I am just starting out playing DH and I have a question regarding how to figure out what a group of players can take on at different levels. The DnD system uses CR to determine what types of monsters a PCs can fight and how many they can take on at their level. With DH I dont's see anything similar. I do notice they rate their creatures by if they are minor threat to a major threat. However, I don't know how many creatures I can attack the PCs with, at there given level, or what type I should use. I'm wondering what is a good rule of thumb to figure out how to make a combat encounter challenging for PCs at the different levels without a TPK or making it a breeze. Thanks

pehldog63 said:

There's nothing hard-and-fast to determine it. This is partially because an encounter becomes more or less difficult depending on the circumstances (cultists in cover with a heavy stubber laying down suppressive fire is quite different to cultists being ambushed in a dark alley, even if the number and ability of the group of cultists is the same in either situation), and partially because the story should be determining the nature of threats being faced, rather than an arbitrary formula telling you what's 'fair'. If the PCs are performing an armed raid of a den of incoherent narco-addicts, looking for a suspect, then they're likely to come away easily; the encounter doesn't have to be "balanced" for them, it simply is what it is. Similarly, busting down the front door to confront a group of heavily-armed Hereteks should not necessarily end well for the PCs; the situation is one where the PCs may well have to back off and try another approach.

Remember, xp isn't awarded for winning fights, and getting into needless battles is something that should be avoided - combat in Dark Heresy can be extremely vicious and deadly, and particularly during investigations where heavy armour may be inappropriate, can be unpredictable and costly for either side. The side that fights intelligently, knows when to run away, and works to avoid unnecessary gunfights, often live longer.

Beyond that, encounter structure generally depends on a number of factors - what equipment the characters have with them (are they arrayed for battle, with bulky armour and obvious weapons, or are they clad in street clothes with light-weight, concealable wargear?), what kinds of characters the group is made up of (some characters are better combatants than others), and the tactics they use (taking cover and suppressive fire are good ways to prolong life-expectancy). I would advise groups of adversaries over single opponents - few RPGs handle the "many heroes, one villain" set-up well, and Dark Heresy is particularly difficult to run that way - with enemies similar to most of the human NPCs in the back of the rulebook coming in groups of similar size to the number of players, with maybe one or two extra to allow for a little flexibility.

Although many DH villians are themselves highly dangerous in a fight, it bears keeping this in mind:

I'm sure I could take Don Corleone in a fistfight. Old man was on his deathbed. But neither of us will ever be 1/1000th as dangerous as Don Corleone.

At another forum (DakkaDakka) someone asked a similar question. I wrote the following based on my (limited) experience:

Encounter Balance.

This is something that I feel I’m yet to get right. In the first game I had a bunch of ‘mooks’ that worked fine – they caused good damage, but died to just about anything. I also created a few ‘Big Bads’ to spice up the combat, but I made them far too weak, and their pitiful 10 wounds were eaten through in a single round of combat most times. The Genestealers, on the other hand, were nigh-unstoppable, and only a liberal use of Krak Grenades saw two of them felled before the final one got the last character.

In the second game the Arbites were a little tougher due to their armour, but they were still a bit on the weak side (Power Swords are frickin’ awesome… especially on a WS50+ Assassin who gets to attack twice per turn). Not many Fate Points were used and they were never in too much danger. Even the Daemonhost was a bit of a pushover, but that was mostly my fault.

- - As an Aside, I should mention that all characters in these scenarios were pre-generated. In the first scenario I started the characters at Rank 2, in the second two of them were rank 3 with the Assassin at Rank 5, and the second game with all three at Rank 3, this was to avoid them just getting utterly destroyed by the first Stub Gun-wielding Scum they came across - -

The third game was even more strange with the Orks at the start proving to be unbelievably tough (Toughness 40 w/Unnatural Toughness X2 makes them very hard to kill), so it game down to the Tech-Priest’s axe and the Servitors Melta-Cutter before they won that confrontation (and the Tech-Priest was in Critical Damage by this stage, and that was only with me being nice and not attacking him for one round with the Power Klaw Nob and instead killing one of the Servitors). Then the lesser pirates were a complete pushover, with them dying in droves to accurate Lasgun, Shotgun and especially Hand Flamer fire (look up the rules for the Talent ‘Cleanse and Purify’ once you’ve read the rules for how Flamers work… that’s a great ability).

