Hey guys, I've come across this strange dilemma in my game. My players are investigating a Guard Regiment and One of my players who plays an Arbites(Selvador), tried to tell a sergeant off for gambling. Now I though that he could report him and basically end his life without pulling the trigger himself. But even with that, I kind of got stuck. Is there a limit of Arbites power, considering that Guardsmen are a military organization? How would it work and what influence would an Arbitrator have?

Thank you in advance

The Adeptus Arbites are galaxtic cops. Their remit is the Lex Imperialis, the Imperial law.

The Astra Militarum has its own military police, as does other armed forces within the Imperium, and civilians are policed by a third type of coppers (known as Enforcers in 40K speak).

The Imperial law is all about the smooth running of the Imperium. Arbitrators concern themselves with heresy, treason, sedition, tithes, and the security of the Adeptus Terra and its representatives.

Gambling is unlikely to be covered by the Lex Imperialis, but that is of course up to you. Gambling in a military setting, however, would almost definitely be a matter of military law.

So.. The short answer is that your Arbitrator should inform the MPs, if he cares at all.

As for what influence an Arbitrator has, well... That depends on the locale, obviously, and you should feel free to tailor things to your campaign needs. But generally speaking, even a lowly Arbites trooper will have a great deal of clout.

The Adeptus Arbites are the cops of the Imperium. In many ways they're the overt equivalent of the Inquisition, and at least in theory, nobody is above the Lex Imperialis - meaning nobody is above being arrested by an Arbitrator. In practice their authority does not necessarily extend to things like Space Marines and the class of individuals known as Peers of The Imperium (Rogue Traders, Lord Sectors, The High Lords of Terra, The Assassin Temples, etc.)

Right, so if we cut deep into the core of all things, an Arbitrator can actually arrest a Guardsman or maybe even an officer of the Imperial Guard? what about the Commissars? I mean, they aren't even counted as part of the military strictly speaking...

Right, so if we cut deep into the core of all things, an Arbitrator can actually arrest a Guardsman or maybe even an officer of the Imperial Guard? what about the Commissars? I mean, they aren't even counted as part of the military strictly speaking...

If they're breaking the Imperial law, certainly. If they're breaking some other law or code of conduct, he may ignore it or inform the relevant authorities, but an Arbitrator's remit is 'only' the Imperial law.

Thank you so much Simsum, you really helped

Like many details of the setting, the specific tasks and privileges of the Arbites are very much a matter of personal interpretation, which is why you are bound to see a dozen different answers in a dozen different GW codices, Black Library novels, or FFG rulebooks. That being said ...

Of course, this opens up additional potential, from the player character being reprimanded for wasting his time rather than doing what he is supposed to do, to the local Guard garrison not accepting his authority out of jurisdictional conflict and a traditional "turf war" between powerful Imperial organisations, especially when a Commissar is involved, and/or if an individual is truly corrupt or simply sworn to obey an element not accepting the Arbites' influence. Of course, the latter may then indeed hint at a deeper issue that suddenly starts to warrant more attention.

I tend to view the Arbitrators as very similar to Judges in Judge Dredd, except if you've caught their attention, you probably aren't going anywhere that isn't in a black bodybag. As for your exact scenario, it would depend on the regiment, as each would have different reactions to the issue. Some regiments would be like 'Sure, I'll lock him up. *Never acts on the issue*.'. Others might even risk laughing in his face 'cause bigger guns and stuff, whilst others would instantly jump to their feet and yell, perfectly honestly. '**** him! Lieutenant, have that man flogged!' So it all depends. I would do what fits your setting most.

"I want Truman's executive order authorising Majestic and I want a list of its twelve directors."

"Majestic doesn't officially exist, therefore there can be no directors."

"Under the constitution I am charged with enforcing the laws of the United States of America. Now, under those laws, and facing the penalties of treason, I order you to release those names!"

"My command does not recognise your authority, *sir*."

-- Attorney General Kennedy and LtCdr. Albano, Dark Skies ep. 13

Hot **** I had forgotten everything about this series. Now I must find this and see it again.

Generally speaking, if it isn't treason or heresy, the Arbites don't care.

Simsum and Lynata are entirely correct, I'd say.

I would say that the appropriate thing to do would be to inform the Commissar or the Guard Enforcer (Military Police/MP) if the regiment's got them.

As long as the target in question isn't specifically breaking the Lex Imperialis, the Arbitrator would have no cause to directly interfere and his jurisdiction would be dodgy. Under most cross-jurisdictional situations, it would probably be best to inform the nearest superiors, or, if they are clearly above your paygrade (which might be the case with, for example, Commissars), inform your own superiors.

The Arbites jurisdiction and mandate is pretty wide, though. The Book of Judgement for Dark Heresy is filled with some hilarious nuggets of information about the Lex Imperialis as applied in Sector Calixis.

Suspected Intent to Witness Unsanctioned Psychic Manifestation:
Field Interrogation, Field Judgement (Execution).

The imperial infantryman's uplifting states that gambling is "a crime punishable by a flogging and incarceration for an unspecified time."

Some sources describe an Arbites Judge (i forgot what their top rank is called) as having (in theory) jursdiction over even the planetary governor! So i theory they can walk into the governor's mansion, go "sir you are under arrest for trading with the Tau!" and shoot the guy dead. So an arbites of suffiecent rank should (in my opnion) be capable of arresting anyone short of an inquistor. Of course arresting such powerfull and well conected individuals may prove tricky.

