Jump to content



Photo

Adventure aftermath


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 Laoin

Laoin

    Member

  • Members
  • 19 posts

Posted 02 November 2012 - 06:42 AM

A few days ago my group of Acolytes finished the first DH adventure I run as GM ("Idyll Heresies"). They came out of it with only minor scratches. The group managed to defeat a Plaguebearer and a few Peste Ticks without beeing corrupted. They solved most of the mysteries I threw at them and were - understandably - at the end of the adventure quite pleased with themselves.

 

But - as I see it - the Warhammer 40k-universe is not fair to heroes. And I don't want them to get too big-headed - especially at the beginning of our campaign. So I decided to confront them with a rigorous scrutiny by the Inquisition as a special aftermath of the adventure. (After all, they encountered warp spawn creatures and even a minor demon.) Now I ponder the question how to conduct this scrutiny. What would the Inquisition do with Acolytes who had their first contact with Chaos creatures? (It shouldn't be lethal, of course. But it should give them an impression of the paranoid institution they now work for.)

Do you have any hot tips for me?



#2 IdOfEntity

IdOfEntity

    Member

  • Members
  • 114 posts

Posted 02 November 2012 - 07:40 AM

Prolonged seclusion and an interview with a member of the Ordo Malleus seem like reasonable responses.  The *cough* interview process could make for an interesting adventure on it's own.  A member of the Ordo Malleus could construct a means of imprisonment brutal enough to make the characters plan an escape.  If the odds are stacked against the members, and they think the only way to survive is to escape, an Interrogator or Inquisitor for the Ordo Malleus might expect a tainted acolyte to reach for those forsaken powers they have been exposed to.

So the Interrogator expects their first escape attempt and quickly suppresses it.  The Interrogator attempts to make them as desperate as possible.  They attempt to escape again, and if they use anything daemonic or attempt to make a last-minute pact with a daemon they are guilty.  If they simply accept their fate up to the point where the headsman's axe is about to fall, then they are set at liberty.  If they attempt to escape, and even manage it, without using daemonic influence they are set at liberty.

What do you think?



#3 Ghaundan

Ghaundan

    Member

  • Members
  • 448 posts

Posted 02 November 2012 - 09:16 AM

 Play on the fact that they did well, maybe a bit TOO well. For all the inquisition knows they might be cover agents who were helped along in order to get in good with their superiors. Interrogation, inqusition style and perhaps some flaggelation, fasting, prayers and oaths of loyalty to the emperor and last a rite of passage to show their conviction. Which would be some very dangerous or unsavory mission.



#4 ranoncles

ranoncles

    Member

  • Members
  • 244 posts

Posted 02 November 2012 - 09:50 AM

Let me start by doffing my cap, Sir. A GM who is willing to shrink oversized character ego's is ok in my book .

As to ways & means:

Your players are basically under investigation of taint and corruption with reference to dark pacts and whatnot.

I would start out by having them thoroughly vetted by the church. Have them recite the 'Hymn of Malleus Imperialus' or some such (e.g. test Imperial Creed) after having them totally shaven (yes, all over…) . Then immerse them in a large bath of holy water (test swimming). If you are really mean you can claim beforehand that if they survive they are guilty and if they drown they will be martyrs of the inquisition….

Oh, and have them lashed by a servitor causing a 1 wound reduction (e.g. the lashing weakens them) until they have proven themselves again in the eyes of the inquisition or sufficient time has lapsed for them to heal from such an ordeal.

 

 

Then the real tests start….

They are to be tested in some special inquisitorial vault which has many different rooms. In any particular sequence, let them confront the aspects of the chaos gods.

Khorn:
The players are each required to kill some fearsome beast and are offered a lasgun or a melee weapon and have to simultaneously protect some weak citizens. If they are particularly bloodthirsty (they pick the melee weapon and score max weapon damage during the fight) or ignore the citizens they are obviously influenced by Khorn…

Slaanesh:
The players are required to join some orgy whilst trying to extract information from a fellow reveler. They have to make willpower tests to withstand the charms of seductresses (or seducers) and or several tests against getting drunk or distracted…

Tzeetch:
Some kind of mindboggling test or magic/psyker test would seem appropriate. Perhaps they are offered secret knowledge to pass the test or access to a 'magic' weapon.

