Hello all!

I am a LONG time player of table top RPG's and LARPs. I have GMed for LARPs. However, I am relatively new to GMing for table top RPGs. My group is great! They are all experienced players... some of them new to the Warhammer 40K universe. Some of them are old hands. The problem arises from what universe to run our game. Here is what my players want to do.

I have a player that wants to play a daemon host. He is a long time player that is looking for something that is not the same old thing. I can understand this and am willing to work with him. (And if I was running a Dark Heresy campaign, there is precedence in the books for this situation.) However.....

I have another player with some gaming experience. She isn't so much into the apopcolytic settings... but is willing to give Rogue Trader a try (since she likes playing space cowboy type characters).

I also have another player that loves the Inquisition. He really really wants to play a Tech Priest.

So here is my question... Has anyone tried to run players from both Rogue Traders and Dark Heresy campaign settings at the same time? Have you had any problems with this? Also, I would be greatful for any ideas and comments on doing this. Am I just nuts to want to try? LOL

Elizabeth

Well, the 2 games are made to be interchangable, but to be fair to the players playing Dark Heresy they should be given 5000 starting xp.

and the Explorator is a tech priest tbh, just a higher ranking one so i dont see that problem.

Daemonhost on the other hand is a bit tricky, im sure some Rogue Traders maybe would use one but if any1 found out the Inquisition would come down on the players and probably smite the entire Rogue Traders house just for having one if they have any proof or hint that he did know of it.

Besides a Daemon is only out to wreak havoc and wouldnt play nice with anyone.

well thats my 2 thrones anyways.

I agree about the XP boost. (I just now realized that Dark Heresy starts at a lower level than Rogue Trader.)

The Daemon Host.... Yeah. This one is going to be interesting. And if he didn't have a great back story and reason for being a Daemon Host, I would shoot it down. He has a really good story. Also, he has a great character concept. (He came up with this without having read the book.) Think Carl Thonius from Ravenor times 10... basically a daemon who really doesn't want to be a daemon. (Hey... It could happen. It would be very rare.) His back story is long... but the short of it is that he is ex-gaurd taken prisoner by the ruinous powers and given an unbound daemon to host. Unfortunately, they messed up the ritual and gave him the wrong daemon. (Darn that tricky chaos language.) He got loose... and is in hiding. The player KNOWS that he cannot kill everyone on the ship. NPCs are fine... and having a weird "affliction" running rampantly through NPCs might be fun. It certainly adds a twist to the plot line.

I am thinking that as GM I am going to request that the tech priest isn't from the Inquisition. I really don't want to pit player against player.

As far as my group is concerned... My players know that I do not allow meaningless PVP. They are very heavy into roleplaying. If PVP happens through good roleplaying, it is one thing. This just gives them an opportunity for more player interaction than I could ever give them as a GM.

I do have the first two "scenarios" sketched out. It would work well for all characters involved... including the daemon host. So, I guess we will let the dice roll and see what happens....

Elizabeth

I can understand that people want to play something new.

But has your player, played a King before? With vast armies at his disposal, a Spaceship the size of a small city and so much money that he spends it on weird luxury items? If not, why not try the Rogue Trader? He is all that, and more.

RT is unique as the game starts where most campaigns ends.

As I regularly have players play form both dark heresy and rogue trader I may be able to help. For a good ammount of time My parties senchal was posessed by a demon, although far from the same power tier perhaps it may allow for the feel of it without some of the other issues. That is from the radicals handbook if you want to look it up. It worked out really wonderfully with her hiding it from the rest of the party till it eventually came out and the captain decided to keep her anyway it was quite touching.

ElizabethB said:

Tech Priests are only in Inquisitors retinues on secondment. If you want to use the Dark Heresy career path for your tech priest that's fine but I'd compare the skills available to the Rogue Trader ones as the trade and knowledge skills differ a fair bit and there's probably stuff missing from the standard tech-priest advancement from DH that you'd want in RT.

ElizabethB said:

...What? No, there are so many reasons that's a bad idea, both fluffwise and in terms of gameplay. An Unbound is quite literally a Daemon in human flesh. Hell, most of the time you see a Greater Daemon it's anchored by a human vessel being used as a daemonhost.

