I personally love having a hard currency, and certainly miss it. I suppose me and my players just like having a currency to tally and count. Just making rolls for everything is boring, and leads to a little less variety. And influence counting as bribes, favours and so on has always rankled me, since it implies that every new character is someone with wealth and sector spanning reputation. You've just rolled up a new feral world guardsman, and it just so happens that this influence roll mean that he is well connected on Forge World XXI, and can pick that new gun right up.

For my games, I plan on using both influence and currency. Macharian Handbook as a baseline for all prices, since it covers Heresy 1.0 and Rogue Trader, and since they are similar power levels, the prices carry over with no problem. And when it's prudent for a player to acquire an without currency (like actually having a contact on the world, or openly displaying their power) then Influence comes into play.

I am afraid this is one where I agree with you, but there are a lot of people who will disagree because they do not like keeping track of money. However the whole influence idea is really a bit daft. A noble from a small agri planet is probably going to have less influence compared with a minor Tech Priest from Mars. However in both cases the level of influence they will have on any other planets is probably about nil. It will be organisations in the 40K universe that will have influence, rarely individuals.

I personally love having a hard currency, and certainly miss it. I suppose me and my players just like having a currency to tally and count. Just making rolls for everything is boring, and leads to a little less variety. And influence counting as bribes, favours and so on has always rankled me, since it implies that every new character is someone with wealth and sector spanning reputation. You've just rolled up a new feral world guardsman, and it just so happens that this influence roll mean that he is well connected on Forge World XXI, and can pick that new gun right up.

For my games, I plan on using both influence and currency. Macharian Handbook as a baseline for all prices, since it covers Heresy 1.0 and Rogue Trader, and since they are similar power levels, the prices carry over with no problem. And when it's prudent for a player to acquire an without currency (like actually having a contact on the world, or openly displaying their power) then Influence comes into play.

I also don't like how a lot of people have this mindset of "Oh, just make the game more investigatey and less combaty, that'll make them stop wanting good things and easily rolling for them!". Thats not what the Inquisition is ALL about. Sure a lot of them skulk in the dark, but others openly take to the battlefield in all out war, and others are often involved in brutal fighting. I just happen to like running action packed games.

Our minds are one on this. As I said, I plan to use currency for being covert and not drawing attention to yourself. Then when the situation calls for it, "I am an agent of the Emperors most Holy Inquisition and.....

....I am seeking aid from any faithfull armies in the vacinity"

....I command you to tell me where you've hidden the Pringles"

....I am commendeering your vehicle"

....I am taking this gun and those five ammo clips.

.....if you try and stop me your scrotum will know what twenty thousand volts feels like"

and so on.

I personally love having a hard currency, and certainly miss it. I suppose me and my players just like having a currency to tally and count. Just making rolls for everything is boring, and leads to a little less variety. And influence counting as bribes, favours and so on has always rankled me, since it implies that every new character is someone with wealth and sector spanning reputation. You've just rolled up a new feral world guardsman, and it just so happens that this influence roll mean that he is well connected on Forge World XXI, and can pick that new gun right up.

For my games, I plan on using both influence and currency. Macharian Handbook as a baseline for all prices, since it covers Heresy 1.0 and Rogue Trader, and since they are similar power levels, the prices carry over with no problem. And when it's prudent for a player to acquire an without currency (like actually having a contact on the world, or openly displaying their power) then Influence comes into play.

I am afraid this is one where I agree with you, but there are a lot of people who will disagree because they do not like keeping track of money. However the whole influence idea is really a bit daft. A noble from a small agri planet is probably going to have less influence compared with a minor Tech Priest from Mars. However in both cases the level of influence they will have on any other planets is probably about nil. It will be organisations in the 40K universe that will have influence, rarely individuals.

This is precisely why I think its best to treat aquisitions made via influence as 'the characters standing within the Inquisition' for pre-game aquisition tests. Anything else becomes so abstracted as to be meaningless, and actually has the potential to take a large swaythe of role playing out of the game.

I personally love having a hard currency, and certainly miss it. I suppose me and my players just like having a currency to tally and count. Just making rolls for everything is boring, and leads to a little less variety. And influence counting as bribes, favours and so on has always rankled me, since it implies that every new character is someone with wealth and sector spanning reputation. You've just rolled up a new feral world guardsman, and it just so happens that this influence roll mean that he is well connected on Forge World XXI, and can pick that new gun right up.

