First as a new forum member i will introduce me and my gaming experience...

Im an old rpg addict and currently playing games of Star Wars Saga and D&D, call of Cthulu. Played Vampire/werewolf in the past but dont really like this game setting.

Im an avid fan of Darker Game Tone as a GM which makes my game always more realistic and survival heroism is a common theme. My fantasy game are brutal and im quite happy with D&D 4e and the different setting released each year right now for fantasy. Would like a system less grid/mini-based but i like the oldschool openess for RP of this game even if those class power may be sometime over restrictive.

Ok for Science-Fiction...

Im currently playing SW saga and with the ending of the line which was absolutely a great system for a space opera and one i will play for years (dont plan to buy any new SW system after, this one is just perfect), im looking for a new gaming system to support.

Im looking for a really darker horror/ post-apocalyptic system and warhammer 40 000 brought my attention. It looks like it is a really interesting setting who can suppost galactic campaign as well as a more local story.

So...

With that in mind i would like the feedback of the community about the Dark Heresy, Rogue Trader and Deathwatch game setup.

Whats the pro and con of those system? Is the system really supporting a darker game setting? I heard about mutilation, easy death and insanity... how is this system integrated with action? Im really looking for an horror survival type since SW saga do really support my space opera heroic action theme.

Finally, i heard about how the three are different tiered and themed game with the same system. Are they really compatible? Can i mix class of both 3 in a single game, like running an inquisitor in a ship with a trader? For me thats something really important. Whats the best supplement for Dark Heresy already out if i only consider buying 1 or 2???

Thx for your feedback, im listening

Hi there and welcome!

First, you will not be able to get any "hard on info" on DW. It is not out now, there haven´t been any teaser material about the actual rules system or anything. It is only know that it is about "Space Marines".

Talking "mix-ability": If you come from Werewolf/Vampire and all the other WoD-Storyteller-Games, you will be used to a HIGH standard of "mix-ability". Unfortunately, that is not really given to DH-RT yet. While they follow the same rules and pc are raised by the same level mechanic, it seems that a starting RT-character is where a DH character will be after he "maxed out". Check the upcoming news for "Ascension" here. This is the "next step" for the DH-figures and it seems that a "starting A" might be on par with a "starting RT".

Talking Darkness: Oh yes, the 40k is grimdark. It is all about grimdark. There is nothing but grimdark. Unfortunately, sometimes to the point that it is getting absurd...and thereby, comicall. For me, I like it. I am french of the kind of absurdity you can find in movies like "Dark Town" or "Sweeny Todd". But the horror in here normally only scratches the onreached areas of horror commonly described as "chtonic". But a good GM can bring it this way. You only have to life with the fact that the game tread to "gun bunnies" and people wieldung all-destroying hand-weapons and psyker powers turning a room into the burning chamber of a cremetory.

Talking Insanity, Corruption and "Sudden Death": Due to my experience, death is anything but sudden. It is HARD to kill a pc. All pc have "fail safes" called "fate points" which the simply burn one at a time to prevent certain death in the most cinematic fashion.
Corruption is another treat her. It slowly ruins the character and is the only thing that can not be bought back or brought back by anything a pc or player will do or opt for.
Insanity is cureable to a point...and in someway, appreciable. A stunning number of figures in 40K should be insane, it is an in-game credo that only the insane will prosper, and only those who prosper shall define what is sane.

Talking "Which system to get"? :
Since you are an experienced GM and you seem found & fine with "galaxy spanning campaign" I would recommend RT. The DH core rules out for sale are RIPE WITH ERRORS, check the actual errata to get a taste for what we are talking about. The RT system has some minor "rules changes" which are big improvements in my eyes to the standard rules. Plus, your players will start with figures of real power, ordering their own ship with a crew of thousand to do their bidding. For a less experienced GM, this is a real burden since the old "tried & true" schemes don´t work here. But if you come from "Vampire", you already might be used to pc having their on little vanguard doing stuff for them.

Final words: Go for RT!

Wow ok... i just took a look at the v3 DH errata and its horrible...

It looks like their adding, removing ability to all classes. Is this playable lol

Are they printing any errated version??? anyone know...

there was only one book that did that and it was superiority for warmachine, they messed up and rewrote the parts that was wrong and stuck it in the book before shipping.

D4M0CLES said:

Everyone reacts that way. What isn't immediately apparent is that most of the errata is actually clarification - restating and making clearer what is already there, because parts of the community had problems with interpreting it - rather than correcting mistakes.

Gregorius21778 said:

Disagree. DH has much more flavor. RT just seems to fall flat to me. It is a very unimaginative set of careers.

In my opinion Dark Heresy can tell more compelling stories and is by far easier to GM.

