This is more a general question of how you handle them.

Because in my mind, they won't always have a vehicle.

Making their vehicle use infrequent makes the specialty not worth it, while if you want them used often, you have to tailor your campaign around the fact they have a Leman Russ with them.

It's just that, in my mind, V-Scale and P-Scale can be very separate.

So how do you plan around this? What do you do as a GM?

First off, might I recommend that you watch 'Kelly's Heroes'.

The easiest way to deal with the issue is to say 'no'. Some players won't like that.

If you want to allow it, then you can go with the 'Shadowrun' method. Generally, everyone gets a time in the game where the action gets bogged down in each specialist's particular phase. Extra long chases with the Rigger. The Street Samurai taking forever in combat. The Decker going on and on until everyone falls asleep. (I exaggerate, but that gives the idea.)

The way I would really do it, though, would be to incorporate all aspects of having a Leman Russ into the party dynamic. How can a tank rescue wounded soldiers from a burning field hospital? Operator and party have to get the tank to the other side of a canyon to assist with a vital strike in a very short amount of time, how are they going to do it?

Even operators have to get out of tanks. Shore leave is a lot more fun without the tank…but so much trouble can happen.

Frankie said:

If someone in my group wanted to be an Operator, I think I would simply just assume a vehicle for the majority of the campaign; I don't see it as that big of a downside, and it makes a lot of sense for a OW regiment to be mechanized. Also keep in mind if you're worried about vehicle balance, you can always just issue them a Chimera instead of a Lemen Russ, or something similar.

If you dont want to deal with, just calmly discuss it with said player and see if they want to play something else. Perhaps appease them later with a vehicle segment in a campaign.

Regardless, the beauty of a traditional RPG is the freedom you have as both PCs and GMs. My personal goal as a GM is to create a world and story that my players will enjoy, so if a player wants to be an Operate, I will adjust the world to make that happen.

I also personally love they included vehicles off the bat, as opposed to DW, for instance, that added them later. It definitely potentially adds a lot of variety to gameplay scenarios (and my players are still clamoring for a Titan in one of these campaigns, someday…)

Think of them more like a Spec Ops guy then just the wheel man. They still have a natural inclination to be good path finders, stealthers, hackers, techies, crafters, demomen, translators, and back up medics. Especially handy to have around if there's no Tech-Priest/Medic/Ratling. Give him/her bridges to blow up, secret data files to decrypt, maps to interpret/routes to plan, generators to repair, weapons to upgrade. Oh no, they blew the Medic's head off, who will stabilize this gut shot to the Ratling? ****, the Tech-Priest managed to hack data slate, but he can't read Imperial Codes to translate the orders, wait doesn't the Operator know Imperial Codes?

Like a Void-Master in Rogue Trader, just have to make sure the player understands that they won't always be behind the wheel, and that it maybe a good idea to diversify his skill set a bit. Also have to work with the other members of the group. Not everyone will want to play as a mechanized division, in a vehicle combat heavy campaign.

There is a very simple solution, ask yourself: Does the Regiment Type give them a vehicle as Standard Gear?

If yes, Operators work. If no, they do not work so well.

As for "balancing" a Leman Russ, keep in mind that Armoured Regiments only have a measly Flak Vest and Las Pistol. If they do not spend Extra Starting Gear points there will be very little the footsloggers can actually do without the tank. Secondly, wherever a Leman Russ is deployed there is likely to be enemies equipped for anti-armour or other tanks. You have to tailor the campaign to the regiment (or the other way around, if you prefer that, but there must be some tailoring be done).

Saibot said:

Mechanised Infantry regiments are well-served by a mixture of specialities - the Operator can man the Chimera, while the squad operates around it.

However, beyond that there's plenty of room for using Operators for things other than vehicles. While their Comrade advances are vehicle-specific, their skill-set and equipment allows them to be quite in a few other roles, particularly as Tech-Use and the Fieldcraft aptitude are both so versatile.

In certain human-vs-human conflicts, starting the mission without a vehicle and stealing one later on may also be an option.

only slightly on topic but perhaps we could increase the operators wounds to 8+ rather than there current squishyness, sure a few wounds is not horrible but when everyone else (except the ratling but he is tiny) gets more you start wondering why. in there vehicle it wont matter out of it they are already suffering from being a vehicle specialist ouside of there element to also short them on survival hurts.

Think the Operator does need some non-Vehicle Comrade Advances if one wants to make this class useable for tech use not just related to vehicles.

As for integrating an Operator with a normal PC squad, there's always assigning the Operator to a Sentinel (though may need to house rule in some new Comrade Advances given the Sentinel is a single seater…something like Assisted Fire or such for a Comrade that's a fellow Sentinel jockey).

Librarian said:

+1

I think this increases his value outside his vehicle. Can be the tech/demolitions guy.

Operator needs some comrade advances that work when they are operating a single person vehicle

In our group, the operator is the demolitions guy.

Barely even moans about his lack of wheels anymore.

If you don't have a tech-priest, the squad will LOVE the operator with or without a vehicle.

Why they get only 6 + 1d5 wounds is beyond me, even the Psyker gets 8 + 1d5.

Oh, and we need stats for the Tauros and the Valkyrie in the MRB.

Tonights session, we found that an operator outside his vehicle might as well be playing CoC. I'll say no, they don't work well.

BaronIveagh said:

Is there an actual reason they are squishier than everybody except a ratling (who is essentially a heavily armed soccer ball?)

Andor said:

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that it's because they're not supposed to survive outside their vehicle and to be **** sure the operator dies if the vehicle takes a serious hit.

Outside his vehicle he's the brainy tech guy. Inside his vehicle, he's the combat monster.

Ours is just a Sentinel pilot, and it's been working pretty well for him. Except for when the Dark Eldar realized they could try to snipe him out of the open-topped vehicle and nearly killed him. That aside, it's been quite nice. He pilots his ATST ripoff and doesn't afraid of anything.

Night10194 said:

Yeah, I notice there's no equipment or upgrades for the frankly dozen sentinel variants. Or much in the way of vehicle upgrades at all, actually,

BaronIveagh said:

That's why RPGs have the GM, because no rulebook has enough room to cater to everything. Perhaps a Logistics test rated Rare for enivromental sealing could make the Sentinel not be Open-Topped anymore.

JuankiMan said:

Yeah, except we know they're coming in another book, so it's sort of pointless to draw up rules for x/y/z when we know that an 'official' version is most likely in the pipeline somewhere. I grant, my fan stats for tanks ran much longer then anticipated, and indeed, a lot longer then FFG originally announced,

Though perhaps there would be more room without things like hunting lance that have no real use, as we have no rules for rough riders in the book, either.

BaronIveagh said:

The rules for removing open-top from Sentinels are in the book though. In the Sentinel's special rules section, it states that you can switch out the enhanced motive systems trait for the reinforced armour and/or the enclosed vehicle traits. And that if the sentinel has the enclosed vehicle trait, it loses its open-topped trait.