For my games, I plan on using both influence and currency. Macharian Handbook as a baseline for all prices, since it covers Heresy 1.0 and Rogue Trader, and since they are similar power levels, the prices carry over with no problem. And when it's prudent for a player to acquire an without currency (like actually having a contact on the world, or openly displaying their power) then Influence comes into play.

I am afraid this is one where I agree with you, but there are a lot of people who will disagree because they do not like keeping track of money. However the whole influence idea is really a bit daft. A noble from a small agri planet is probably going to have less influence compared with a minor Tech Priest from Mars. However in both cases the level of influence they will have on any other planets is probably about nil. It will be organisations in the 40K universe that will have influence, rarely individuals.

Couldn't agree more with both of you, and I'm planning on using the same solution as well if FFG don't add an official currency system. My DH1 campaign already uses Ascensions Influence and Thrones depending on what is most appropreate.

My concern isn't that Influence isn't a viable system - I've said many times during Beta1 and Beta2 that Influence certainly has its place - but that by making a completely abstract currency system FFG are removing the potential for certain campaign types that require it to function.

Here is an example of what I mean;

Take the last book of the Ravenor series - he is completely on his own, no favours to call in, very few friends outside his immediate party, hunted by the Inquisition and his enemies, and surviving on money that he has hidden away over the years for just such a situation.

My group love this sort of "backs-to-the-wall" scenario where resource managment is actually important, and I'm guessing we aren't the only ones who like to have a bit of crunch to are game economics. It forces the players to think in a different way,

I've found the if you go purely abstract the players loose the sense of achievement that can come from scrimping and saving for whatever shiny has caught their attention. It also removes a potential NPC reaction that comes from haggling with the "shop-keeper", I often use the local traders - and indeed the local trade-culture - as a subtle hint to the mood of an area. things like traders that are nervious for no reason, or overly suspicious. A good example of this in use is from the film Book of Eli, when the main character arrives in town and needs to charge his Ipod the shop keepers reaction to him gives you an instant feel for the way life is in the town - the paranoia about "outsiders" motivations, checking for visible signs of mutation and/or disease (we are never told if this is real or simply fear of the unknown), and eventually down to the actual bartering.

sorry for the Text-dump but I do feel that the middle ground between Abstract and Accounting is appropreate for DH and should be something that we at least examine fully as a community.

Regards

Surak

I just started my DH2Beta1 scenario.

It took place on Damaris (using the city's infrastructure, so they can see where they are going). - from the Rogue Trader scenario.

They invenstigated some cults, figuring out that some cultists in prison had some buildings (of 50+ levels), they then got access to get an area in the city, sold it to the Adminstratum and bought a "5 flat-levels of rooms ect. So they could make some Irish bar+arena so they could get some underworld info.

They paid this with some influence, 3 players payed 3 each (and the building area they got access to earlier, worth of 6 influence).

Later on, they went to an auction for items "left" by prisoners, the arbites will get rid of. An rogue trader's Plasma pistol, a power stake/short sword and some few relics, altogether for 11-12 influence (can't remember the excat number).

Ofc all of these items and the building will make them known by people.. Administratum will get suspecious, Underhive members of the cults and gangs around the city will be aware of unknown people (the agents) buying very rare items and 5 levels of flats at the bottom of a building..

They start at 50 sublety, as normal.. After all this, they are at 35-40 in sublety, due to all of this. + the weird investigations in the prison.

Dunno if i have done this right, but it feels like that

In the end, it will hurt them badly, cause of their actions.

Comment to this, please

I'll comment to this....

There's buying some ammo, a ration bar or a new pair of pants.

Then there is buying 5 levels of flats and rare items.

The former won't attract much attention. Unless you walk into the store without pants

While the latter will get you noticed.

If the acolytes bought one flat, so that they could investigate the building, then that shouldn't raise too many eyebrows. Unless you group is quite large....

....eight men and four women sharing a two bedroom flat might be a bit suspicious. Unless the cultists are Slaaneshi.

P.S. I know you said 3 players, but I was using an extreme example.

I'll comment to this....

There's buying some ammo, a ration bar or a new pair of pants.

Then there is buying 5 levels of flats and rare items.

The former won't attract much attention. Unless you walk into the store without pants

While the latter will get you noticed.

If the acolytes bought one flat, so that they could investigate the building, then that shouldn't raise too many eyebrows. Unless you group is quite large....

....eight men and four women sharing a two bedroom flat might be a bit suspicious. Unless the cultists are Slaaneshi.

P.S. I know you said 3 players, but I was using an extreme example.

