Dezmond said:

Fair enough, and I'm going to say that Dark Heresy then isn't the game for you, will never be the game for you, and you should go look elsewhere for your badassery. Its a simple, you don't like the game, then take your money elsewhere and find a game that does suit you.

You want to play Warhammer 40k but Dark Heresy isn't for you, go get any number of generic sci-fi games out there and convert them to Warhammer 40k. I suggest Mekton Z, but that's just me.

Seriously, Dezmond, after all of this, if this whole conversation boils down to this one post by you, then I empathize with you, I really do. Dark Heresy isn't giving you what you want, and I can wholeheartedly agree with it, but simply you aren't going to change it.

Its reality, face it, you're not going to change it. So go play something else, or don't play at all. Complaining about it here in the manner that you're doing isn't going to change a **** thing.

Dezmond said:

Well yeah but I didn't make a habit of picking a fight with an army unless I had one of my own to block my retreat.

+++++Complaining about it here in the manner that you're doing isn't going to change a **** thing.+++++

Yeah, but there may still be time to save Deathwatch!

:-) (of a sort)

.

..

.

.

:-)

Dezmond said:

Team work, tactics, finding allies, and picking my battles and the location of my battles and knowing when to stand my ground and knowing when to retreat, and knowing when to get the hell out of dodge and incinerate the entire world with nukes and biologicals.

And if I die after all that, and it was epic in scope, then I die, and my character will go down in the books of my Chapter as a hero.

Beowolf may have been a badass, but he's equally remembered for his tragic end. Hercules another badass, dies. Achilles dies in battle. The 300... they all die and they're not remembered so much for being baddasses (all Spartans were) but for dying in such a manner.

The Marathon isn't ran because the guy lived, but is ran because the guy died.

Casey Jones wasn't remembered for his life, but his death.

Same with John Henry, he's not remembered for being a strong man, but for how he used his strength... and he died.

I can keep going if you want. RPGs are about stories, and while a number of baddasses live, an equal number of them die in memorable fashion and are more remembered because they died, then because they lived.

Oh, the death is important.

So important it shouldn't be left to chance!

--

I'm also willing to discuss Epic Death, and how to ensure it. Maybe the quickload doesn't work in boss battles (with a little 'this is a boss battle' sign), or you can trade Fate Points for extra damage or automatic success ensuring your hero always dies a memeorable death. To be honest though, a death should always be an active choice made by the characters player, not a random event mandated by the rules.

--

The bad guys also can use tactics. If they don't you arn't facing an enemy of equal or greater power, now are you. You lose to an equal enemy half the time.

Faux-Equal battles, wherein a toddler fights a grizzly bear and the bear calls it equal because there is one fighter on both sides is another matter entirely.

Dezmond said:

I agree with your first two points completely, but that's part of why fate points exist, as well as GM caveate exists. But there needs to be a death mechanic in there, because if death were completely up to the GM, then players would get pissed off because it was so arbitrary.

As to your last point, yes the bad guys can also use tactics, and they should. Now its about who has the better tactics, the better ground. If they do, then I should be retreating. If I do then yes they should be retreating, and now its up to me to prevent that, or to chase after them.

Epic battles aren't about just wading in. Epic battles are as much about how you win.

just to throw in my 2 cents on this.

DH does make low rank characters feel like there in over there heads. Its a good mood to start a somewhat horror based game with. This is why I insisted on starting at 400exp, that and Illumination is really good.

The players have figured out what there character can do in the beginning. And by the time they've done that, their rank 2 or 3 and can do a fair bit. Still, if they aren't careful, they will lose fate points and/or limbs quickly. (One reason I really like critical damage system. There are many was things can go bad, without having to kill the character).

Once you start running low on fate points, your competent enough that you don't have to spend them as often. And the players have developed the practical paranoia of the setting.

If the character does die, they don't have to start over at rank 1. The penalty is not exp or anything mechanical, it's in the role play. You learn to love your characters.

Cent the Second

Success in combat isn't too bad, so long as you balance the power level of the enemy (something you have to do no matter what the system). Outside of combat the low precentage on skill is not nearly as the lack of access to the correct skill.

