I've recently been given the chance by my GM to make a new character using the Radical's Handbook as radicalism has been something I've wanted to try for a very long time. However, limitations are there in the form that what radicalism is there needs to able to be hidden on some level, at least from my fellow players (a rather conservative adept and a black priest) if not my superiors. I might add that the GM is using a fairly sand-box style campaign, meaning we are free to do as we want with what we have available.

Now - suggestions; does anyone have any thoughts on what might be the best options? I've been considering the Hive Mutant origin with rather discreet mutations. Any and all suggestions are welcome.

Play a Hive Mutant. Take 'Grotesque' and 'Tox Blood'.

Be a Fallout ghoul

I would suggest the Blighted Schola backround with the Warp Touched Backround package and any of the other careers and alternate ranks would be fine except maybe the Sworn radical and the Daemon vessel for obvious reasons.

Those don't exactly appear easy to conceal.

Actually, on a serious note, I'd second ThenDoctor's suggestion of Blighted Schola and/or warp-touched. They're both pretty good, and a lot more subtle than "Im a radicool I can haz tentacle nao?"

Blighted Schola grants a fair hunk of good forbidden knowledge, and some other good mental abilities, of which I think the IPs/CPs are chickenfeed in cost. And unless your other party members/inquisitor (depending on how you get drawn into the game) really look into your background too deeply, it's not too hard to conceal your 'taint'.

Warp-Touched makes for great daemonhunters IMHO. The simple immunity to Fear, on top of all the other good effects, means they are untouched by the daemon's single greatest weapon - those batshit insane fear tests. Sure, you *could* get fearless, but that entails a WP test for those situations you'd rather walk away form, and usually isn't available to low-level characters, so depending on your starting rank it's a very enticing option.

I should know, I've built a warp-touched guardsman (ironically, Penal Legionarre wasn't such a good choice - all the fear-resisting talents you can grab are somewhat useless with From Beyond). He and his chainaxe have so far spelled the end for a pair of Horrors of Tzeentch, one on each occasion, in one swing each. Granted, he got a Righteous Fury on both accounts, but still, the point stands. Daemons aren't as tough once you can get past their crippling ability.

Depending on how much pride your Black Priest has on tackling daemons though (Pure Faith should be doing the same thing as above to him), you might not want to step on his toes too much. Though I do think there's the possibility of awesome bro-tier friendships forming between two acolytes who constantly stare down daemons, each with their own differing 'philosophies' etc etc odd couple style joke.

Just my experiences GMing/playing.

The Hobo Hunter said:

For some odd reason, the Black Priest plays incredibly pious (to which point, he's already incredibly suspicious of Meridien and another PC because of how little faith they have, show, and do actually have) and downright refuses to get Pure Faith. Myself as the GM, I'm incredibly confused. He is already playing the essiential RP prerequisite of pure faith quite literally, but isn't gaining any benefits from it other than huge gigantic check marks in the Inquisitor's books. I don't think stepping on his toes would be a problem, as it always has been before.

One apparent inside rule with all of my PCs is, you're not allowed to get along. Or at least it seems that way to me, because it's damned well true. Each person dislikes one character, and disdains the other (hate triangle?). It's a cycle of life I guess.

As well, [Meridien] doesn't know how his character is being introduced, because honestly, I haven't gotten to that point yet. I'm still running through a modified version of Edge of Darkness, and currently writing and rewriting the next. After that, with their leads, I'm giving them freedom, as it's never something I've done before and I truely want to see how well they've come along. But, convertness would be a great idea because I've portrayed their monodominant Inquisitor as a very snappy man with his punishments from the rumours they've heard of him, and he already knows if he's found out to be mutated he'll be wiped from existance, maybe even to the point destroyed from the warp with utter hatred (not srsly)!

I've just gotten to the point of finishing the character creation rules for them involving the Radical's Handbook. I'm awaiting to see who wants to change up their character, if they do, and then figuring it out from there. An example of what I was thinking of, since I'm not using this one anymore since one character is sticking around minimum (the Black Priest), that if all three PCs wanted new characters, how I would've intro'd them was on an assassination mission, killing their previous characters and taking up the investigation under another Inquisitor and move along from there.

But, alas, I'm clogging up space in my player's thread giving the GM perspective. Just so there are both stories upon here.

Matthew
http://tacjmz.webs.com (Group's Campaign Website. Not much on it, but I plan to add more when we actually get together to play)

Thanks for the reply, actually, since it'll give a perspective (however little) of what type of situation I am in from another perspective. I'm looking at my options, to be honest, radicalism is something I'd like to try, but it's a very, very risky business and due to that I'm weighing my options of whether to change out or not. Entire point of this thread is to see what I can manage given what's available and whether it is worth the risk.

The radical path offers a great many fluffy/crunchy gems for characters - as well as GM's. From what you are saying, it sounds like it comes down to what you/your character are willing to risk in service to the God-Emperor. Are you willing to risk your life, your body, your mind, your soul? If you can honestly say yes to more than two of those, then it might be worthwhile to try and play a radical.

Of course, as I myself can't wait to play my first radical, I may be a bit biased.

True, however, the issue also is that I cannot serve Him on Terra if I have a round of bolter shells hailing down from a few puritans into me. Thus, covert radicalism.

Meridien said:

Exactly. Which is why you have to be prepared to be a deceitful, lying, conniving son of a gun if you want to play a true radical. In other words, you have to be willing to be just as dishonest as your enemies (and your Inquisitor), if you want to pull it off ... for any length of time, at least.

**shivers with pleasure*** Doesn't that sound like great fun?!?

Sneaky is the word for that kind of job.

In some instances, you'll have to be extra careful. For example, there is an assassin player in my group who is looking into taking the radical path. I pointed out to him that he is teamed up with three progena (a Sororitas, an Arbitrator, and a priest) who are very dedicated to the cause and a soulbound psyker who goes out of his way to prove how pious he is. Due to previous actions taken by the assassin, my Arbite has already been keeping an eye on him.

With those kind of odds stacked against him, I'm actually looking forward to seeing how he pulls it off if he decides to go that way.