It seems i've been called out....

Firstly, and most importantly, where in my post did I state that I disliked WOW? What about my post personally offended you? Where do you get off assuming you know my mind? You've taken this thread on a delightful tangent in your ignorance, but the tangent was spun-off by you, not by me.

So, don't assume. It makes you appear as an A$$.

Drawing fire is a tactic that one does with the intention of NOT getting hit...tanking fully intends to take damage and soak up the pain. In the real world, when men are on the field butchering each other, men do NOT tank. Hell, TANKS don't tank!!!! If a tank hangs itself out there waitin to get pegged, it gets pegged. - BOOOOOM!!! by one guy with one missile. There goes a few million $. Woops. And all at the cost of a soviet rpg that cost buddy 4 camels. Woops.

Now, sure, I dropped the ol' role vs roll bomb; fair enuf. But just look at the battle lines that have formed up....I'm liking my allies! And we have you outnumbered...care to take the 'tank' role, and see how much flak you can soak? Me, I'm a sneaky barstard, so you won't find me in no stand-up fight....i fight to win.

Which, of course, is precisely my point: space marines are the best, they always fight to win, and they are not, eva, gonna stand up to take a s#!t-kicking like a good tank...heck, even ripper swarms are gonna chew him to pieces!!! The teeniest of the tyrannids!!!!!!!

Now, I ain't tellin' you how to run your game in your house; i will in fact fight for your right to do as you see fit, no matter how wrong you are, cause it's your game and only you know how you have fun.

All I said was, to me, tanking ain't on for the grimdark. I'll thank you to read my posts with both eyes open next time. Thanx!

And, ummm, have fun tanking?

ItsUncertainWho said:

Well, I once played a CoC character who was a Proto-Tank... because he had been converted into a Proto-Shoggoth. I think he had a bit over 30 HP, still died eventually. Of course.

Alex

PS Tanks occasionally get used to "tank", namely when they spearhead an invasion. Remember the fall of Bagdad? Abrams, Abrams everywhere.

crisaron said:

Sorry, but I think you completely misunderstood. I will never "punish" a player for choosing a certain tactic or certain skills. I was talking about players who concentrate only on fighting and fighting tactics, the way many people approach MMORPG like WOW or Guild Wars. I do not like that combat only, "grind-to-get-better-skills" approach and I will never tolerate such players in my group. It is dull and boring and such players waste my time. I would advise such players to get a WOW subscription.

Deathwatch is in my very humble opinion not a game created to be combat only despite the fact that it focusses on Space Marines. The succes of the first adventure in The Emperor Protects proves this. In my group we are discussing more about would a space marine from chapter X take a weapon like that or not instead of choosing the best weapon from the table. For example, our Salamanders marine chose a meltagun over the better plasma gun as designated wargear, our Black Templars assault marine does not have a jumppack. The same with armour and other gear. I like the players in my group very much for that and as a reward/compensation I tailor my adventures so they can still have a lot of fun with sub-optimal weapon and skill set they chose.

crisaron said:

Every RPG has classes that conform to online archetypes... Except for those that don't. Like Twilight 2000, Traveler, Champions, Twilight 2013, the WoD series, All Flesh Must Be Eaten, Witchcraft, Fifth Cycle, Necessary Evil, Deadlands, GURPS, Alpha-Omega, Legionaire, Mechwarrior, Shadowrun, Blood Rose, Serenity, pretty much every superhero and/or modern RPG as well as any game where character development is decided by the player rather than a pre-determined class.

While I agree with you on MMO's actually being RPGs, and I have found great role play on more than a few. My family has been in the RPG industry since the late 70's, and I can tell you with absolute certainty that the the majority class ideas of which you speak are actually a fairly recent (last ten years or so) concept, and even after their invention the majority of non-computer RPG's ignore them entirely.

Zappiel said:

Phew, I thought you were talking to me for a sec. But I am not quite sure who you are talking to. Your post reads like a pretty unfocused buch of passive aggressive attempts at strawmanning and false representation. But I didn't really pay attention to Aluminium Wolfs posts, so maybe your are talking to him? If so, sorry for the confusion. But please try to make it clear whom you are talking to next time.

You're funny, Gokerz; you make me laugh. But you and I both know that you are just not THAT dense.... (although, you DID misinterpret my first post as a personal attack....)

So man-up and take yer licks, lips; this craven dodginess just does not become one who claims to have a point to make...one who claims to have been so unfairly wronged by us big mean role players...

Come on! I thought you were the tank guy....why so sneaky/dodgy? Have you found it tactically unwise to be a tank yet?

