Okay, so I’ve spent the past few days looking over Dark Heresy, its rules, the character creation, and basic assumptions. I’ve had some knowledge of the setting beforehand, having played Chaos Gate and the Dawn of War series on the PC, owning a few Black Templar space marines as a Warhammer 40k Tabletop Wargame army before, and reading several of Dan Abnett’s inquisitor novels.
That said, I think that the primary obstacle in creating a pitch for a Dark Heresy campaign is the preconception that 40k is nothing but mindless violence and senseless death. While these are things that are extolled in the in-game literature, the truth gets a little more complicated than that. Of course, first impressions make for very strong influences on how people react to something, and Warhammer 40k is one of those love it or hate it settings at first glance.
And so I think it might be a good idea to start laying out my groundwork for a Dark Heresy Campaign pitch. First off, assumptions:
- The Imperium of Man is home to countless cultures – Despite the monocultural portrayal in most of the popular art and imagery of Warhammer 40k, there are countless worlds in the Imperium which have their own individual cultures, art, customs and architecture. Each new world that the Acolytes visit can be pretty much anything. Strange Garden Worlds terraformed and cultivated to serve as vacation spots for wealthy nobles, sprawling steampunk industrial cities where the smoke from the city sized foundries blot out the sun, even strange Utopian civilizations that resemble Egyptian culture that worship the Golden Throne as a Pharaoh and Sun God. All of these have a place in this universe.
- Dark Heresy is a Street Level game – This isn’t about leading the Adeptus Astartes into glorious battle against the Eye of Terror… yet. Your life isn’t about just war or the battlefield. Dark Heresy explores the more human side of the setting, dealing with the people of the Imperium, and the evils that seek to corrupt them.
- Acolytes aren’t part of the ignorant masses - Dark Heresy’s primary assumption is that the players are the agents of an Inquisitor, common men and women who have caught the eye of an Inquisitor for their force of will, resourcefulness, cunning and strength. It is the ability to resist the total social brainwashing of the masses and actually think and act independently that the Inquisitors prize in their Acolytes. Anyone who mindlessly babbles the dogma of the Imperium is ultimately useless to an Inquisitor.
- The game has room for Character Development – While the game is ultimately one where violence and combat is going to happen, the characters have room to grow. I’m not entirely sold on the eternal vigilance angle espoused by all the 40k propaganda, and so there will actually be downtime for the Acolytes, and opportunities to round out relationships and contacts and pursue non-combat vital angles. Heck, even Inquisitor Eisenhorn found a little time to knock back a little amasec now and then.
- Dark Heresy relies on Investigation and Combat in equal measure – As Acolytes, majority of your character’s work will be undercover. Often even the Planetary authorities will not be made aware of your identities as Agents of the Throne as even they may be part of whatever heresy you are sent to investigate. There’s no help hotline to the Inquisitor either, so caution should be foremost in the Acolyte’s minds. Still, nobody got anything done by being cowardly, so Acolytes should not mind getting their hands dirty now and then.
- Dark Heresy will ask hard questions – The moral choices made by Acolytes are difficult, as sometimes the lines blur between the innocent and the guilty. Furthermore, the forces of Chaos are seductive, often luring Acolytes to make foolish pacts with the daemons for the “greater good.” This isn’t a game centered solely on Man vs. Other conflicts, but also upon Man vs. Himself.
I feel the need to spell each of these major assumptions out to help players understand that there’s a lot of interesting things that can go on in a Dark Heresy game. It’s not just about kicking down doors, screaming “HERESY!” at the top of your lungs and wailing on whatever poor soul was behind the door with your chainsword.
And so these are some of my basic assumptions, what do you guys think? What assumptions did you or your GMs use when you played Dark Heresy? I’d really like to know.
4 d emprah!
now w/ plot!
The style of the inquisitor that the acolytes are working with has a huge influence on what kind of game it becomes, and how the characters are restricted. A radical inquisitor, even a mild one who is in the gray area allows for a much different game than working for a monodominant (Only humans ever, kill all heresy, witches, and xenos.) Some monodominants are exactly the dogma spouting psychopaths you describe who happen to be very perceptive, alert, and brutal and inspire the kind of fear of the inquisition that is desired. If you happen to be working for a clever one of that particular breed you will be expected to be pious, and be able to work under cover without revealing your particular brand of rabid phobias.
Each faction, and indeed each inquisitor changes the tone of the game drastically. Working under Eisenhorn would be a different game from working under Ravenor, and both of them are essentially centrists with radical leanings in different directions. Eisenhorn has radical leanings in the Xanthite direction, which uses daemons as weapons. Ravenor has heretical leanings by learning and using xenos foretelling from the Eldar.
One could tell the players what kind of inquisitor they were working under, and allow them to build someone likely to fit into that inquisitor’s mindset. Alternatively one could introduce the inquisitor later and obfuscate the actual beliefs of the inquisitor for a much more paranoid and dangerous game. As your point of there are ten million different cultures that are individual to their own planet, so too are there as many different styles of campaign in the universe based on the inquisitor you work with.
