I saw it mentioned on a thread I saw this morning. I know it does not require models, but how does it work ???
Please enlighten me.
... isn't that Dark Heresy? Basically? The idea of playing Inquisitor without models seems to just be a really short Dark Heresy game without the same detailed options for social interaction.
Quote from: DapperAnarchist on August 05, 2011, 09:00:55 PM
... isn't that Dark Heresy? Basically? The idea of playing Inquisitor without models seems to just be a really short Dark Heresy game without the same detailed options for social interaction.
I'll just echo what Dapper said. If you're looking to get more detailed in terms of social interaction and playing out the story coupled with wanting to spend less cash then I suppose you could do more of an open-ended RPG style of play where the GM presents a scenario and the players play it out until conflict occurs. At that point you could just use a drawn map as the "play area" with whatever markers you had/whatever measurement conversion you'd like and just play it on a smaller scale.
Or you could just play Dark Heresy (get 4 people to chip in and you're looking at $10-$15 bucks a pop for the rule book which is really all you need).
Thanks for the help, I will consider both options.
An interesting idea might be, if you have lots of time, to play DH until a sufficiently large battle happens, then jump to Inquisitor, then finish that, go back to DH, back to Inq, back and forth...
Quote from: DapperAnarchist on August 06, 2011, 10:14:12 PM
An interesting idea might be, if you have lots of time, to play DH until a sufficiently large battle happens, then jump to Inquisitor, then finish that, go back to DH, back to Inq, back and forth...
I always thought this was a great idea and it could rather organically lead to some much more interesting games of INQ. One possible issue is that INQ is designed to be more head to head rather than cooperative, but that's purely a "spirit of the game" argument; I think it's a fantastic vehicle to bring DH games to life at particularly tense moments, plus it requires the gamers to actually model their character and brings a more immersive experience to the game.
I had attempted to reply to this on Friday but the post got eaten...
The system we use is a chimera of Inquisitor (combat system), WFRP (Non-combat interactions...etc and the basis of the advancement scheme), Rogue Trader (direction of advance scheme, minor systems (no rules in WFRP for Tanglefoot grenades for example)) and Confrontation (primarily Rogue Trader/Inquisitor integration)... plus piles of random pieces of paper full of house rules...etc.
The reason we started on that path was to expand the story beyond the fights - we started to shoehorn in odd bits of WFRP and it grew from there.
Why didn't we go for Dark Heresy?
Mainly because it didn't exist when we started out.
We haven't switched because I'm far more familiar with the old WFRP rules and they mesh nicely with the Rogue Trader rules anyway.
But it's played much like any other pen and paper, the GM has to provide more data and make more judgement calls without the models and the board to refer to but that can make things smoother in some ways.
But yes, our game sessions tend to look more like the IC boards that a standard game, much less combat, much more intel gathering, alliance forging and sneaking about ;D
Quote from: InquisitorHeidfeld on August 08, 2011, 01:38:36 PM
We haven't switched because I'm far more familiar with the old WFRP rules and they mesh nicely with the Rogue Trader rules anyway.
Is this Rogue Trader 1st Ed 40k or Rogue Trader the RPG by Fantasy Flight? because the latter is essentially identical to Dark Heresy.
Quote from: Heroka Vendile on August 10, 2011, 10:56:50 PMBecause the latter is essentially identical to Dark Heresy.
Pretty much the only differences (as opposed to additions like Navigators or Spaceship rules) I've yet noticed are the psychic power rules, that it uses Profit Factor over Thrones* and some minor errata - things like Righteous Fury in RT being "Roll damage again and add it" instead of DH's "Add D10" (which coincidentally means I got it wrong in the last session, I recited the DH rules. Not that those extra few points would have made made much difference with that kind of overkill).
*That there is no Thrones value for RT equipment/weapons is slightly irritating, because it makes it harder to transfer RT equipment into DH.
Rogue Trader the 1988 version.
Because it's built from the same foundations as Warhammer Fantasy Battle (1st & 2nd Ed) and the original WFRP was built to integrate well with those it's quite a neat transition where it needs to be - though it's rare we really need it (because most stuff is straightforward enough in the Inquisitor or modded WFRP system).