As GM I am considering the consequences of death in the game and would like to hear about how other people have done it.

I think there is a very real chance that some members of the party will murder one of the other members - a psyker who is getting pretty dangerous to the group.

What do we do if the psyker wants to burn a fate point to stay alive?

I assume standard practice for an acolyte who has died is to just let them re-roll another guy. I have decided I want to impose a 10% experience penalty on new characters, because I have been generous at giving roleplaying experience to the group, and the new character hasn't participated in that. I would then give bonus experience to the new guy if the player made up a good background story.

Finally, at character creation I had allowed players three re-rolls instead of one, and a one time transfer of 5 points from one stat to another. I am thinking about restricting the new character to two re-rolls, and no transfer.

I would love any input from people about these options, or how others have done death in campaigns.

Thanks!

It strikes me that rather than penalising the character, you're punishing the player ; that doesn't seem entirely fair to me. Why wouldn't they have the re-rolls and transfer? Dark Heresy can be quite fatal for player characters, so it seems unfair to limit new PCs.

Caralon said:

I would absolutely allow the psyker to burn a fate point to stay alive. Of course, the players who want him dead will probably keep shooting until he doesn't have any fate points left, but whatcha gonna do?

I think the larger problem that you seem to be ignoring is how this act will affect the players . Unless the psyker's player is extra-ordinarily good natured, he'll probably make a new character that's looking for revenge, or at the very least will feel discouraged about the whole affair and may lose interest in playing.

There's also the fact that players who like to cause trouble usually aren't limited to one method of doing so. I'm guessing there's a good chance the psyker's player will start causing problems with his new character, too. Perhaps in a different way, but problems nonetheless. You should at least consider addressing this problem at a player level. Talk out why the psyker is a problem and try to see if you can root out a solution that maybe doesn't involve killing the psyker summarily.

If the psyker player wants out and is trying to get himself killed to accomplish that, then burning fate points and making a new character are the least of your problems.

Caralon said:

I used to think highly of background stories in RPGs, until I realized I was just making more homework for myself as GM. Bad RPers can bang out a five page essay about how cool their character is as easily as anyone else, and then proceed to ignore all the role playing hooks they made for themselves. Good RPers, by contrast, rarely need the extra help of writing things down. That's just my personal opinion on the subject, of course.

Caralon said:

I don't think penalizing the new character for not being around for the first part of the campaign is really necessary, but I don't think it's a horrible thing to do either. If this helps convince your players to avoid the old "oops-I-died-now-I-rerolled" syndrome, then more power to you.

I still think the most important issue here is concerning the players, not the characters.

How is the Psyker getting dangerous, is it through corruption/insanity or just unlucky with psychic phenomenon? If it is corruption/insanity maybe allow him to burn a fate point to stay alive, and through that experiance he losses some of the corruption/insanity. That might allow him to continue playing and give some basis for the loss or corruption/insanity points(and at a decent cost of burning a fate point).

If it is poor rolls with psychic phenomenon, if he makes another psyker this is unlikely to change much, especially if he is coming in a lil weaker with less chance of decent characteristics.

A third and even more radical idea comes to mind, what if he dies, burns a fate point and comes back a Null? This would give the character something unique, and limit his threat to the group. Possibly he does a purgatis type of attack which backfires on himself, there are probably numerous ways to make this make some sorta of pseudo-science sense.

I would let the new character be created in the same fashion as the others were. If you don't allow the same number of rerolls then you have basically allowed the others an unfair advantage over him.

You wouldn't need to give him the same number of xp though, as you said xps should be earned. At low ranks you might just have him come with a brand new 400xp character, although I suggest letting him start at the same or one Rank below the others (which I guess is about 10% less). The reason would simply be that the Inquisitor would not throw in a green acolytes with an experienced Cell.

But the issue here might be player based, if the Psyker burns FP then he obviously wants to play his character, while the opposing players obviously wants him not to. You have to make a stand on the issue wether you want intra-party conflict or not, and if the players are ok with it. If it's the sort of "no holds barred" game then I suggest you disallow the usage of FPs altogether to prevent sillyness and metagaming. If you play with them in such situations then any attempt on a fellow PCs life will automatically fail, and the victim will be alive to tell the Inquisitor. No burning of FP will stop the Wrath of the Inquisitor, just like FPs wouldn't help if the party throws you out.

