warpdancer said:

Which doesn't meant other Inquisitors will turn a blind eye to one of their fellows ordering exterminatus on a whim or executing governors and high lords. Do people in power engage in heresy? Yes. But 'people in power' is also an apt description of Inquisitors.

A reasonably powerful Inquisitor in good standing will probably be able to order the execution of a governor of a reasonably important world and expect his order to be carried out. However he will then be expected to present his reasons for doing so along with some evidence to the local Lord Inquisitor. Failure to do so will probably garner the Inquisitor a poor reputation - which means they will be less inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt in future.

An Inquisitor who tries to do something extreme (exterminatus, wipe out an important noble house without proof, execute the Lord Governor of the Sector) will probably be blocked by other Inquisitors, who will countermand his order and begin to investigate his activities. In order to pull off something like that he needs to have the backing of at least a handful of other Inquisitors, preferably ones with good reputations.

An Inquisitor's reputation is critical to his success and power. An Inquisitor who is widely respected and trusted across the sector will be given a lot more leeway than one who is known for rash (or radical) actions.

warpdancer said:

Yes, but in Eisenhorns case you had several Inquisitors allying themselves to catch him as well. Maybe because a rogue Inquisitor is actually quite a threat in the eyes of most Inquisitors. Also remember that most Inquisitors that did ally with him either had something to gain from it (meaning that they profiteered on Eisenhorns lousy situation), or they were his personal friends who were sure to know him better than the accusations made against him.

As for cabals, you do realize that most cabals are pretty temporary and fickle at best, right? It's not an exclusive "club" where the members back eachother up no matter what and are of a cohesive collective mind. The reason why cabals are formed is because the members all know vital information about something, but in order to access more information of the other members, they will have to share it with eachother.

Also, the Tyrantine Cabal is a pretty bad example since it's the cabal where both Rykehuss the Witchfinder and Vownus Kaede are prominent members. Given the chance, one of them would stab the other in the back quicker than you can blink. And that goes for many of the tyrantine cabal's members.

warpdancer said:

The Ravenor novels, the Eisenhorn novels. Take your pick.

warpdancer said:

On paper, yes. But like I said, your authority is useless if you can't back it up with sufficient force.

warpdancer said:

Yes it is childish, but it is how a lot of Inquisitors seems to reason. They are are often a paranoid, egomaniac and narcissistic bunch, and what makes matters worse is the fact that the Inquisition actually promotes such behavior. Which of course make the individual members very suspicious and untrusting when it comes to what OTHER Inquisitors claim. Unless convinced by overwhelming evidence they have no reason to support another Inquisitor at all, and nor should they. Having blind faith in another man's (flawed) judgement would not be the Inquisitiorial thing to do. The only one who really knows best is yourself, and thats how pretty much all Inquisitors reason.

Varnias Tybalt said:

Not useless. Force is useful when persuading the powerful (up to and including other Inquisitors) because it engenders fear. For many people, simple fear of the Inquisition, or loyalty to the Imperium is entirely sufficient. Inquisitors, like Rogue Traders, tend to be the kind of people that expect to be obeyed and who are blessed with a commanding presence that compels others to do as required.

Remembering the feudal nature of the Imperium, an Inquisitor can get by with most day-to-day matters simply through his own force of personality and the expectations of the culture he exists within. Few people are likely to challenge an Inquisitor at all, let alone directly, partly because the notion of the Inquisition is a terrifying one in and of itself, and partly because they're notionally 'in charge' compared to the teeming masses. From a military perspective, quite often an Inquisitor will be obeyed because he's recognised as being the superior officer. The structure of society and the reputation of the Inquisition as a whole are all that are necessary in 99% of cases.

It's only when you get to the major powers within the Imperium, and when dealing with other Inquisitors, that the carefully considered application of force (or rather, the threat of force) becomes a factor to consider.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

Which was kind of my point here. While an Arbites Judge is a powerful individual, he would still be pretty bound to listen to an Inquisitor and do what the Inquisitor says. Certain Imperial commanders with millions of armed men under their authority however is a different story. While some of them might respect the supposed chain of command, many important generals and warmasters consider themselves above Imperial scrutiny, and they sure have the means and power to dispose of a pesky little upstart of an Inquisitor if they wanted to.

Varnias Tybalt said:

Which would be an amazingly stupid thing to do. Unless the warmaster was considering treachery anyways, disposing of an Inquisitor is a good way to commit suicide. While the Inquisition may be a fractious bunch of homicidal lunatics, the one thing that will unite them is someone challenging the authority of their position. Even the most successful and powerful of Warmasters in the Imperium would be crushed if the Inquisition believed he killed one of their own.

macd21 said:

It's called assassination my friend. Quite a useful tactic actually. And im pretty sure that most Inquisitors who have absued their authority and fallen out of favor with their conclave (which they will do once the abuse of authority begins, due to the fractious nature of the Inquisition) often meet their demise at the hands of an assassin, sent by someone of power that they tried to push around with the rosette, but that person of power later found out that the pesky Inquisitor fell out of grace.

It all makes perfect sense.

So, to summarize, Inquisitors do answer to other higher powers than the Emperor himself. It's just that these powers aren't very tangible and fixed, but is more a matter of Inquisitorial politics and maintaining ones reputation and the gathering of sufficient power.

Varnias Tybalt said:

Except that an attack against the Inquisition is, IMO, taken seriously - afterall, while they might well accept the practical necessities of wielding their authority, I don't think any self-respecting Inquisitor is going to sit back and allow some self-important upstart Warmaster to throw his weight around and start assassinating 'inconvenient' Inquisitors. At that point, the line is drawn - to presume to execute an Inquisitor is a challenge to the authority the Inquisition represent as individuals and as a group. The precedent of such a challenge cannot be allowed to be openly established without serious reprisals. I'm not saying it hasn't happened in the past, but rather the Inquisition seem like they'd take major action in such a situation - they police their own, and suffer no interference in such matters from the outside.

It's not about whether or not a given Inquisitor had fallen out of favour or the like... it's the principle of the thing.

As for Warmasters being 'above the Imperium'. That's hardly the case. A Warmaster can only be appointed by those of sufficient authority within the Departmento Munitorum, which in turn sits within the Administratum, which in turn is the largest office of the Adeptus Terra. A Warmaster who forgets his place and starts stepping beyond his station... will find his authority revoked, his resources curtailed and the fleets and armies under his command redeployed by the bureaucrats who gave him that power in the first place. The title and power of a Warmaster is a carefully-watched thing, so terrified is the Imperium of a repeat of the Horus Heresy. An important General or Admiral is in an even poorer situation - such men must do as they are told, as the Guard is useless without the Navy to bear them to other worlds, just as the Navy is useless without the Guard to conquer those worlds.

Last page of this thread in one sentence:

'The Inquisition is a gathering of like-minded individuals divided by a common goal."

(paraphrased from one of the sourcebooks).

Varnias Tybalt said:

N0-1_H3r3 has already covered this.... but no. A Warmaster who bumps off an Inquisitor is just asking for trouble. He'd have to be 100% sure no one could link him to the Inquisitor's death/dissappearance and when dealing with an Inquisitor you can't be 100% sure of anything. Odds are he'll have an acolyte or other agent somewhere that you'll miss that will get word to the nearest Lord Inquisitor as to what you've done. Even if that's not the case, he will probably have allies in the Inquisition who will look into his fate, drawing attention to the Warmaster.

And as soon as the Inquisition has even the slightest suspicion that the Warmaster is responsible, he is dead. They may do it subtly, so as not to rock the boat too much, or they may make it blatant so as to show off their power and send everyone a message - which depends on the political situation at the time. But letting anyone challenge the power of the Inquisition and get away with it is a dire threat to the safety and security of the Imperium (or at least the Inquisition's authority within it, which is the same thing as far as they are concerned).

The only two groups who can get away with ordering the assassination of an Inquisitior are other Inquisitors (with the backing of a large number of fellow members of the Ordos) and the High Lords of Terra (who only get away with it because they have an Inquisitor in their ranks). Anyone else is playing with fire.

Varnias Tybalt said:

The Ravenor novels, the Eisenhorn novels. Take your pick.

I don´t know the ravenor Novels, i ask which Eisenhorn Novel.

On paper, yes. But like I said, your authority is useless if you can't back it up with sufficient force.

Authority or better autoritas is all the Big I have, Force they do ´ve only insofar as it is given to them by others because they´ve autoritas.

They are are often a paranoid,

Paranoid yes, egomaniac not so necessarily.

Neither Draco, Horst, strike me as egomaniac

Unless convinced by overwhelming evidence they have no reason to support another Inquisitor at all, and nor should they.

Every Inquisitor see themselves Honour bound, to help other Inquisitors if they need it taken from Rogue Trader

There are many outside or on the fringes of the Authority of the I , Space Marines, AdMech, Navigator Houses Warmasters, but Imperial Commanders aka Governeurs of Worlds, Generals and Admirals are not, neither are Noble Houses

In case of the Navis Nobilitate the I use undercover methods to reign them in, a General would be assassinated or executed, a noble house put down with what needed , Guard, PDF, Assassins,

A warmaster is IMPOV appointed by the Senate Or the Lord Militant of the Imperial Army the chief of the Departmento Munitorum, he is in command of a crusade and wields full Imperial authority equal to the sector Marschall of the Segmentum Solar

warpdancer said:

Er, no. Many Inquisitors hate each other, few trust any other Inquisitors other than close associates or those with very good reputations.

warpdancer said:

they're all one omnibus nowbut most specifically in Malleus.

macd21 said:

It's one thing to support another Inquisitor in the normal course of his duties - Inquisitors are a fractious lot, all of differing opinion - but another entirely to support him when his authority is being challenged by an outsider. Allow people to get the idea that they can simply push Inquisitors around, and that will seriously dent the reputation and fear that any Inquisitor can bring to bear.

Inquisitorial politics is something that few outside the Inquisition have any clue about. Even most Acolytes are blind to the nuanced-yet-vicious interplay between different Inquisitors until late in their careers. They keep their disputes and their disagreements internal, and when it comes time for one of their number to be forcibly removed from power, it's done by another Inquisitor (or several). The overwhelming majority of non-Inquisitors are encouraged to believe that the Inquisition are a united front against the Daemon, the Alien and the Heretic...

N0-1_H3r3 said:

Yes, but that doesn't mean that they'll unreservedly support an Inquisitor who wants to (for example) execute one of the High Lords of Terra. Even an Inquisitor who is being 'challenged' by an outsider, say a planetary governor, can't rely on all that much support. He'd essentially have to call in help from a more powerful Inquisitor... which is extremely embarrassing. Especially if the other Inquisitor decides that the governor was right and that the first Inquisitor was being unreasonable.

Good thread...

Anyway since we started this has been released about Ascension...

Dark Heresy: Ascension

IT IS TIME TO ASCEND TO A HIGHER PURPOSE!

New rules, new Ascended Careers, all manner of essential gear, and an extensive Games Mastery section makes Ascension an ideal supplement for both players and Game Masters.

Advanced character generation, including transition packages to take your Dark Heresy characters from Acolytes to Throne Agents, and Ascended Careers including Crusader, Storm Trooper, and Vindicare Assassin.

New Ascended Psychic Powers, plus a section on ascended adversaries, from Greater Daemons to renegade Imperial Governors.

Systems of influence and reputation for a different scale of wealth and power in the Imperium, plus Paragon Talents and Mastered Skills to enhance your character’s abilities.

How to serve the Inquisition at a higher level, including an adventure that takes your Throne Agents into the halls of power.

This book takes your Dark Heresy campaign to greater heights of power, responsibility, and peril in the grim darkness of the far future.