I agree. Buying something that is "daily use" like pants is easy to get, and shouldn't be rolled for in 99,9% of the time.

Buying 2 very rare items and 5 levels of flats (from 1st to 5th level/floor), that make people lift an eyebrow or two, atleast

I didn't get to say, that there were no ammo to the plasma pistol, which makes it useless atm.

Scyndria,

A quick question on your example;

How did your group roleplay the Auction part of the above scenario, as this is the sort of situation I would normally swap to Thrones as it just sounds ridicuous to have a character bidding with influence (mechanics wise it works fine of course and I know the Influence represents currency but for an auction I want my players working out what they are going to risk, and at very least getting into the spirit of it)

Setting up a Bar to gain underworld connections - perfectly reasonable in my book.

Using Influuence to get it - well personally that would depend how they went about it but thats another issue entirely

And I definately feel that the group should now be on the locals radar - so a loss of Sublety is sensible (I still tend to ad-lib this "Stat" rather than having a fixed value).

Regards

Surak

Scyndria,

I agree. Buying something that is "daily use" like pants is easy to get, and shouldn't be rolled for in 99,9% of the time.

I'll comment to this....

There's buying some ammo, a ration bar or a new pair of pants.

Then there is buying 5 levels of flats and rare items.

The former won't attract much attention. Unless you walk into the store without pants

While the latter will get you noticed.

If the acolytes bought one flat, so that they could investigate the building, then that shouldn't raise too many eyebrows. Unless you group is quite large....

....eight men and four women sharing a two bedroom flat might be a bit suspicious. Unless the cultists are Slaaneshi.

P.S. I know you said 3 players, but I was using an extreme example.

Buying 2 very rare items and 5 levels of flats (from 1st to 5th level/floor), that make people lift an eyebrow or two, atleast

I didn't get to say, that there were no ammo to the plasma pistol, which makes it useless atm.

A quick question on your example;

How did your group roleplay the Auction part of the above scenario, as this is the sort of situation I would normally swap to Thrones as it just sounds ridicuous to have a character bidding with influence (mechanics wise it works fine of course and I know the Influence represents currency but for an auction I want my players working out what they are going to risk, and at very least getting into the spirit of it)

Setting up a Bar to gain underworld connections - perfectly reasonable in my book.

Using Influuence to get it - well personally that would depend how they went about it but thats another issue entirely

And I definately feel that the group should now be on the locals radar - so a loss of Sublety is sensible (I still tend to ad-lib this "Stat" rather than having a fixed value).

Regards

Surak

Well, They rolled some influence/commerce checks counter by other interrested NPC's. They offered some x value of influence. At some point, the PC's or NPC's won the item, when the other one wont pay the price.

About the bar, they went to the Administratum (i found that reasonable) to make sure the deals were done, and other stuff like license to sell alcohol ect ect.

So overall, they did as in the real world, imo.

Ofc it did cost them some sublety. 1: They bought 2 very rare items in public. 2: It were a Rogue Trader's items. 3: They bought freaking 5 floors in the underhive world >.<

As said in my earlier post, they should be at 35-40 sublety, 2 very items taking 1d5/fixed value + the 5 floors of flats took a large amount, imo.

Influence looks like it works then but I'm not sure I want starting acolytes buying bars and the like.

I'm a big fan of the "not even if you rolled a natural 1" rule.

My concern isn't that Influence isn't a viable system - I've said many times during Beta1 and Beta2 that Influence certainly has its place.

Here is an example of what I mean;

Take the last book of the Ravenor series - he is completely on his own, no favours to call in, very few friends outside his immediate party, hunted by the Inquisition and his enemies, and surviving on money that he has hidden away over the years for just such a situation.

My group love this sort of "backs-to-the-wall" scenario where resource managment is actually important, and I'm guessing we aren't the only ones who like to have a bit of crunch to are game economics. It forces the players to think in a different way,

This post does a great job of summing up my feelings on Influence. It definitely has its strong points, but at the end of the day, I really like resource management. I liked PF in Rogue Trader because part of the fun was being obscenely wealthy, so resource management only applied to really important stuff.

Part of the fun of Dark Heresy though (and this ties into Supposed Power Level of the Players) is that sometimes you're not obscenely wealthy. Sometimes you're playing cat and mouse in the darkness of the underhive, and it doesn't matter who you were topside. Those are the situations where Thrones should totally exist. I have no problem if before their mission the Acolytes say "Hey, didn't we help kill the Daemon of Shul'Nog? I think we've earned matching hats. With force fields in them" but once they're on planet and undercover there needs to be a secondary system for them to work with.

