Some background:

I've been playing RPG's for years, but I've never been a GM. I really want to try my hand at running my own game, and I am very interested in DW and the Fantasy Flight 40K books in general. Of course, there is a problem...

The group I normally game with is geographically spread out, and it can be a struggle for us to meet on a regular basis (I'm the only one in the group with a "normal" 8-5 job). In fact, only two of them -- my regular GM and his wife -- have the time to meet for an additional game outside of the one we're already playing. They have expressed interest, but the GM in particular is extremely wary of two player games.

My primary question is this: is running a two player DW game practical, especially for a newbie GM like me?

If it helps, I can already tell you what they would be playing: a Dark Angels Devestator and a Librarian (probably either Ultramarines or Blood Angels).

I've considered things like running a GMPC or giving them NPC squadmates to help roundout their kill-team, but the GM is adamantly against GMPC's (which I understand) and isn't necessarily keen on constantly operating with NPC's. Anyway, both of these options kind of feel like a band-aid to me. If the game can't be run effectively at the player count I'm working with then I probably need to just accept it and move on, and so I'm looking for advice.

A secondary question is this: since there are experienced GM's on this forum I would like to ask if there are any games out there which they could recommend for a small two player group? I've considered Call of Cthulhu, L5R, and OW (I was going to offer them command of a Leman Russ), but I have limited experience with all of these. My GM friend is mostly into Old WoD and AD&D, and so he can only give me limited advice on these other games.

Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks.

I've played one player DW in the past which worked very well.

What I did was focused very heavily on the role playing side of things. The action and combat was quite peripheral. The player was a KIll Team Tactical Marine sent into a non Imperial Human enclave/territory in order to convince the ruler not to ally with a xenos species. The powers that be had tried regular diplomats and the Ecclesiarchy but that hadn't worked so they figured maybe introducing them to a Space Marine might work.

The game was very good fun.

Two players will be fine but I would suggest really trying to get the players into their characters as warrior knights devoted to a specific Chapter and then play on that rather than as a series of combat encounters.

I know this is a Deathwatch forum and I love the game but to be honest if your wondering which game to play the classic game for any sized group has to be Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay (1st edition for personal preference but dealers GM choice otherwise).

I have to say that Deathwatch is ideal for this because the PCs are so powerful. In a sense, Deathwatch is not very beginner-friendly because there are so many special abilities that may be combined that it might overwhelm initially. Fortunately some rules can be left out at the beginning.

If you go for DW, my advice is to add a GMPC and give them all Renown 21 or more.

Alex

The best GMPC is overwhelmingly Apothecary, by the way, if nobody is interested in that role.

Also, I mean, your friend-who-usually-GMs may hate GMPCs, but it's hardly appropriate for him to tell you not to have one if you're GMing. I know how GMPCs can take away from the players in some way, but they don't strictly have to. Covering fire and heals are both extremely feasible for an Apothecary without stealing the spotlight.

I use a GMPC Blackshield. He is quite mysterious. The 'strong silent' type. He uses two bolt pistols regardless of whether this is appropriate or not. This gives him a certain flair which is cool for building style but crucially he always fades into the background when the PCs want/need to shine. I only really use him when the PCs need to be given hints or to put in red herrings. Also he is good for fudging combats (i.e he manages to severely weaken an overpowerful horde or adversary).

Another thing to consider about Deathwatch is that can be designed around a smaller that 4-5 person group, especially if your players are Kill Marines (specialty from Rites of Battle). There's a lot more infiltration/assassination missions than there are of the other styles of missions, but you can always tailor it to your players wants.

I also agree with Kshatriya on GMPCing an Apothecary to help keep the KT alive and that the GM-who-isn't-GMing doesn't have a much of a say in how you run your game. You've got enough on your plate as a GM without having to walk on eggshells too.

Essentially every character they interact with is a GMPC and while I understand what your usual GM is getting at he's in the wrong in telling you how to run your game. Any game can be fun for any amount of players. Check out Scion and Exalted, two of my favorite settings and epic/crazy enough that anything will work.

Typically the thing that makes a great game is challenging your players while giving them what they want.

I ask my players for feedback at the end of the gaming session. What did they like? What didn't they like? What do they want to see more of?

Each player wants to feel special or have their time in the sun. If someone allocated points into interaction skills and all you do is get them to shoot some thing's face off but they kinda stink at it then they will be a little discontent.