Also, he has a great character concept. (He came up with this without having read the book.)

Saying that he came up with an idea without reading the book worries me, especially when he wants to play such a powerful character (I'm assuming you have seen the daemonhost generator in Dark Heresy).

Think Carl Thonius from Ravenor times 10... basically a daemon who really doesn't want to be a daemon.

What has he told you about the daemon to make this sound decent ?

His back story is long... but the short of it is that he is ex-gaurd

I thought that the daemon completly took over the host, making the host rather irrelevant. Has he told you much about the daemon ?

taken prisoner by the ruinous powers and given an unbound daemon to host. Unfortunately, they messed up the ritual and gave him the wrong daemon. (Darn that tricky chaos language.)

Not one of the usual ways for a chaos ritual to fail, but it could happen. Why were the cultists trying to create a daemonhost that they would have no control over ?

He got loose... and is in hiding. The player KNOWS that he cannot kill everyone on the ship. NPCs are fine... and having a weird "affliction" running rampantly through NPCs might be fun. It certainly adds a twist to the plot line.

Which unholy changes are you giving him ?

How will you be handling his starting stats and advancement scheme ?

He isn't a human, so I don't see those schemes applying.

What downsides has he suggested to make up for having the advantages of a daemon ?

How will you be handling corruption for him ?

Do your players mind that the -10 on all willpower tests from the daemonic presence will apply whenever he is around ? (making them weaker to fear and mind control, which he is likely immune to)

To me it looks like he wanted a really powerful character, picked something powerful from the lore, then made a backstory to justify it, throwing out anything that might hinder his character.

My suggestion: Don't let him take the deamonhost, instead offer him the option to start as a daemon vessel (radicals handbook).

The better option really is some pre-existing 'Faustian' dark pacts with a warp entity, fairly easy to live with a GM and easier to make them and their companions utterly miserable whenever you decide the patron wants more... and like a fat kid chewing on cake, they always want more. Course by better option, I'd really not want it in my game from start. Its something that should be played for and earned through roleplaying.

There is also the options in Radicals handbook for people that have survived possession and end up members of some rather secretive and dastardly sects of the Imperium I'd really like to have in a group just for interest sake.

ElizabethB said:

For the first question I have to go with everyone else. Letting a player play a daemon host is both dangerouse from a gameplay perspective and a story perspective. It belies a basic misunderstanding of the concept as well. Chaos daemons aren't like demons from Buffy, they are more like Cthulu. They aren't "evil by nature" they are so alien as to be incomprehensible and strike those that try to comprehend them with insanity. They are the emotions of sentient beings combined with the inherrant chaos of the universe made manifest. It isn't just a matter of "I don't want to be evil", it is something beyond that. It is like a cube trying to be a square, a wave trying to be a person, a sound trying to be a bottle, a concept trying to be a person. It doesn't really make sense. You will be robbing your story and your villains of their power, humanizing an incomprehensible horror, and that is unfortunate.

As for not wanting to be the "same old thing", has he ever played RT before? It is SO FAR beyond "the same old thing". A king over a dynasty with the power to conquer worlds, buy out empires, ruling over tens of thousands of subjects, speaking with the authority of GOD. It should be plenty new for him.

And I might be a bit crotchety, but for me a character should be new, interesting, and compelling due to his/her personality, backstory, etc. rather than their "ohsocool" abilities.

Second question: So is your player of the impression the Inquisition has something to do with tech-priests, or does he just want to play a tech-priest and happens to like the inquisition? As for being a tech-priest...be an exploritor. High ranking tech priest with access to tons of high level equipment.

Lots of people have talked about, and probably even run RT and DH campaigns together, though as has been said, RT campaigns are much higher powered. They have a very different feel though and you probably are going to end up focusing more on the RT aspect. Small, personal party level investigations are hard to make compelling when you have an army in orbit and enough fire power to lay waste to worlds.

RT is HARD to GM, even for veterans. I would focus on running a RT campaign for now. The inquisition can easily make the occasional appearance, both as allies and veterans, but remember the RT himself is actually a peer of an inquisitor, so it is going to be a very different campaign than DH.

i would have to agree that you should avoid letting any players play a Daemonhost. they would be way to powerful compared to anyone else.