This does make the GM do some work, but I had a lot of fun with it. The setting is rich enough that you, or your players, can invent a creative way to use the skills avalable.

Ya see, I just think that the characters are so low key compared to what the setting can support.

This is 40k, home of the Emperor and the Primarchs. We know there are alpha level psykers and eversor assassins. So why are we playing Just Some Guy?

We have walking cities and five mile long spaceships and hives and craftworlds and webways. All this cool, epic level architecture, and yet the characters are just so, well, Mundane.

The character is the only thing a player can really call his own. Give him something worthy of the universe.

Yes, the Acolyte power level can reach ridiculous levels. Five people SHOULD NOT be able to slaughter A HUNDRED Plaguebearers (mostly in melee combat), unless these people are Grey Knights of the Ordo Malleus or something. Yet our Acolytes has pulled that kind of stunt off (and no, the entire group is NOT all out combat oriented PCs, only one of them is a shameless combat monster, and thats the assassin of the group).

So yeah, it can become quite over the top some times. Personally I would like to see a significant nerfing in the powers mere mortal humans can acheive. Bolter rounds are supposed to be lethal as hell, yet an unarmoured Heavy can shrug off a bolter round or two with a little luck (remember we are talking about the same rounds that shredds normal humans to pieces in every released Black Library novel).

So to summarize: nerf the stats of humans (that includes Inquisitors and their Acolytes as well), and instead dish out more fate points in order to let the PCs be able to pull off heroic feats. The grim darkness of the far future should be significantly more deadly than this, in my opinion...

N0-1_H3r3 said:

That reminds me of the new World of Darkness. nWoD is likewise very dependent on "equipment modifiers" to skill checks. I mean, when wearing sneakers give you +1 to your jumping checks, equipment modifiers are common .

However, some GMs, still used to the old Wold of Darkness system can be very stingy with the bonus dice... in which case the nWoD dice system tends to break down.

Same thing with Dark Heresy... if you choose to not fully utilize the game the way it was intended, odd things result.

I think a big problem with DH is a matter of perception. When you look at your character sheet, it's very easy to tell that you have exactly 40% chance to hit with a gun. Some players find that unacceptable, not realizing that - in truth - their D&D character doesn't have better odds of hitting. They just can't tell as easily. And, add to that, DH have plenty of options for you to improve your odds if you care to do more than just stand and shoot.

I've had players quit the game over the whiff factor. Which was funny since he had a better BS than anyone else in the group, and he was the only one having trouble hitting anything. Yet, he refused to listen to advice because 'it wouldn't make a difference'.

Can't please everyone!

Yes, the Acolyte power level can reach ridiculous levels. Five people SHOULD NOT be able to slaughter A HUNDRED Plaguebearers (mostly in melee combat), unless these people are Grey Knights of the Ordo Malleus or something. Yet our Acolytes has pulled that kind of stunt off (and no, the entire group is NOT all out combat oriented PCs, only one of them is a shameless combat monster, and thats the assassin of the group).

Would you mind describing how you managed to do that? Because with the stats of Daemons being as they are, I can't really imagine how that's possible, assuming you used the errataed versions (Swords have Penetration 2, Toxic, Balanced and not Primitive).

Let's see: WS of 35. Likely outnumber you 2:1, so 45. Depending on the enemy in question, the second half action is either used on a Feint (extreme-dodging types) or an All-Out-Attack for a 65 attack roll. Assuming it hits and isn't dodged or parried, it deals 1D10+3 damage. Let's assume you're wearing Power Armour for an AP of 8 and have a TB of 4. Penetration 2 means the Plague Bearer has to roll a 7 on his damage die. Once he does that, you've got about 60% chances to not make your Toxic save and receive another 1D10 straight to the wounds, which your average character can take about three times. And this doesn't take the greatest problem (Fear test with a -30 penalty at the start of combat, with every Shock result above 60 taking the character out of the fight for a time) into account.

So... well, I'm curious.

Cifer said:

I'm not really sure I want to hear the details actually, I might facepalm.

On the subject of crazy things PC's have managed to pull off...