My advice is to come up with a reasonable explanation as to why there are only two of them. Perhaps start them out during a failing mission as the Thunderhawk is coming to extract them off planet with vital information. It's up to you to mould the story around the actions of your party not the other way around. If you try to make them do something they don't want to then it will feel like you are railroading them. That's the biggest and most often made mistake made by new Storytellers. Rambled on for a while if you want or need more advice I'm always more than happy to tell people what I think

I use a GMPC Blackshield. He is quite mysterious. The 'strong silent' type. He uses two bolt pistols regardless of whether this is appropriate or not. This gives him a certain flair which is cool for building style but crucially he always fades into the background when the PCs want/need to shine. I only really use him when the PCs need to be given hints or to put in red herrings. Also he is good for fudging combats (i.e he manages to severely weaken an overpowerful horde or adversary).

I mean no disrespect, but given the OP is looking for advice on GMing I have to say this.

The above sounds like exactly the kind of GMPC I, and most players I know, loathe. It hits atleast 3 of the Mary-Sue archetypes too, mysterious, silent and dual wielder all of which will yield nothing but collective groans from the table when this character shows up. My usual GMPC is typically not a combat character at all, usually a boat driver or in DW the shuttle pilot or rhino driver (if none of them have that kind of skill) if I use one at all. It certainly depends on your group, but for my gaming club this is a perfect example of what to avoid. Your group may be different, but its certainly something you want to check because badly used GMPCs can be a complete deal breaker for many players.

Contrary to what many people are suggesting, I actually think DW works best in a larger group (5+) of players, that way the squad feels fully fleshed out (you have to put restriction on the amount of people who can play what though, so that everyone feels like they have a purpose and so everything feels thematic. Its certainly possible to do, but it will by its nature drastically change the nature of a Squad based combat RPG like this. If your players are up for it, try giving them two characters each, or create another 3 squad members but don't control them other to give them a voice . Let the players level them up and move them during combat, rolling dice etc, but leave them playing as their main character. Its easier for you as a GM, and lets the players still feel like its their story, not yours.

If your group is spread out, have you considered running games over skype using programs like roll20 or rollz? These kind of set ups are perfect for people in your situation because it means you only have to focus on time, not distance with your existing friends, but also you can get new players from all over the web if they can play at the time that is convenient for you. I moved to China last year and the RPG scene here is less than non-existent. After starting to play this way I've joined two games playing with people from 4 different time zones (including my own). Its been a real life-saver.

I use a GMPC Blackshield. He is quite mysterious. The 'strong silent' type. He uses two bolt pistols regardless of whether this is appropriate or not. This gives him a certain flair which is cool for building style but crucially he always fades into the background when the PCs want/need to shine. I only really use him when the PCs need to be given hints or to put in red herrings. Also he is good for fudging combats (i.e he manages to severely weaken an overpowerful horde or adversary).

I mean no disrespect, but given the OP is looking for advice on GMing I have to say this.

The above sounds like exactly the kind of GMPC I, and most players I know, loathe. It hits atleast 3 of the Mary-Sue archetypes too, mysterious, silent and dual wielder all of which will yield nothing but collective groans from the table when this character shows up. My usual GMPC is typically not a combat character at all, usually a boat driver or in DW the shuttle pilot or rhino driver (if none of them have that kind of skill) if I use one at all. It certainly depends on your group, but for my gaming club this is a perfect example of what to avoid. Your group may be different, but its certainly something you want to check because badly used GMPCs can be a complete deal breaker for many players.

No disrespect taken. It is a good opporunity to show the OP GM that as the saying goes 'Tropes are Not Bad'

Your right that at first glance the character does appear rather GM pet like.

Allow me to elaborate and show my working.

He is a mysterious silent Blackshield because when he was first created I was playing a one player DW campaign. The PC needed another KIll Team member to bounce ideas off. However I was conscious that pretty soon other PCs would be getting involved. I didn't want duplicates of other Chapters necessarily, certainly not for GMPCs and also didn't want to steal anyones thunder by making some kind of in depth backstory that demanded its own subplot. Basically he isn't a brooding badass archetype. He is actually quite affable as marines go. It's just that he shamed his Chapter, doesn't massively like to speak about it and has respect for the rest of the group so doesn't speak much unless asked or something obvious that needs attention comes up. Basically he is silent not to be keewl but so he can keep his mouth shut and let the PCs be the heroes.

Although he is dual wielding bolt pistols he isn't a bad ass gunslinger. In fact he doesn't even have Independant Targeting and his Bs is about average. He obsessively dual wields bolt pistols precisely because these are comparatively two of the weaker weapons marines have. Therefore he won't ever outshine any of the PCs.

In fluff terms the reason he only ever dual wields is because of the shame he brought on his Chapter he doesn't feel he can use other Holy Weapons of the Astartes until he has been redeemed. Thus he only uses the humble bolt pistol. This reason has never been explained to the PCs.

In turn this fluff reason means that the PCs can't/won't just use him as another heavy weapon platform or just give him a jump pack and use him as an ablative Assault Marine. Basically they'll have to sink or swim on their own.