Nurgle:
They are sent on some kind of mission (still in the vault though) and during that mission they are repeatedly exposed to illness and contagion (test toughness). Eventually, they will be infected and are given the choice of taking a semi-permanent toughness penalty (-3 would be fair) or accept the blessings of a suspect priest….

 


If the players come out of this with a mixed score, they are subjected to the final test: a meeting with a pet daemon. Bound by an Inquisitor, this pet daemon will interview the players with a series of riddles (easily found on the internet) to determine if they are indeed in league with a daemon….


Having gone through all of this, they would rather be killed by the next daemon they encounter than suffer through it again….

 



#5 Laoin

Laoin

    Member

  • Members
  • 19 posts

Posted 02 November 2012 - 09:21 PM

Ahhh… so many splendid ideas. Thanks a lot. You gave me a good starting point to give my Acolytes a good shake (insert here: *howling evil laughter*).

Nahh, I'm not a cruel GM (at least I hope so), but I see the Warhammer 40k-universe as a real bleak place with looming disaster on every step the Acolytes take. And I try to give my players an impression of how I will lead this game right from the start: as high as they might rise in their career in the Inquisition - they will only be chess pieces or marionettes on the strings of unseen and strange powers.

Well, we will see, how this will out.

 

So, thx again for your tips.



#6 Zakalwe

Zakalwe

    Member

  • Members
  • 531 posts

Posted 02 November 2012 - 11:57 PM

Laoin said:

Ahhh… so many splendid ideas. Thanks a lot. You gave me a good starting point to give my Acolytes a good shake (insert here: *howling evil laughter*).

Nahh, I'm not a cruel GM (at least I hope so), but I see the Warhammer 40k-universe as a real bleak place with looming disaster on every step the Acolytes take. And I try to give my players an impression of how I will lead this game right from the start: as high as they might rise in their career in the Inquisition - they will only be chess pieces or marionettes on the strings of unseen and strange powers.

Well, we will see, how this will out.

 

So, thx again for your tips.

Food for thought from a greybeard:

Are you sure your players are cool with being punished for succeeding to 'keep it grim dark'?

I've played in campaigns where the gm **** on the pcs to 'keep it in theme' and despite being great games ultimately it sucked.  We hadn't clarified what everyone expected from the campaign and that was a mistake.

You need to consider that the inquisition is not a homogenous organisation, and if they are lowly acolytes it is likely that only their inquisitor knows about them, and so the response should be appropriate to who their inquisitor is.  Instill a sense of paranoia, sure, even set up a recurring character who eyes them with suspicion, BUT I think that unless you have the players agreement then the suggestions above, though creative and in theme will potentially alienate the players.

Just make sure they are cool with it before you do it.  Even though you do most of the work, always remember it is their game too.

Just my 2 cents.
 

 

Interrogator Z



#7 Nameless2all

Nameless2all

    Member

  • Members
  • 760 posts

Posted 03 November 2012 - 12:27 PM

Zakalwe said:

 

Food for thought from a greybeard:

Are you sure your players are cool with being punished for succeeding to 'keep it grim dark'?

I've played in campaigns where the gm **** on the pcs to 'keep it in theme' and despite being great games ultimately it sucked.  We hadn't clarified what everyone expected from the campaign and that was a mistake.

You need to consider that the inquisition is not a homogenous organisation, and if they are lowly acolytes it is likely that only their inquisitor knows about them, and so the response should be appropriate to who their inquisitor is.  Instill a sense of paranoia, sure, even set up a recurring character who eyes them with suspicion, BUT I think that unless you have the players agreement then the suggestions above, though creative and in theme will potentially alienate the players.

Just make sure they are cool with it before you do it.  Even though you do most of the work, always remember it is their game too.

Just my 2 cents.  

Interrogator Z

I agree, to an extent.    The Inquisitor of the PC's can conduct these "tests" himself, and they can be as indepth or brief as you want.  For me, I spent about 20-30 mins with a group of 5 players going over some various tests.  An induced chemical interrogation, led by some Black Carapace men.  A priest asking them to confess their sins, while the Inquisitor recorded it and watched secretly incase of taint.  And then a series of screenings by a medical examiner, an Imperial Psyker or a Blank (the Psyker didn't use any powers, just asked questions), followed by the Inquisitor/Interrigator.  They each asked about 1-2 questions, which only required short explanations on the PC's part. And then they were released and given a mission, without knowing the results. 

