warpdancer said:

Eisenhorn, over the years, struck me as having become independently wealthy. How this was achieved is never talked about. The Inquisition proper never knew about his false identities, his funding, or just about anything else. They turned him loose with a charter to purge the heretic, the alien, and the demon. This he did. When necessary he'd show the rosette, but that was pretty much always with officials of the Imperium.

Look, acolytes are supposed to be undercover agents. If they show up plush with money, equipment, and contacts beyond their means, they will draw attention and questions. There is real world support of this. Look at the movie Donnie Brasco for an example. The undercover agent didn't even get to collect on his paycheck. They deposited it into a secret account for him and gave his wife a stipend while he was undercover. Everything else, from guns, to contacts, to money, he had to procure with his own means, so as not to draw questions. A wise heretic will investigate someone snooping around, and if they trace the funds and equipment back to the Inquisition, will act accordingly.

Again, it's not like the Inquisitor has plucked his acolytes from the crib and they have no life. Arbitrators have their badge and the force of law to leverage. Assassians and scum have the underworld. Clerics and Adepts have the bureacracy that they can manipulate. Psykers... well, they have their own resources. Guardsmen have their PDF or Imperial Guard that they can rely on to an extent.

Remember, Eisenhorn let the entire ruling body of a planet die in persuit of a heretic. Individual lives, ultimately, mean nothing to Inquisitors. Hell, they can order an Exterminatus and kill off an entire planet if needed. Do you really think that an Inquisitor cares if a few new recruits live? It might be inconvinient, but it wouldn't slow down the inquisitor's stride. If their lives mean nothing, why the hell would he take the time to equip them? He's on the other side of the galaxy handling things that are *really* important.

Also, remember that often, and especially according to the rules, the Inquisitor is in another part of the sector entirely, and it can take weeks, even months to communicate, even one way, and communications get lost all the time. Inquisitors can't rely on acolytes who need their hand held. They need self-sufficient agents, because backup may be six weeks away, assuming the transport ship doesn't get lost in the warp. I consider an Inquisitor who doesn't provide for his agents to be a pragmatic, hard-edged bastard who knows that coddling will result in incompitent or dead agents. Read Ender's Game. Ender is in the same place as the agents. If the agents think, even for one minute, that their "patron" will provide for them, will save them, or will even care if they die, they will not give absolutely everything they can to their jobs, and the Emperor demands nothing less than total devotion and zeal.

You totally *can* provide all the toys, money, and contacts that your PCs could possibly want, but that ruins several thematic elements from the game, the biggest two being that feeling of isolation in a sea of humanity, and the allure of absolute power over everything around you. My players have played D&D however, a game that gives you no set income, and no patron to give you income, and also has some of the most incredibly expensive items imaginable in it. By end game, you're walking around in equipment that is so valuable it might take a small kingdom a year to generate enough funds for one piece of it. In D&D you have no problem acquiring funds. Creative players here should have no problem acquiring funds too. There just isn't any treasure chests or dragon hordes.

TheFlatline said:

Look, acolytes are supposed to be undercover agents.

One of their roles , yes and not street gangers,

If they show up plush with money, equipment, and contacts beyond their means, they will draw attention and questions.

If, if they´re such foolish, considered it is foolish, Yoke seemed to work that way reasonable successful, Draco was successful, Eisenhorn also, an Inquisitor who don´t credible and plausible cover identities at hand is a liability.

There is real world support of this. Look at the movie Donnie Brasco for an example.

No, i don´t know the movie.

Again, it's not like the Inquisitor has plucked his acolytes from the crib and they have no life. Arbitrators have their badge and the force of law to leverage. Assassians and scum have the underworld. Clerics and Adepts have the bureacracy that they can manipulate. Psykers... well, they have their own resources. Guardsmen have their PDF or Imperial Guard that they can rely on to an extent.

None of Eisenhorns or for that matter the Inquisitor from Shadow Point seemed the acolythes pat of their Departmento any longer.

Do you really think that an Inquisitor cares if a few new recruits live?

No, but he would care if they fail

He risks failure, losses are acceptable failure is not. f rom Rogue Trader

And Eisenhorn cared for the core members of his team, he took great risks to avenge Midas Betancore.

Also, remember that often, and especially according to the rules, the Inquisitor is in another part of the sector entirely, and it can take weeks, even months to communicate, even one way, and communications get lost all the time .

Yes therefore a competent Inquisitors sees that preparations are taken, that his acolythes are well equipped and prepared

I consider an Inquisitor who doesn't provide for his agents to be a pragmatic, hard-edged bastard

I consider him an incompetent idiot.

