Howdy all,

I'm very new to the Rogue Trade concept, though I've enjoyed various forms of WH40K and WHFRP over the years.

As I've mentioned in replies to a couple of posts, I'm having some trouble getting my head around the scope of this RPG. The character creation process, including skills and talents, is pretty standard fare, designed to create pretty standard RPG characters. The various powers available are almost all individual powers, useful for standard RPG activities - fighting, tinkering, bartering, etc. Lots of things like dual weapons wielding, acrobatics, etc etc.

On the other hand, the scope of the game's scope seems to assume that the characters are in fact not individual combatants, but rather the leaders of very large corporate or military units. This results in the odd cognitive disconnect that sees me creating a character who is extremely talented at quickly drawing two pistols and engaging multiple targets when what he really needs is the ability to quickly assess reams of leave forms and purchase orders.

In other posts, some have commented that characters will be personally involved in the nitty gritty of combat etc because you can't rely on "mooks" to be able to do everything. I think this shows a lack of understanding of the scale involved in having tens of thousands of employees. These people aren't all "mooks". Any trader of any intelligence employs highly trained specialists in addition to mooks, and I can think of almost no situation in which the commander of a modern aircraft carrier (for example) is going to personnally participate in the boarding of a hostile ship. Indeed, it would be irresponsible and reckless for him to do so.

The character creation focus on individual skills/talents for combat etc just doesn't seem consistent with the game's scope. In fantasy game terms, it's as though the characters are the King, Lord Marshal, Arch Bishop, and Keeper of the Purse of a kingdom, but the game mechanics still assumes they'll be dungeon delving and kicking in doors to rooms full of surprised goblins.

Not sure how to resolve this conflict of scope. I'll probably just change the concept for my campaign such that Rogue Traders operate small ships (think Firefly) on the fringes of the Imperium.

Any thoughts?

It's like Star Trek. Yes, Kirk would be within his rights to send down wave after wave of crew to face whatever the problem is. But they would all be turned into cubes and crushed. The only way you can get anything done is by taking the bridge crew down with maybe a few disposables. That's when adventure happens.

It is a medieval society. Very few have the freedom or the drive to do anything more than operate the device or machine they are trained to operate.

Your players are members of the Elite.

And yes it is helpful to be able to process reams of paper!

Yeah. Keep in mind, the Imperium is a feudal society, and in terms of both ability and gear, the RT and their crew are the best of the best. For comparison in attitudes, keep in mind that it wasn't until sometime in the early 19th century, if I remember correctly, that British Prime Ministers were no longer expected by society to uphold their honour in duels, if so challenged.

Also, some of the stuff you encounter in even the realy RT adventures would happlily chew through an entire army of ratings armed with laspistols.

Keep in mind you probably don't hire many of the thousands of people under you, they might have lived on the ship you own for generations. This means they only learned what they know from their parents and have very few skills besides that. Some will never have been on the ship in their life.

And you are the rogue trader and his crew, you aren't there to do paperwork, you are the the owner of the warrant of trade and his friends / trusted advisors. What you want is to bring honor and fame to your family who will inherit this legacy. A large part of why things work in RT is because everything is about appearances and inheritance, you need to look good so you can keep the warrant in your family, and part of looking good is being seen to lead from the front and not be afraid to do things yourself.

Also by rights of salvage, plunder and procurement the rogue trader has to be the first to set foot on an enemy/abandoned vessel in order to claim it.

Okay, that was helpful. The medieval society bit is certainly something I hadn't quite understood to its logical conclusion. The idea of RT ships as spacebound cities full of families etc was also something I hadn't really understood. That makes much more sense indeed.

In that context, it is much easier to "suspend disbelief" . Thanks very much!

Ay, your biggest problem I think was illustrated when you said "modern aircraft carrier." Anytime you use the word "modern" in conjunction with anything 40k, you're gonna run into problems and logic disconnect. Modern, logic, and reason are all quite hazardous to the 40k setting. Ancient, faith, and conviction are much better words to use. Any time you find your self starting to use one of the dirty words (modern, logic, reason) replace it with one of the more appropriate words (ancient, faith, conviction) and you shouldn't run into these problems any longer.