As it happens he very often fulfils the exact roles you have described. Presently he has barely been seen in this adventure as he has been piloting the Thunderhawk they have been using and overseeing the crew of the Frigate they have in Orbit. A bit of minor medicae was also useful until a real Apothecary turned up.

He can be used to fudge combat . Not in a 'and then he does a matrix dive and shoots the Chaos Lord in the head winning the battle' kind of way but more in a shaving a few points of Mag here or dragging a PC to safety there kind of way. And only if I feel i have done something wrong as a GM. I'm sure we've all been there. You write a scenario and its genuinly too powerful for the PCs who are put in a position they can't really walk away from. Other than TPK manufacturing an escape might be the only way out. Therefore a blank slate character can be useful. Luckily I've not really had to do this so far this campaign.

None of our group are new to RPing so I know exactly what your saying about GMPCs and Mary Sues and I agree that it looks dodgy on paper.

Funnily enough he is the first genuine GMPC I have used in x years of GMing as previously I was quite opposed to the idea altogether seeing it as good way of introduing a Mary Sue GM-pet. But in hindsight I am kind of glad I stumbled on the cliched character and made it work as a viable GMPC because it has proved that any character can work as long as the delivery is correct.

My present group includes 5 players and may go up to 7. I think it will be fun to see all the PCs developing but personal experience of GMing very large groups (my DH campaign had 14 odd players split between groups and cameos) means I know it will be a handful.

Contrary to what many people are suggesting, I actually think DW works best in a larger group (5+) of players, that way the squad feels fully fleshed out (you have to put restriction on the amount of people who can play what though, so that everyone feels like they have a purpose and so everything feels thematic. Its certainly possible to do, but it will by its nature drastically change the nature of a Squad based combat RPG like this. If your players are up for it, try giving them two characters each, or create another 3 squad members but don't control them other to give them a voice . Let the players level them up and move them during combat, rolling dice etc, but leave them playing as their main character. Its easier for you as a GM, and lets the players still feel like its their story, not yours.

The biggest issues with 5+ are slowdown, creating combat situations that are both challenging but not overwhelming. And I've never seen one person controlling multiple PCs working properly. It usually results in a characterization failure for at least one character if not both.

Contrary to what many people are suggesting, I actually think DW works best in a larger group (5+) of players, that way the squad feels fully fleshed out (you have to put restriction on the amount of people who can play what though, so that everyone feels like they have a purpose and so everything feels thematic. Its certainly possible to do, but it will by its nature drastically change the nature of a Squad based combat RPG like this. If your players are up for it, try giving them two characters each, or create another 3 squad members but don't control them other to give them a voice . Let the players level them up and move them during combat, rolling dice etc, but leave them playing as their main character. Its easier for you as a GM, and lets the players still feel like its their story, not yours.

The biggest issues with 5+ are slowdown, creating combat situations that are both challenging but not overwhelming. And I've never seen one person controlling multiple PCs working properly. It usually results in a characterization failure for at least one character if not both.

Yes. The GM really needs to take charge in large groups in giving the players enough time to plan and for everyone to have their say but not let the PCs ramble on.

I've only been in a single DW campaign, if it could even be called a campaign. We didn't really have a long running storyline. Every mission was designed to be completed in a single session.

We had the same problem. There might be several people show up to a game session, but there might be only 2-3 people, and we rarely knew until D-Day. With single-session missions it was okay for people to miss a session. They never had to come into an adventure cold.

Eventually, as we all learned the rules, more people wanted to GM single sessions and the regular GM got to draw up a character and play, too. It was all quite fun.

When only a couple people show up, you have more stealth-based missions. Consider missions of sabotage, assassination, retrieval, etc., based on the skills of the players showing up to the session.

If it's definitely going to be a two-player game most of the time, I would definitely recommend the Legends of the Wulin system. It's in the wuxia action genre, not as crunch-heavy as the 40k games and PCs are high-power but still more...restrained in PC power than something like Exalted (or at least, NPCs can match PCs, even PCs who are mechanically optimized). It is very easy to play in an episodic format.

From what I've seen of Deathwatch, it might be the -most- ideal for running under four player groups. Almost all of the roleplaying infrastructure is taken care of behind the scenes with the NPCs of the Deathwatch. This frees up a lot of roleplaying opportunities that you might not otherwise get with fewer people. They can focus on more tactical fights with smaller numbers and minimize their total party liability. They wont have to do anything but watch each other's backs as they progress and librarian/devastator should be a very powerful combo if they can make it work.

If your story line is compelling enough, I don't see any reason why they wouldn't enjoy themselves, unless they just prefer larger groups in general.