My group recently finished the Shades on Twilight scenario. They actually managed to kill Akirvas and his bodyguards, and severely maimed or outright killed 18 of the Raiders before the Twilight was bombarded. Four of the players had to burn fate points to escape death, and only one acolyte with no ammo was left when Agamorr showed up to kill the last two raiders as they were stalking forward to finish him off. It really is nice to see genuine elation on a player's face when they find out they're character will actually live. They got some serious rewards for what I did to them that session.

This scenario leads me to the conclusion that Spasm is a really nasty power when used against major npcs. When that destructor went off it took out 3 raiders, and an acolyte. Not to mention while he was twitching on the ground the group's sniper popped him in the head with a roll of a 03 with an accurate weapon (he has both the deadeye shot and sharpshooter talents). Ironically enough he triggered righteous fury on the initial dmg while reciting the Litany of True Striking. 4d10 + 5 later Akirvas' brain matter is splattered all over the floor.

Cifer said:

Im gonna try describing it, even though it was a bit.... well "Chaotic" at the time (no pun intended). And I dont have the specific details of all the PCs (knowing a few of the talents they have, I have far from detaile knowledge of their stats) Lets see here:

The Plaguebearers were the errated versions. However the toxic quality of their weapons did little to help, because either the character they were trying to chop could doge or parry insanely good (the assassin being ridiculously adept at both), or the character had a very high Toughness value (like my own Mechanicus Secutor, but no he's not a combat specialist since he primarily boasts Lore- and other Int-based skills). One of the characters were also a Black Priest of Maccabeus (and hist LItany of Detestation really gave the plague bearers a hard time). What am I forgetting? Oh right, three characters so far (one Assassin, one Black Priest, and one Tech-Priest), the Guardsman of the group had recently undergone a full cybernetic resurrection so he could handle his own pretty well, and the last guy (a Scum) was just being plain sneaky and wasn't given very much attention (if im not mistaken), the plaguebearers being busy with harrassing the Black Priest and the Tech-Priest in the group.

Weapons and Armour-wise: yes several members wore power armour (even the assassin if im not mistaken, a little out of place in my opinion, but the guy playing him has recently just tried to make him a combat monster and not caring much about being sneaky). The assassin also sported two power-swords and had wall of steel (he could parry an unnatural amount of times) and he also had the talent counter-attack, meaning that every time a Plagueberarer tried to hit him, he parried and chopped the daemon's head off (lets just say that the guy is wicked with any weapon that holds an edge, being a Moritat reaper and all).

The Black Priest of Maccabeus being and Ordo Malleus fetischist liked to run around shouting litanies of detestation, and also blew holes through the daemons with his Sacristian Bolter carrying sanctified bolter rounds. And when that wasnt enouigh he drew his eviscerator and went texas chainsaw massacre on the foul things.

The Cybernetically resurrected Guardsman carried a Melta-Gun if im not mistaken, or perhaps it was a heavy bolter? : / nevertheless he picked off quite a few from afar (him and myself picked off most plaguebearers from a distance before they closed in, which was a pretty slow affair, plaguebearers not being the fastest bunch).

I dont really remember what the Scum used, but it was something largely insignificant i think (he didnt bag as many as the rest of us)

The Tech-Priest (myself) carried a power-fist (which turned plaguebearers to slimey mush in close combat), and two bolt pistols (one in his hand, and one on a mechadendrite, the Machinator Array talent letting him mount better pistols than the puny compact las model on his Gun Mechadendrite). Sure he is better att shooting than hitting things in close combat (talent-wise he has more helpful talents with firearms than in melee combat). But he used a power-fist which really doesent need much help, talent-wise, to kill anything it touches (after all, the thing is used to punch holes through tank armour).

Oh right, fear-tests. The Black priest had high Command skills and talents like "Into the Jaws of hell" and the like. Not that I can remember anyone actually failing their fear-tests to begin with, the Black Priest goaded us all to stand and fight, even though we were severely outnumbered.

The conditions of the battle-site were largely open (only fiting for something as epic as that). However the plaguebearers had materialized pretty far away from us all, letting us have a few salvoes before they could close in.