You totally *can* provide all the toys, money, and contacts that your PCs could possibly want,

I could and i should not, without contacts they will be out to dry, a compromised contact is another thing especially if the contact is as well capable as loyal

the biggest two being that feeling of isolation in a sea of humanity,

Good equipment isn´t something who helps in that matter, the question

Is it a good thing to do, to get our toys or will it death trap.

My players have played D&D however , as well as GURPS, Cthulhu etc which the pcs habve income, ressources

Creative players here should have no problem acquiring funds too. There just isn't any treasure chests or dragon hordes.

I f you want to play D&D, do it, but i don´t remember Eisenhorn, Draco etc going on the treasure hunt for a chest of coins but hunting the empereors or their own enemies

Well, it looks like TheFlatline and warpdancer just simply need to agree to disagree.

One important question would be: What is an appropriatly equiped Acolyte?

The true answer to this question would be in my eyes another question: What is his mission .. this time?

If i send my players on a sneak-and-peak assigment they are normally given a small amount of thrones for bribes, fake cognomen, usual clothing for the sector, and if they do not have any of their own, subtle weapons (knives, guns with silencers). If it's their job to listen around in a low-hive, than they get dressed and equiped like gangers.

When they investigate in mid-hive they of course get more money (for bribes), better clothes and so forth.

If its a true purge-and-cleanse mission .. i wil send the IG, not my players. Sorry, but they were brought in for their brains, talents und rafinesse, not as street muscle. Besides, playing such a scenario tends to take a long time only to have your PCs either killed or critically wounded.

For me, there is no standard-equipment except a knife, the rest is up to the personal preferences of the PCs and the kind of mission they got.

Remember that your Acloytes are spies for the Inquisition, not Space Marines or Death Squads.

I have to agree with Segara, you guys need to agree to disagree. Also I can totally see both sides of the argument, both sides are valid (which is why its so hard to get some common ground). I think essential items for the missions should be provided, however weapons and armor should be the PCs own. Partly because it gives the PCs something to work for, and partly because the weapons in the game are pretty lethal, even the minor ones. I'm just about to start my first campaign with the game and the PCs will get what they can afford and nothing more.

What the =II= thinks is necessary for the mission should be provided, which means they could come with wron footing in the mission. or this gears is not available because other teams have needed and got it.

The personal or Signatur Gear of the PCs should be their own, it is a good way to give a feeI of accomplishment(?) when tIheir Inq uisitor takes the effort to get them some special item tailored to their needs or style

TheFlatline - I liked your Donnie Brasco example. I think it has merit: the Inquisitor will expect his acolytes to have a cover, and for that they must have a cover income. I see no reason why acolytes shouldn't be able to keep the spoils of victory: as long as they are not warp-tainted, or xenos. I think the choice items, and a tithe of the income from the other items may well be taken by the Inquisitor - again perhaps not unlike the mafia. Maybe Eisenhorn got rich from taxing his network!

The GM will want to make sure this is all done reasonably, perhaps be enforcing the weight/encumbrance rules: after all, if you've just offed one of the Temple Tendency guys, carrying all that lovely equipment away might be a job in itself!

from france

i apreciate both side but i agree with warpdancer. which lead me to the original question does looting worth the efforts? i don't take buy the donnies brasco or fbi approch to the problem because simply put am not american. so i will take one big, easy, over the top and widely know example.

james bond

put aside the repliques, the fact that is always win and so on.... every country has his network of spy. i see the acolytes this way a network of spy, a colection of james bonds.

how james bond and so spy work. they infiltrate, put bomb, extract prisonner, take information, dscovered secret, bribes, kill and so on... the inquisitor of james bond is .. M yes is not always here, and does not always support him. but unless james bond goes rogues in order to accomplish a mission m gives him ( and his colleagues) money, tool, weapons, contact. etc. if he has to play a wealthy gambler in order to meet a bad guy it is not with his money but the governement money. change james bond with accolytes and governement with the big i and you get the picture.

i know accolytes aren't quite the same as a james bond but still it works the same way at least for me. if the inquisitor say "do with what you have i expect results and i wash my hands if the chaos/ xenos/ heretics/ santa claus wins because you could not infiltrate, put bomb, extract prisonner, take information, dscovered secret, bribes, kill and so on... because your were underfund, under equipped.. "not only no one will work for the m/inquisitor but he will have to do himself his own dirtywork and the chaos/ xenos/ heretics/ santa claus will always win.

again unless gown rogues no spy play the most dangerous games without a litlle backup. so if we take the do with what you have methode the only other possibility is looting with the problems i describe.

for me the possible way that the acolytes begins with nothing or almost nothing if they don't go rogues and don't answer to m/inquisitor is that they begin as prisoners like in tattered fates

Oh yes, if the acolytes need something special for their investigation, I see no reason why the Inquisitor should not provide. But, I think that the most valuable acolytes in an Inquisitor's network will be those who stand on their own two feet, and who have resources of their own.

