The Marines have emotions. Why are you people getting this stuff? I've read on Lexicanum that the Salamandars even live with regular humans on their home planet, and the Space Wolves party hard. The Iron Hands clans are constantly scheming and feuding with each other, The Dark Angels brood over the past failures and stuff... doesn't that contradict the whole emotionless thing?

Danger said:

The Ultramarines are fond of interior design and the Blood Angels like soap operas. All of them have a healthy interest in Thrash Metal if nothing else. Players will play them tough to begin with, but eventually everyone has to roleplay. In the end it is up to the GM how the players have to solve a problem, Blammo isn't always the answer...

Danger said:

Yep. But for some reason people continue to insist that marines are emotionless kill-bots. *shrug*

In my opinion, Astartes should be played as experiencing emotions differently to humans. If I may point to fiction where I thought this was done well, think Flight of the the Eisenstien or Fulgrim (NOT Horus Rising or False Gods ). Not quite killbots, but sure as hell not really human either.

Anyway, I might be sceptical about this game, but let's face it, if there's something FFG have done well with DH and RT thus far, it's enrich and enhance the setting. Not once have I thought "Why are they trying to make 40K thier own", usually "Hey, that's a nice little idea!". Presumably they've got something up thier sleeves, and surprisingly quickly too. Nary has the first RT supplement been released than we're seeing the announcement and banner art

macd21 said:

Because there has been just as much fluff describing them as fearless, emotionless killers as there has been them all being happy fluffy macho-men that are all in touch with their emotions. This is one of the many problems with the whole GW policy of "everything is canon". The two options aren't compatible, which means whichever way this game goes, some of the fluff is going to be rendered "wrong".

I am not saying this is the right answer, but isn't the fluff written from the POV of a non space marine, isn't this just like History is written by the victor. The Empire thrives on fear, therefore Space Marines are discribed as fearless killing machines. This distances the Space Marines for the people of the Empire, allowing them to be what they need to be, it is a self fuffilling prophesy. People believe what they are told.

What I wonder is how FFG is going to tackle the fact that you are playing the actual ubermensch in a fascist empire? And I'm not being provocative here: I think they handled playing evil capitalists *** colonialists in an evil empire fairly well - one of the appeals of RT for me is the ability to play Henry M. Stanley with a space ship instead of a machine gun (not, of course, out of any appreciation for the man, but because it actually does what sci fi should do: comment on the real world. Pretty surprising for a game that's really about little hand-painted space-soliders... ).

I'm not saying FFG should shove this message down the throats of the players: anyone who just wants to play guys in space-armour shooting stuff should of course be 100% supported in doing that. But for us who like a bit of kafka and orwell in our space orgies a little bit of byzantine totalitarianism would be very welcome.

The whole 40 000 universe from the point of view of humans is like fascism on crystal meth (actually, let me rephrase it: fascism on far more crystal meth than they really used). Read the history of SS and skip all combat parts and suddenly you've got some very solid material for a really wicked Space Marine campaign... In the end it is not GW or FFG than makes the game come alive. It is the GM:s and their Players.

No, you probably won't see much touchy-feely things going around.

Yes, you will probably see a lot of blood and excessive violence.

No, it won't let you play endless hours of romantic intrigue set in 19th centuresque palaces.

Yes, it will (still) let you plunge into all the deepest, darkest reaches of human(esque) mind.

I'm sure FFG aren't blind to that issue, Etepete. The beauty of 40k is that as a GM you can have your cake and eat it: you can have a totalitarian government and worse alternatives. You can criticise religious dogma while noting the unifying power of faith. And, like you say, you can satirise/criticise human greed while embodying it in the rapacacious adventures of Rogue Traders.

I'm positive they'll find ways to play on that angle, the moral ambiguity of playing the prime killers in a facistic hyper-state...

Polaria said:

Exactly! The deepest darkest reaches with the blackest blackest humour (on crystal meth) - that's the point. Grim Dark should be Paranoia meets Bad Taste meets Aliens. I completely agree that it's down to the group of players - it always is, I find. So the point is that this thread shouldn't be about whether Space Marines have feelings or not - the point should be, how do you handle them being evil, totalitarian killing machines? A lot of people will ignore it, but hopefully there'll be some goodies in there for those of us who don't.

