egad, good sir!  you missed the last line in me previous post……and the Inquisition can order anyone to do anything (especially if they have a kill team with them….)  - if the Inquisition wants to hide an active kill team on an innoccuous tradeship, and have that tradeship perform secret, desperate, vital, (lucrative) jobs on their behalf, why not?  This was the basic premise of our group's first foray into adventure (inquisition investigating Haarlock et al, supported last Haarlock sion to aid in his recovery of heretical/xeno/warp tech, etc etc).  Obviously, a lot of work for the gm, as this is not the standard DW campaign (more like a RT campaign, with space marines); but it IS doable, and provides a lot of character and adventure options.

I can't speak to yer point about OW as i've not read it and don't know yet how it stacks up alongside the others; but it sounds like a fine idea (so long as guard-boy doesn't feel too puny beside the Angels of Death…lottsa good roleplay potential).

Kasatka said:

I'm not sure if it would truly be a solution to have the Marines "break the game" for the Guardsman by simply doing everything better. At least with a high-powered Inquisitor or a similar character, the player would have her own moments instead of being an add-on to the team that just cannot get anything done.

Granted, it's not a very good style for the game as it basically segments the session into "Marine stuff" and "stuff for that other character", but this way there would at least be something for everyone. Not that I actually think that things like "social situations" or incognito infiltration etc would happen all that often in a game of Deathwatch, mind you. Teams who get stuck with trying to solve such tasks should perhaps ask themselves whether they might not be better off with one of the other 40k games.

Also, this goes back to the player's actual issue. If OP's friend does not want a combat-centric character, then suggesting a Guardsman is just as helpful as suggesting to play an ordinary Marine in the first place. Which I still think is an option, though - the GM just needs to ensure and promise that it won't be 100% bolterporn. Maybe she'll bite. :)

If not … worst case, you have to see that you can't make everyone happy. If the majority of the group agrees they want such a strong focus on combat - as was implied - then the female player either has to drop out for the duration of the campaign, or suck it up and try to have fun even with a character and a game that does not inherently interest her that much. It's still a social event between friends, after all, and that may be its own reward.

And I still think an Inquisitor would be the most obvious choice for a non-Astartes character, if it absolutely has to be one. Those are the guys (and gals) who lead Deathwatch kill-teams in GW's fluff all the time, after all - and even though FFG opted for a different relationship, Ordo Xenos Inquisitors could still accompany a DW kill-team as allies, valued for their expertise on the subject. Just give her Astartes-grade guns and armour. She'll still be way more squishy than the others (so the Marines may have to shield her), but aside from at least dishing out equal ranged damage she could compensate her lack of resilience by solving a couple riddles along the way. This way you could keep the focus on combat and still give that player what she's looking for. Just grant her a moment or two on her own where she can examine Xenos artifacts and stuff like that - maybe even simultaneous to a separate task for the other characters, such as defending the ground against approaching enemies until the Inquisitor is done.
This principle works in all the other games that have more varied character classes; I don't see why it should not be possible in Deathwatch, despite the RAW's innate obstacles.

We're putting too much effort into this. Here is the relevant part of the intitial question:

computertrucker said:

If she doesn't want to play a Space Marine, then she doesn't want to play Deathwatch, plain and simple.

adeptus, you didn't read something in that quote you, erm, quoted:  "…she's interested…"

Me thinks the girl is interested….she just wants to play something with more elan and style than a hulking murderous goon….that's not a bad thing!

Zappiel said:

You have a more generous interpretation that I do, Zappiel. All I hear is "I'm only willing to play if I can break the rules and be the Special Snowflake, center-of-attention character in the party." I'm sorry, but saying you have no interest in playing a Space Marine in a dedicated Space Marine game is like saying "I'm interested in playing Dungeons and Dragons- but only if there's no magic in the campaign. I don't like fantasy."

And, really, has a GM catering to a very needy and demanding RPG player ever not ended badly?

The only accomodation that I think I would be willing to make is to let her watch a couple games and see how gender is irrelevant, and that Space Marines have individual personalities just like normal humans. If she still doesn't want to play, fine; let her know when the campaign is wrapping up and discuss the possibilty of playing Rogue Trader for the next campaign…

Adeptus-B said:

Cryhavok said:

Arugably the whole topic is a non-starter in the sense that; the DM has already made a descision from my reading of the first post. I don't really see where any conversation can really go.

Except to correct the DM on the assumption that a Sister of Battle can't compete (they can). To raise the other options that could compete (PSycher/Inquisitor)

Also - I'd like to direct the OP to Black Crusade - the game line that has marines and non-marines functioning together. Specifically you'll want to borrow the hordes combat rules which otherwise completely destroy people with less wounds/toughness and weaker armour.

I would probably go so far as to say you should use heretic stat generation (which is 25+2d10) for the stats. (30+2d10 for CSM). Heretics get more xp to spend at the start as well. Finally give any non-space marine the quick and the dead talent (Which I think is +2 innatitive)

Rapier said:

What makes you think they could "compete"? I mean, sure, on some level … depending on how you interpret the term. In theory, a crippled person could "compete" in the Olympics as well, he likely just wouldn't have much fun.

As for Black Crusade, I would point out that its CSMs are "toned down" in comparison to Deathwatch, not having either Squad Modes for magically neutralising lascannon blasts or to attack twice in a round, nor Demeanours for a free +30 boost, nor the whole list of bonuses you get from the dozen or so implants, nor a whole list of other special things. Even their Unnatural Toughness is lower (now being a flat bonus rather than a multiplier). And still I see many potential issues between their version of Marines and normal human combat-centric characters.

