Dark Heresy and Rogue Trader: the same rules are the same rules?

By The Laughing God, in Dark Heresy

So I finally got my hands on a copy of Rogue Trader and so far have only perused its contents. What I am wondering, is: are the rules that are overlapping with Dark Heresy in any way different?

I mean, we find rules again on combat, equipment, skills and talents, mutation and damnation, NPC traits etc that seem the same. Am I right to assume that in Rogue Trader these rules are different only in that they have the Errata from Dark Heresy taken into account and may be more elaborate in the sense that there are new skills, talents and guns, but in every other aspect are exactly the same?

Thanks!

The Laughing God said:

So I finally got my hands on a copy of Rogue Trader and so far have only perused its contents. What I am wondering, is: are the rules that are overlapping with Dark Heresy in any way different?

I mean, we find rules again on combat, equipment, skills and talents, mutation and damnation, NPC traits etc that seem the same. Am I right to assume that in Rogue Trader these rules are different only in that they have the Errata from Dark Heresy taken into account and may be more elaborate in the sense that there are new skills, talents and guns, but in every other aspect are exactly the same?

Thanks!

There are a few tweaks and changes not yet covered by the DH Errata, though I imagine they'll find their way there in time. The biggest ones I've noticed are that Bulging Biceps now removes all the penalties for firing a heavy weapon without Bracing, and that you can fire pistol and basic weapons on semi- and full-auto while moving your Agility Bonus in metres, albeit without the bonus to hit (and with an additional -10 in the case of full-auto while moving).

Thanks for your reply. I was thinking too there should be some 'sneaky' differences that have not been noticed yet. But with the Errata figured in I am tempted to use the RT book as the new definitive, corrected rules set for DH games.

Also, with Righteous Fury, in RT it gives you the entire weapons damage again, rather than just 1d10. You also roll (for the first RF) against your modified BS/WS, rather than unmodified (as it was in DH).

Suffice to say, combats can be a hell of a lot more deadly now.

Wait, what was that about Righteous Fury? That's on the damage rolls, not the to hit rolls still, right?

Nope, the "to hit" roll for Righeous Fury now includes modifiers, rather than it being taken off the normal BS/WS stat, as it was in DH. Means that, if you have decent modifiers and a powerful weapon, Righteous Fury's are a hell of a lot more deadly.

Oops that's how i've been running RF in my games of DH right from the start... oh well it's right now gran_risa.gif

But yea im gonna be using a lot of RT for DH games now.

Well, it's right in RT, not in DH gui%C3%B1o.gif

Not yet I'd hope. If the games are to be compatible the rules and the traits in common have to be the same.

When they say compatible, they mean "you can transfer characters between the two". That's all they've ever meant. Having the rules other that those needed to accomplish that the same isn't required.

MILLANDSON said:

When they say compatible, they mean "you can transfer characters between the two". That's all they've ever meant. Having the rules other that those needed to accomplish that the same isn't required.

Still, I think the OP has a valid comment. A conversion PDF would seem to be not too much to ask for.

However, I wish we could just get a straight system and not a piecemeal system as is, meaning having to dig through 8 books to get all the rules is kind of annoying. Its ok for small things, or unique ideas, but it does get frustrating trying to remember what book has what rule.

Perhaps if they put them all on cards LOL

Or you could just remember the rules? I know that's what I do.

Peacekeeper_b said:

Perhaps if they put them all on cards LOL

That's not funny!! sorpresa.gif Okay, yes it is.

from france

it looks like the whole world of darkness sytems of white wolf. diferent games almost diferentes rules and talents that can be described and affect the game differently and character playble with a few changes in each games. it was possible to play at werewolves with a vampire character for example. if the three games dh rt and deathwatch folow the same way than yes it will be a nigmare of collecting tons of book for a few change appart from the backround. i don't think the will print the differents backournd separately if you already pose a core rule book. i think that they will continue to publish three games with the idea in mind that players won't neceseraly play more than one game.

homwever the should think to players that will want to play to the three game and wants a unified rules books and separate backrounds. i know that just a utopia.

MILLANDSON said:

Or you could just remember the rules? I know that's what I do.