Considering the scenario in hindsight, sure we did have a nice arsenal, and the PCs in question was at the later levels of their career path (around 10.000 xp if im not mistaken). But come on, A hundred plaguebearers against five people? Only Grey Knights should be able to fight through those odds, not a bunch of Inquisitorial henchmen and cronies. (in my opinion that is)

IEpic and cool? Sure. Plausible (fluff-wise, not rules-wise), not a chance. We're only human after all...

Zarkhovian_Rhythm said:

We also killed Akirvas (the haemonculus right?). The Black Priest of our gang cut of the haemonculus' ear and kept it as a trophy... I (the tech-priest) stole his Destructor and kept it as a trophy (a very nasty and painful trophy as our future enemies got to experience). Sure our Inquisitor raised an eye-brow when he found out what I had stolen, but he let me keep it and tinker with it. And i felt like a kid on christmas day of course. XD

Also if im not mistaken a frigging Talos showed up somwhere in Shades of Twilight, that one we didnt manage to destroy so we just ran away from it instead (our shots barely grazed the thing).

Then I'd say your GM didn't play the Plaguebearers to their full capabilities.

The easiest trick for Plague Bearers to use against Counterattack is Vomiting as it can't be parried - use your first half action to feint. If it succeeds (and with a good assassin, it's not likely to, but the dice are a big enough randomizer that it's still worth the chance), use the sword. If it doesn't, vomit - it's not too likely to hit, but it can't be parried and thus can't be counterattacked either.

Also, are you aware that the Litany of Detestation burns up a Fate Point every time it is used and works on only one Daemon at a time? It's nice against the final enemy of a game (15 unsoakable wounds to the Bloodthirster over there , thank you!), but using it against a hundred enemies would be... odd.

Finally, ranged combat is obviously a (non-Tzeentchian) Daemon's weakest point, which was precisely why I found it strange that you claimed to have been able to take them on "mostly in melee combat" - but now, with the addition of Sacristan Bolters with Psybolts, heavy bolters, meltaguns and dual-wielded boltpistols, it seems a little more believable, especially with the terrain working for you.

Cifer said:

They did vomit on the assassin, and i think it even hit once. The problem with vomit is that it used BS to hit, and Plague bearers have pretty pathetic BS. As for feinting, the Assassins WS were A LOT higher than the Plaguebearers, suffice to say that every feint they tried to do didnt work other than wasting a half-action for the Plaguebearer. And yes, the assassin was a Combat master at the time, meaning that the surrounding plaguebearers didnt get any bonuses to their WS for outnumbering him. If you combine that with "The Reaping" which the Assassin had from being a Moritat Reaper, he could dish out ridiculuous amounts of attacks on the surrounding Plaguebearers. Basically he only thought it was fun-day att happy land when he was being more and more surrounded by the Chaos filth. Which also explains why he killed most of the enemies in melee (My Tech-Priest being the second if im not mistaken, due to the awesome smashiness of the power fist).

The Litany of Detestation was used properly (however the priest had amassed a few fate points up to that particular battles so he burned a few). I just mentioned it becaus I find the Litany of Detestation to be a sick power.

Suffice to say that fatepoints were widely used and a few even burnt during the encounter. But i still think our power level was simply too strong. Survive an encounter should be feasible (thats what fate points are for after all), WINNING it however is not plausible for normal humans.

Varnias Tybalt said:

Your GM must be very generous with handing out fate points, I've only ever been deemed worthy of that one time in all our sessions, and the same goes for my fellow player.

xenobiotica said:

We dont have a fixed GM. However we've played several pre-written adventures (Shattered hope, Purge the Unclean-campaign, Illumination, The House of Dust and Ash etc.). A few of those gave out fate points for simply accomplish certain tasks during the adventure (which several of us did). This one with a hundred plaguebearers was one of our own creations (possibly an attempt to make us burn a few fate points), however considering the fact that our own creations can include enemies of such monstrous proportions one could guess that it also means that a few players get even more fate points when facing dangerous odds and manages to pull through.

My Tech-priest still have all his fate points left from every adventure (in contrast with the other PCs ) so far I have 7 Fate Points. (started with 3 when I rolled him up, I have so far earned 1 from an adventure one of us created, and the rest comes from pre-written adventures if im not mistaken).