On paperwork, that's another job for mooks! The more boring the job is, the better suited it is for mooks (and the more exciting the job, the more a mook will screw it up). Heck, the Seneshal should have a small army of scribes going through the paperwork for the PC's ship alone with a vast army of the nervous little buggers in an almost limitless dreary cubicle-farm chained to their matriculation machines, steam counters, and logic-engines collating and summarizing all the vast data of the dynasty. The Senishal might have even been one of those poor wretches before he finally and thankfully got promoted out of the dreary mind numbingly repetitive job of the scribe. Now he just gets summery reports from them enabeling him to advise the RT on the state of the dynasty and what needs to be done while hitting folks in the face and loving the fact he's not slaved to a desk.

Grashnak said:

First of all, the other characters are the representations of those specialists or at the very least the leaders of said specialists which you're refering to.

Second, you can't think about how a commander of a "modern" aircraft carrier would do, this because Rogue Traders aren't military commanders, they are explorers and adventurers. Sending mooks to do everything just so you can stay safely aboard the ship like a modern commander would do, is like a person engaged in extreme sports asking another guy to parachute out of a plane for him.

Third, a rather medieval mindset premanates the whole 40K universe, where even commanders are expected to show bravery in the line of fire (especially in the military), otherwise they'll lose favor and respect among their peers. A commander who just sit back all the time and stay confined to his or her vessel will not be a very succesful one.

To bring in a point not discussed yet: At some occasions, it is unpolite to bring a literal army with you.

Take for example a "flagg waving mission". The RT arrives at the system, broadcasting the imperial hymns on all frequencies while approachning the central inhabitated world. While approaching, he is greated by a broadcast from the planet. They are welcomed and a shuttle with an embassador of the world is coming to pay a first visit "according to customes". Whenever they allow him on board or not, they will be invited to a "statesmans banquet" with the planetary ruler.
This is a situation where you can either destroy all chances for political solution (by coming down with an armed company "securing" the planetary palace)...or you come with a retinue & a honour guard (the pc and perhaps 2 or 4 oathsworn bodyguards). Whatever will happen during the banquett (a trick to take the captain a prisoner, a revolt by counter-imperial seperatists or simply an assasination attempt from a minor local powergroup that wants the planetary ruler to look like an enemy of the Imperium), the personal skills of the pc will count. Afterwards (as soon as the enemy is clear) it is commanding companies and regiments. But at the beginning, you have it close and personal. As well as "Commando Operations" against power supplies etc. the RT will only trust his "best of the best of special operatives" onboard... your Archmilitant plus "a view good men".

This is one thing I am going to (ab)use in DH adventure I am currently working at. One where the acolythes are going to accompany a RT on a journey to world which had been cut off from the imperium for a long time ("Flagg waving mission"). The RT performs the duty as part of the requierments of his Warrant. The Administratum is to busy hunting xenos pirates to send a "regular navy vessel". So an RT must do.

I hope this concept of "creating personal situations" and "creating big scale situations" was helpfull.

I haven't read the other thoughts yet, and I'm sure there has been some great comments, I hope I'm not duplicating, but, that said, here is my two cents:

Your analogy is that of a modern day Air Craft Carrier, who wouldn't go out to battle foe's hand to hand. But something that might 'help' if your at all familiar with the startrek cannon, would be to think more of a Klingon Leader of a fleet or starship - His honor would require him to be the first off the boat and prove himself to be the most courageous in battle etc. Our current culture for War, and leaders of war strays from the culture of a Rogue trader quite a bit.

And though my 'Klingon' reference may not be the 'best' example (I probably should have used Gangis Khan, or Tribal Leaders in the 15 - 1800's of Native Americans, to properly illustrate the point.) but the bottom line is that there is a different Battle Culture in Rogue Trader than what we have in today's modern Ship commanders. Now... that said, a group could certainly play the game as the leave shuffling order giving Captains of war that you eluded to. With Rogue trader, you have either option available to you - send out the troops, and tactically plan your attack, or go in first in line battle sword swinging.

