I've looked over the Warrant path from Into The Storm and I've decided that the rule that you can only choose the options that is beneath or adjacent to the previous option is rediculous. If I ever GM a game, I'm going to present a basic template that uses the Age of Rebirth granting, the ascending status, the Reward option, the Halo Stars Sanction, the Pirate contact, and the Infamous option.

The idea being that the Rogue Trader Family has existed since the end of the Horus Heresy, and has become displeased at the path the Imperium has taken. So they have no problems with trading with Xenos and non-Chaos pirates for advanced technology and to avoid attacking their ships, respectively. What do you guys think about this?

Just what for folks gaming it, just like you have to watch for that if you open the life path. I myself have no issue with it as written, some folks hate it, some folks love it. If I where you I would have my pc's craft the story before allowing them to look over the chart all that much, unless you have a group you know who will not game it.I myself would also not allow them both the Acrotech and the xeno tech on the same ship. If they wished to split the points up into more then one ship I might be ok with that.

Remove the game mechanics and allow for free choice. The limitations of the table are made for game balance at the expense of making sense. Remove the game mechanics from it, and now making sense takes priority.

HappyDaze said:

I agree, whole heartedly. It should also be noted that the players should use page 33 of the Core Rulebook for their starting profit/ship points, while the Ship & Warrant Origin Path are free flow choices, that benefit them none other than to add background and character to their Ship/Warrant. If you as the GM choose to reward them with an Archeotech or Xeno tech component, then you can do so, or you can make it cost them SP/PF per component. For example, -5 SP/PF per component, up to a max of 1 or 2 with they have created a really indepth story. This is just my opinion though.

I would allow my players to craft their own story. I would just present them with a Warrant and Ship I created, then I would let them make the adjustments they want.

The way I figure it, the Warrant and Ship Path shouldn't govern your PF/SP. Instead, it should supplement either your dynasty or your fleet with assorted resources. A ship that served in the Meritech Wars may be considered an honourable/exciting posting, meaning that ex-Navy crew acquisitions are easier. A dynasty that's been around since the Heresy may have charters that grant it particular rights and obligations, perhaps a right to demand a tithe from a particular world, or relaxed shipping fees along a certain route, or the honour of being able to call upon the Astartes for assistance.

I wouldn't specifically tell the players what the benefits of each choice would be, though.

Arnstinium said:

I always allow them to craft their own story, whether or not they do so is a different aspect all together. The Warrant and Ship creator assists them in doing so, in a more linear way.

Taking the ship option away from groups, is, IMHO, detracting from the game. They designed it so the players get to choose their own ship, and incorporate what they want into it. Yes yes, I know that when you have a campaign in mind, and they create a Transport ship with asteroid mining rigs instead of a Frigate or Light Cruiser with temples and lances, it can somewhat mess with your story, but that's part of the fun in it for me. The unexpectancy of the game, the thrill of not truly knowing what to expect out of the players and their desires within the game. And the ship is part of that for the players. It's has a past, present, and future story for the players. Just giving them a ship that I create means very little to them, and doesn't do anything to express their ambitions/desires within the game.

Without game effects what is the point to using it at all? Anyone can make up a history with no effect upon the game. The point of the path was to place it at the hands of the players with in game results.

Hunterindarkness said:

I don't know if "anyone" can make up a history. I've had players that simply won't be bothered to come up with more than two sentences of character background, and Dynasty background isn't likely to be a bigger hit with these. Using the selections offered gives a sort of checklist to make sure various aspects are covered. Even without using any game mechanics, it provides for a way to ensure that your history covers all the bases.

Hunterindarkness said:

Helps you roleplay would be obvious answer……..

Forcing the kind of folks who make one line histories to "roleplay" by making them use the warrent path for no reason other then "roleplaying" gets you a history they simply ignore.You add nothing to the game. You are making them do something they don't want to do without any benefit. If your players can't be bothered enough to make a history, this is kinda pointless.

I do not see a point in making folks "roleplay" something they refuse to do.

Visitor Q said:

Hunterindarkness said:

I must be blind or something. Where did Visitor Q state he "forces" them to "roleplay?" Anyhoot, what everyone is doing is stating their opinion on how to modify it for people who want to. And obviously, one way to utilize the Warrant and Ship Origin Path found on page 34 of ItS, is to use it as is. Thank you for pointing that out.

The post above the one you quoted. I asked what was the point if it was only to tell a story and the first reposne I got was some folks would not do any more then bare min. That was what I happen to be relaying to. If the warrent is simply for story for those folks who will not write one, then forcing them to make one will not fix that issue.

Now up thread someone had a cool idea about each part giving something, like peer or contact y or enemy and so on that would effect long term, without touching PF and Sp. I found that to be a good idea really.