Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I just read this old review of 1st edition 40k, and there are a lot of awesome things about it: https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1459055/long-rambling-review-1st-edition-warhammer-40000-r

But I only ever got around to 40k at the 3rd edition, and never got to fully reading through the first edition. But the fellow says that his sessions are half roleplay, and half game session. That's what I want to achieve out of my games. Still trying to come up with the perfect way to include roleplay in my 40k TT games.

So the 1st edition rulebook had stats such as Intelligence, Willpower, and Cool. That is so awesome. But then, did this add to the actual roleplay element?

I'd love to pry open this part in 40k history. What was it actually like, narratively speaking in these games? And how did the 1st edition rules actually support roleplay?

I haven't actually ever played a full game of RT, but I do have the rulebook and played out a couple sequences. The game evolved somewhat over time before 2E came out as GW released stuff over time, but the basic game revolved around a 3rd party GM essentially designing a scenario and adjudicate games for two other players.

In modern 40k you're basically playing a handful of variants on "hold random table spots" with prebuilt company level forces looking to destroy each other in pitched battle. Whereas RT would suggest playing an imperial noble's raiding party launching a raid on a rival's gold stash, or you might be playing an Ork pirate group facing Imperial Marines, or an Assassin/Navigator/Inquisitor squad facing against "an alien force" (whatever the GM wanted to pick from the back of the book or make up) to dive into a bunker and blow up a superweapon, you'd just grab whatever from your ostensibly huge stash of random mini's that the game now gave you an excuse to use and the GM would set it up.

The scale of the game is also much smaller, a vehicle showcased was a converted deodorant stick into a hovercraft and served as a game centerpiece. Something like a Dreadnought would usually be the largest thing on a table and so the mechanics could be much more detailed.

Int, Willpower, and Cool are useful for portraying things like Ogryns, which have often gotten stuck with weird Ld rules over the past few editions when using just one stat combined in Ld, whereas in RT that'd be shown with their Cool and Willpower might be very high (so pain or enemy fire might not effect them as much) but their Int and Ld very low (so they might be tricked easily or unable to command if a leader falls).

It really is much more of an RPG experience, basically using RPG mechanics to portray combat at a skirmish scale.

Rogue Trader was essentially Warhammer Fantasy in space...with a much heavier dose or role-playing. The idea of full lead/pewter armies was still mainly in the realm of Napoleonics gaming, etc. Games Workshop was originally (gasp!) more about backing and producing a bunch of smaller games. The idea of modern 40K or AoS wasn't even a twinkle in their eye.

So the game evolved from role-playing routes into small tabletop skirmishes. In 2nd edition they went further toward a proper wargame. Even then 40K was immensely more in-depth and the model count was 1/4 of what you see on the table today. Just a dozen examples of how wildly different it was:

1) Models could perform actions to hide, meaning they could only be detected at certain distances
2) Vehicles had crew members who could exit the vehicles, and had to be moved around inside the vehicle if crewmen were killed during the game
3) Vehicles could limber and unlimber artillery pieces and other items they could drag around the game for scenarios
4) Armour penetration dropped off over range as the round/beam lost velocity
5) Daemons had to be summoned by gaining points, and opposing daemon factions would immediately attack eachother and disappear into the warp
6) Models had limited vision arcs and could only shoot 90-degrees to the front of their model
7) Many larger weapons had one or two pages of rules dedicated to themselves in each codex to explain how they worked
8) You had a dozen types of grenades including poison, smoke, anti-foliage grenades (yep, you could throw grenades to chemically destroy trees/bushes on the table!)
9) Certain models were listed as having protective visors meaning they were immune to certain things like flash grenades and certain invulnerable fields which emitted blinding flashes when hit
10) You had to fight each combat individually in close-combat...meaning a large combat could take an hour to resolve!
11) Morale and leadership was much more important with Fear and Terror having actual implications (forcing units to flee, or making it impossible to charge, etc.)
12) If your opponent had daemons in reserve...any model teleporting (Terminators, Warp Spiders) stood a chance of showing up on the table...as a daemon...Grey Knights were excluded from this of course

etc.

3rd edition and by extension 3rd-7th (all of these games were based on the same basic structure established in 3rd) more or less threw out any vestiges of role-playing or heavier story-telling elements in favour of much larger games, with a much easier learning curve to be more mass-market suitable. This was the beginning of GW's corporate era (and arguably saved the company). The eventual goal (still present) is to make the game faster and deadlier, requiring more miniatures on the table which in turn means more model sales.

8th is a new game design by the underlying streamlining, etc. is still present.

I very much enjoy 8th edition but I don't think it's very suitable for role-playing unless you were to add that as a sub-component of the game (prior or post). My gaming group plays more narrative games but that really means a lot more terrain rules, and more functional objectives (get to this switch, turn the power for the shield generator off, etc.). If you're interested in 40K role-play you could try to use one of the many role-playing games they've made since ---- try to cram it into the game somehow? I just don't think there is much you easily put into a standard game of 40K to make it feel like a role-playing game.

The 1e book includes rules for several different playmodes including campaigns and GM-run scenarios (there is a big set of plot generator charts as well).

It's more necromunda than d&d though with the character system being one 'hero' and their squad. The army sheet even comes with 11 slots for statlines.

There are points for gear and stats but no strict xp system beyond that other than 'gain +1 to a stat after each game to a maximum of the hero statline' - you could however retrofit the stat points costs to give an xp system.

---------------------------------------------

If you wanted to run it as a campaign each player would have a set number of points to buy up their character, squad, and equipment (with some sharing between stats and equipment pools) and then bonus points to spend on upgrades and replacements after each game, again split between character and squad.

They are all going to be combat encounters of one kind of another though, much like the deathwatch RPG.

---------------------------------------------

In terms of the extra stats
-Leadership - stops you squad falling apart (mainly rout tests)
-Intelligence - determines equipment options (items have tech levels) as well as psychic powers
-Cool - protection vs psychology rules (confusion, frenzy, fear, and hatred)
-Willpower - psychic defense

The inclusion of a GM and people wanting to role play can turn basically any system into a RPG. RT was a weird mix. It was probably closer to the wargame side of the fence the role play, but all the essential elements were there. RPGs of that era were an eclectic mix anyway.

I played a bit of RT as an RPG back in the day, had a bunch of fun. Role played adventures carving a little fame and glory out of the universe heading a small troupe of freelance mercenaries. Some roleplay, some minis shooting it out on the table. Good times.

If you want a more robust game system, you can look at FFG’s line. Most everything there should be able to translate to the tabletop if you wanted to switch gears to a mass battle. But it also has a more fleshed out skill system, and traits and abilities that help give characters more personality and depth.

A few things not mentioned, RT supported 40k as an RPG by including the means to build any vehicle or creature/unit from the ground up. You had an expansive equipment list (Squats on flying skateboards anyone? ). They also had a post-game injury list that could give your dudes impairments (unless you got that cybernetic eye or whatever). I recall a Ratling (halfling) character of mine with a cyber leg. Basically the only thing they didn't give you was a workable ecconomy. Dark Heresy from FFG solves that and as was previously stated can be converted to tabletop if you need. I'm still an active RT role player after all these years but i take heavily from Dark Heresy for skilles and such (previously it was WHFB). I'm gearing up for a RT/DH campaign in the near future actually. It's going to be a 40k/Borderlands thing