Lightbringer: Everyone has their own interpretation of 40k, of course, but I find it exceedingly difficult to see anything positive about faith in a religion that venerates a rotting carcas that eats souls. I believe that Games Workshop at the time when the background story was drafted, were pretty sceptical tof religion, and to be honest the Ecclesiarchy must be meant as a pretty vicious caricature of the catholic church. I would be more inclined to look for positive faith among Xeno's and Heretics. Personally, I would never play a 40k game without a bucketload of black, black humour - but in the end people see different things in the setting and I'm only talking about my own preferences here. Besides, if I had read more of the novels my opinion might have been very different (so I don't think I will).

Etepete said:

Oh yes, I agree, entirely. The Ministorum stuff was originally pretty blatant savage satire, really! But like most things 40k, a more nuanced and interesting approach has developed, which allows for all viewpoints on religion. In particular, Dan Abnett's stuff is broadly positive about the empowering effects of religion, whilst also allowing room for the humanistic concept that the Emperor himself was an atheist, and that the current religious situation in the 41st millenium is akin to a vast cosmic joke...

Like I say, room for all viewpoints!

Each different product of the 40K setting has different requirements. Battlegame, board games, computer games, novels...It is quite simply impossible to have a standard representation of a Space Marine that fits every product.

The way Space Marines (and every other aspect of the setting) are represented and used in each product is simply based on a core concept that gets elaborated and shaped to fit the needs of that product.

There hasn't been an official 40K RPG before, so it has never been necessary to consider how Astartes will work as the subjects of one. The way they are presented for the tabletop battlegame is obviously no good. The way they are presented for board games is even less so. The way they are presented in novels are shaped by the plot requirements and preferences of each individual author.

No present model of a Space Marine perfectly fits the needs of an RPG. The writers of Deathwatch are those who get to decide how to fit the core concept of the Astartes into an RPG, how to elaborate upon that concept and shape it into something that is adequate for the game, provides roleplaying options, and maintains as much as possible of what people are expecting Astartes to 'be'.

It is a very dificult task, but I for one, having playtested the game, believe wholeheartedly that they have pulled it off with magnificent success. The Marines in this game are hugely playable, and also conform to every preconception I had about them.

Well done FFG I say. And I think when you guys see the finished product you will agree.

Lightbringer said:

I completely agree with your philosophy here: a multitude of possible themes, moods and viewpoints is certainly a very good thing!

I've only read one book of Mr Abnetts/set in 40k: Titanicus. Is it considered any good? I think my main objection that would be relevant to this discussion would be that he mainstreamed the Imperium. The grunts on the ground felt a bit too much like just any soldier out of any fantasy or sci-fi or war-fic novel rather than the scurrying insignificant little serfs of a colossal empire run mad.

I think I'll stick to my satirical (and chainsaw-equipped) guns myself, but I must admit that the "The Emperor is an atheist" angle has loads of appeal

Etepete said:

Titanicus isn't bad, but for me his best novels are Legion, the Ravenor trilogy and the Eisenhorn trilogy.

Abnett does a good job of having Marines be human enough to relate to. Ben Counter is hit or miss on it, as he is with his books' quality in general... Alaric from the Grey Knights series, for example, is far more human and interesting than whoever that Ultramarine was that was in Battle for the Abyss. Most of the Black Library books that feature Marines that are even remotely close to good show off that while they have been drastically changed to get them to where they are, there is still a human 'core' to every Marine. And no, CS Goto's not-quite-as-sucky-as-Dan-Brown ramblings don't count.

As to Shame going out the door with Fear, I'm not so sure about that one, even if Fear is truly gone instead of just ruthlessly crushed and redirected. The Space Wolves' cultural spectrum, just as that of their inspiration (the Vikings) is based on having Honor at one end, and Shame at the other. Lone Wolves go out into battle alone looking to die or kill a hell of a lot of enemies in the attempt, because they're ashamed of something (usually Survivor's Guilt, based on what's in their codex).

Etepete said:

Not to mention a bit of Nietsche (apparently, there's nothing he couldn't teach you about the raising of the wrist...)

This is what the setting is all about, for me.

