Hello all.

I've now read through most of the Core Rulebook for Deathwatch and one thing that's really missing in the overall picture is: more personality for the marines! I know the demeanors, both chapter and personal is supposed to paint a picture of how the character is in his attitude and how he will be interacting with other marines. But I think especially the personal demeanor is blunter than even the old D&D alignments when trying to get a grip of how the PC shows his personality and values.

During the latest weeks I've only recently started to read some 40K novels, to get an idea of how marines are depicted. I loaned them from a friend and I started (maybe not so smart) with the Horus Heresy-books; 1. Horus Rising, 2. False Gods, 3. Galaxy in Flames and 4. The Flight of the Eisenstein.
I haven't finished the last book yet, but they are very very good books! I can't recommend them enough! I'm gonna buy them asap.

They have, more than anything, managed to show just how ponderous and yet somehow innocent thinking marines can be. And also how totally different personalities play a big role in the dramatic happenings! Ok, the setting is of course much more theatrical and truly shows a time of legend.
Nevertheless, I'm aiming to somehow add more personality factors, maybe more in tune with the Pendragon RPG, I don't know yet.

I would really want to hear opinions on this. And yes, the players should be free to roleplay as much without game mechanical fetters, but some people doesn't even know how begin showing the true personality of their character. I really think the platform for roleplaying needs revising in this game!

Ok I think I'll present my idea a little further:

In pendragon, the character has 26 so-called Traits, of which 13 tend to be better and
13 tend to be worse. They are also eachothers opposite. An example:

The Energetic trait has Lazy as its opposite, and Honest has Deceitful as its opposite,
as expected. In the oldest version of the game, there is only 12 traits, and of those the
Chaste/Lustful and Forgiving/Vengeful could be taken away, as marines have little use of the
more human values of chastity or lust and are never known to be forgiving (but could be
vengeful). So, I'm left with 10 traits/opposites;

1. Energetic/Lazy
2. Generous/Selfish
3. Honest/Deceitful
4. Just/Arbitrary
5. Merciful/Cruel
6. Modest/Proud
7. Pious/Worldly
8. Temperate/Indulgent
9. Trusting/Suspicious
10.Valorous/Cowardly

It doesn't have to be these, I have a long list of others that can easily be exchanged for them.

Now, some of these traits should have a certain level to begin with, just as the chivalrous knights
in Pendragon have certain values and mettle of personality that shouldn't be too low or else they
wouldn't be knights at all! The same could be said of Space Marines, atleast the most of them.
Individual strayings from these values could be (and should be!) tolerated to allow for interesting
character differences. But, a few should be expected to have higher starting values.

Having read your posts I find I have alot to say. First of all I am very glad you have found and enjoy the horus heresy series. They are possibly my favourite series of books ever (its a close run thing with Gaunt's Ghosts) Almost all of them are very good in my opinion. However as a piece of advice if I were you I would skip "battle for the abyss" it was stand-alone and in my opinion extremely boring.

Now onto the rest. I have to say I like the idea of more detail in demeanours but i've got to say I don't think any space marine could ever be accused of being Lazy or Cowardly. I think the thing is that although space marines are certainly larger that life most of what you would call negative traits were bred out of the space marines, fear, wrathfulness, pride. and several of the legions that turned during the Heresy turned because they were overly proud (Emperor's Children and Luna Wolves) or Wrathful (World Eaters).

So yeah in my opinion I like the idea of many more demeanours and possibly more detail in the demeanour system. However I don't like the good/bad demeanour idea. obviously nobody is perfect any space marine might be overly suspicious or consider himself above humans. but at the end of the day every marine is hypnoindoctrinated to be as pure in purpose as the can be. while noone is perfect I do not like the idea of assigning a specific negative trait to a space marine

I agree there aren't enough demeanors, and the book is definitely short on some of the RP advice on playing space marines. That said, they do say the list of provided demeanors is in no way exhaustive, and that it's not prescriptive in how the marine behaves in all situations.

If your group needs the extra nudge though to help get them into character, providing an expanded list isn't a bad idea. It can help to give players a framework with which to work.

I've also found expanding on the standard 'how does your player feel about this' questions that come with most games to be very helpful in getting players to flesh out their characters- innocuous questions like 'how do they structure their morning given the freedom of the deathwatch,' 'how do they view the different imperial organizations,' and 'when confronted with <situation x> how would they react', etc. You can get a lot of the pendragon traits you list below pulled out in an organic fashion.

As for marines not being lazy or cowardly- they just can't be lazy or cowardly in front of anyone. They ARE indoctrinated, but they're not robots- so long as they can perform their essential duties they're not necesarily going to get kicked out, beaten up, or killed. Or perhaps being seconded to the DW was a chance for them to redeem themselves after being caught participating in one of their vices.

