So when a mechanicus member is in a squad and a commissar is as well is he within his right to shoot him should he deem it necessary to maintaining the loyalty and moral of the squad as a whole?

Obviously there's the "It depends" answer, but I didn't know if there was a precedent in place for such an issue.

As a general rule ... I'd say that the AdMech is more or less off limits in the normal course of things as far as the Commissariat is concerned.

Which is to say, barring blatant and active treason/heresy, the most a Commissar can do (safely) is file reports, and urge the recall of the AdMech representative for AdMech review. And even when immediate action is required ... the Commissar is probably limited in the scope of what he can do - ie, probably no summary executions, but almost certainly arrest/confinement while awaiting transfer to AdMech/higher authorities.

And if a Commissar does act directly ... they'd better have a solid case to justify their actions.

Edit: And the AdMech will be reviewing the case should a Commissar act directly against one of its members.

As Lynata said, This situation would be dicey (At Best!)

The Adeptus Mechanicus is but really isn't part of the Imperium. They are also the ruling caste of their part of the Imperium. The only person who could probably get away with the outright execution of a Tech priest would be an Inquisitor. Certainly not a "mere" Commissar!

If the Commissar witnessed a member of the Admech acting directly against the Imperial interest than He would probably have the authority to detain said individual. If the Engineseer resists than that's a different story!

Oddly enough: I doubt even the Arbites would have the Authority to detain a member of the Admech as they are again, technically, outside their juristiction.

All that being said, If the Tech priest was killed in the field the AdMech would certainly investigate! If it was determined that the Tech Priest in question was in the process of committing heresy; They would probably consider the matter closed. If not however, The Commissar would have some serious 'splaining to do!

Yeah, where the Adeptus Mechanicus stands is often a matter of much debate and interpretation.

In GW's books they are the 3rd department branching down from the High Lords, next to the Ministorum and the Administratum, which to me implies that Tech-Priests are similar to Ecclesiarchy Clerics in legal standing - with the exception that many of them are working on semi-sovereign Forge Worlds, whereas with the Imperial Church, only a miniscule fraction of Clerics are stationed on the Ecclesiarchy's equivalent, the Shrine Worlds, and the bulk preaching to folks on other Imperial worlds. And just like the Ecclesiarchy has the Sororitas as an internal police force, I'd expect the Mechanicus has an equivalent for their own as well.

However, just like Clerics on Imperial worlds can come under scrutiny of the Arbites, I suspect it would be similar to Tech-Priests. Only the isolation and absence of "external Imperial control" on Shrine and Forge Worlds guarantees relative safety from other adepta, with exception of the Inquisition.

... but even that is a matter of which sources we follow, for whilst GW's books state that the Inquisition has authority over the AdMech, Dark Heresy contradicts this. In general, I am under the impression that a lot of fans and a number of Black Library novels ascribe a lot more independence to the AdMech than the original creators of the setting intended. But that's fine, too, as long as you can make the political situation believable. As always with such details in 40k, there is no right or wrong answer here!

There's also the opposite viewpoint, as displayed in (I think it was) Titanicus, where an angry mob on a forge world tries to lynch a tech priest, because he seemed a bit heretical.

Given the vagueness of Imperial Law, the tendentially long transit times between one part of the Imperium and the next as well as the different grades of zeal in the populace and the individual Imperial...

I would thus say, it's highly situational, and it depends on how the regiment in question sees the admech, how and what local laws and treaties exist with the admech, and how the local commander of the guard sees them, if the commissariat will act openly against an unruly engineseer, let his peers handle it internally, or take him to a private debriefing from which he doesn't return, either because he's executed, mind-cleansed or sent back to his forge world with an angry letter attached.

Yeah this particular GM's planet has heavy Mechanicus ties. They apparently found a collection of STCs that allowed for a lot of transhuman modifications to happen faster and easier.

Interpretations of that aside, as I personally have many many issues with it, he never game much of an answer about just where the jurisdiction ended or not.

I'm not playing a commissar right now, currently running a priest to see if I can't get some good roleplay out of it, but if/when this one bites it I planned on rolling up a commissar and wanted to see how much precedent I'd have. I'll ask for a straight answer anyways.

I think I would argue that, in a scenario where the group has a Commissar, anyone else in the group falls under his watch, and if they act in a way that demands it, BLAM!!! In a way, it's really no different than him capping a Psyker, also not really a member of the Guard, but a loan from another Adepta. It also comes down to how often you think a Commissar actually resorts to summary execution. Tech-Priests within the Guard are rather minor, by their order's sense of things, and so if the Engineseer in your group behaved questionably, he probably should just be shot, like any Guardsman, and few to no questions asked. This is my take on things only, of course.

