Many people seem to think the official 40K RPGs are too complicated. I'll agree. So why don't we just use 40K the wargame to make another version? It could be quick and easy to play, and every 40K player would be able get started with it more or less right away.
Where we start is obvious. Even forgetting Killzone, INQ28 and In the Emperor's Name, which are three possible foundations, we have six editions of 40K and at least 25 years of material to build on. But even a newer edition - fifth or sixth say - should be enough.
To clarify, I'm taking a player character to be anything from an individual to a small force.
The way I see it, there are three areas needing a bit of thought: 1) use of a GM or other resolution system; 2) mechanisms for doing the cool stuff not generally possible in the wargame; and 3) space and time, i.e. where events take place and how they link.
Here I'll summarise these three problems, and in the next couple of parts suggest some solutions. I also want to offer a starting adventure to show just how simple it could all be.
1) Using a GM, or not
GMs were used in wargaming before D&D appeared of course, and the idea was there in Rogue Trader too. Bringing a GM into a 40K that doesn't currently need one raises two issues: a) finding a player to be GM; and b) agreeing what the GM actually does.
For a) the issue might be bigger than it looks. In 40K there are usually only two people directly involved, but here we could see many joining in, with one or more models each.
This makes me think the approach could focus on fast play and dynamic encounters, to have a session fit a game night slot, and get lots of rotation and experimentation with the role of GM. One or more players will likely take to it better, but many could be. After all, military SF does lend itself to splitting parties, across multiple fronts or missions.
For b), i.e. deciding what the GM does - good luck. In roleplaying as a whole the jury is still out on that. In the context of a 40K wargame-to-RPG expansion, it's probably fair to say that the GM would represent everything beyond that the players control - the world itself and the other things in it - and improvise or arbitrate where a situation is unclear.
In the next post I'll have a suggestion for a soft resolution system that can be used with no GM, and allows much more than the cards in the Nor the battle to the strong deck.
2) Doing all the cooler stuff
The essence is using existing rules wherever possible, and adapting them using familiar principles if not. As mentioned, we have six editions and over 25 years, which is a huge amount of material, fully official or not, but even a single edition has a useful framework.
Common areas for improvisation might be hidden movement, interaction with objects in a non-destructive way, like picking up and attempting to use lesser-seen items, and being creative with them, and of course communication with each other and any other factions.
For the last of those, which could seem the most problematic of all, have a look at the negotiation idea I once posted. It's not as impossible to rule as it might look. In general, I'm optimistic about resolution, and again, I plan to cover this element in the next part.
3) Space and time
The issue here is how a force moves between encounters and how these are played out.
I'm assuming miniatures and terrain will be used, but the amount of tabletop needed will be less and that setups and objectives will be more fluid. That said, some encounters may not need a physical representation, or could be avoided or resolved another way.
As a kind of halfway-house suggesting how flexible approach to space can be in a given situation, have a read of this general approach to simulating very heavy terrain, and this variation for fighting in hives and similar structures in fifth edition 40K. Anything can go.
Encounters could be created or generated by the GM or the players alone, even using tables or systems shared by other groups. I have a fair few ideas to use as examples too. A set of encounters, an adventure or a campaign could have certain end conditions, and maybe victory conditions to determine a winner, or could just be part of a so-called 'sandbox', with complete freedom of determination within the reality of the game world.
Could all of this be reduced to a workable form? I think it could be simpler than it looks.
Here's the idealised posting plan as it stands right now:
Part 2 - Using a GM or not, and doing all the cooler stuff
Part 3 - Running encounters, adventures and campaigns
Part 4 - The basics in a ready-to-use, easy-to-read form
Part 5 - A sample adventure, but modular for replay value
Just don't ask how long it could take. If you have any thoughts, or want to get involved, or even want to take it in another direction completely, go for it. It's just for fun, plus it's good enough for PP. As a working title, I'm calling the project RT6, but that's open too.
_
11 comments:
the current 40k RPGs aren;t too complicated once you pick them up. I suppose though it depends what you want, if you want a RPG or just a "tabletop fighting game with my hero character" ala DnD 4th.
Try this site - its pretty much what your looking for.
RPG tabletop gameing using 40k,rougetraider 40k,necromunda... all in one :) go look.
http://talesfromthemaelstrom.blogspot.co.uk/
This is an idea my buddies and I have been loosely doing since RT. We usually will do a session at the beginning of any new campaign phase, where each player gets a squad of troops; one player is the "investigator" and one is the "instigator" with the GM being the moderator.
The investigator will deploy his squad in teams from 2-4 models. The Instigator has hidden deployment predetermined by the player and noted down by the GM.
The investigator has a mission to complete or mystery to uncover. The Instigator is there to attempt to thwart the other player, but at the same time reveals himself as the cause of the problems in the system or on the planet in question.
It really makes for a dynamic way of setting the tone for our campaigns.
I'll do a more complete write up on Galaxy in Flames over the weekend.
When i first started playing 40k, many moons ago, the rules came in just one hard backed book - called Rogue Trader, if I remember correctly - and one of the guys I gamed with would on occasion run a one off game as characters from our armies. they were pretty much just combat without a huge set up and terrain, but they were fun and i think may very well have been my first experiences of role playing.
From what I remember there was bugger all work needed to be done to get a basic character sorted out. I miss those rules.
@ Anonymous - The position could be a philosophical one, but also very much about practicality. Here especially it's about barrier to entry. With a simple development of the wargame, existing 40K wargamers could jump straight in.
