I thought that might be a very interesting campaign. For those who haven't read it - a great adventure in itself. For those who did - I'm sure they would want to act in their own way in those books.
What do you think?
I thought that might be a very interesting campaign. For those who haven't read it - a great adventure in itself. For those who did - I'm sure they would want to act in their own way in those books.
What do you think?
I think it sounds like a lot of fun. Do you envision having your players take the roles of the characters from the books, or having their own, created characters thrown into the events of those books? Personally, I'd say the latter sounds more fun, but either way I don't see how can go wrong when you're starting out with such excellent material as your baseline/inspiration. I also think it'll be a lot of fun for you to imagine lots of different ways that those events could've gone, depending on how the PCs play it.
Rheist said:
I think it sounds like a lot of fun. Do you envision having your players take the roles of the characters from the books, or having their own, created characters thrown into the events of those books? Personally, I'd say the latter sounds more fun, but either way I don't see how can go wrong when you're starting out with such excellent material as your baseline/inspiration. I also think it'll be a lot of fun for you to imagine lots of different ways that those events could've gone, depending on how the PCs play it.
Thanks for the comment! My idea is to use their own characters, not those in the book (although, it might pretty easy to generate in-book characters, if one prefers so).
So the main problem is to envision how the events *could have proceeded* subject to the actions of the PCs, which are almost always unpredicable. That might be difficult, but fun, anyway. As for me, I would have played it gladly.
I'd love to partake in an Eisenhorn campaign, but that's not whats on offer. (Is it?)
It had crossed my mind, but running it depends almost entirley on the players doing what Eisenhorn does and not their own thing :/
cyclocius said:
It had crossed my mind, but running it depends almost entirley on the players doing what Eisenhorn does and not their own thing :/
And that's when the interesting part of GM's job comes into play. Combined with some *REASONABLE* streamlining, it will be interesting to envision how the events would have unfolded.
Do you have any ideas of your own, if you would be the designer of such a scenario?
I think an interesting approach might be to have the players as Acolytes of another Inquisitor, rather than Eisenhorn himself, perhaps Commodus Voke or Tutus Endor. I magine it would be a lot of fun having to investigate some of the more dubious goings on which Gregor and his team get up to, only to find that the dangerous heretic you're investigating is a famous and decorated inquisitor.
Can't say I have. But I have been thinking of doing a campaign situated in the Scarus sector (where the Eisenhorn and Ravenor trilogies take place for the mostpart). Especially since that beautiful DH-esque map of the Scarus sector was included in the Ravenor omnibus. It just begs to be used for Dark Heresy.
PGMason said:
I think an interesting approach might be to have the players as Acolytes of another Inquisitor, rather than Eisenhorn himself, perhaps Commodus Voke or Tutus Endor. I magine it would be a lot of fun having to investigate some of the more dubious goings on which Gregor and his team get up to, only to find that the dangerous heretic you're investigating is a famous and decorated inquisitor.
My thoughts exactly.
Varnias Tybalt said:
Can't say I have. But I have been thinking of doing a campaign situated in the Scarus sector (where the Eisenhorn and Ravenor trilogies take place for the mostpart). Especially since that beautiful DH-esque map of the Scarus sector was included in the Ravenor omnibus. It just begs to be used for Dark Heresy.
While Dan Abnett's maps are pretty cool, I would still prefer to re-live the events of that trilogy, now from the player's or GM's point of view. As well as to introduce those people who haven't read to that great book.
egalor said:
While Dan Abnett's maps are pretty cool, I would still prefer to re-live the events of that trilogy, now from the player's or GM's point of view. As well as to introduce those people who haven't read to that great book.
Sounds like a good idea. Though I couldn't do that myself since most of my players have already read Eisenhorn. Which is why im hogging the groups only copy of the Ravenor Omnibus, since I intend to use a few events from that book in my campaign. 
The rule goes that if one GM is reading a Black Library book and wants to use some elements described in it, and the others haven't read that book yet. They aren't allowed to read it as it might spoil the scenario or make them immediately think "I know where you stole that idea from!
"
Varnias Tybalt said:
egalor said:
While Dan Abnett's maps are pretty cool, I would still prefer to re-live the events of that trilogy, now from the player's or GM's point of view. As well as to introduce those people who haven't read to that great book.
Sounds like a good idea. Though I couldn't do that myself since most of my players have already read Eisenhorn.
No problem whatsoever. I imagined myself as the player - and I would have greatly enjoyed the scenario based on the book I have read. Imagine: although you may know the main plot, you never know what could happen if you didn't act as Eisenhorn/Ravenor did.
I think it's a decent project to work on (before somebody else used this idea) ![]()
Anybody wanna jump in?