I think I would argue that, in a scenario where the group has a Commissar, anyone else in the group falls under his watch, and if they act in a way that demands it, BLAM!!! In a way, it's really no different than him capping a Psyker, also not really a member of the Guard, but a loan from another Adepta. It also comes down to how often you think a Commissar actually resorts to summary execution. Tech-Priests within the Guard are rather minor, by their order's sense of things, and so if the Engineseer in your group behaved questionably, he probably should just be shot, like any Guardsman, and few to no questions asked. This is my take on things only, of course.

Except that the Adeptus Mechanicus is rather 'more equal' than the other Adepta, even if you subscribe to the theory that all the Adepta are equal.

The double-headed eagle that represents the Imperium of Man? One of those heads represents the Adeptus Mechanicus. They are a separate, though allied, entity in most respects, one that the Imperium-at-large is hugely dependent upon. The AdMech is treated with kid gloves for a reason .

Also, there's a huge difference between capping a psyker, and summarily executing a tech-priest, however minor. Psykers are largely treated as expendable, though useful while they last. Tech-priests aren't that expendable, except sometimes where the AdMech's own operations are concerned.

Psykers are often considered time bombs waiting to go off. Tech-priests are the ones responsible for keeping the Imperium's technology running.

Even the Inquisition doesn't have free reign over the AdMech and its members. The AdMech polices itself, and on most worlds has more or less de facto diplomatic immunity.

The double-headed eagle that represents the Imperium of Man? One of those heads represents the Adeptus Mechanicus. They are a separate, though allied, entity in most respects, one that the Imperium-at-large is hugely dependent upon.

The Imperial Aquila represents the union of Earth and Mars, under common leadership of the Emperor. That means the AdMech follows Him-on-Earth, and right now he is represented by the Senatorum Imperialis. The Mechanicus' highest leader, the one who has authority over any other Tech-Priest, is a member of said council, which is the second reason for why said council is able to issue edicts the Mechanicus is expected to heed.

You could certainly say that the Imperium depends on the Mechanicus - just as you could say the Mechanicus depends on the rest of the Imperium (Forge Worlds make poor places to farm food or mine for resources).

Even the Inquisition doesn't have free reign over the AdMech and its members.

Depends on which book you're looking at.

I think this is actually true for Dark Heresy - but not for Games Workshop's own material (see GW's Inquisitor game, or the Codex Inquisition, or the Inquisitorial fluff in the TT rulebooks). Which version of the fluff you follow depends on the individual group.

Ordo Mechanicum anyone?

I'd say if the Techpriest is a legitimate problem, deal with it as the situation demands. You're more likely to survive, though, if you do it via paperwork. They're horrendously difficult to kill in my experience. Took me two swings of a linked Demiklaive, putting out an average of 17 pen 8 damage per turn. o_o

As I see it, the Commissar is a Commissar, so they will view the situation, weigh the options, and then accept the consequences, without fear or regret. If there is a problem TP in your group (problem" here reads more heretical, or mission-destabilizing than an a-hole got to play an AdMech), the Commissar will figure out if they should remedy it with the AdMech, or remedy it with the bolt pistol, and either way, the consequences will fall in them, and only them, and they'd accept that. It should only be a big issue if the Commissar is a player, AND they are performing the typical player-Commissar problem of "I can shoot anyone I want; that's what Commissars do" bologna. Otherwise, the situation will remedy, and the AdMech will probably appreciate the bad cog being removed from the smooth-running machine. If they do flag it, then the Commissar will be reprimanded, and the player MAY have to roll up something else; a bit of prior warning to them is all that should need. Sorry, but I'm choosing to llok at it from the simple approach, and if the game is to run well, incorporating all of the different specialties, then the game doesn't need Commissars, allowed to shoot other characters, but only certain other characters, hedging out two or three to chuckle that they can get away with being dumb, "because the AdMech/Ecclesiarchy/etc will shield me." It loses a little oomph if the Tech-Priest is wearing a red bullet-proof vest. Fluff-wise, I can see some issue, but this game sometimes tells fluff where to go, and as PCs, they should all stand on the same footing. Either come up with reasons none of them might get shot (Rogue Trader), or put them all "on the firing line", and let their actions determine their fate.

Yeah as I mentioned earlier, it's not an issue that I need to worry about currently. If it does come up he'll essentially make it clear that while he may not be able to shoot the tech priest for anything except major infractions, he'll never stop filing paperwork until they tell him to stop.