For what it's worth, I tend to cleave towards the Judge Dredd model (Since that's where the original Necromunda Arbitrators were modeled from). So, An Arbitrator who Personally witnesses a crime in progress is free to act on it as feels appropriate (Arbitors are expected to be familiar with the laws of the area they police). If said Arbitor chooses to apprehend a Perp for a local crime (If he bothers!) he will probably turn said perp over to local enforcers with a recommendation of sentence. This recommendation will likely be followed since failing to follow the dictates of the local Imperial governor (IE: enforcing the law) WOULD be a violation of the Lex Imperialis.

More likely though, If the Arbitrator bothered to act at all it would be to Curb stomp the fight out of the offending perp "As a warning". (Stun Batons have a way of getting the perp's undivided attention!)

The Book of Judgement and RT: Hostile aquisitions give some good ideas of how the Lex Imperialis will play out in a given scenario. Of course, If said Arbitor is ALSO an Acolyte of an Inquisitor, his remit is wide indeed!

I'd like to argue the other side of the coin, so to speak.

Yes, arbiters have a wide jurisdiction but it is narrowly contained within the Lex Imperialis. Just like the tech-priests base everything on exisiting or previous schematics, the arbiters can only act according to established precedent and laws. The fluff strongly hints at massive tomes with 10,000 years of laws, interpretations & precedents. So in many ways, the hands of an arbiter are tied by having to act within that 'narrow' scope. Hence IMO the Scholastic Lore (Judgement) and Common Lore (Arbites). In this case, I'd have the player check (with a hefty penalty because a guardsman gambling would be an obscure crime for an arbiter) his knowledge skill to see if he has any legal grounds.....

And then we have the turf war situation....the IG is not going to allow the local arbites to stomp their men on such minor charges. Bad for the morale of the men (soldiers will gamble, drink and fornicate and any good officer knows better than to prohibit something which is going to happen anyway) and bad for their own prestige vis a vis other imperial organisations...

So in this case, the arbiter could have threatened the sargeant with informing his CO about gambling. Depending on how this particular regiment/colonel treats it, the sarge would be shivering in his boots or laughing his head off.

I'd like to argue the other side of the coin, so to speak.

Yes, arbiters have a wide jurisdiction but it is narrowly contained within the Lex Imperialis. Just like the tech-priests base everything on exisiting or previous schematics, the arbiters can only act according to established precedent and laws. The fluff strongly hints at massive tomes with 10,000 years of laws, interpretations & precedents. So in many ways, the hands of an arbiter are tied by having to act within that 'narrow' scope. Hence IMO the Scholastic Lore (Judgement) and Common Lore (Arbites). In this case, I'd have the player check (with a hefty penalty because a guardsman gambling would be an obscure crime for an arbiter) his knowledge skill to see if he has any legal grounds.....

And then we have the turf war situation....the IG is not going to allow the local arbites to stomp their men on such minor charges. Bad for the morale of the men (soldiers will gamble, drink and fornicate and any good officer knows better than to prohibit something which is going to happen anyway) and bad for their own prestige vis a vis other imperial organisations...

So in this case, the arbiter could have threatened the sargeant with informing his CO about gambling. Depending on how this particular regiment/colonel treats it, the sarge would be shivering in his boots or laughing his head off.

On the one hand, existing case law and precedent is limiting, on the other, with 10k years of it, it is probably possible to find precedent/case law justification for nearly anything with sufficient time and research, even if it's being taken wildly out of context. I seem to remember BoJ saying that there were normally a great many adepts/Arbite-clerks/etc that research such things.

And, if you're going up against a well-funded/staffed/supported legal team for a noble or something, they can probably find a precedent to oppose the one utilized by the investigating/prosecuting Arbites, leaving it to the judging magistrate(s) to evaluate the relative strengths of the precedents, and see which one wins, or to create a new precedent.

The situation could be a bit murkier if the gambling results in debt that may compromise the sergeant's loyalty, or if the sergeant is gambling with Imperial materials, or if the activity is directly leading to a dereliction of duty. Any of these could compromise the effectiveness of the IG unit in question and thus likely fall under the Lex Imperialis. However, policing these things is one of the functions of the Commissars, and the Arbites typically have other things to do. Oddly enough, because of the potential consequences of failing to fulfill their 'critical' functions, Adepts (of any of the Adeptus ) are far more likely to fall under the scrutiny of the Arbites than common Imperial citizens.

If your resident Arbitrator gives a good god **** about some random I.G. sergeant gambling, then he/she is missing the point. The Inquisition's role - and that includes its acolytes - is too root out (and destroy) heresy which takes many forms - generally associated with whichever ordo the acolytes come from. Gambling is not going to be deemed a heresy. In fact, it's more likely that its an accepted practice among soldiers in nearly any regiment. At worse, the offender gets flogged and/or demoted. In reality, nothing happens.

The larger issue is - why does the arby even care? That likely is a gap in the player's understand of what an arbitrator actually is. Or worse yet, indicative that the player still views himself as an arbitrator, which he/she is not. Acolyte now. An agent for the Inquisition - that's what he/she is now. I'd recommend you have the player do some reading on these topics.