Sounds like an interesting DH Campaign. However I suggest not putting the players too near Eisenhorn. An Inquisitor needs alot of support to function at his level. I mean in the books He has three estates on three different planets none of which allows regular travel (well, its just a hop and skip away if he really needed to get there). Also between the first and second book a century passes. Maybe the Acolytes are searching for the daemonhost as a backdrop but discover something equally threating. And its 41 years between the second and third books. Maybe the acolytes have to deal with some aspect of Eisenhorn's holding during or after the Conspiracy Era. Of course waiting for the Rogue Trader rules on wealth/profit might be a good idea before putting them in charge of any large money enterprises.
He does say that he pays for the Essese's Services and Im sure they don't come cheap.
Maybe your players don't work for Eisenhorn directly but work for one of his staff like Ms. Bequin. I bet that Distaff probably needs some work done. 40 or so Untouchables. We read how Ms. Bequin was 'mistreated' during her early life whoses to say that some of the young untouchables need "Problems" dealt with from their previous lives so they don't interrupt their new ones.
AdabrBrcol said:
Sounds like an interesting DH Campaign. However I suggest not putting the players too near Eisenhorn. An Inquisitor needs alot of support to function at his level. I mean in the books He has three estates on three different planets none of which allows regular travel (well, its just a hop and skip away if he really needed to get there). Also between the first and second book a century passes. Maybe the Acolytes are searching for the daemonhost as a backdrop but discover something equally threating. And its 41 years between the second and third books. Maybe the acolytes have to deal with some aspect of Eisenhorn's holding during or after the Conspiracy Era. Of course waiting for the Rogue Trader rules on wealth/profit might be a good idea before putting them in charge of any large money enterprises.
He does say that he pays for the Essese's Services and Im sure they don't come cheap.
Maybe your players don't work for Eisenhorn directly but work for one of his staff like Ms. Bequin. I bet that Distaff probably needs some work done. 40 or so Untouchables. We read how Ms. Bequin was 'mistreated' during her early life whoses to say that some of the young untouchables need "Problems" dealt with from their previous lives so they don't interrupt their new ones.
A very useful input, thanks.
I think I see your point. Indeed - Eisonhorn has a LOT of powerful resources available (like Essene, estates, etc.), and this kind of power is not usually allowed for the PCs. I see two possible solutions here: first, we wait for the release of Ascension. I expect this topic to be covered in detail there. Second - the Rogue Trader game, which will help resolve the Essene issue.
As for the gaps between the parts - yep, you're right, that's an issue. But what if I stick them into one? AFAIR, the main plotlines are interconnected too strongly (only minor details) - so it's possible, I reckon, to make them follow each other with some reasonable time gaps in between.
Third: I would prefer to keep them as far as possible from their Inquisitor. I wouldn't support the idea of Ms.Bequin as their Inquisitor, but I would rather prefer to keep their Inquisitor a bit of mystery. He will contact them via vox all the time, give his false name and use distorted voice. In this case, I will have more freedom as regards the actual personality of the Inquisitor in question, or even introduce Eisenhorn (and/or his fashionable pet doggy Cherubael) later in the adventure, when he moves towards (or reveals to be of) the Radical path - and escapes before the PCs could have a chance to get into conflict with him. BTW, that's when The Radical's Handbook will come in handy.
***
Apart from this - I've just re-read a few first chapters of Xenos. I think it might be possible to design a game out of it. I would suggest, that the scenario begins by assigning an urgent mission to the Acolytes to hunt down Eyclone (who's "damned to hell and back"
) on Hubris. From the game design point of view, I'd think of the following:
- what happens if the Acolytes manage to stop Eyclone before he triggers the thawing process?
- If they don't, will they be able to explain their deeds on Hubris the way Eisenhorn did in the book (by rolling at least several successes under Fel)?
- If not, what kind of complications would ensue?
- will they be able to properly study the mortuary and survive the combat with Eyclone's "little but nasty secret weapon"?
Etc.
Heck, it' sounds very attractive. Any other thoughts?
I would start the Acolytes in the trilogy after house Graw due to the fact that it says, "He had gotten used to such a huge staff now." at the start of the second book. this is because in Xeno we only see him with Aemos, The arbie and the Untouchable. I don't mention the astropath he normally has around because it seems like every time he leaves a world or has a battle the Astropath burns out or dies (Psyker PCs beware
).
My comment about having the order-giver being Ms Bequin was because i just finished reading the topic "Using Dark Hersey out of Inquisition context". You said You don't wish the Acolytes to know who the main boss is. Thats fine. I mean I suspect that the majority of communications during any Eisonhorn Campaign will be transmitted via Astropath. They will only know a name used to purchase the services of the Astropath. Given the high amount of fake names (Alter Egos) that the staff and Eisonhorn use during the book series. Whose to say that they ever meet any of their employers.
Also another chance to put your Acolytes into the employ of the distaff (i keep going back to them because they are among the least of his powerbase that is not really identified lock stock and barrel in the book series) Where did he aquire all those Untouchables. I mean oh In his many campaigns (including his frequent 'rest breaks') he runs across them and goes "You can join the Thorn Academy or be a punching bag as a result of your being born with a negative Psi rank."