And I am not American either!

the 8 spider said:

I feel like players should have a bit of both. My thoughts on the imerium is that people are a great deal harsher in 40. Of course, inquisitors aren't going to send out their accolytes naked without the tools to complete the mission. However, they would have little patience for an accolyte team who runs into to trouble and comes running home looking for more equipment and resources.

I like a campaign where the Inquisition gives me the basics and I can pick up, trade for, steal, and loot the rest.

But then, that's just me.

the 8 spider said:

James Bond usually lost all his toys, or only used some of them once. Most of the time he acquired his gear from his enemies and turned the tables on them. At least, the old school Bond did. Brosnan's Bond was a mockery of the name. Bond wouldn't be Bond unless he could go into a dangerous situation caught, strung up, and practically naked, and yet some how eek out victory from a dire situation. Your example simply reinforces *my* example. Bond gets the toys after he shows that he can do the job without them.

Okay. Donnie Brasco. He was an undercover agent for the FBI. Donnie Brasco wasn't even his real name, just his cover name. He was literally dumped out on the street, had to find his own job, make his own way, and reported back to his bosses with little to no support... for something like 6 years without *any* support from the FBI.

As a result, Brasco almost became a "made man", which is something completely unheard of. No law enforcement has ever managed to infiltrate so high into the Mafia as to have the opportunity to become completely, 100% trusted by it's members. They cut the case off before then, simply because to become "made", he would have had to commit murder. Even after the arrests, at first the Mafia didn't believe that it was Brasco, because he had checked out "clean" for so many years. Wikipedia will illuminate:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donnie_Brasco

Anyway, my final problem with kitting players out is that it represents sort of a 4th wall break in the game. Especially if you give equipment that isn't obviously needed for the stated mission. My players got a simple task: Go to planet XXX and track down who is behind the assassination of a fellow Inquisitor. They got a handful of cash, some false IDs, and a transport berth. They thought it was generous. They have no problem getting money. A little extortion, a little hustling, a little situational "looting", and they're running mean and lean. They also have almost no connection to the Imperium formally, and they want it that way. I offered them some equipment, and they didn't even take a lasgun, because they said it would "stick out" in the environment they would be heading into.

Sometimes kitting players out is good, or even necessary. I wouldn't even begin to think about sending the PCs into the space hulk from Purge the Unclean without opening up the armory. Equipment, to me, is an equalizer, a way to make situations more survivable, or less reliant on roleplaying. Sometimes a contact makes sense as well, and I'll hand that down. But it shouldn't be expected. My players want to impress their Inquisitor, and often try to get by doing the most with least.

I'm perfectly willing to agree to disagree, and as I said, if the game is fun, there's nothing wrong with kitting out your PCs. I just offer a different take on the game itself.

A large part of it also has to do with your players. My group is very resourceful and will find a way to get what they need and do what has to be done no matter how little they start with; and they'll stay in character while doing it. Some people may not be so fortunate, (though one of my players drives me insane) and need to pack up their pcs with amo and gadgets before sending them out - so be it.

Ultimately, as I believe was just stated, whatever makes the game most enjoyable for you and your group is the correct answer. I will willfully - no, gleefully - disregard, alter, or blatantly rewrite parts of a game I find to be lacking in order to achieve that goal of "fun" ... so I certainly encourage others to do the same.

TheFlatline said:

My players got a simple task: Go to planet XXX and track down who is behind the assassination of a fellow Inquisitor.They got a handful of cash, some false IDs, and a transport berth. They thought it was generous.

I think it´s absurd, i considered them set up to fail to be scapeegoats, an alibi team, but not send to investigate.

They have no problem getting money. A little extortion, a little hustling, a little situational "looting", and they're running mean and lean.

And what did they loose, what di they´ve to risk?

At best it costs time, time which may valuable which my be the digfference between failure and success. To Quote General Romeo Dallaire UNAMIR Commander a Soldier hast to do with shortages, but to much schortages will cripple him

I offered them some equipment, and they didn't even take a lasgun, because they said it would "stick out" in the environment they would be heading into.

And? i had in games Paladins who did the same.

or less reliant on roleplaying.

This is argument is as old as it is outclassed, i don´t find shopping tours, tavern blather etc an interesting roleplaying experience any longer.

My players want to impress their Inquisitor,

If it is so, they wouldn´t do it, with reducing their chances, endangering their mission..