That very diversity is what I'm so enjoying about Rogue Trader.

Thanks,

zWolf -out. (and please everyon, I beg pardon for making a startrek reference in here... <- = my attempt to avoid Flame-age.)

In all honesty, my players rarely get off the ship, unless the arch-militant is leading a strike team or some sort of diplomatic function requires face time.

Think Picard, not Kirk.

And further: Um, no offense, but 40k dosn't have anything to do with how the real world worked at ANY POINT IN THE PAST AT ALL. It's better to say that logic and 40k should be treated as seperate entities entirely, particularly when it coems ot the wildly contradictory rules and fluff.

For real entertainment, watch GW waffle between being a mini producing company when asked about rules and a game producing company when asked about minis. I've seen their PR flacks do this IN THE SAME PARAGRAPH, IF NOT SENTENCE. Any attempt to apply logic or reason, or any sembelence between the real past or real present to 40k is doomed to failure.

BaronIveagh said:

I think you're overestimating the usefulness of logic and reason when understanding human history.

Another illustrative anecdote: Feudal Japan had access to guns from the Dutch for most of the Tokugawa Period (1600-1850 roughly) but chose not to use them because there was no pressing need (no surrounding countries had them) and having peasants armed with guns would interrupt the formal duels between aristocrats (ie, samurai) that were featured in most battles.

And Japan was actually a relatively reasonable feudal nation, at least if getting their act together once modernity came knocking at their door is a barometer.

I could go on. It's a little outside of my area, which is more recent, but I am a grad student in History.

Granted, 40k is fiction, and often silly at that, but it actually does a better job of conveying a feudal mindset than most fantasy products.

Hodgepodge said:

As the old saying goes: Truth is stranger than fiction, because fiction has to make sense.

I can see the problem and have adressed it myself.

In the Rogue Trader section it is described how larger-then-life a Rogue Trader is. How important and might a Warrant of Trade is. How normal it is to have a fleet at their disposal, etc.

Yet in game your more like a starting merchant-free trader-degraded Rogue Trader who managed to obtain a Warrant of Trade. I can see the Kirk-ish /Picard-ish parallels.

Most odd to me is the fact you start the game in a lot of cases with a 'puny' escort instead of the 'promised' cruiser. Yet a Rogue Trader has a large fleet at his disposal. In Battlefleet Gothic, a heavy inspiration, the Rogue Trader is on a cruiser vessel. with attendant escorts (six).

Don;t get me wrong, I love the fact RT RPG has a focus on small ships and 1:1 encounters with them. However I do think there should be a better explanation on why your on a small ship as a mighty Rogue Trader. Lets say your a starting merchant/free-trader, trading in the knonw Koronus Expanse worlds, working up to gain a Warrant of Trade (be it through connections, heritage, theft, etc) and then start commanding a fleet and exploring into the Koronus Expanse depths.

Not every Rogue Trader starts off with a cruiser though, and doing so would, at present, put a big brick wall in getting anything bigger or cooler than your current ship. Having the biggest shiniest stuff right from the start means very little development is available in that regard.

Thanks for agreeing with my point of view.

Darn, too quick.

That's the point: A Warrant of Trade does give the Rogue Trader the biggest and shiniest stuff already.

I'm actually going to merge my DH characters (Most of them are around the 3-5000 xp mark) into RT by making them Redshirts (DH) and Rogues (RT)

All players will roll an RT character (Rogue), although none of them will create an arch-militant (it will be a "floating" npc).

When a ground op is announced where combat is expected to be heavy, a ground party will be created comprising the following -

- The Rogue Trader player himself (must always be on the ground - that player effectively gives up his DH character...)

- One other Rogue must be present (either randomly selected, group decision or they can take the "floater" arch-militant)

- The rest of the ground crew will be Redshirts.