I'm not saying a Commissar can'i summarily execute a tech-priest in extremis. I'm saying that unless the case completely airtight and the situation is extreme*, the Commissar probably won't execute a tech-priest, they'll just file loads of paperwork, and detain/confine the tech-priest, for the case to be transferred to and reviewed by the relevant higher authorities.

I'm saying that the Commissar's actions won't be getting the same automatic rubber stamp of approval that would be the case should he have been dealing with normal Guardsmen.

However, the Commissar may be able to execute a tech-priest, and if and only if the rest of the unit is willing to go along with him (or there are no witnesses/evidence to the contrary) , and then call him a battlefield/combat casualty to cover up the execution. This would probably not cause too many raised eyebrows, but carries some risks.

*Chaos! Usually. Because determining techno-heresy or violations of the Omnissian Creed is not part of a Commissar's purview, or training.

Personally, I'd say Commissars are way too fanatical and stubborn to "look the other way" when a Mechanicus operative is threatening mission success or otherwise behaves like a crazed cultist of the Ruinous Powers - and too proud and convinced to even think about having to cover up something, as that would imply they did something wrong.

"Yeah, I shot him. Whatcha gonna do about it?"

That being said, if confinement is possible - meaning they caught him in the base, "red-handed" (heh) ... yeah, in that case it would be more likely to go for imprisonment, then notify the Inquisition. Not only because this allows the Commissar to push a decision that's not really his to begin with onto someone else, but also because they'd probably know this might go deeper than just this one guy, and they don't have the time, the resources, or the expertise to look into it.

Imho, a field execution would be more like an "emergency measure" when the only other option would be to do nothing, but the transgression is too great to let him get away with just some paperwork bitching. Remove an obstacle to the mission's success, and continue the fight. In their mind, it really might be that straightforward, because that - not adeptus politics - is the one thing they have to worry about.

It does come down to just how we as individual gamers consider the AdMech "fitting in" with the rest of the Imperium, though, meaning whether they have their place and regulations for interaction, or whether they are essentially like foreign ambassadors walking around with a Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free card. Which probably goes all the way back to how we think about the Mechanicus' role in the Imperium as a whole, as mentioned above.

So far his only job is to recollect enemy technology for purification and re purposing.

As I see it, the Commissar is a Commissar, so they will view the situation, weigh the options, and then accept the consequences, without fear or regret. If there is a problem TP in your group (problem" here reads more heretical, or mission-destabilizing than an a-hole got to play an AdMech), the Commissar will figure out if they should remedy it with the AdMech, or remedy it with the bolt pistol, and either way, the consequences will fall in them, and only them, and they'd accept that. It should only be a big issue if the Commissar is a player, AND they are performing the typical player-Commissar problem of "I can shoot anyone I want; that's what Commissars do" bologna. Otherwise, the situation will remedy, and the AdMech will probably appreciate the bad cog being removed from the smooth-running machine. If they do flag it, then the Commissar will be reprimanded, and the player MAY have to roll up something else; a bit of prior warning to them is all that should need. Sorry, but I'm choosing to llok at it from the simple approach, and if the game is to run well, incorporating all of the different specialties, then the game doesn't need Commissars, allowed to shoot other characters, but only certain other characters, hedging out two or three to chuckle that they can get away with being dumb, "because the AdMech/Ecclesiarchy/etc will shield me." It loses a little oomph if the Tech-Priest is wearing a red bullet-proof vest. Fluff-wise, I can see some issue, but this game sometimes tells fluff where to go, and as PCs, they should all stand on the same footing. Either come up with reasons none of them might get shot (Rogue Trader), or put them all "on the firing line", and let their actions determine their fate.

This is all way too black & white for wh40k which has about 40,000 shades of grey....

There are just a few things I'd object to in your post.

Firstly, commissars are human, not robots. Self-preservation is a human concept (not just something Cain discovered). So picking a fight with a rival organisation such as the admech is not to be done lightly.

Commissars don't work in a vacuum. If the colonel of a regiment orders a position abandoned, commissars of those companies don't go gunning for him for cowardice. The colonel might be planning something sneeky. Or he might have received orders. A commissar at that level will decide. Just as a commissar will determine if sanctioning a tech-priest is within his paygrade or not.

Secondly, your idea that "the AdMech will probably appreciate the bad cog being removed from the smooth-running machine" by a commissar is IMO rather naive. We're talking about bureaucratic organisations who have raised infighting to galactic levels....No organisation is going to let another sanction their own members. Loss of face, don't you know. They'd rather cover it up than let it be exposed/dealt with by the enemy.