Narkasis Broon said:

Aha! Interesting. Yes, I'll have a look on the "Battle for the Abyss"-books, but I'll not expect too much then. Thanks for the warning. I've also tried the Deathwatch book by C.S. Goto- absolute rubbish! I was super-disappointed. No more C.S. Goto! Sounds like an old computer routine "then goto".

Narkasis Broon said:

I'm happy to hear this idea isn't a total waste. But, I have to disagree that *all* bad stuff has been extinguished from the marine psyche. I'm not so sure.
It's very important to me to evaluate the term "negative traits". If you consider the Dark Angel suspicion against almost all deviation from "true humans" and the Black Templars "psyker animosity", you could quite easily include some negative traits in there. Trusting/Suspicious would be the traits affected, as an example.

I'd also like to have "directed traits", that is some of the traits are heightened or lowered when activated during a special situation. Like in the Dark Angel example: they usually have a Suspicious trait against abhumans and would-be tainted individuals, but otherwise could be tolerant towards different branches of military within the higher echelons of the Imperium. Like assassins or inquistional forces.

The list I talked about (please note: this is from a time when I considered using D&D alignments as a basic designator! - not anymore):

Chaotic Good
Hedonist: pleasure is the most important thing.
Immature: acts younger than own age.
Extroverted: outgoing.
Follower: prefers to let other lead.
Humorous: appreciates humor and likes to joke.
Altruist (*): selfless concern for others welfare.
Giving: gives of self and possesions.
Courageous: brave in the face of adversity.
Imaginative: a clever, resourceful mind.
Energetic: does things quickly, with verve.
Cheerful: always happy and smiling.
Enthusiastic: excited. can't wait to act.

Neutral Good
Dreamy: a distant daydreamer.
Romantic: given to feelings of romance.
Optimist: always see the good side of things.
Kindly (*): warmhearted and friendly.
Considerate. thinks of others feelings.
Loving: affectionately concerned fo others.
Generous: willing to give more than fairly.
Forgiving (*): able to pardon faults in others.
Benign (*): gentle, inoffensive.
Friendly: warm and comforting.
Merciful: willing to extend pity or aid to others.

Lawful Good
Creative: able to make something out of nothing.
Leader: takes initiative, can take command.
Helpful: help others in need.
Trusting (*): trusts others to behave correctly.
Pious: reverently devoted to worship of a god.
Self confident: sure of self and abilities.
Virtuous (*): pure, of excellent morals.
Well mannered: polite, courteous.
Humble: lack of pretense, not proud.
Truthful (*): always fells the truth.
Diplomatic: careful to say the right thing.
Forgiving: can take insult without injury.
Modest: does not seek excessive attention.
Temperate: frugal, abstains from excess.

Chaotic Neutral
Loquacious: talks and talks and talks and...
Rough: unpolished, unrefined.
Follower: prefers to let other lead.
Emotional: rarely keeps emotion in check.
Reckless: acts rashly, without thought.
Liberal: tolerant of others, open to change.
Aggressive: assertive, bold, enterprising.
Illogical: may not use reason to make decisions.
Frivolous: flighty, harebrained, rarely serious.
Courageous: brave in the face of adversity.
Imaginative: a clever, resourceful mind.
Energetic: does things quickly, with verve.
Enthusiastic: excited. can't wait to act.
Flippant: unable to be serious about anything.
Slovenly: messy, nothing is ever put away.
Filthy: knows nothing of hygiene.
Tardy: always late.
Self doubting: unsure of self and abilities.
Cowardly: afraid to face adversity.
Impatient: unable to wait with calmness.
Foolish: unable to discern what is true or wise.
lmmoral: lecherous, lawless, devoid of morals.
Lazy: difficult to get motivated.
Spendthrift: spends money without thought.
Tactless: speaks before thinking.
Lustful: has strong sexual desires.
Arbitrary: no concern for right/wrong – legal/illegal.
Valorous: brave and courageous.

True Neutral
Amoral: no care for right or wrong.
Atheistic: denies existance of the supernatural.
Peaceful: serene of spirit.
Calm: difficult to anger, a peaceful spirit.
Patient: able to wait with calmness.
Wise: understands what is true, right or lasting.
Worldly: does not believe in godly powers.
(or: believe in taking matters in his own hands).

Lawful Neutral
Curious: Inquisitive, needs to know.
Precise: always exacting.
Studious: studies often, pays attention to detail.
Silent: rarely talks.
Even tempered: rarely angry or over joyous.
Leader: takes initiative, can take command.
Emotionless: rarely shows emotion.
Conservative. restrained, opposed to change.
Passive: accepts things without resisting them.
Selfsufficient: does not need others.
Logical: uses deductive reasoning.
Sober: serious, plain thinking straightforward.
Teetotaler: abstains from drinking alcohol.
Peacemaker: attempts to calm others.
Honest (*): always gives what is due.
Organized: everything has a place.
Clean: practices good hygiene.
Just: acts fair and legally impartial.
Prudent: thinks before acting.
Cowardly: fearful and afraid of consequenses.
Punctual: always on time.
Self confident: sure of self and abilities.
Respectful: shows respect for others.
Dependable: does duties reliably, responsibly.
Thrifty: careful with resources.
Dull: a slow, uncreative mind.
Unenthusiastic: can't get excited.
Chaste: has strong sexual morals.