The characters themselves will still gain xp (I'll probably award equal xp to both Rogues and Redshirts) however there are some differences between the two types of character -

- Redshirts do not get fatepoints - they are much more fragile

- Redshirts do not get their own gear list - the seneschal ("loot-boy") chooses the equipment before the op. One exception - they can pick one piece of gear at game start as a cherished weapon

- Whilst in transit / warping, Redshirts have downtime rules I've already used during DH to improve themselves. Rogues cannot do this - they are considered to be "working" during transit.

- If a redshirt dies, the player can create a new DH character with 5000xp of their choice,

This will eventually make most Rogues with better equipment and talents, and their own extensive armoury, whilst the Redshirts will have better stats (due to downtime training), and be more expendable. The Rogue Trader himself must always lead from the front!

Furthermore, whilst onboard ship or when negotiating trade warrants etc, the players can heartily play weakling navigators, astropaths and void-masters to their hearts content without too much worry of being taken down and seriously leaving the ship in the lurch, and we can do some proper "ships council" style sessions where decisions are made

horizon said:

Not automatically. Being given a Warrant of Trade doesn't come with the ship, money, etc. You have to get that yourself with your own funds, and not all people given a Warrant of Trade can automatically afford a cruiser. It's something to build up to.

Being given everything from the beginning sounds dull to me. You appreciate it more if you have to work for it.

I think RT could be fun played Ars-Magica style, that is, with 3 characters per player.

The first is the "primary" character, representing the most powerful/influential/competent "leader" type; ie, a "standard" RT character. This is the player's main character, the one making the big decisions at the highest levels. This character influences the overall story the most, and while s/he can certainly get involved in the specifics and minutea, his/her primary role will be that of a high-level director. Example: Costellus Vane, Rogue Trader extrordinaire, captain of the proud vessel, Demeter's Lament.

The second is a body-guard/first-officer/adjunct, a highly skilled specialist, expert in a particular discipline. A Dark Heresy character would be appropriate for this. This is the character the player uses for missions, specific tasks/encounters or playing out detailed combat-time scenarios. Example: Alexia Thanatos, Assassin, lady of shadows. Personal death-dealer of Costellus Vane.

Third character is a "companion." This character is not statistically powerful, but serves a useful role in the primary character's retinue. This character is mainly an RP character, to add flavor and depth to the RT experience. An NPC profile with perhaps 100 to 200xp of advancements would be suitable for this. Example: Gurvald Mertz, Chef, personal culinary virtuoso in service of Costellus Vane's refined pallet.

Obviously, this approach requires more work on behalf of the GM and the players, but it can be very rewarding. Players get a chance to play the game in a lot of different ways and GMs have a lot of potential hooks to take advantage of.

@Millandson :

Then you almost completely ignore the Rogue Trader chapter in the book?

I do agree with you that the building up part is better then already have it all, but that is gaming wise. Background wise a Rogue Trader should / does have more resources at his disposal. It is even written in the endeavour section were it is said endeavours can be run in the background by NPC's (with penalties as the RT is not present etc).

Grashnak said:

The characters are also supposed to be the swashbuckling heroes the ship turns to when stuff needs to be done and done right. Yes the leaders of the ship might have adventurer underlings to do his dirty work, but in terms of what it means to be a rogue trader and his senior crew in this setting is to sometimes be the first ones into the legendary monster's lair or the ones to board a xenos capitol ship to represent what a dynasty is willing to do for fame and glory - a resource that almost all rogue traders seek and sets them apart from any navy or army officers you might think of comparing them to.

horizon said:

No, I just read up on other sources of 40k info rather than relying only on the book. A large number of RTs only have the one ship, especially brand new RTs, which is generally what the game's character creation system makes. Warrant holders don't get multiple ships straight away, they have to work for it.

Heh, the only other Rogue Trader document I read is the Battlefleet Gothic one. In which the RT gets his cruiser and escorts/cargo ships.