I think that a certain amount of fundamentalism in the characters is a positive for evoking the world, and a true faith in mankind at the very least is useful for resisting the various threats to the mind and soul. One of the things I remind my players is, it’s a world where closed mindedness is encouraged because open minded people literally do have daemons crawl out of their split skull and wear their skin.
Excellent point on how the Inquisitors that the Acolytes will be working for can change the nature of the game. I believe the book also had some interesting advice suggesting that the Inquisitor’s creation be done along with the players, so that they all each contribute something to this Authority Figure. I’ll have to put some major thought into that before I start finalizing any sort of campaign pitch then.
I missed responding to your final question about what assumptions were made. In the first game very few were made because even the GM was completely new to the system. The only assumption I can remember being made is, this is going to be lethal. That ended up not being true, but only by virtue of us the players being completely insane.
In the current game I’m running I as the GM this is the basic list of assumptions I made.
The players want to be challenged: This isn’t necessarily a world thing, but it does mean that the difficulties in the plot need to challenge the mind, body, and integrity of the characters.
The PCs are living in an area where true heresy and treason exist, and needs to be found for the good of mankind: I assumed this to not have a dull game, or spend years in transit.
The Inquisitor does not approve of you: This is in place because of the character he is, and because it gives the PCs a goal on a personal level, or a challenge to overcome. They can hate him for it, or strive to win daddy’s affection.
Your foes are your equal or better: This partially falls under the challenge, but it goes beyond that and makes the world more deadly, and forces people to think before each engagement. Not that it necessary has.
Home should matter: I wanted the characters to develop a connection to a place, not just be vagabonds going around righting wrongs. They may be there half the time or less, but it should be a place that grows to matter to them, so I can threaten it.
At a certain point there is no safety net: This is one that is common in my games, but in Dark Heresy it matters a lot Just as you said in your point about combat and investigation in equal measure. Part of that comes down to the fact that one of their inquisitors is an invalid who can barely walk anymore much less fight, and the other will preserve himself because he has other things that he needs to do besides die for his acolytes.
Any other assumptions I made were unconscious.
Nice set of assumptions! Gives me something to really think about.
I’m in agreement with the one about foes being equal or better, since this is a game that ought to inspire careful and decisive action on the part of the Acolytes. Home is also a big thing, though I’m tempted to pull off an Eisenhorn and give them a mobile home of sorts, as well as an actual holding where they can stay when they’re not rooting out corruption in the Imperium.
Something else to consider is, does the inquisitor use them all the time for the inquisition, or do they have a “day job” when the inquisitor doesn’t need them that gets interrupted when they’re in the middle of important things? The constant interruption of a normal life as opposed to living the inquisition are two different things. Or do they grow from sometimes puppets to full time agents?
I’d like to point out an example in another game: Cthulhutech.
Yes, you do have your towering hulks of metal destruction. Yes, you do have the Engel that can do what mechs do only better and with more insanity. Yes, you have the Tagers. But what about the investigators on the street that everyday have to hunt down cultists that own illegal copies of the Necronomicon, etc.
In WH40K for something like this: forget the war, forget the millions of xenos wanting your blood. Those things are only background noises. Your job is to ferret out the corruption of Chaos within the Empire, even if it leads you to a Space Marine chapter that’s just about to engage an Ork infestation.
Not much to add as I’m in the two games Atraties mentioned, and he covered all the basis.
I will point out that there is something else to remember. As lethal as Dark Heresy is, players get protection in that they can burn fate points to stay alive. Sure they’ll be maimed a bit, but they can stay a live. This can be very reassuring for people as it means that if, and when, they die that they have the choice of having the death count, or living through the impossible.
This means that you may not lose a favorite character as fast as you’d think otherwise. It also means that you can control the “real” lethality in your game as a GM by how often you give out Fate points, and what your criteria are for them.
I’ve seen DH run a variety of ways- totally gritty (a la Aliens); almost campy space opera style; tragic (in the literal sense) and Machiavellian socio-politic scheming and backstabbery.
All of them work and all of them are interesting in their own right.
Each GM handled the game assumptions just by stating: hey, here’s the tone I am going for and here’s what you can expect. For the most part, it works.
Hey loquacious!
I’m glad to see that DH has the flexibility to do various tones for a campaign. I’m hoping to forge a campaign pitch that will actually fly with my players. They’re a WoD heavy bunch, but they’re jaded and not entirely all that enthused by the usual 40k propaganda: “Blessed is the mind too small for doubt” and all that. Part of why I felt the need to spell out the little bits is to hopefully shed some light for them regarding the ways that a DH game can swing.
You could always try it as a WOD style game with armor and chainswords… It’s not TOO far off. Instead of trying to find out “WTF” was that, they’re trying to stamp it out. Kinda Hunter, but on steroids. Yeah. That’s how I’d spin it with such a group.
Nah. Hunter on Steroids would look like Spes Marins.
Seeing as Hunters fight a defined evil.
Cyberpunk nMage is the winning ticket.
Instead of incurring paradox you just occasionally weep blood, shatter all holy symbols in a few miles, get turned inside out, turned into a daemon, or get sucked into the warp without a trace. Bad things happen to psykers in 40k sometimes, especially when using high end powers. The stronger you get, the more dice you roll. Get a 9 on any die, bad things happen.