Now, apparently my heavy flamethrower caught you in it's blast, and for that I apologize.....but you drew first blood deliberately, brother; and all because you got tweaked-off by some off-handed comment I made at no one in particular. So grow a pair, brother! We'd all appreciate it!

[oh, and to comment on the comment regarding abrams leading the charge into baghdad town......indeed, looked pretty, too! But....spec ops were in their first, the scouts were all in their first, and the way was cleared for the heavy tanks so that they would not get gooned. Hell, the gawddarned CNN were all in their first......so, in reality, the tanks did not lead the charge (except in the publicity pix! )]

Whichever way you slice it there is going to be a lot of fighting in a Space Marine game.

So it behoves us to make that fighting as entertaining as possible.

Spliting responsibility for a fight in to easily understood roles that must work together to suceed is a technique that is demonstrably fun.

A Space Marine game is not the place to be taking a stand against the evils of MMORPGs. Turning your back on popular, entertaining and well developed methodologies for no good reason (largely, BECAUSE they are popular, entertaining and well developed) is foolish in the extreme.

--

Seriously though dudes, if you are the kind of person who wants roleplaying not rollplaying what are you doing playing a Space Marine game?

crisaron said:

"High toughness" in CoC means "fractionally more able to withstand damage" and people in CoC do not idly throw around spells.

Avoiding damage in Call of Cthulhu is all about the dodge skill.

But I think it is worth pointing out that the combat minigame in CoC is not as entertaining to play as the one from Dungeons and Dragons or World of Warcraft.

This does not vastly matter, as the combat in CoC is not the main attraction of the game. This is much less true of a Space Marine game, which is likely to feature combat as a much more important draw for the players.

AluminiumWolf said:

Zappiel said:

Err... no. The Abrams tanks were speeding through Bagdad to reach its center. The streets they were driving through were not cleared, you can't clear that much urban space in any reasonable amount of time (and to keep it cleared you need an ungodly amount of troops). The only other safe way would be to let the tanks advance at walking speed so that they can be spearheaded and flanked by a massive amount of troops or else run the risk of catching whatever AT devices the enemy troops have at hand.

The US generalship correctly assessed that the Iraqi defense was not prepared for an Abrams spearhead and in fact the shock caused their defenses to collapse totally.

In fact Main Battle Tanks do tank a lot to take flak away from APC, IFVs and light tanks. The Abrams tank has been about the only US armoured vehicle that could withstand huge "normal" IEDs iirc. Thus the surprise and outrage at the sudden use of EFPs by some insurgents.

Alex

AluminiumWolf said:

The concept of a tanker more likely originates from MMORPGs like City of Heroes (where I play a Tanker). There it makes sense because you have such archetypes in comic books.

It makes no sense to adapt to Deathwatch where the baddies you face are so powerful that they can one-shot you, no matter what. I would also like to question whether the explicit concept of a tanker is such a popular, entertaining and well-developed one. It is more or less a one-trick pony by design after all.

Alex

PS I was only saying that I once played what would have to be considered a tank in CoC context: a PC who can absorb way more damage than the other PCs. Unfortunately it doesn't matter much how many HPs you have in that RPG.

The important thing is that with the Holy Trinity (Tank, Healer, Damage Dealer) everyone has a role to play in the fight and everyone has to work together to win.

RPGs are a team sport, so I think it is great to have mechanics that so obviously require teamwork.

Using it also has the advantage that everyone already broadly understands how it works, so you are not trying to reinvent the wheel for not reason other than snobbery.

From a UK perspective the term "Tank" has been around since LRP events got rolling properly (so about 15-20 years ago).

It referes to the guy with the lots of body hits and heavy armour and usually a big shield who holds the front rank on a linear/quest/mission when things get heavy. The guy who takes a pounding and holds the line while the rest of the linear team/warband ect gets it's act together to deal with the threat.

In this respect yes, yes you can tank in DW. However on the linear using your tank(s) to do the above normally means one thing.... Something has gone wrong, you've been pushed onto your backfoot and have lost both momentum and advantage. The only time this is not true when you're pulling a Diversion, however all too often that diversion will cost in blood maybe even sacrifice. I've been there as part of such a tractic and it's not pretty. All the time invested, the effort put in the successes and failures. It's not easy to step up when you know you may not come back.

Now, the Adeptus Astartes are conditioned to do that very thing when it's needed. But ONLY when it's needed, a Space Marine that throws his life away..well.. he doesn't make it to being a SpaceMarine.