So if you think the would-be assassin is right to make an attempt on the psyker's life, either let him with a good chance of success (I-E no FPs), or say no. While the Scum in my own group has requisitioned a Psycannon bolt for his bolt pistol for use against the Psyker should he go mental (with the blessing of his Inquisitor), it's probably not going to happen in my game. It's mosty just a nod to the old Commisar tradition to be "behind the psyker" ready to help him reach the Emperor should the Warp threaten. Since the psyker in my game is Favored by the Warp it is highly unlikely that he be possessed anyway.

But again many groups can't handle intra-party fighting, so just say NO to the offensive player if you're unsure. If it has come to the point where these characters are not compatible, one of the makes a new one, preferably in agreeance with the other. Trust me, this can break a group completely or at least force out a player who is likely not wanting to play with you guys anymore.

This may sound really, really harsh but i see it like this: You have a number of extra-lives(your fate points) once you are done with these it's game over man. No new character, the player is out. Okay, i have the luxury of other players asking me to play in my campaign. But it makes my players REALLY careful. If a player scrifices himself for the group: no harm done, his heroism gives him a shiny new fate point. If he does something really suicidal and lives, that mean it's effectively another extra life.

I have found the following line on new characters pretty working:

If its a new player with a new character I'll give him the exact same rules for character generation but the character starts with less XP than old, well-established characters.

If its an old player with a new character it depends on why his character died:

Doing something stupid and run out of fate points -> You roll like a new player

Heroic sacrifice for the group -> You roll a character of same XP as previous one. Alternatively (if you are using "everyone starts at rank 1" -rule) you can give him some bonuses, like more control over attribute assignment, more starting equipment, letting him roll some rare class of character etc.

Mutually agreed death or removal of character to further the campaign -> You get a slight XP bonus and/or other bonuses.

"Doing something stupid" means that player is playing carelessly, indulging in bad roleplaying and/or generally gets his character killed without/because he is not contributing to the roleplaying experience. A slight XP penalty to the player is justified. He may not be happy about it when it happens, but ultimately it gently leads everyone towards better roleplaying.

"Heroic sacrifice" is when you character dies the way they should go. Fate points are all used and he goes down fighting or prefers to use his last fate points to further a common goal rather than avoid death. No XP (or other) penalty. Thumbs up for you and roll a new character. No hard feelings for anyone.

The "mutually agreed death or removal of character" is something tied to the actual feel and thematics of the game. For example, GM may feel a character has to be killed because a death of a character would fit the theme of the campaign and make some adversary feel "serious" enough. So he makes a pact with the player, explaining what he wants to do and lets player participate in planning how and why his character dies or is removed. In exchange for particpating in the planning of the scenario and providing a memorable, in-character, in-theme moment for all the other players this player gets a new, slightly more experienced character. Everyone is happy.

Firstly i think you need to adress why your other players want to kill the pysker? If it's because they feel s/he's too powerful, then the attempt on his life will do one of two things, prove their point (the attacking players die) or the pysker will die burning fate points and the rest of it. It sounds like you have a deeper problem on your hands though, as psykers aren't that overpowered, yes they can be great tools, for a whole host of things but they are reasonably balanced for the system.

Another problem i can forsee, say your players kill the pysker, you start him at the being of the same rank with what ever stats he rolls, however you do that, and he plays a clone, a pysker that has pretty much the same personality and skills, it'll just keep going and eventually the players inquisitor is going to get sick of sending them reinforcements.

If your players do kill the pysker they better have a really really good reason for their inquisitor, else they could all find themself put against a wall.

Thanks for all the intelligent responses! Somehow, no one has died yet.

People wanted to kill the Psyker because he was contsantly walking around town using Touch of Madness on civilians and rolling nines. Somehow, he's avoided a Perils of the Warp test, and when they actually got into a tough fight they only made it out because of the Psyker! Some of the rifts have been healed. We're still working out the death thing. What we were trying to do was avoid a situation we anticipated where character lost arms, went crazy, etc, and then just decided to roll a new character to get around it. I think we have largely avoided it by recruiting people who are cool and don't want to get killed!

If you get a chance to look at the inquisitors handbook anytime you should take a look at cybernetic resurrection. Although this would be a wonderful thing to happen to a tech-priest, any other character takes some pretty hard cuts in his stats. I've made it a rule in my group that if you take critical hits to the head or body that kills your character then you are made to take your character through this process (even if you burn a fate point since all the fate point is doing is insuring you survived the encounter). This way there is a true consequence to death in the game, unless you're the tech priest. And, that consequence is not that you just simply have to re-roll a character.

This although may be punishing to the player slightly, is more punishing to the character because his stats get reduced heavily. The best part is that you don't have to re-roll a character and worry about giving an experience cut.

This would probably work on your Psyker, let him read about it, he'll decide he doesn't want that happening to him and probably stop going around town making people go insane...