As said by a certain British officer....:

Gentlemen, the Germans are our opponents but the Army is the Enemy. - Sir Dudley Pound, First Sea Lord (1877-1943) .

That's how (rival) organisations consider each other....

The good thing is that this situation offers endless opportunities for role-playing. A commissar firing off endless complaints & reports, a tech-priest explaining himself to his superiors or perhaps lecturing the ignorant commissar on the finer points of admechery....

Commissars don't work in a vacuum. If the colonel of a regiment orders a position abandoned, commissars of those companies don't go gunning for him for cowardice. The colonel might be planning something sneeky. Or he might have received orders. A commissar at that level will decide. Just as a commissar will determine if sanctioning a tech-priest is within his paygrade or not.

It's not cowardice if it's ordered, they wouldn't be in the right anyways.

Firstly, commissars are human, not robots. Self-preservation is a human concept (not just something Cain discovered). So picking a fight with a rival organisation such as the admech is not to be done lightly.

Whilst I agree with you over venkelos regarding the Mechanicus likely not appreciating such interference, what do you think they would do if some Enginseer would be shot by a Commissar?

Enginseers are fairly low in rank and influence, and the Commissar would very likely file a report that would - at least in his/her eyes - justify the execution. Personally, I would expect a protest note condemning such a "rash action" (regardless of whether it was actually necessary or not). But beyond that? What are they gonna do? Stop delivering guns to the Imperium of Man? Withdraw their personnel and risk an escalation over the corpse of a single third rate technician? When the Imperium is likely to go "exactly why are you defending that heretic? do you have something to hide? "

Organisational pride only goes so far when it comes to pawns, and unlike the Commissariat, the Adeptus Mechanicus is far too fractured and egoistical to risk unnecessary trouble for something as insignificant as this. Local officials will huff and puff for a while because it is expected of them, perhaps even temporarily raise prices as a token of their displeasure, but that's that. I'm sure it would be different if this were a repeat incident that would be construed as a lack of cooperation or even outright sabotage by this Commissar and the superiors shielding them, but I'm assuming it would be a singular case and the Commissar actually had a good cause to do what they did.

A commissar firing off endless complaints & reports [...]

Well .. to me, that just doesn't sound like the Commissars I know and expect from 40k.

Disclaimer: As mentioned before, this is a simple matter of interpretation, and as such there can be no single "right" answer here. However, I suppose we can still debate our positions.

I think that the "Book" would say summary execution of an engineseer is reserved for extreme situations, such as blatant Chaos-worship, or major violation of the Omnissian Creed such as Abominable Intelligence or Iron Men.

Lesser, though still major concerns would result in confinement for trial by the AdMech (with Commissariat/Munitorium observers/representation).

Moderate concerns would be bringing it up with the senior engineseers, and having them be involved.

Anything less is paperwork, and talking to the engineseer. And the Engineseer can counterfile paperwork, depending on the cause of the dispute.

This is at least in part because the Engineseer is governed by the AdMech and the Omnissian Creed. And Commissars aren't trained to judge by the lights of the Omnissian Creed. They're not really qualified to properly evaluate Engineseers most of the time. I mean, sure, they'll probably know some of the highlights, at least of the explicit major don'ts, but anything complicated, and they're going to be out of their depth, and need to refer to competent authorities.

I don't think a Commissar would care much about an "Omnissian Creed" - as you say this is none of their business. It's really just when said Enginseer would become an obstacle to operations of the Imperial Guard, or even commit treason. It's a bit like Battle Sisters going around judging people based on their understanding of the Imperial Creed, then executing Guardsmen or picking fights with Space Marines. Although, in fairness, I do agree that Commissars would be more reasonable, still acting based on conviction, but with a better understanding of the greater picture, and being a stickler for regulation (which could be good or bad for the Enginseer).

That being said, I also think it comes down to just what exactly it is that the Enginseer would be doing. Chances are, a Commissar might not just be unqualified to judge them, they might not even care.

Assuming said Enginseer is actually roleplayed "correctly" and behaves like an agent of the Mechanicus, rather than just another ordinary human, of course. In this case, I don't even see that much potential for friction, simply because both the Enginseer and the Commissar are focusing on different tasks that don't actually interfere with one another?

My take on this is that it really depends on which player is being a bigger prick! No Commissar, if played correctly, is going to take action against a member of the admech without at least considering the ramifications. (Like Lynata said). That being said, It is an exceptionally stupid Engineseer that thinks they can commit some form of Heresy and essentially laugh in the Commissars face!

