of Chaos, now they embrace it wholeheartedly. As I already said, I love me some WH40KRP, and I’d definitely enjoy playing a Chaos Space Marine battling the forces of the False Emperor or a cultist weaving a demon’s web in the very heart of the Imperium, but releasing this as a game unto itself is a bad move IMO. The idea of splitting the line into three distinct games, which was originally conceived by Black Library, was bad in the first place and now it’s really beginning to show.
FFG already made an unnecessary move by releasing a new edition of WFRP, a game that was quite healthy and didn’t need a facelift. Some will say that FFG’s edition is innovative and that change is good, but I view that specific change as one not for the sake of improvement, but as one for the sake of change itself. Oh, and it also screams “This game is ours now and we have this really cool idea, so lets release a new version just to show how cool we are! It will have cards and minis and shit, who cares about pen and paper RPGs only consisting of pens and paper anymore! Yeah, then it will really be ours and ours alone!” FFG’s changes are an interesting take on RPGs, but not ones I like. While I commend them for the idea as a new product that’s intended to stand apart from its competition and thus earn some major cash, I’m of the opinion that such additions to RPGs should remain as optional accessories, not integral parts of the game itself. But the most important part is that they should have applied their innovations in an entirely new game – instead they have discontinued one that has only started to mature, and thus reset the cycle. I’m talking about sourcebooks – when a game is new, the most essential sourcebooks are released first, and the more exotic ones follow later. WFRP 2nd Edition was just getting into that period, but now it’s going from the very start, again. The mechanics didn’t need much greater a facelift than D&D went through from 3.0 to 3.5 too. That is the reason I view FFG’s WFRP 3rd Edition as a nothing more than milking the cash cow, and that sentiment is extending at least somewhat to the Black Crusade.
http://www.rpgcentar.com/cms/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/black_crusade_heretek_250.png“>http://www.rpgcentar.com/cms/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/black_crusade_heretek_250.png” alt=”" width=”250″ height=”396″ />Right, back to the Black Crusade. The above is one of the reasons why I’m looking at the new game with suspicion. I can’t help myself but view it as a cheap marketing ploy. $60 for a new core rulebook isn’t a small expenditure either. The other is from a design point of view. Why release three different games that use the very same mechanics, with just a few additions between them? Why repeat 80% of the writing across three different core rulebooks? The idea is barely plausible if you intend to limit yourself with those exact three games. But we all know that such a limitation won’t last (and it obviously didn’t). There are always additional areas of the game, different kinds of play you can explore. It would have been much simpler to release a single game with a single core book, no matter if it were just a bare-bones rulebook with just a short introduction into the setting or a rulebook with a default setting and playstyle assumption, such as each of the currently existing core rulebooks are. It would be easy to release additional sourcebooks for different “modes” of play, which would of course introduce new careers appropriate for the genre as well as new rules to facilitate the change of playstyle. Cross-genre compatibility of the resources would be a tad more greater too. But the greatest benefit would be to any future expansions. Let’s say that the game originally started as Dark Heresy. Wanna play a Rogue Trader? No problem, here’s a sourcebook for that. And another few specifically for the genre, but which could also be useful outside of it. Same thing with playing Space Marines or anything else. A change of sides, want some blood for the Blood God? Piss easy. Ork freebooters? Waaaaaaaagh, nothing to it. For the greater good? Sure, if you insist.
http://www.rpgcentar.com/cms/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/black_crusade_necron.jpg“>http://www.rpgcentar.com/cms/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/black_crusade_necron.jpg” alt=”" width=”170″ height=”195″ />On the first glance everything would be the same for the player with both the above-mentioned approach and the current one used by FFG. But the approach I just described is much more modular and makes the game easier to expand. FFG’s philosophy leaves little chance of certain niche sub-games ever appearing. For example, if you wanted to play as Tau, there isn’t a big likelihood of an entire Tau game ever being published, just as of a Tau soucebook being published for any of the current games. However, such a product would be a viable one if there was only one, all-encompassing game.
In the end, I guess it’s better for FFG to keep releasing new games in the WH40KRP line than stopping. Because the moment that happens, we can be sure that a new and “improved” edition is on the horizon.
No related posts.
Leave a Response