Spending a Fate Point is more than avoiding death.

If a players burns a Fate Point to avoid death, he avoids death and not only to survive another round.
something should happen to keep the character alive, perhaps the Inquisitor intervenes or some other Imperial Officer.

The Psyker Character on the other hand should make some changes or the Inquisitor himself would execute him and in my storylines that is end of character, fate point or not.

Caralon said:

Just out of curiosity: How Radical is your Inquisitor?

In my (admittedly very non-radical) group a psyker deliberately risking warp and damnation by using his powers "just for laughs" would have gotten a bolt to the back of the head from interrogator in less than two hours...

Polaria said:

Heck, even the radical Inquisitor of my group would have taken some serious action after such behavior. Maybe a fitting punishment by having her own Ascended Psyker mess with his head. And/or giving another party member a remote control to his brand new explosive collar, with the order to press the trigger if the Psyker "abuses the power of the Warp again." In which case no FP will help you. After a mission of good behavior it comes off of course, you don't want to harass the player too much, just let him know what is acceptable behavior or not.

It seems your psyker is doing it for kicks, at random for no real reason other than to amuse himself.

Firstly as a GM you should warn the player that this is unacceptable behaviour for a member of the cell, inquisition and that continuing with using his powers for his own amusement will result in consequences. Then if he continues simply roll perils for his hubris, and you can explain it in game as well as the more power he keeps throwing out the more attention he draws to himself in the warp, the more the other players emotions of anger stir the warp until it has to do something to balance itself out in the local area.

Another method : taste of his own medicine

Have a Heretic Pysker use the power on him then disappear into the crowd, the other players are likely to give chase, but have him disappear, then pop back up over the course of a session to repeat the event and see how he likes it as a player.

OOO that is a great idea.

Our inquisitor is sort of radical? I don't really want to get into it. But, the Inquisitor has only met these Acolytes once and he is off doing whatever (or they think he is!) and he is not supervising them directly right now. But, yes, the rest of the party did a good job making clear to him that if he pushes it they will execute him and not feel like they were disobeying the Inquisitor.

Caralon said:

Have the Inquisitor debreif them after the mission. Take out each acolyte and give each player the chance to tell the Inquisitor what happened during the misson. If they convince the Inquisitor that the Psyker was out of line, there should be consequences. It will also help to promote the suspicions and grimdark feel of the game - after all the Inquisition is about heretics being denounced.

Caralon said:

One thing that will help your campaign out in general is to flesh out your inquisitor and his cadre. These are the people your acolyes are aspiring to be one day and you can use them as a good model of what a Primaris Psyker should or should not be. I agree with a mission debrief, maybe even if it is not with the inquisitor themself, perhaps with the inquisitor's interrogator who asks to have a private meeting with the psyker while he is torturing a heretic. He can explain to the character the cause and effects of such future actions with vescerial detail.

Caralon said:

This is the kind of Psyker that gives Psykers a bad name. He's running around using his abiities because he's bored in game, and should be put out of the group's misery at the earliest opportunity.

If that doesn't happen, and the group gets back to 'civilization' and meets up with their Inquisitor, a full report should be made to said Inquisitor. Followed by them mind-cleansing their Psyker, who obviously is being played by someone who doesn't understand the way of the 40k universe. By mind cleansing him, you can let him keep his character, but inform him that further instances of his undersirable actions will result in a bolt shell being put into his head... by his own team!

While this seems vicious... it's actually quite nice... he gets to keep playing the character he enjoys.

This actually happened to me in a game once. Although it really wasn't my fault... I had a false report turned in by the party's Adept, whom I was trying to avoid because I could sense the evil on the player (his dagger actually), but it still resulted in my character getting a mind wipe.

He's just throwing around psychic powers?

This is what i would do: When people start going insane in the street, it is bound to be investigated. A hereticus cell might come to think that it is a rogue psyker. So, you simply send a low-ranking acolyte team to handle the psyker, and see what happens.

If the psyker survives and remains in the cell, send a team to investigate the deaths/dissappearance of the earlier cell.

Rinse and repeat as necessary, until the psyker learns that he shouldn't throw things around.

Always think of logical consequences for the actions of the characters. At least, that's what i always do.

The Black Ships come for you.

In my oppinion if a pc kills another pc the worst thing the gm can do is punish the player with the dead pc for having his pc killed.
If one pc tries to kill another pc and gets himself killed, that is the moment to give less xp.

If the PCs don't get along with each other I would give the one player, who accepts to change to a new pc some kind of bonus before they try to kill each other.