However, they are gonna get a beating pretty soon in our first group's closing adventure. Lets just say that you'll need a couple of fate points to burn in order to escape a Halo Device. *whistles innocently*

Varnias Tybalt said:

In Dark Heresy it would seem that how powerful/gimped a PC is is ultimately determined by the GM.

Your GM put your characters in an optimal situation and probably played the Daemons in a less then optimal / goonish tactless manner. You were given a battlefield which optimized your strengths while playing up to the weakness of your enemies. You were much better armed them them (even if they were daemons) and, beyond that, he had given you fate points (handing out fate points is, of course, going to ramp up the heroic level of the PC's... the more that's given out, the more godly the PC's will become).

How many Fate Points did each character have at the start and how many did each burn? That right there would be the true indicator of how hard the fight was and how well you faired and is the ultimate GM control on how hard he/she wants things (beyond setting difficulty modifiers which your GM seems to have done in your favor as opposed to your enemies favor).

In the end, like I said, however, the acolytes power level is determined by the GM. In my game, I guarantee five Plague Bearers would have wiped your party. Of course, i would have went about setting the battle up much differently but your GM probably wasn't looking for a party wipe but, instead an epic battle where you guys would feel like Big Goddamn Heroes ;-)

And to sum this thread up to date:

Acolytes are not powerful enough!

also...

Acolytes are too powerful!

Man, you really can't please everybody, can you? ;-)

Varnias Tybalt said:

7 fate points?! Holy @¤#%! Just thinking about being able to use more than 3 (which is the most I've ever had at any given time) fate points in one single session makes my brain release endorphins into my system. But now my knowledge seeking Adept (and his entire group) is dead due to lack of fate points to burn. Maybe I should convince my GM that we should play through the pre-written adventures so that my Assassin might have more chances to survive his own adventure's lethal tendencies.

Graver said:

The Plaguebearers werent played in a goonish bevavior. The Battlefield was more determined by our (the players) tactical choices than anything else. (in the beginning of the encounter, the Plaguebearers were assaulting a settlement, it was our choice to drag their attention towards us when we remaind stationary in the open). Its not like we gave the GM at the time much choice, I mean its not like the open ground could suddenly sprout cover for the Plaguies (well technically the GM could do that, Chaos forces abound and all that, but we at least try to think about plausability in our games, instead of the GM acting like he's got a grudge towards the players).

The Fate Points were earned from previous adventures (like I said), and from different GMs (although quite fair and justified). The only way for the current GM to do would've been to just arbitrarly take away peoples fate points (that wouldn't have been fair at all since we worked hard to earn them in the first place).

The weapons were also previously accuired, and the world the mission was situated on was a feral/feodal world where no one would've been able to restrict us from bearing those kinds of weapons so there were no logical reason for us to leave them back at HQ.

To summarize, the entire situation was fairly GM:ed (without the GM having to be exceptionally mean in any way), and we stuck to the rules (because we find it to be the most fair way to go about playing). Therefore it was the rules fault we could prevail in such a sick manner, not our GM's. And a rules system where the GM have to intentionally be "extra mean" in order to give the PCs a challenge is flawed in someway.

And this example is not all I have to support my thesis. Take the fact that normal humans can shrug off being hit by bolter rounds providing they have a decent Toughness Bonus (4 or higher). Sure, bolters being tearing nowadays made up for it but still the two dice could still come up 1 and 2. And sure it could just be a bad hit. But come on! We're talking bolters here (the same guns that insta-gibs normal people in every book ever written about them). Lasguns are too suffering from pathetic damage values fluffwise.

Not to mention "assassin-guns" like the S-Venom compact las-pistol. I mean if its supposed to be an assassins weapon it helps if it could actually kill anybody with one shot. However a puny 1D10+1 with no penetration is not very likely to kill any average person with a Toughness Bonus of 3 with one shot. And if anyone intends to use it to assassinate an, oh lets say noble dignitary of some kind (common targets) his bodyguards would be all over the assassin before he could pull the trigger a second time in order to confirm his kill.

So nerfing the importance of Toughness Bonus for normal humans (acolytes and different kinds of heretics) would make them a little more vulnerable to more realistic standards. And if you amped up the lethality of weapons (yes, including "puny" las pistols), players would be **** sure to keep their heads down during a firefight if they dont want to die, instead of them running around in flak armour with shruging of ridiculous amounts of las fire that SHOULD kill normal people, even if they are wearing flak armour.