So yes you can Tank in Deathwatch, yes you may even have a situation that needs that to happen, where a Space Marine needs to stand there and take serious punishment. But should it be common? No, not at all. Should you spend XP on traits that make you tougher and harder to kill? Oh Yeah

RolePlay your character

...and read Ian Watson's SpaceMarine, there is a lovely section in there where it talks about the Imperial Fists and their attitude to pain and about suicidal tendancies being a Flaw.

And please, please, please boys and girls. Can we drop the waspish and snippy and oblique verbal attacks. We all indulge in the same hobby, we all (hopefully) have fun doing so and we are all capable of discussing this matter without getting hostile about it? It's a game folks based entirely upon a work of fiction that exists for toy soldiers to be played with in a formalised way. It's worth investing emotion in for sure, because it delivers back melodrama in spades, but it's not worth getting emotional over.

Or, as Phil Brucato once wrote "See **** Game, See **** use Rules to make Sue cry. Don't be a ****" wise words for us all right there.

AluminiumWolf said:

As you are the one insisting everyone else conform to your idea that all RPG's should be like World of Warcraft, and that any combat focused RPG that does not conform exclusively to WoW's archetypes will fail (or at the very least, be taking an extreamly risky path), so who is trying to re-invent the wheel again?

As an example of combat focused RPG's that do not need these archetypes, I would point out Robotech, Werewolf, Champions, Rifts, All Flesh Must Be Eaten, Hunter, Mechwarrior, Twilight 2000, Alpha-Omega, Dark Heresy and Rogue Trader. Only in a few of them are the 'needed' archetypes even possible, and in most they do not exist at all. And, once again, for your wheel comment, I would point out that all but the last three significantly predate WoW.

Moirdryd said:

Yeah, not my proudest moment online. But there are some things that significantly irk me when it comes to RPG's, chief among them is an assertion from another person that "all games (of type X) must conform to (idea Y) or they are (doomed/inferior/being foolish)". As someone who literally grew up in the industry, my parents and their friends were all RPG designers and/or computer programers in the 80's and 90's, I can not tell you how bothersome that assertion is to me.

I'm not saying that all games need to feature the trinity, I'm saying that there is no really pressing reason why a Space Marine game shouldn't, and a number of reasons it would be quite a good idea if it did.

AK, buddy, yer wrong 'bout baghdad, brother....if there had been a t-80 within 100 km they'd have walked softly and been ready with their big stick (big stick bein' the flyin' artillery battery - DPS!!)....but, as you say, they roared right in, like they knew they were safe....cause the scouts already told them all was well. Generals are cowards, brother; and losing an abrams is a scary scary thing....

Let me put it this way: you and your friends could make a tank trap yerselves in an afternoon that would stop an abrams in its tracks...allowing you to calmly and casually pop its top at yer leisure. Imagine what could have been done to secure baghdad....but they didn't, and the coalition knew it.

Now, sure, of course, if a tank is with a couple guys who are gettin shot at, then, yeah, the tank is a 'tank' for that encounter. But, then so is a wall, a small boulder, a ditch, a tree, a fencepost, a fallen log, ..........

Likewise, if a space marine is facing a bunch of guys with puny sluggas, then, yes, he'll be fairly 'tankish' in that situation...but that is NOT a space marine situation: sm's are the best, used only in the most desperate of missions. They don't walk into battlefields where they can stand around and laugh at the bullets bouncing off of them (though this is a nice aside for the players to allow them to bask in glorious space marine goodness, it is not standard, not Codex approved, if you will).

Sure, tanking situations will occur...and, again, you oughta play yer game the way you wanna play it...my only point was that it's tactically not on. Especially for the best warriors humanity has ever created. Sounds like something the Fists would do as part of a last stand, but that's about it. Yes, for last stand type situations, i could see it; or if yer fightin' hordes of nobodies and can take their hits; but, by the Codex, these are not situations for Space Marines! There is absolutely no room for tanking in a universe wherein the tiniest of the tyranids can still friggin' eat you, armour and all!

[and as for this nonsense about tanking in the land of the Great Cthumby....ya, no thanx! You go ahead, you tank the shoggoth...have fun with that...]

[i doubt even the great Marneus could tank a shoggoth without soiling his armour....and getting turned into fine paste....] TEKELI-LI! TEKELI-LI!!

AluminiumWolf said:

It would be a horrible idea, because Space Marines don't work like that in the fluff or in the TT, and 40k RPG's main sales pitch is the ability to recreate the experience of the 40k universe through the medium of roleplaying. It'd be like making a Star Wars RPG where the Jedi have to use Vancian slots for their Force Powers.