Yeah thats what I do as well, but I imagine that unlike me some people might actually have lives.

And when I dont recall a rule, I dont fumble through a book or a pile of cards, I just makea referee call on the spot and move on.

I was just saying, that when I do look up a rule, its kind of annoying to have to figure out which book it was in. Its not a major issue, I was just stating that itd be nice to have a master index at some time in the future.

Peacekeeper_b said:

I was just saying, that when I do look up a rule, its kind of annoying to have to figure out which book it was in. Its not a major issue, I was just stating that itd be nice to have a master index at some time in the future.

I wholeheartedly agree. Ofcourse we all try to remember the rules, but I for one do NOT remember all the curious little details and such, and would like if there was clarity on exactly how a rule is supposed to be to avoid conflicting information on the same thing but in different books.

Peacekeeper_b said:

MILLANDSON said:

Or you could just remember the rules? I know that's what I do.

Yeah thats what I do as well, but I imagine that unlike me some people might actually have lives.

I have a life, it's called post-grad and a family (fiancee and step-son). No need to suggest that people who have good memories don't have lives.

Though a master index could be useful, I'd rather FFG work on extra stuff for me to use in game instead. DH and RT are as compatable as they need to be presently (ie you can use characters from one in a game of the other).

the 8 spider said:

from france

it looks like the whole world of darkness sytems of white wolf. diferent games almost diferentes rules and talents that can be described and affect the game differently and character playble with a few changes in each games. it was possible to play at werewolves with a vampire character for example. if the three games dh rt and deathwatch folow the same way than yes it will be a nigmare of collecting tons of book for a few change appart from the backround. i don't think the will print the differents backournd separately if you already pose a core rule book. i think that they will continue to publish three games with the idea in mind that players won't neceseraly play more than one game.

homwever the should think to players that will want to play to the three game and wants a unified rules books and separate backrounds. i know that just a utopia.

from California

White Wolf nWoD keeps the rules the same as it has a core rule book. Rogue Trader and Dark Heresy ARE their own core rule books. oWoD would be comparable to RT and DH in this respect but not nWoD.

Atomic_Pope said:

from California

White Wolf nWoD keeps the rules the same as it has a core rule book. Rogue Trader and Dark Heresy ARE their own core rule books. oWoD would be comparable to RT and DH in this respect but not nWoD.

Groan, it didn't used to when I played it. Each game was seperate book and out in seperate editions. Was pretty much a nightmare to keep up and the characters weren't very compatible.

An updated errata for DH would cover this please, and the character systems seem to be almost the same but set at different levels so that should not be an issue.

Atomic_Pope said:

from California

I believe the guy starts all his posts with "from france" because he, in the past, has caught some flak for his lack of fluency with english. It's just a warning that his native language isn't English.

Slaunyeh said:

Atomic_Pope said:

from California

I believe the guy starts all his posts with "from france" because he, in the past, has caught some flak for his lack of fluency with english. It's just a warning that his native language isn't English.

That's why he put 'from California' isn't it? :P

<joke>

MILLANDSON said:

I have a life, it's called post-grad and a family (fiancee and step-son). No need to suggest that people who have good memories don't have lives.

from the Netherlands

somehow I think Peacekeeper_b helped himself to some humor and irony when he made this statement and did not want to suggest anything unfriendly about people who are blessed with lives and good memories :)

The Laughing God said:

from the Netherlands

somehow I think Peacekeeper_b helped himself to some humor and irony when he made this statement and did not want to suggest anything unfriendly about people who are blessed with lives and good memories :)

from Germany, by way of Ohio.

Sounds about right, not that I remember what we are even talking about anymore. Im too busy trying to figure out of Gromrindal is a Squat or not!

Peacekeeper_b said:

Sounds about right, not that I remember what we are even talking about anymore. Im too busy trying to figure out of Gromrindal is a Squat or not!

What you should be thinking of is whether dwarves or Squats prefer to be called: "little people" or not. I hear political correctness is a big deal these days. gran_risa.gif

Also, IIRC Prone in RT provides a penalty to range attacks targeting the prone person, as long as they are farther than 10m (I think that's the range), whereas in DH there is no advantage to being prone.