I'm perfectly willing to agree to disagree,

If you hadn´t brought for the good roleplay argument it would be much more belivable.

Jack of Tears said:

The Mossad had sent a new man for a test at London, No money, etc his contact was an hoax, he was out in the cold.

What did he ?

he broke in a closed supermarket , stole the money and tokk a plane back to israel.

Do i belive therefore the Mossad, MI 6 etc would start her real missions the same way?

Would i consider it plausible and belivable?

No, , would a game without plausibility and belivability be fun to play? No!

That's funny ... you know, how I noted it was really up to what you and your players liked and were good at. My players enjoy being dumped in situations over their heads and finding ways out of them - I don't think they'd know what to do if they were given a back full of goodies to start each mission. They find what they do FUN. But, hey, no doubt you're definition of fun is superior to ours.

warpdancer said:

Wait, the Green Berets work undercover and can't be associated with the US in any way, lest they blow their cover? That's an inappropriate comparison. They're a military unit, sent in to kick ass and take names in unconventional warfare.

Also, your argument about plausibility and believability rings hollow in a game with super-humans in power armor, demons from a nether-world that conform to humanity's subconsious fears, and orcs that speak in a cockney accent, are actually fungal in nature, as well as genetic memory that allows them to build weapons without any foreknowledge whatsoever. It's a fantasy game, a dark fantasy game at that, and thus, by definition, is fictional and... I dunno... fantastical?

You know what? I'm done with this stupid argument, as it's turning into a d*ck waving competition and potshots are starting to get personal. I tried to be eloquent and complete in my commentary on how I approach to Game Mastering, but it's obvious you don't wish to discuss this unless you come out "right" in a discussion that has no "right" answer.

I already said that the goal of the game is to have fun. If everyone has fun, mission accomplished. My players have flat out stated they enjoy the feeling that they carved their way out of a dire, hopeless situation, and achieved what victories they can from it. We have fun. Mission accomplished. Nothing you say or do can change that. If your players are honestly having fun, nothing I say *should* have any impact on how you GM.

TheFlatline said:

Also, your argument about plausibility and believability rings hollow

Don´t think the above the sama as realistic, believability grounded in plausibility is from inside the game world - universe not our world.

In 40k These things exist, do they function and interact in an apprpriate and believable manner for the setting?

You know what? I'm done with this stupid argument, as it's turning into a d*ck waving competition and potshots are starting to get personal.

Well , why did you start with the good roleplaying "argument" backstab?

I tried to be eloquent and complete in my commentary on how I approach to Game Mastering, b

And telling my approaach is "good roleplaying" including between the lines yours is not

Jack of Tears said:

No, that was not my intent.,

the assumption, the reason was a lack of ressourcefulness, i don´t send the pcs, to use a german RPG allegory, with tattered pants and a rusty knife on their missions*, was it.

*and that only this is good roleplaying, with which a good roleplayer would´ve fun.

To use another german allegory: Der Ton macht die Musik (english: the tune makes the music).

Your comments so far warpdancer have been getting a little bit, well, overconfident (some would say cocky).

First and foremost you should both define WHAT your Acolytes shall be in your game.

As far as i understood it so far: For warpdancer they are chosen individuals who are destined to kick demons and heretics in the balls, and then shot them in the face when they lie on the ground, and maybe throw in a few good one-liners or jokes while doing that.

For TheFlatline they are the eyes and ears of the Inquisition, brave people entrusted to sniff out heresy in all it's form, and, if possible, put a stop to it or call for the IG.

If i understood you wrong please point out (politely) where i', wrong.

Both playstiles can be used with DH, but they differ rather strong from eatch other, and therefore the necessary equipment for the jobs.

For the first kind group looting is most of the time NOT worth the efforts, for the second it is necessary for survival.

Can you both agree to that?

segara82 said:

That was not my intent,

I want to excuse for this

As far as i understood it so far: For warpdancer they are chosen individuals who are destined to kick demons and heretics in the balls, and then shot them in the face when they lie on the ground, and maybe throw in a few good one-liners or jokes while doing that.

No, the heretic .- xenos part is partly right (in the Eisenhorn Horst Style*) the demon part not, and the shot them in the face with onliners is wrong, or otherly spoken, sniff them out or liqidate the IG should not be used in normal =I= Operations.

Greater Mop up Missions will be done by I-Forces like Imperial Stormtroopers Sororitas, Arbites(Unter the direction of the Inquisitor himself or an high ranking acolythe like Fischig or an Interrogator) and allied Forces the Space Marines,

*which means losses are accepted and acceptable, failure is not