My concern isn't that Influence isn't a viable system - I've said many times during Beta1 and Beta2 that Influence certainly has its place.

Here is an example of what I mean;

Take the last book of the Ravenor series - he is completely on his own, no favours to call in, very few friends outside his immediate party, hunted by the Inquisition and his enemies, and surviving on money that he has hidden away over the years for just such a situation.

My group love this sort of "backs-to-the-wall" scenario where resource managment is actually important, and I'm guessing we aren't the only ones who like to have a bit of crunch to are game economics. It forces the players to think in a different way,

This post does a great job of summing up my feelings on Influence. It definitely has its strong points, but at the end of the day, I really like resource management. I liked PF in Rogue Trader because part of the fun was being obscenely wealthy, so resource management only applied to really important stuff.

Part of the fun of Dark Heresy though (and this ties into Supposed Power Level of the Players) is that sometimes you're not obscenely wealthy. Sometimes you're playing cat and mouse in the darkness of the underhive, and it doesn't matter who you were topside. Those are the situations where Thrones should totally exist. I have no problem if before their mission the Acolytes say "Hey, didn't we help kill the Daemon of Shul'Nog? I think we've earned matching hats. With force fields in them" but once they're on planet and undercover there needs to be a secondary system for them to work with.

How does a ~-50 "you're undercover and can't draw on your resources normally" penalty to Influence not solve this?

How does a ~-50 "you're undercover and can't draw on your resources normally" penalty to Influence not solve this?

Part of the fun of Dark Heresy though (and this ties into Supposed Power Level of the Players) is that sometimes you're not obscenely wealthy. Sometimes you're playing cat and mouse in the darkness of the underhive, and it doesn't matter who you were topside. Those are the situations where Thrones should totally exist. I have no problem if before their mission the Acolytes say "Hey, didn't we help kill the Daemon of Shul'Nog? I think we've earned matching hats. With force fields in them" but once they're on planet and undercover there needs to be a secondary system for them to work with.

I like this! It's not raw but it's definitely appropriate. Better still it's voluntary. You could offer an initial trade off of influence for subtlety (1 for 1). So basically, you make your initial aquisitions for the mission while still in "downtime". Prior to going into undercover mode you ditch your Id's credit chips and any other incriminating evidence of your Identity. This would allow a 1 to 1 swap of Influence for subtlety. You can recover these things but doing so costs twice the subtlety gained if done while undercover. (Having Joe scumbag desperado suddenly by 5 floors of a Hab block for whatever reason is going to make a BIG splash! Renting out a couple of large apartments...Not so much). This is why I liked the Ascension Influence charts. They showed other modifiers than just rarity for aquisitions. Notably, You could get away with a lot more if you were just Borrowing something than if you planned to keep it permanently. Warrior wants to Requisition a heavy bolter from his regiment for 1 mission? No big deal! Return it when you're done! He wants to take it off world and keep it with him for an unspecified time (Basically permanently.) Might be a little more tricky! Actual Inquisitors could easily get a Naval Frigate assigned to them for a single mission (Say to pursue a renegade into the expanse.) but they're NOT Rogue traders! No way the Imp. Navy's gonna give them one as their personal transport!

How does a ~-50 "you're undercover and can't draw on your resources normally" penalty to Influence not solve this?

Part of the fun of Dark Heresy though (and this ties into Supposed Power Level of the Players) is that sometimes you're not obscenely wealthy. Sometimes you're playing cat and mouse in the darkness of the underhive, and it doesn't matter who you were topside. Those are the situations where Thrones should totally exist. I have no problem if before their mission the Acolytes say "Hey, didn't we help kill the Daemon of Shul'Nog? I think we've earned matching hats. With force fields in them" but once they're on planet and undercover there needs to be a secondary system for them to work with.