Also, just because DW doesn't conform to MMO playstyles doesn't mean it lacks tactical depth.

AluminiumWolf said:

Really? Because you have stated up front that every combat oriented game should conform to those archetypes.

AluminiumWolf said: a game that is going to feature as much fighting as a Space Marine game is likely to ignores all that work at its peril.

AluminiumWolf said: We need to be asking - is this fight as much fun as it is in WoW?

AluminiumWolf said :Whichever way you slice it there is going to be a lot of fighting in a Space Marine game.

So it behoves us to make that fighting as entertaining as possible.

AluminiumWolf said :Turning your back on popular, entertaining and well developed methodologies for no good reason (sic) is foolish in the extreme.

AluminiumWolf said :This does not vastly matter, as the combat in CoC is not the main attraction of the game. This is much less true of a Space Marine game, which is likely to feature combat as a much more important draw for the players.

Never mind the numerous combat focused games that did just fine without them, including Deathwatch.

Also, as Morangias said, it would be very thematically inappropriate. No one in 40K has a zone of healing which can be used X number of times per day, healing Y damage a turn, or has a Thunderstrike with a cooldown of 55 seconds. nor are there weak healer space marines and very touch space marines running around that need to work together to fight off the Eldar. All of that is a very, VERY, good reason not to use the trinity mechanic.

Now, as I said earlier in this thread, I LIKE MMORPGs, they are fun. But that is not a good reason to tell everyone who makes a product even remotely like them that they all need to reinvent their wheels.

To the contrary, it is a bad configuration because this unholy trinity calls for exactly one tactic: tanker draws incoming attacks, damage dealer kills enemy, healer ensures success.

Perhaps MMORPGs are successful in spite of it and not because of it.

Alex

I'm not saying that no one should ever tank in 40K RPG's, but I preffer a more realistic, flexible approach to the subject.

In MMO's and certain RPG's tanks are valuable because the rest of the party are called 'squishies', even the least combatative (which is relative anyway) Astartes is hardly squishy (unless they go to great lengths).

Any 'tank' character is going to lack a specific factor, sustained direct healing without risking the healer.

Any 'tanking' is going to be a temporily drawing fire to allow for other goals. Risking themselves while the healer saves a team mate or performs a rescue, repair or any other objective. At which point you have to ask what tactical, assault or devastator marine ISN'T going to volunteer for that heroic action.

Strangely it's quite common in DH to require characters to soak up damage, stopping the amazingly squishy characters from getting into most of the combat, the Crusader class even has specific rules for it, something that is missing from DW for it to work effectively.

Face Eater said:

From that point of view: Yes I think tanking can be done in Deathwatch. A kill-team tactic were one draws all the fire/hits and "soaks up" the damage while the other members of the team distribute the blows can work. But I seriously doubt that most Game Masters would put your team in such a simplified situation.

Or rather that the GM would allow this rather simplicistic tactic to succeed time and time again.

Alex

ak-73 said:

As a long time fan of Lethal Weapons movie there is nothing like having the old hard headed buger run around in boxer shorts while, the young thin guy snipes at the flamer thrower release valve!

In DW it is just so part of the whole "better then man" or "cinematical" i.e. free dodge "reroll" on occasion because it's your stile!!! To me it screams "my guy defiently stand in the corridor blocking the genestealers "Over my dead body! For Dorn!" (ain't this the Black templar chapter power or the dark angel?).

You guys talk about RP like you had to play this "a la" Splinter Cell, one bullet one kill! Lets keep it real!...

Man 10 foot tall SM? Anyone? So if you have a player that goes for a never fall/back breach master/ship assault/etc, you know those guys know for assaulting reinforced possition and take loads of damages? Like a guy with a Terminator Armor and a thunder shield?

Dark angel, tech marine, with termintor armor, thunder shield, the machine is flesh (3), etc

I mean it's totally end game for sure, but if you are there and this is the guy's RP as a never falling back (probably played too many dwarfs, etc), not just going dice roll but actually going "I will not fall, you shall not pass, Yarrr!!!!" " I am the line, the flat liner!!!"

man over the years too me a dicer does not mean a poor RPer, I have seen Dicer create very nice and developed characters.

A poor RPer to me is someone who can;t adapt to is fellow RPer. We all play this game to dream and use our imagination, we are all different folks, there is no good or bad way and a good party is usually a mixt of all the types.

Some may wonder why I like a Min/maxer? cause they are the guy who will have read the freaking book... God knows I have had Rper going well I will use the premade here again and you can then tell me what to do, its just numbers... I usually try a new RP system every other month for kicks and now I play all my new system with Dicers.