The different mechanics and the special treatment that Marines get in FFG's RPGs, especially in Deathwatch, do create a gap that will be noticeable by the players - I'm not sure how you could pretend otherwise. DW simply isn't meant to be played with anything other than Space Marines, and the reduced compatibility is the price people have to pay for getting to play superhuman badasses who take on entire hordes of Tyranids head on with just ~four guys, and whose raw physical strength enables them to throw rocks that do more damage than a normal guy's gun.

For example, see several people's firsthand experience in this thread.

There are ways to work around it (such as using Marine mechanics for non-Marines too, or by handing out artifact-quality gear freebies), but to try and include a non-Marine combat character "as is" has a high chance of resulting in disaster. Unless the player truly doesn't mind to be a goon who, in a game all about fighting, can neither deal nor take as much damage as everyone else.

Personally, I'd recommend not trying to evoke expectations that have a high chance of not being fulfilled.

Yes marines start as superhuman badasses, but the to say no one else can be a superhuman badass is simply wrong. Also it displays a singular lack of imagination that makes me glad I dont play in your games.

This has nothing to do with imagination - it's taking a look at the numbers and realising the differences. Did your Marines simply not "get creative" as well? Do you regard a necessity to "get creative" in order to "keep up" fair if it is applied only to half the players? Don't you think that certain types of creativity might even go against a character concept? I could see an Assassin being very adaptable, but a Battle Sister notably less so.

But hey, if your players had no problem with it … lucky you. It seems to be the exception.

As to sororitas attitudes, its a player, not a robot sororitas. Story wise, a sororitas that is separated from her sisters and assigned to assist a kill team might develop attitudes different from her sisters, she may have even received the assignment due to those attitudes. Attitudes that in no way hinder her faith or conviction. The marines, with thier demeanors, are far more limited than a sororitas.

My last point is thus: due to lower stats and such, everything a lesser character does when hanging with marines, is more dangerous, and therefore more heroic. The only time I have ever seen a mixed group not have a blast with the game was when some players obsessively competed over character stats and abilities.

As I have pointed out in previous posts, the areas where normal characters are able to "go far beyond what a Marine can" are not the issue. I've been talking about combat-centric characters who, just like Astartes, need and should have their moments in the area that defines them. It also stands to reason that a game like Deathwatch concentrates on fighting, and although an overlap is possible, I have already elaborated on the possible problems that would arise from such an approach.

And I guess we just have a different understanding of the Sororitas. Thinking about it, maybe it really is just our interpretation of the setting that keeps us from reaching consensus regarding what people should be allowed to do and how to play.

But, feel free to go on and claim deficiencies in people you don't know because they dare have a different opinion than you do. It's certainly easier than engaging in a honest debate. And now I'm glad I don't play in your games, too.

Good day, sir.

However I will never give up the position that non astartes can play with, and even shine along side, an astartes character.

But the part that bothers me, is that you are debating "what people should be allowed to do and how to play." Unless you are that person's GM, you dont have any say in it. The OP asked for advice on how to handle an unusual situation, and rather than being helpful, most of the posters here have spent time telling him how he cant do it. So feel free to be mad at me for making assumptions about you, but at least Im not deciding how strangers are allowed to play.

Alright, fresh start…

I've never intended to "tell people what they should be allowed to do and how to play" (actually, I don't think anyone here did) - and I really don't know what gave you such a crass impression. In fact, I have elaborated on the possibility of a Deathwatch game with less combat-focused segments in my very first post in this thread, even including a practical example on how everyone could feel valuable.

But I also deem it prudent to caution against likely issues, before anyone is lured in by false promises and then let down by the harsh reality. In the end, people should always check the books for themselves and see how the rules would or wouldn't fit to their idea of whatever they want to play, for the best roleplaying still needs some backup by the numbers, lest the character risks ending up a joke.

If someone does not wish to play a character whose role is defined chiefly by combat prowess, perfect! But in the past couple posts, I've been talking about those few cases who are, especially the Battle Sister as it was presented as a possible alternative. This was a bit side-tracked from OP's actual problem in that the player already clarified that she does not want to play a combat-centric character, so OP's problem has less to do with the non-Marine sucking at combat, but the Marines sucking at things the non-Marine will be incredibly good at.

Which, as I've already pointed out, may not actually be a problem. At least this way everyone still gets to have their moment, and everyone will be important for successful completion of the mission. It just requires a bit of finetuning to have the specialisations tie into each other and the session as seamless as possible.

Given that you seem to have experience with non-Marines shining in non-combat areas of mixed games, perhaps you could add your recommendations concerning this area now.

Hey, original poster:  don't listen to the naysayers - go for it!  Let's be honest:  the original game, the game behind 40k and all things grimdark, was intended from the outset to be a game involving a wide range of characters brought together to fight other groups of wide-ranging characters……the game was Rogue Trader, and it's premise was that the player controlled a group of explorers plumbing the depths of unknown space and fighting the beings encountered there…..some of these explorers were marines, some were other things…..the point?  The game, in it's original inception, was meant to involve multiple types of character working together on adventures.  So, if you want a good 40k experience, seems to me that's the way to go……just understand that the ffg rules systems are not inter-compatible and will force the gm to do a helluva lotta work…..