This only occurred after the adventures.  So, about once every 3-5 gaming sessions.  And once they reached lvl 6+, I pretty much quit doing it, and only had the Inquisitor talk to them for about 5 mins per PC.


For a collection of fan created material, please refer to the link below. Some of it was edited/created by myself and friends, while most is other fan material. Happy gaming people.https://drive.google.com<p>-"May your endeavors always be prosperous, though they may not always be profitable."


#8 Laoin

Laoin

    Member

  • Members
  • 19 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 12:35 AM

@ Nameless2all: That is approximately what I plan to do. So thx for your practical experience. Especially for the "sending them on the next mission without knowing the results". That is really good idea.

 

Zakalwe is right of course. All this is about having fun together. I play roleplaying games since the early 80s. And after all this time (urgs… 30 years…) I come to the conclusion: it all stands or falls with the fun we all have in the game. (That is one of the reasons why I don't like powergaming. But that is another matter…)



#9 Nameless2all

Nameless2all

    Member

  • Members
  • 760 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 02:18 PM

Ahh power gaming.  Why does that comment remind me of a buddy of mine, who I allowed to create an Ascension level character, who then choose to play an Ogryn, Vindicare Assassin, with the background of being Hermatic Warded against Daemons.  And, he purchased Best Quality Carapace armour with the Boarding Shield and a Great Lathe Weapon.  Yea…………..  It was a fun one time session. lol 


For a collection of fan created material, please refer to the link below. Some of it was edited/created by myself and friends, while most is other fan material. Happy gaming people.https://drive.google.com<p>-"May your endeavors always be prosperous, though they may not always be profitable."


#10 BrotherKane

BrotherKane

    Member

  • Members
  • 229 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 10:00 PM

I tend to have my PCs take a "Psych evaluation" after a mission where I think there might be suspicion of taint.  This generally takes the form of an interview with an appropriate NPC where they are asked to report (I usually get them to paraphrase stuff they emphasise in their report and anything they leave out rather than listen to 4 full accounts…) and they are also asked to evaluate their fellow acolytes performance/any suspicions they have.

If I'm feeling particularly cruel I ask them to evaluate their own performance in the same way.



#11 Zakalwe

Zakalwe

    Member

  • Members
  • 531 posts

Posted 07 November 2012 - 08:15 AM

Nameless2all said:

Zakalwe said:

 

 

Food for thought from a greybeard:

Are you sure your players are cool with being punished for succeeding to 'keep it grim dark'?

I've played in campaigns where the gm **** on the pcs to 'keep it in theme' and despite being great games ultimately it sucked.  We hadn't clarified what everyone expected from the campaign and that was a mistake.

You need to consider that the inquisition is not a homogenous organisation, and if they are lowly acolytes it is likely that only their inquisitor knows about them, and so the response should be appropriate to who their inquisitor is.  Instill a sense of paranoia, sure, even set up a recurring character who eyes them with suspicion, BUT I think that unless you have the players agreement then the suggestions above, though creative and in theme will potentially alienate the players.

Just make sure they are cool with it before you do it.  Even though you do most of the work, always remember it is their game too.

Just my 2 cents.  

Interrogator Z

 

 

I agree, to an extent.    The Inquisitor of the PC's can conduct these "tests" himself, and they can be as indepth or brief as you want.  For me, I spent about 20-30 mins with a group of 5 players going over some various tests.  An induced chemical interrogation, led by some Black Carapace men.  A priest asking them to confess their sins, while the Inquisitor recorded it and watched secretly incase of taint.  And then a series of screenings by a medical examiner, an Imperial Psyker or a Blank (the Psyker didn't use any powers, just asked questions), followed by the Inquisitor/Interrigator.  They each asked about 1-2 questions, which only required short explanations on the PC's part. And then they were released and given a mission, without knowing the results. 

This only occurred after the adventures.  So, about once every 3-5 gaming sessions.  And once they reached lvl 6+, I pretty much quit doing it, and only had the Inquisitor talk to them for about 5 mins per PC.

That is probably how I would handle it too if I was going down that path.  I wouldn't  let it derail the game or drive plot unless it was a major theme of the game.

 

Interrogator Z






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS