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...

The problem is that if he isn't who is? You can't just have Enginseers running around doing whatever because no one save the Admech has them under control. And if it's the commander that has that right then there's no way he'd accomplish the job in a sane manner, he'd have to give out the ability for others to have a minor amount of authority over them.

To be fair, he did mention a "clear breach of allowable conduct" - I guess the question is just when this line would be reached?

Most of the TP-specific stuff (tech-heresy) is something a Commissar likely wouldn't even notice as "wrong". On the other hand, a "clear breach of allowable conduct" implies that a Commissar would notice it, and then I feel they should act upon it with the same uncompromising harshness they'd judge any other Imperial servant attached to or interacting with their unit.

Commissars are kind of like traditional fantasy Paladins. Groups that want to revel in bedlam and underhandedness will find the Paladin a member of the "fun police". The trick is to get it down in such a way that the Commissar doesn't feel like they're being played to spoil the fun of others, but rather like a well-played Paladin.

I've played with two Commissars in my time. One a genuine very interesting Commissar who mastered the art of the Tarkin doctrine, and the other a complete douchebag who only chose the class because it gave him a license to shoot other players.

Funnily enough, the douchebag Commissar has landed himself in a pickle in that he knows the minute he opens fire on the squad he's with, that they're mavericks with a reputation for pissing in the face of Imperial doctrine if it gets the job done. Two Commissars have already had "accidents".

I'm a firm believer in the idea that problem characters usually find themselves weeded out by their squad.

I'm a firm believer in the idea that problem characters usually find themselves weeded out by their squad.

"Deathworld Veterans resent strangers telling them what to do or threatening their friends, so Commissars have a very difficult time maintaining control. They also suffer a disproportionally high number of accidents when serving with Deathworld troops. Roll a D6 for each Commissar before setting them up (roll for models in reserve when they deploy on the table). On a roll of 1, the Commissar has met with an unfortunate accident and cannot be used."

- Games Workshop, Codex: Catachans p. 3

Commissars are kind of like traditional fantasy Paladins. Groups that want to revel in bedlam and underhandedness will find the Paladin a member of the "fun police". The trick is to get it down in such a way that the Commissar doesn't feel like they're being played to spoil the fun of others, but rather like a well-played Paladin.

I've played with two Commissars in my time. One a genuine very interesting Commissar who mastered the art of the Tarkin doctrine, and the other a complete douchebag who only chose the class because it gave him a license to shoot other players.

Funnily enough, the douchebag Commissar has landed himself in a pickle in that he knows the minute he opens fire on the squad he's with, that they're mavericks with a reputation for pissing in the face of Imperial doctrine if it gets the job done. Two Commissars have already had "accidents".

I'm a firm believer in the idea that problem characters usually find themselves weeded out by their squad.

Strangely, with the grimdark everything of 40k, I'd see them more as Blackguards, but that's splitting straws, so... I think one problem in my head, and it is probably mostly just in my head, is that many people who play RPGs are a bit silly and clownish; we are going to sit around a table, talking for fictional personages, while we roll dice to see if the fates smile on us, or crap on us, rather than...whatever mundanes do in their spare time , but when I am imagining a group playing most 40k games, there is a certain amount of the usual "fun" between players that I'd rather not see. I've never served in the military, so beyond watching movies, I don't know how real soldiers behave in combat, or on missions, but these are soldiers who grew up in a morbid, despotic hellhole, so when the players act "silly", as they often do, it hurts my image of the world. That's when Commissars both help and hurt; they can help by trying to maintain the immersion, but they can hurt when they, or the player who is actually one, just act like fun-busters, either sniping your enjoyment with their attitude, or shooting you, because "that's what Commissars do". RT is special, among the 40k games, for me, because the players are all-powerful (compared to Inq servants, robot-philosopher SMs, and such), and insane by necessity, but "soldiers" imply a level of discipline my friends, as players, can rarely manage, and then the Commissar just appears as a buzz-kill I'd use to harsh their fun.

Tarkin-doctrine comparison is good. Honestly, if the Guard thought about it, they could overpower the Commissar, and run for it, but no one wants to be the guy who had to get capped while the rest overpowered him, thus no one steps forward, the mob stays in check, and the Commissar stays feared. If they were already running, they'd want to live by running, not get an explosive shell in the head, so don't run, or YOU will be the one who doesn't make it, anyway.

Also agree, regardless of your role, if you are an issue, SOMETHING will deal with you, whether it goes all Nam, and someone salutes the Commander, who "miraculously" gets sniped two seconds later, or if the Heavy doesn't get support, as his position is about to be overrun, or the crew just agrees to shoot the Commissar, with that Ork gun one of them just found, and agree to never speak of it, again. Whatever, it's the grimdark future, and it doesn't pull punches. For you to live, other people have to WANT you to live.

I'm a firm believer in the idea that problem characters usually find themselves weeded out by their squad.

"Deathworld Veterans resent strangers telling them what to do or threatening their friends, so Commissars have a very difficult time maintaining control. They also suffer a disproportionally high number of accidents when serving with Deathworld troops. Roll a D6 for each Commissar before setting them up (roll for models in reserve when they deploy on the table). On a roll of 1, the Commissar has met with an unfortunate accident and cannot be used."

- Games Workshop, Codex: Catachans p. 3

Agree, It should even apply to cadian squads if the comissar is an offworlder. (They reeeeeealy don't like offworlders)

But on the question: Unless that enginseer is going full on "BFTBG!" or "Hey fellas, let's be friends with the tau!" then the commisar isn't going to cap him. He would (I dare say) never execute an enginseer to restore squad morale.

It wouldn't work anyway:

Guardsman1: "Oh shiiiit he shot the cogboy! We better stand and fight, lads!"

Guardsman 2: "Whodat? Run you fool! Runawayrunawayrunawaaaay!!!"

from the imperial infantryman's uplifting primer:

"tech priests are invaluable"_ "tech priests must be protected" _ "Watch out for them as they tend their holy duties, and be sure to give them the maximum protection."

So it would be a very foolish Commisar who executes an enginseer.

Besides, if the tech priest wanted to retreat he could simply inform the commissar he was doing so. He could further state that while guardsmen are expendable, he is not. He could then demand that the squad cover his retreat! Hell, the commissar might even agree!

If the Enginseer is not deemed a critical part of the mission at hand, it sounds plausible. In my opinion, the Commissar would know of the agent's value to the Imperium and the local war effort, and thus feel obliged to extend a certain amount of protection.

On the other hand, if it's likely that the Enginseer's expertise is needed to ensure completion of the mission objective, I'm fairly sure the Commissar would be like "you're not going anywhere". As much as 40k is about shades of grey, the people within the setting tend to see things fairly black and white, and for a Commissar an Enginseer would be either a proper servant of the Emperor, or a traitor to mankind deserving to be treated as such. The Tech-Priest's station would merely afford him or her an infinitesimally greater degree of latitude (out of respect or due to lack of knowledge, depending on the situation) until the Commissar switches from one mode into the other, compared to your average Guardsman grunt.

I tend to agree with you on this lynata. My point was that the engineseer "could" take such a route. Not that they were guaranteed success with it. If the engineseer was acting to preserve a critical asset (which might be himself depending on the mission) then fine! If not, the commissar would act accordingly. I still believe the commissar would rather detain the tech priest rather than execute him though (in that situation) rather than execute them. This would prevent complications with the admech and the commissar would realize that. Of course, more extreme circumstances would necessitate a more extreme response!

Yeah, it would depend a lot on the circumstances. I just suspect a high probability that the conflict would occur at a time where the Guardsmen needed to detain the Enginseer are actually needed elsewhere - to do what the squad came to do. And a Commissar is not going to cancel a mission (or risk it by withdrawing part of the troops) just to play nicey-nicey with another adeptus because politics might recommend it.

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.

I can see this happening between rational, logical politicians (as senior officials have to be). But I could also see it go quite differently.

Organisations which show little loyalty towards their own (no matter how low), get very little loyalty in return. A lowly enginseer may well be a peon in the great scheme of things but he is still a part of an organisation. If that organisation lets another (rival) organisation kill off their peons, they lose face and ultimately power. And where does this slippery slope end? Is killing enginseers ok but not magos biologis?

Personally, I liken the adepta with the many branches of the Third Reich. Himmler's SS would have loved to run the whole show but he was forced to tread very carefully when dealing with members of the army, navy and air force until post 1943 when they all lost influence and Himmler's goons were unleashed. But until then, even Himmler couldn't really touch anyone if a Canaris or Goering blocked it.

Perhaps a better way of looking at this would be to compare it to the diplomatic community. Sometimes a host nation has to sanction foreign diplomats (for example because they have been spying or drunkenly crashed into a bus filled with nuns). The foreign diplomat gets expelled. And the foreign country then expels a similar ranking host nation diplomat from their country, as a like for like gesture.

So if a commissar shot a tech-priest, I'd expect the commissar to be handed over to the cogboys to be turned into a servitor.

That way, balance between the organisations is maintained, nobody loses face, nobody has to hold a grudge.

*nods* We'll have to "agree to disagree", then. Which is not a big deal, of course; the background material does not cover this detail, so all we are left with are interpretations and vague comparisons, leading us to conflicting opinions.

And whilst I too like to draw comparisons between the Imperium of Man and the Third Reich, the Feldjägerkorps had authority about both the Wehrmacht and the SS when it came to policing the battlefield.