Many players have a tendency to forget that a Commissar's "Summary Execution" authority is essentially only on the Battlefield! The Imperial Guard still has Court Martials and due process for other times! (As does the Admech I imagine!) This is one of the Major differences between a Commissar and an Inquisitor. A Commissar's Authority has fairly well defined limits (IMO). The Inquisitor's authority for all intents and purposes is, unlimited in this regard!

Commissars don't work in a vacuum. If the colonel of a regiment orders a position abandoned, commissars of those companies don't go gunning for him for cowardice. The colonel might be planning something sneeky. Or he might have received orders. A commissar at that level will decide. Just as a commissar will determine if sanctioning a tech-priest is within his paygrade or not.

It's not cowardice if it's ordered, they wouldn't be in the right anyways.

True but that's not the point I'm trying to make. If a colonel gets ordered to withdraw his regiment, he doesn't go around telling every company commissar about it. He orders his companies to withdraw. And if the regimental commisar asks why, he'd likely show the orders.

So a company commissar is not going to question it. He knows its 'above his paygrade'. He essentially only focuses on the officers and men under his control. If however such a company commissar saw a colonel raising daemons, he'd gladly put a bolter round between his eyes.

And that is how I would consider the relationship between commissar and tech-priest. The commissar is not qualified to really question the tech-priest and wouldn't intervene unless faced with a clear breach of allowable conduct...

I agree the Commissar isn't going to "just" cap a Tech-Priest, but then I don't see them just "capping" Guardsmen, either. Everyone, even the Engineseer, knows what a Commissar means, and can adjust their behaviors accordingly. If they are going to be heretical, they'll just try harder to hide it. If they are going to be cowardly, they will know what MIGHT happen to them (and I don't see a TP, trained to serve with the Guard, and maintain their gear, being any more or less cowardly than the Guard they fight alongside; if nothing else, they might be even more unwilling to abandon the Omnissiah's tools, read tanks, and such things, to the depredations of the enemy). I see a Commissar warning anyone in the group that they are walking a fine line, and he's watching, which is fair warning, and if the Tech-Priest continues to misbehave, in a way that is severe, BLAM!, and the Commissar is prepared to accept his consequences, just like if he caps the Sergeant. He will know that the TP has had much of the Guard's field-behavior training, and that there are differences in that training, too, but if the Tech-Priest is doing something terrible, my image of a Commissar doesn't draw a line that says "well, HE'S okay, because he's AdMech." He says "I warned him", and probably shoots him (maybe not fatally), and then reports to the superiors exactly what he did, and why. If the AdMech chooses to discipline, assuming the greater AdMech ever learns of it (we have seen how well messages can circulate, even if the Commissar hasn't capped the Astropath for Perils ), the Commissar is trained to accept whatever. If the TP was acting heretical, HERETIC!!!, and shot. If he was going to run, he would be abandoning his Omnisssiah-blessed charges, and deserve death, in the eyes of the AdMech. What the Commissar won't do is hesitate, and I don't think, at least, he'll view the TP as that much different; they "grow up" alongside the Guard, like everyone else, and are held to similar standards, tasked with similar goals. Also, they (TP) know what is expected of them. If this all sounds naive of me, I tolerate it. I wouldn't tolerate a game of Only War where the AdMech player KNOWS his red robe is permission to be a dangerous tool, where I won't let the other Guard, Psykers, Ogryns, or whatever in the group do the same. He might believe it, and that's fine, but he might get broken of that belief, too. That's just my take on it, though. I'm a firm believer that MOST Commissars DON'T dispense summary executions on ANYONE without a decent amount of warrant and evidence. It's nice to imagine Vice-Admiral Stukov, from Brood War, just blasting people to get the mission done, but I don't choose to believe that most Commissars choose to waste bolt rounds "needlessly".

I think that, in the end, Commissars operate based on the Tarkin doctrine - fear of force, rather than force itself. They need to act without hesitation when a "demonstration" is needed in order to establish said fear (see Alderaan), but most of the time, the simple knowledge that the Commissar is not joking should suffice to keep people in line. Constant fear of repercussion is much more efficient than having to shoot people again and again. Look at the reputation Soviet Commissars and Barrier Troops had in WW2 ... and how many soldiers they actually shot.

It's a back-and-forth between all players in the group - the Commissar to portray this sort of domineering presence accurately rather than just BLAMming everyone, and the players not to give the Commissar a reason in the first place, because their characters ought to know better. Call it a cooperative effort to maintain immersion/atmosphere and prevent unnecessary drama.

Commissar players obviously have a very fine line to walk - they must appear not only inspiring but also tyrannical, without making the game un-fun. But in the end, it's just another roleplaying challenge like many other types of characters pose. "It's not for everyone."