RT is (to use a quote from Spaceballs): "The search for more money"
Dark Heresy is more about exploring morality, cultures, what-ifs and complex webs of intrigue (if you're a WoD'er, you'll feel right at home here).

I definitely recommend Dark Heresy over Rogue Trader. It's way better for a dark gothic setting, and designing adventures is easier as the setting can be grasped intuitively in a way that RT cannot.

It is heavily themed with corruption, decay and danger, so more or less exactly what you seem to be looking for.

The whole errata thing is a disgrace, but I've gotten used to it and it doesn't really have a negative impact on gameplay.

It depends on what kind of game you're after.

If you want something more like CoC, then go with DH.

If you want something more like Star wars, go with RT.

It might be hard to actually kill a PC, but it is very easy to drive them insane and maim them horribly.

Mechanically, RT is superior to DH, as it is essentially DH plus errata 3.0. That being said the system as a whole is pretty sound. with DH you just need to learn the Errata, as irritating as that is. In terms of mixability, they are almost as mixable as WoD, its just that the classes from RT are more powerful than DH, but that's no different that the different kinds of things in WoD.

I'm with the most others here on which game you'd probably want to pick up. Since you're looking for Survival Horror and have already fallen in love with Star Wars for all your heroic space-opera needs, you'll want to go with DH for the 40k side of things, but I covered that on this thread in the RT forum.

As for the whole errata thing, the game is playable without it. I've been running the damned thing since before BI closed it's doors (all 1 month before) and there was no errata. We did run into a major problem during that time though:

Player: "It says here I can buy Sharpshooter but in order to buy it I need to have Dead Eye Shot."

Me: "So... get Dead Eye Shot."

Player: "It's not listed anywhere for me to buy."

Me: "Oh, really? Okay, how much is Sharpshooter?"

Player: "It's a hundred..."

Me: "Okay, you can buy Dead Eye Shot for a hundred xp then."

Player: "Okay, I'm spending two hundred for Dead Eye and Sharp Shooter!"

It was terribly arduous and we almost didn't make it through that -I don't know how our game survived. Seriously, though, that was the worst problem we encountered and to be honest the errata isn't that important. As N0-1 pointed out, most of the errata is just rules clarifications and alterations based on player input (like when everyone was going on and on about how revolvers with ap rounds were out preforming semi-automatic armour-piercing grenade launchers or the nerf to psykers when everyone was bitching about how overpowered they could become in the wrong hands, etc). True the errata is thick and no other 1st ed. rule set that I know of has one so massive, but is that because they are less error ridden or is it because their creators chose not to release one and, if they did, it isn't quite as extensive and exhaustive as this one? Hell, I still have a lot of old WoD books that tell me to reference page @@ for more information on Blank and have no clue where the hell to find page @@ and I probably never will.

In fact, the whole idea of an errata for a pen and paper rpg is fairly new (at least to me). Most all the 1st ed. books I have are riddled with oddities that I'm not sure were intentional or mistakes or what but I still ran them just fine the way many GM's did back before the internet, forum communities, and almost instant communications with the developers -make a call that's sensible and move on with the game.

As for which source-books to buy, there was a thread discussing everyones favorite one and why HERE . That should give you a bit more info on which ones will do what for you.

Gregorius21778 said:

I don't know where this misnomer comes from but I've seen it a few times.

Maxed out Dark Heresy characters are far superior in attributes, skills and talents to a starting Rogue Trader character. This should be obvious from looking at the equivalent XP for an RT character.

Ascension, given their access to Paragon Talents, Mastered skills and transition packages (together with the careers themselves having innate benefits) are even higher in the power level.

Evilref said:

DH and RT have numerous difficulties in translating their PCs over from one system to the other. It mostly boils down to how much 'value' any given amount of XP has. For example, RT characters (explorers) are assumed to gain twice as much XP per session as DH characters (acolytes). However, all their skills and talents (save for the first rank) cost twice as much XP as any acolyte would ever pay. In addition, each rank/level an explorer gains takes roughly twice as much XP as an acolyte; acolytes go from 0-15,000XP and explorers from 5,000-35,000XP. One gains 15,000XP during thier 'career' while the other gains twice that amount but pays twice as much for everything and gains XP twice as fast.

This is before we even consider such oddities as an Arch-Militant explorer (basically a ship's officer, master soldier, etc, general combat badass) waiting until the pinnacle of his time to receive Swift Attack (a fairly 'staple' combat talent for any melee fighter) while an Adept acolyte (a librarian, researcher, generally wimpy but booksmart) gets that halfway through his career. And all this is before we consider the differences in theme between the two games...

I think a more accurate comparison would be taking a maxed character from both systems, then giving the acolyte +5 to all characteristics (as explorers naturally start with +5 to every characteristic in comparison to acolytes). I'd be interested in how 'equal' the two would be.