So you met the "I can do whatever I want because I wrote an elaborate background"-player.

Don't buy it. Try thinking ahead: what would become of the story and characters further on? Is it a "one-trick emo pony" character that is just fun and interesting in your imagination, but rather fail when brought into the game?

"I'm so speciaaaaal"

Although I really love exploring the boundaries of humans through inhuman characters, it annoys me when the inhuman character is a cliché and the one that made the character doesn't realize it.

Personally I'd say no. But as for demons in general. There are radical inquisitors noted in the 40k codex as using demons to fight against the demons. They think that (the ones who do it) the best way to fight demons is with demons. The whole fight fire with fire thing. They do, however, note that those Inquisitors often become heretics and have to be killed. So while it happens that demons help the humans they often end up with a bad ending.

Exactly. Daemons is a really bad thing in 40k. They aren't there to reason with, nor can you. Even if you by some miracle managed to chat with a daemon, you would still gain Corruption points + face consequences from the inquisitors + other factions that hate daemonic contact (most of the Imperium).

Ringarin said:

A daemon that hates being a daemon does sound like something that a lot of radicals would like to get their hands on. So instead of simply saying no to this players idea, he could say "yes, but with consequences". Such consequences being Ordo Malleus getting involved.

- Some Inquisitors want the Daemonhost for themselves and will do whatever it takes to get it.

- Some want to banish the daemon back to the warp and don't care about anyone who doesn't help them.

- Some will want the daemonhost destroyed and will purge anyone who doesn't help them.

- Some will want the daemonhost destroyed and will purge anyone apart from their own team.

- Many of them are lying about which group they belong to.

- If the players survive long enough, the Grey Knights will show up because it's clear that they are the only ones that can handle it.

- Since the Eldar hate chaos, are they likely to get involved ?

The RTs warrant isn't likely to provide much protection here once word gets out.

While it would be short violent and unwinabble, it does sound like it could make a fun campaign.

If you have the Radicals Handbook, the Daemon vessal elite advance package is just what you are looking for. And for bonus points Carl Thonius was the inspiration for it.

Just don't expect him to be around for a while...

SomVone said:

I was going to suggest this too. Daemon Vessel from DH Radical Handbook is exactly what you are looking for. It's practically modeled on Carl Thonius from Ravenor.

Bilateralrope said:

Oh... ABSOLUTELY with consequences. This player and I both know that there is no possible way he is going to survive. His view point is that getting hunted is half the fun. Also, I was going to start everyone else at a higher rank than him. There is going to be severe restrictions on what he can and cannot do in game and what he can and cannot have on his character sheet. We have been discussing this indepth... and have a game plan.

As far as my other players are concerned... we go through who wants to play something weird this time anytime we start a new game. For instance, in AD&D v3.5, we have a level 3 death knight werewolf. (Don't ask... its not my character and I am not the GM for it.) So it does end up being fair in the end.

Bilateralrope said:

Okay... you forgot about the heretics who want to worship... the chaos legions who want him back... and so on.

I didn't even think about the Eldars. So thanks for that one. It slipped my mind. I was leaving the Grey Knights in my back pocket in case he got stupid.

Bilateralrope said:

I wouldn't totally mess the other players' characters up from this incident.... when the deamonhost or daemon vessel (as some of you guys have suggested to use) dies. However, I am of the total mindset of setting up situations in which they almost die. It is no fun unless they come out of it going... OMG I can't believe we survived that. Besides, everybody person playing in this campaign knows that he is playing something totally messed up.

For those that suggested The Radical's Handbook, I just picked this up and will be looking through what it says about the daemon possessed. So, again... thanks for the suggestion everyone. I really appreciate the constructive criticism. I know that to some of you, you would never allow something like this to be played. However, my gaming group does tend to push the envelope. We have fun with it. Plus, if it were any other gaming group, I would not allow this in any shape or form. As long as everyone is having a blast is what counts in the end. (It is just the GM's job to figure out how to make it work... jk... roflmao)

Elizabeth

ElizabethB said:

LOL... Yeah I know I have a weird sense of humor... and I don't always say what is appropriate... or pc... I am just glad somebody got such a kick out of me at my own expense.

Elizabeth