I like this! It's not raw but it's definitely appropriate. Better still it's voluntary. You could offer an initial trade off of influence for subtlety (1 for 1). So basically, you make your initial aquisitions for the mission while still in "downtime". Prior to going into undercover mode you ditch your Id's credit chips and any other incriminating evidence of your Identity. This would allow a 1 to 1 swap of Influence for subtlety. You can recover these things but doing so costs twice the subtlety gained if done while undercover. (Having Joe scumbag desperado suddenly by 5 floors of a Hab block for whatever reason is going to make a BIG splash! Renting out a couple of large apartments...Not so much). This is why I liked the Ascension Influence charts. They showed other modifiers than just rarity for aquisitions. Notably, You could get away with a lot more if you were just Borrowing something than if you planned to keep it permanently. Warrior wants to Requisition a heavy bolter from his regiment for 1 mission? No big deal! Return it when you're done! He wants to take it off world and keep it with him for an unspecified time (Basically permanently.) Might be a little more tricky! Actual Inquisitors could easily get a Naval Frigate assigned to them for a single mission (Say to pursue a renegade into the expanse.) but they're NOT Rogue traders! No way the Imp. Navy's gonna give them one as their personal transport!

I like both of your points and agree with them.

Just a mention of Ascension, I agreed with the Influence for experienced Acolytes, Interrogators and the big Inquisitors themselves. It was as though the low level Acolytes had to pay their way but the experienced and trusted members got to throw their weight around. Seemed appropriate to me.

How does a ~-50 "you're undercover and can't draw on your resources normally" penalty to Influence not solve this?

I think you may have missed my original point. The point was to introduce resource management. (As in, deciding when and how to use things) Having a low chance of getting things is different from having a low amount of resources with which to get things. It's the difference between

"Do you want a new gun?"

"No, I probably shouldn't. I'll just spend a little on ammo, and then save the rest in case I need medical supplies."

"Oh. Then maybe just armor?"

"As I just said, I can't really afford it if I want to keep a reserve for medical care."

vs

"Do you want a new gun?"

"Uh, let me check... No, no apparently I don't have money right now."

"Oh. Then maybe just armor?"

"Let me check... yes. Apparently I have armor money, just not gun money."

Well, if your goal is to reintroduce bean counting, I can see why the influence system might not work for you. May I suggest treating a character's influence score as their wallet? A stub gun might cost 1-2 Influence, more for more expensive gear. You'd have to have a lot more ways of increasing it. I really hope FFG doesn't do this.

Your example is contrived and a poor interpretation of the Influence system. I can't tell if this is you arguing in bad faith or a genuine failure to imaginate a situation in which a character is able to acquire armor but not a weapon. There could be any number of reasons for armor to be attainable but guns not and that's not a fault of the influence system (though it is arguably a problem of rolling to acquire equipment, which would happen in either system).

Rolling to acquire equipment means that things that *should* be available are sometimes not, and then I have to backpedal and explain to my players why they couldn't get X, which means that wherever equipment is rolled for, I have to be ready to spontaneously introduce and justify arbitrary shortages.

I *could* write a better justification for why they're able to acquire armor but not a weapon, but I feel like having to write justifications midgame slows down play a lot more than beancounting ever did.

Dude, in DH1, even with a money counter you still have to roll Inquiry to find what you're looking for. If your imagination is so strained you can't think up a reason why a guy going around the city asking where he can buy a high powered sniper rifle might not find one, maybe you should let someone else do the creative part.

In your game is everything available so long as you can afford it? That sounds like it would solve your problem. Just don't roll for gear and hit them with -10 influence or whatever.

maybe you should let someone else do the creative part.

This is the kind of charm that makes these boards so pleasant.

Just don't roll for gear and hit them with -10 influence or whatever.

How does "You can have anything you want as long as it costs less than X" in any way introduce resource management?

I'm saying to treat their Influence characteristic as a resource. Buy gun, go from 34 Inf to 24. Kill a dude and take his wallet to get to 26. That kind of thing.

Well, if your goal is to reintroduce bean counting, I can see why the influence system might not work for you. May I suggest treating a character's influence score as their wallet? A stub gun might cost 1-2 Influence, more for more expensive gear. You'd have to have a lot more ways of increasing it. I really hope FFG doesn't do this.

Your example is contrived and a poor interpretation of the Influence system. I can't tell if this is you arguing in bad faith or a genuine failure to imaginate a situation in which a character is able to acquire armor but not a weapon. There could be any number of reasons for armor to be attainable but guns not and that's not a fault of the influence system (though it is arguably a problem of rolling to acquire equipment, which would happen in either system).

I'm not going to link it because it's not exactly a family-friendly site, but go look word up on UD.

edit: it's a perfectly cromulent word.

I think that the primary problem with the influence system acting as a currency system is the incentive to constantly go shopping.

I'm saying to treat their Influence characteristic as a resource. Buy gun, go from 34 Inf to 24. Kill a dude and take his wallet to get to 26. That kind of thing.

So, we're back to being murder hobos? Joy.