I think that the Vindicare and primaris have shown up a lot of the upper-level limitations of the DH rule-set.

In using a percentile system it is very difficult to create playable normal humans and still fit space marines and lords of change on the same scale while retaining the drama and tension of success/failure in combat at the table.

A few tweaks that I use -

1. 96-100 is an automatic failure in all rolls.

2. Unnatural attributes give you a +3 to your stat bonus per multiplier you attain.

3. Vindicares get an extra reaction per round which can dodge the undodgeable. Their gimp suit soes not give them +10% to dodge.

4. The effects of most psyker powers are based off psy rating rather than Willpower bonus as per Rogue Trader. Still working on a lot of conversions for this.

5. An idea that I was considering was a passive defensive score. This would be a penalty to attacks on the character (that he is aware of) based on WS bonus for parries or Ag bonus for dodges. I may also put in a way to make your attacks more difficult to dodge/parry as per the fast quality. Still trying to figure out where to set the ratings but that may be a good way to put the edge back into duels between Uber-PCs and BBEGs. When an ascension PC with WS 70, a best quality power sword and blademaster attacks he almost always hits. Likewise his foe with similar numbers almost always parries. If each had a -20 or so to both rolls then suddenly the battle is interesting again. If we tie the defense score to high-end talents then PCs can still pwn mooks but need to use trickery and tactics in the end of level boss-fights.

I must say that I am worried about Deathwatch and I do not envy the chap with the job of trying to shoehorn marines into the BRP skeleton of DH. That said the design diaries seem to be focusing on more indy concepts to build the kill-team so it looks interesting and i will definitely buy it.

Jack of Tears said:

I respectfully disagree, for three reasons:

1. "Inquisitor and his cadre" is supposed to be the default group shape, necessary for this big jump where the group no longer takes orders from the outside but rather chooses it's own way of saving (or damning) the Imperium. It's not like it's the first game with such inequity between team members - other than this and Rogue Trader, Fading Suns did also have something like that as a default model, and some teams in either edition of WFRP did also work like that due to fluff associated with professions. So it's not some new, worse way of doing things objectively.

2. The inequity of the system is strongly mitigated by other Cadre members being extremely important people in their own right. Any Inquisitor worth the title will tread carefully with his Throne Agents, because they are neither the kind of people who enjoy being jerked around nor the kind easily replaced. In my game, the dynamics are such that everyone has a say on any matter, with the Inquisitor having the final word but always being willing to heed someone's better idea. So the unequal relationship is only a problem if the group wants it to be.

3. From my rather comprehensive experience with roleplaying games, every group gets to have a leader sooner or later, as some players are just more charismatic than others. If you're upgrading your DH characters to Ascension in the course of the campaign, just make the natural leader into the Inquisitor and nobody will even notice any change.

Morangias said:

Unless the usual leader doesn't want to be the Inquisitor. What if he's having too much fun with his Assassin? Or his Judge? And what if someone else has their heart set on being an Inquisitor? Do you veto his desire because you feel someone else is better suited? And in the end you don't always have players and characters agreeing - but when one player simply gets to say "doesn't matter what the rest of you think, we're doing it my way" don't you think that places too much power in the hands of one individual? Sure parties almost always decide upon a leader - but that leader can and does sometimes change during a session and - really - the leaders in games I've run (the many many games I've run since you fealt it important to mention your comprehensive experience) is just the most sensible among equals ... there is nothing equal between an Inquisitor and his cadre.

Sure Eisenhorn always listened do his people, but in the end they always did what he said, whether they disagreed or not. (and the one story in which they didn't ... well, you saw how that ended)

If someone was having too much fun playing their assassin, I'd let them keep being an assassin, even as their Inquisitor asks them if they want to step up to the mantle of interrogator/inquisitor. They don't magically lose the "assassin gene" for taking on a new role, and I'm more than happy to let them play the role through the game while maintaining their original career, if they didn't like the look of the default career. I mean, to me it just seems to be a bunch of Peer talents, which isn't really that exciting. I wouldn't blame them.

For multiple people wanting and/or 'qualifying' to be an Inquisitor, just make the pair of them Interrogators in the story (it's not too far-fetched that an Inquisitor would take a few promising students and make them all his direct pupils) and have the Inquisitor try and "weed them out" to see which is more qualified. Good in-story justification, and it allows your players to see if they really *do* want to play an Inquisitor.

What's the worst that can happen? Two inquisitors in a party? Sounds like fun to me. All sorts of cabal shenanigans right from the beginning

As for other "throne Agents" being ultimately subserviant to the Inquisitor(s), remember that an Inquisitor's power, while theoretically unlimited, is realisticaly curbed by what people are actually going to grant him. An Inquisitor who regularly disregards his specialists' advice, and blatantly cares little for them, is going to find them ultimately deserting him for other causes. This could potentially include rival factions, rival Inquisitors, plain bloody-minded vengeance (Inquisitor wakes up chained to the bed with handcuffs, and the room is on fire), or even the Warp itself. This is potentially quite severe for an Inquisitor if his agents are particularly well-suited to espionage or other large-scale covert warfare.

Basically, any Inquisitor worth his salt will try and keep in the good graces with the rest of the party. If they don't enjoy watching the cell tear itself apart violently, spectacularly, and hopefully with some well-placed dickery on the parts of nearly everyone involved. Sounds like a fun game, to be honest.

If you give the Vindicare extra reactions per round, it can be no more than 1, or they become immune to melee duelling, which basically tops out at 4 attacks.

If their extra reactions are per session or per encounter, then you can give them more than 1.

Katsue said:

One word: feint.

I've been thinking Feints, but after thinking further about the mechanics this too would be unviable against the assassin.

As it is a Half-Action to Feint in itself, you first need to get next to the assassin with a Half-Action to use. This means you need to:
A: Be close enough to the assassin to move then Feint, then still have it next to you on your next turn to thump him, or
B: Charge/Run into contact with the assassin, then next turn Feint+Melee.

Seems simple, right? Wrong. That assassin will not be next to you by the time you get to hit him, unless he's feeling very sure of his chances against you in HtH (in which case, you're already screwed).

A successful Acrobatics test allows a Disengage action as a Half-Action. With a combination of masteries, Temple Assassin traits, and Fate for that 1/9000 chance he fails, he will pass that test, and he will be ABm away from you halfway through his turn. Which means he can now shoot you.

So what you in reality would end up with is a bunch of guys chasing an assassin round, every now and then hitting him one ineffectual blow he casuall ducks under, while he plugs bullets into them one at a time. There just simply isn't enough Actions in a round to get everything done which needs to be done.

The only way to get around this would be to send an Eversor (multiple Full Actions a round) or possibly a Death Cult assassin (I believe they can make certain attacks as part of their move) to try and ease the cost, actions-wise, of Feinting the assassin.

Then you have to actually beat him in melee. Not impossible, maybe not even hard, but not a guaranteed thing by any means. Regardles of their set roles, the assassin career has cheap WS and BS advances.

I just said "Feint" in response to multiple reactions making the Vindicare immune to melee dueling. Now, if he's just going to dance away and shoot the melee-ist, well, that's just not melee dueling... smart on his part, but not melee dueling ;-)