Lightbringer said:

I like to imagine the Emperor, his work done in defeating Horus but breathing his last, ragged breaths, try to finally convey the message: "YOU'RE ALL DIFFERENT!" Just like poor old Brian! Then blammo, into the golden throne to be worshipped for millenia... The cruelty of it is both dark and darkly amusing!

Space marines coming to do their stint in the Deathwatch are by their nature different, though aren't they? They are like the SAS of the Astartes, a cut above the rest, sure, but not just in terms of how good they are at killing stuff. They will have to be self sufficient, self motivating and independent- the very definition of special forces doctrine. Some will be able to speak different languages, others will be technicians, others will be adept at blowing s*** up, but they will be doing different things than their brethren

Bad Birch said:

The Emperor loves Bolt-Thrower!!!

L

More like the Anglicans, with the king on top!

L

Bad Birch said:

If you stare into the Warp long enough the Warp stares back at you?

LETE: Both of them, probably. And organised religion in general.

I love the 40Kverse just because of the sheer diversity, as has been mentioned. Like I say, FFG generally do a good job with the 40Kverse, so I won't makde any judgements just yet. I do hope they don't draw too much inspiration from existing fiction - I can't account for Ben Counter, but Dan Abnett's Astartes are usually so human you wonder if he ever sat down to really think about what the terms "psychoindoctrination" and "hypnotherapy" in this context. Graham McNeill does a good job on the Astartes - Fulgrim especially shows us what might happen if you mix real human emotions (In this case, arrogance, wrath and a certain amount of narcissim) with the Astartes way of doing things. You can understand why they do what they do, but despite this what they do isn't human, at least in the normal sense

As I see it the difficulty isn't going to be roleplaying Space Marines so much as creating scenarios where they have the opportunity. In other words the big issue will be creating a campaign that supports the obvious action-oriented nature of the material while still providing a fair number of chances to interact with things other than by killing and/or blowing it up. But the question of roleplaying itself seems pretty straightforward. When the team comes upon underhivers fighting some xenos infestation will they open fire, killing alien and human alike or will try to save the humans. A Salamander is going to have a very different response to such a situation relative to that of an Iron Hand. The roleplaying seems pretty much built-in once you start having different chapters working together.

My personal approachthis means that YMWV, or your mileage will varyis not to try and run it as a standard campaign. I don't really have as much interesting in RP'ing a Marine in a conventional protracted campaign. Thus I would use them as secondary characters that are used to illustrate some other aspect of the campaign. Thus, for example, an Inquisitorial investigation ultimately leads to a Dark Eldar kabal. They call in the Deathwatch to lay the smack down. While laying appropriate levels of smack down, the Marines learn something that feeds back into the investigation...

And then it's back to roleplaying your primary character.

Might be a bit Ars Magica for some, but it works for me. Sorry if it was mentioned earlier, but I didn't fancy reading through seven pages of posts.

Kage

Atheosis said:

I agree with you, it's having the ideas of how to write scenarios, adventures and campaigns that plausibly require SM pcs to interact with npcs as much or more in non-violent ways as they do violently throughout the session and campaign, that is the thorny issue for this game as I see it. A game where combat outweighs non-violent interaction would not interest me; we play long 6-8 hour sessions, in whatever game we're playing at a given time combat takes up a pretty short fraction of that time.

I can think of a few such DW adventures and campaigns, where genuine pc-npc interaction could plausibly occur ... but at this time only a few. Whereas the rpgs that tend to survive at my table inspire countless adventures, not a few.

I haven't made my mind up re DW as yet, and some of what I see makes me cautiously hopeful, but I am still rather sceptical at this time.

I cannot get over how limiting some people are on here when it comes to the complexities of what it takes to create a story that has legs. Pick ANY war movie or War inspired television series or series of books and you can find inspiration for numerous stories that can be altered to bring to a Deathwatch game. The only limitations are what one puts on themselves when they can't see past "guys in hulking armour crushing Xenos." there is A LOT more to it than that if one is willing to go further. Sorry but I am looking forward to this book as I have for countless YEARS of being a fan.

If others have to list the hundreds of possible story hooks for people so short sighted then why do these people even Roleplay?