Chaotic Evil
Foppish: vain, preoccupied with apperance.
Rash: acts before thinking.
Follower: prefers to let other lead.
Cheerful: always happy and smiling.
Enthusiastic: excited. can't wait to act.
Reckless: incautious in thought and deed.
Addict: constantly overindulges in drug(s).
Violent (*): seeks physical conflict.
Cheat (*): shortchanges others of their due.
Disrespectful: does not show respect.
Angry: spirit always unsettled, never at peace.
Untrustworthy (*): not worth trusting.
Rude: unpolite, discourteous.
Harsh: ungentle, sharp tongued.
Unfriendly: cold and distant.
Liar (*): hardly ever tells the truth.
Deceitful (*): full of deceit.

Neutral Evil
Obstructive: acts to block other's actions.
Cruel (*): coldhearted and hurtful.
Thoughless: rarely thinks of others feelings.
Argumentative: starts arguments and fights.

Lawful Evil
Immaculate: clean and orderly.
Introverted: focus one's interests in oneself.
Materialistic: puts emphasis on possessions.
Leader: takes initiative, can take command.
Grim: unsmiling, humorless, stern of purpose.
Aloof: distant from others, even cold.
Pious: reverently devoted to worship of a god.
Self confident: sure of self and abilities.
Diplomatic: careful to say the right thing.
Pessimist: always see the bad side of things.
Suspicious: trusts no one.
Hateful (*): strongly dislikes others.
Selfish: selfish concern for own welfare and possessions.
Greedy: hoards all for self.
Vengeful: revenge is the way to punish faults.
Morose: always gloomy and moody.
Vengeful: eager to seek revenge.
Cruel: deliberate lack of sympathy.
Proud: gets pleasure from boasting and attention.
Indulgent: takes in overmuch of pleasures.

Charmander said:

Charmander said:

Absolutely - that's a wonderful idea! Then reason why someone ended up as a DW marine isn't always connected to glorious acts or a spot-free past.

dracopticon said:

Laziness and Cowardice are relative. A Marine that is willing to waste his life in a hopeless fight might consider all Marines not willing to do so cowards. And if a Marine might not like training as much as a real fight (because it's not the same thing and can only prepare to a certain degree for the real struggle for life or death), he might be considered lazy by others.

Alex

ak-73 said:

Exactly - traits can be relative. But it's important to agree on a platform of rigid traits, atleast when generating the character. It's interesting that you say this, because some of the characters in the Horus Heresy saga is definately harboring resentment towards other marines - even thought they're in the same legion and should be moulded in the same basic thought!

This is precisely why I would want to expand upon the Demeanor theme. Some marine chapters today could be considered less variable in their approach to different things.

I think it has to do with where the chapter recruits! If a chapter only recruits from a single world, they'd be less inclined to variables in personality IMHO.

SPOILERS!
SPOILERS!
SPOILERS!

As was the case with Battle-Captain Nathaniel Garro, born on Terra. The greater part of the Death Guard was - in the time of the books - recruited from Barabus. This difference was absolutely noticeable.

I'd no sooner started reading your first post than I thought 'I'll probably reply and point him at Pendragon'...

Pendragon 's traits and passions work ok, but it's all a bit formal. Sure: The DW's current system does sum up your character in merely one (or rather two if we count the Chapter) words, but so do many systems (nWoD). And most don't even do that. I really don't believe that you can force players to roleplay simply by formalising their personality traits: It needs to come from the player. And yeah: You can't sum up a personality with one word either, so you need players to have actually sat down and thought about back-story - something that DW attempts to do with the background tables.

I've always found that the best way for both players to get a handle on their own characters and for the GM to both do so and get some ideas for personal plot is to simply ask players to write a page or two of back-story and offer reasonable amount of XP for doing so. Everyone wins: RP players get to talk about their character, non-RP players get some XP, and the GM gets a better picture of PC motivations.

Failing that, Riddle of Steel has essentially a passion system that is simpler than Pendragon's and worth a look. I really don't think the Pendragon one would add much to the game save paperwork, most of it is fairly moot, and I'm not sure how you'd mesh the mechanics with the rest of the game. After all: The reason that Pendragon uses it is because characters have to test on their traits on a very regular basis. It's integral to the system.

The personal demeanour isn't good for promoting real roleplay. What it is good for is to provide an alternative "demeanour super fate point" trigger besides the chapter one. It kinda sums up the most prominent aspect of a PC's personality, I guess. If that was all there is, it would make for a flat, predictable personality.

Aöex

ak-73 said:

Pages 31 and 35 of the corebook cover more detail in a characters' background, personality and beliefs than straight demeanor. I think it'd be a good idea to run players through the questions there.