The "saving face" part is important, too, but consider this: given the (relative) rarity of Tech-Priests, how likely is it that stories of his or her execution would spread? And even if they do: as the victim was transgressing and branded a traitor, who would defend them, or even be surprised they got shot by another Imperial? If a Cardinal goes Apostate, are only the Sisters of Battle supposed to shoot them?

On the other hand, if directives were passed to ensure that no Commissar shoots a Tech-Priest, imagine what effect this would have in the field. Suddenly, Enginseers get carte-blanche to pull off silly stunts as they please, and all the Commissar is allowed to do would be to file angry reports to another AdMech bureaucrat? Yeah, I just don't see it working like that. The effects on morale and discipline would be crippling, to say nothing about field operations of the Imperial Guard where some rank-and-file Enginseer thinks they can do as they please.

I am also quite certain the Commissariat would indeed hold a grudge if the AdMech demanded and somehow achieved that a Commissar is handed over to them just for doing his job - as opposed to the AdMech acknowledging that they had a troublemaker who stepped over the line, even if they are publicly still expected to complain about how the situation was handled. After all, unlike the Commissar, that Enginseer was clearly not doing what he was supposed to do, which is why I believe the matter would be thought about differently by his/her superiors.

As for where the slippery slope would end ... I suppose that would depend at least partially on what exactly the perpetrator is doing, and whether or not there is a chance to detain them or the soldiers needed to do so are required elsewhere. In cases of blatant heresy, I wouldn't bet on even the Fabricator General being save from getting BLAMmed. Nobody thought about dragging Saint Dominica before a court just because she killed Vandire instead of arresting him.

Well it was Vandire...

it is said the colective sigh of relief made by imperial citizens unpon hearing of his death could have blown away a warpstorm.

Sometimes, I like to think Vandire knew something dark was on the horizon - not unlike the sovereign from Fable 3, and his 'madness' and purges were preparatory to something. I know, random derail comment... XD

It would be an interesting twist, though.

The background material paints him as paranoid and balls-crazy, but as we all know, there is no such thing as a 100% truthful source in 40k...

Sometimes, I like to think Vandire knew something dark was on the horizon - not unlike the sovereign from Fable 3, and his 'madness' and purges were preparatory to something. I know, random derail comment... XD

If you kill everybody you will end up killing all the bad guys. The sad part is this makes sense in 40k.

Exterminatus everything!

It would be an interesting twist, though.

The background material paints him as paranoid and balls-crazy, but as we all know, there is no such thing as a 100% truthful source in 40k...

Knowing how messed up the 40k universe is: How crazy do you have to be for other characters who live in that universe to think you are insane?

Novel thought. The only sane one is the one everyone regards as insane.

If you kill everybody you will end up killing all the bad guys. The sad part is this makes sense in 40k.

Not really. The fundamental problem with omnicidal solutions is that at the end you have no people, so what's the point? That's unchanged in any reality where people die when they are killed.

Exterminatus is just a way of cutting your losses as the Imperium, otherwise you'll have a high chance of losing a lot more or facing bigger problems in the future.

So killing everybody is limited to a certain scope where it's beneficial (for the still living Imperial people not on the planet).

So no, not "Exterminatus everything", but I'm sure Robin was using it more like in a figure of speech way of saying.

Yup. In hindsight is hould probably typed it in all caps. like this:

"EXTERMINATUUUUUUUS EVERYTHAAAAAAAAAHG!!!"

Gridash knows me to well.

Altough Lupa has a point ofcourse: killing everyone in the galaxy doesn't get you anywhere. Altough in the 40k setting that's the final goal of atleast two factions (oldcrons and 'nids)

But to answer your question "whats the point?" (and i believe this applies in our universe aswell) is "scorched earth" and "mutualy assured destruction" The (possibly) insane notion that it doesn't matter if you die, you can rest easy knowing you take everybody else with you.

Several xenos (amongst wich the eldar ofcourse) had the plan of having chaos win and mankind wiping itself out in order to take down chaos with it. - It didn't work.

Oldcrons and 'nids don't have the objective of killing everyone in the galaxy, they have the objective of killing everyone else in the galaxy. Or in the 'nids case, everyone else in several galaxies.

That's unchanged in any reality where people die when they are killed.

Trufax.

On a sidenote, I watched "The Day After" and "Damnation Road" last evening! Talk about coincidence.

Just stopped by to see if this thread progressed at all.

Was informed that "People die if they are killed."

Time well spent. Cheers.

Well, in fairness, I guess the original topic is pretty much resolved?

Or rather, we ended up with different answers - but they all make sense in different versions of the setting. Which of them we adhere to is a matter of personal choice.