The point I’m making here is that encounter balance – as in how dangerous or pathetic each of your combat set pieces are – is a very difficult task that will take lots of trial and error before you get it right. I don’t think I’ve got it right yet, and my next scenario involves mostly Zombies, tougher Zombies, and then some more technical enemies towards the end. Not sure whether to swarm them with low level mooks like in Left 4 Dead, or make them really tough Zombies that you have to destroy utterly before the finally stop moving (like the Warp Zombies from the Purge the Unclean scenario book). I’d start by making things a bit easier than a bit more difficult. If everyone dies during the first few encounters people will stop having fun.

Also not every fight has to be winnable.

Maybe When going to that cult they are driven back, and call in the arbites to support them.

Maybe they're infiltrating a hive taken over by Chaos, they cant use any gates because the Iron Warriors have those covered.

I wrote a few guidelines that made excellent sense for RT but not the less powerful Accolyte form DH. So I deleted the post.

Be careful as the threat rating are more flavor rather than actual game mechanics. There are a few minor threats that will kill a starting party. Things to look at:

1)The other side's soak vs the PC overall damage, and the reverse. Generally I just add the pen, and damage together and compare it to the TB, and armor. Thus a weapon with 1d10+2 and 3 pen is 6-16dam. A PC with armor 3 and a toughness 3 has a 6 soak. The prior weapon with a 6-16 damage range is going to push a 6 soak PC into low crit range in 1-2 hits.

2)Special traits that double toughness. For example unatural strength, and daemonic aura. In many case these creatures can wear no armor and soak more damage than PCs as the pen ratings of weapons don't effect toughness.

3)Fear rating. Read the rules on fear, and understand them before you send a beastie against the PCs. A high fear rating creature can send 1/2 the party running in fear or worse.

Honestly in DH it's the equipment that really matters. If your PCs aren't under cover they will end up running in carapace, and power armor. With boltguns, and autoguns with manstoppers.

PS-Read the errata off the support page for DH.

Dalnor Surloc said:

Fear Rating is indeed one of the most dangerous tools in the GM's kit. In a party I play in, me and the guardsman invariably run away when something creepy shows its face, leaving the lesser combatants to deal with the nastiness. Fear can do that to your party. One simple Fear 1 opponent can make a party kill. All it takes is that the majority of the party fails their wp roll. I have seen it happen.

Sister Callidia said:

Don't underestimate pinning either. Unlike fear, pinning can be done by any human with a cheap autogun. But that means that the players can also do it to your NPCs.

One published encounter that I didn't think was particularly well balanced was 'Maggots in the Meat' from the GMs toolkit. While the introduction of the Slaugth makes for a very powerful and insidious invading force at the targeted ranks (1 or 2) it seems hidously unfair.

I ran it at rank four/five and everything up to the final encounter went smoothly. However, the high fear rating and health/TB of the infiltrators combined with the number of opponents (3 infiltrators and up to a dozen xenos pets) and vicious xenos weaponry tripped the party up somewhat (as perhaps it should) although they did triumph in the end.

IMHO, Fear is one of those traits that should be used sparingly as it can dramatically alter the course of an encounter if the PCs have a bad couple of rolls. In the above adventure all but one of the party passed the test caused by the Slaugth (who fainted for 5 rounds) while the intial Fear 1 test took out half of the party (1 freeze and 2 running away).

As others have said, DH is a lot more about story than an encounter being 'fair' and overcoming an unbalanced encounter can be quite a boon for the party. Good equipment and preparation can be the difference from a successful mission and a total massacre. Also there shouldn't be any shame in the party running away to regroup, call in reinforcements and come back to fight another day.