@ Anonymous - Great call. Tales from the Maelstrom is a big inspiration and Colonel Kane is the guy behind the 40K OSR? logo. For everyone who wants to visit, here's a direct link. The ideal would be making what they do much easier for players with no knowledge of Rogue Trader, or even of anything but the past edition or two.
@ Big Jim - That's a clean approach too, and having the players take differing parts could be a good basis for experiments with more complexity, although not necessarily more complication of course. I also like a more passive voting or quorum approach. I'm always interested in the way you do things so a fuller write-up would be ideal.
The really tricky part is getting beyond the need for a GM, but even current Killzone goes some way towards that without giving up on balance and your thinking on the the future development suggests another big step forward could be coming. I'm not aiming for current Killzone hard, but more of a soft solution to see how wide it can go, something that could be made more rigorous or have options codified a little better over time.
@ Paul Thornton - You do remember correctly, and there was a paperback out there too. Compared with some systems, getting started wasn't too involved, or didn't need to be. Here I'll just be suggesting players use existing materials to create their characters or forces, with the option of expanding on the in-game representations based on what might usually be present but not used in the wargame. I'm hoping that if the idea takes off in some form that people will look at the huge potential more specifically in future materials.
Yes the next version of Killzone may do a lot for what you are wanting to accomplish. KZ Evolution will have an action based turn system which would allow players to do thing that would be totally out of place in normal 40k. Like use an action to search a building or even subdue an opposing team member if you wanted.
Maybe you'd be interested in collaborating on a few things for Evolution. I'd be more than willing to share where I am at once S.O. Killzone is fully updated.
I'm very interested in seeing where you go and I'd definitely be happy to give some feedback on the development, although I will say I think we should be wary of too full a collaboration.
I'm working on a lot of different projects at the moment - here, there and everywhere it seems - and it looks like you are too. That's excellent of course, in itself, but there is a danger of things becoming too homogeneous, that if too few of us have our fingers in too many of the same pies there's a danger the meals we're making will taste very similar, meaning less choice and less new experiences, and maybe less of the total potential being explored.
Killzone is a very distinct system and I don't want to dilute that or the vision you have for the developments. Another good example of a system and process with it's own tone and nature is the M42 Project. Back at the start I mulled over getting more heavily involved in that, but others dived in first, and what they've produced is something special that might not have turned out that way if I'd been part of the team. As a community we have the ability to support each other very closely - and I think we should whenever we can and think it will help - but at the same time we have a very valuable ability to avoid the uniformity of the projects the bigger producers can put out.
Linked with all of that, I also want to step back from things in general, to be less of a lead and encourage interested parties to come forward and get involved, to take on things once they're rolling that they might not have started rolling themeselves. The same with this project. Once I've shown it's possible, and set out a foundation, I'd be very happy to see others come along and rework it or develop it, even in very new ways.
At any rate, when you start work on Evolution, let me know and I'll get right back, and I'll support you however I can. In line with all of this though, I'll aim to do it from a distance, by building on your thinking, adding to it rather than moving it off the general path Evolution is taking.
Following up on the thoughts above, I'd also suggest thinking about widening the team even further, as with Killzone SO, maybe by putting a call up at Galaxy in Flames for interested parties, first to give feedback and playtest the ideas coming out from the central group, but maybe later once the core is more solid to develop certain aspects. That could be a good blend of approaches, the focused vision with the breadth of field offered by more eyes.
FFG's Deathwatch is good, and very adaptable for single marine chapter. Only War the IG version is also good and the Xenos rules are scatted between all the FFG lines.
Thanks for the comment. If we're talking foundations, I'm not such a big fan of the FFG approach - the core system seems unnecessarily complex, especially when more or less anything can ultimately be waived or made to happen in spite of what the mechanics produce. Then again, their books are good resources for anyone looking for specific inspiration.
The idea here is that even a general knowledge of the 41st millennium could be plenty, and that players of 40K have pretty much all the rules they need too.
First, I have to admit that I am not a Warhammer-gamer, nor a wargamer; I play dungeon-oriented D&D almost all the time (sometimes some crazy shit contemporary horror and recently some My Life With Master, too).
Nevertheless, I really love the feeling of Warhammer (both fantasy and 40k) and it inspired me many times.
To complete the transition from wargame to RPG, however, it would have to be able to get away, at least partially, from the models and the board. Being aware of how the parent game is tied to these things, I have no idea if it possible, though, without turning the game into something else.
I'll almost certainly get back to this project one day. As a system, 40K interests me ever less, but I would like to show just how simple it really is to open this door. It's so stunningly simple it's almost impossible to believe that no one has ever done it, or rather that the fact they have isn't more widely known.
As for getting away from the physical aspects, it's less about that than opening the current system to the potential of the past 26 years and beyond, getting back to doing what Rogue Trader arguably did but with the resources of all the developments since then, inside GW and outside, and maybe to go further still and deepen the collaborative aspects to make almost anything possible.
That may well lead to a fuller transition away from miniatures and tables to some degree, but if so, it will be a move made by individual groups when the time is right, as I think it has to be. The power of the miniature is very strong. But it will likely be completely natural when it comes, and maybe a great weight off the mind.
Re the inspiration, I agree with you, and it might be influencing us on levels we don't even recognise. It seems very possible the 40K universe will live on well past the wargame and the company that helped create it. More so even than now we could be playing in it with every system and none.
Post a Comment