The scenario with the Plaguebearers was just an example to prove my point that the world of Dark Heresy should be deadlier, without heretics having to resort to plasma cannons and multi lasers...

Be careful what you wish for.

Realistic sucks. You spend the whole game pointedly not fighting, which is fine, but people often don't turn up to not fight. Or the GM has to fudge things to stop wiping out the party ever five minutes, which is no better.

Consider how many rounds a character in Call of Duty can take, and why. Or does no one remember how much less fun the early rainbow sixes were...

--

TBH what I want is something like a more traditional RPG where a mook has 5 hit points and his gun does 5 hit points of damage and Sepiroth has 9999 hit points and his whacking great katana does 9999 hit points.

It is easy, well tested and direct.

The Plaguebearers werent played in a goonish bevavior. The Battlefield was more determined by our (the players) tactical choices than anything else. (in the beginning of the encounter, the Plaguebearers were assaulting a settlement, it was our choice to drag their attention towards us when we remaind stationary in the open). Its not like we gave the GM at the time much choice, I mean its not like the open ground could suddenly sprout cover for the Plaguies (well technically the GM could do that, Chaos forces abound and all that, but we at least try to think about plausability in our games, instead of the GM acting like he's got a grudge towards the players).

The Fate Points were earned from previous adventures (like I said), and from different GMs (although quite fair and justified). The only way for the current GM to do would've been to just arbitrarly take away peoples fate points (that wouldn't have been fair at all since we worked hard to earn them in the first place).

The weapons were also previously accuired, and the world the mission was situated on was a feral/feodal world where no one would've been able to restrict us from bearing those kinds of weapons so there were no logical reason for us to leave them back at HQ.

To summarize, the entire situation was fairly GM:ed (without the GM having to be exceptionally mean in any way), and we stuck to the rules (because we find it to be the most fair way to go about playing). Therefore it was the rules fault we could prevail in such a sick manner, not our GM's. And a rules system where the GM have to intentionally be "extra mean" in order to give the PCs a challenge is flawed in someway.

That depends on your point of view. When it comes to Daemons (and especially massive incursions like this one), I consider "extra mean-ness" to be fully justified. Daemons don't play by the rules. Well, they do, but they occasionally invent one or two additional ones. Anything capable of summoning a hundred plaguebearers will very likely create some side-effects too as daemons warp their surroundings simply by their presence.

Next, I can't help but agree that the plague-bearers were not exactly professional. Why should they go and fight enemies that can fight back? They're not Khorne daemons. Ignore the PCs and go into the settlement to infect and slaughter people there (I assume that was their goal).

What happened here is exactly what would happen with a zombie apocalypse if the survivors had plenty of automatic weapons, lots of supplies, good lighting and just a few avenues for the zombies to attack - you wasted an enemy in a situation he didn't belong into. If you want stand-up combat daemons, try a few bloodletters and I promise you things will look a little different.

In this situation, I'd have used ten plaguebearers, teleporting (because walking onto the battlefield is just so last-millenium) directly into different parts of the settlement and each striking every target they can see once - on a feral/feudal world, that settlement would have been dead due to lack of medical care. And let's not get into what the eleventh one in the granary could come up with...

Dezmond said:

That's why I personally advocate for more fate points (or perhaps different fate point mechanic's). But that opinion might stem from me being damaged (read: "spoiled") by the awesome Swedish RPG called "Noir".

Some major company should really take up the rights to translate and distribute that game overseas, its frigging awesome (both rules-wise and fluffwise). Sure its dark, corrupted and perverted as hell in some areas (which, from what i've understood isnt exactly koscher in some countries), but it has the coolest rules I have ever had the privilige of using. Its not so much "realistic" but more "reasonable", it allows for much freedom in doing awesome actionmovie-like stuff, but in a neat and reasonable way. It's very "down to earth" yet "out of this earth" at the same time. Its not realistic, but it feels realistic instead.

Oh well, I'll just shut up about the game for the time being, but its mostly this game i compare other rulessystems with. Its the high water mark in my RPG experiences...