"...into the halls of power."???? Obviously they are talking about a really high social level here but Inquisitor level? I think not, maybe almost?

Anyone heard the term "Throne Agents" before?

Baldrick said:

It is another term for Acolyte; more commonly used by those outside of the Holy Ordos in reference to those who serve, but are not directly, of the Inquisition.

-=Brother Praetus=-

Now, I've forgotten to check the dates on these posts, but in case "you people" are still arguing;

Shut. the. ****. Up. Even if the only purpose of it would be to score points with those on the sidelines, have none of those arguing heard of the idea of starting a new thread in which to carry on your debate? As opposed to cluttering up this thread with things that are at best slightly relevant.

So; Move this to another thread? Accept that we're all idiots and will probably not agree? Please?

Ok. Apologies if I've offended; been a few days since I've last had access to my mood-stabilizers. The quoted release statement seams to address most things I've seen requested in this thread, and seem quite bad-ass as well.

What I want/hope for/from Ascension:

- New Gear: We're moving up in importance and capability, so new gear is needed. Just as a Rank 8 Guardsman carrying a flick bow as his main weapon would be looked at askance, a Rank [Ascension] one may need an upgrade or two for his Heavy Stubber (although I will be leaning to the cringe side of things if Heavy Bolters are suddenly the norm/required).

- How to relate general GM skills to DH and released fluff: It seems a bit much to ask for them to release a book detailing 'basic' (not equivilant with easy or obvious, but non-DH-specific) as a section inside a work dedicated to building upon a specific world/reality. However, what's been requested in this thread seems (to me) to be how to relate these things with 40K, as well as the factions/nefarious dudes already found in other DH products. And the quote indicates they will be attempting this, which I find to be good.

I swear, someone should start a thread, where everyone can just iterate what they like/dislike about DH - and without arguments! Just so we can look at every post in context, have said mythical thread as a source text. So before we jump all over someone for complaining that they can't find any rules for tricking out thier own personal Titan, or someone wondering why every Apocalypse-scale equipment and character choice has to be detailed, we can go back to this source thread and look them up.

"Ah, I see. That group is currently playing an 'the-end-is-nigh' campaign, and every world is crawling with Greator Daemons. How might I reply to thier post, now that I know this to be the case."

"Wow, this campaign season everyone in that circle of players is in deep-cover on Fenksworld's Underhive. What zany, or indeed insane, low-tech ideas have I come accross in my no-doubt extensive and august career."

Not that I expect everyone to love one another, or even see eye-to-eye on much of anything. Mostly because you're all idiots and I hate you. Yet, because I'm aware of said shortcomings on my part, I can at least try and be less of an ass. I can attempt to post my views as just that - my views on this universe, not neccesarily what is currently held to be 'true' by the profit-concerned "powers-that-be" in GW or elsewhere. I'll post my ideas, sprinkle it with self-absorbed 'wit' and sarcasm, and hope that no matter how people take it or what thier immediate reaction is, it will help spark off something awesome in thier mind.

Anyway, thats my section of stupidity for this thread, and I'll leave it at that. And not look over it again, because I'll get embaressed by the spelling errors and vague drifting from topic to topic.

Exhaustion is free, kiddies. Free, and potent.

Haven't even got Radicals Handbook yet and, frankly, I am getting a bit bewildered by all the different packages and careers and stuff. I mean everyone loves being an assassin but really, how many different types do you need? I have to admit, I am a GM and so a lot of this stuff is aimed at the players, I understand this- I'm sure some of them will be thrilled by this. Mostly they want interesting settings, so more fluff on different worlds would be nice but I don't think this will happen now, Just more stuff on being another kind of Arbite until one day, just when you thought they had jumped the shark with Dark Heresy, everyone will get wet knickers as the announcement comes in for official rules on how to be a sodding space marine.

Bad Birch said:

I have to partly agree with you here. Its like the have class systems within class systems. I think what both Dark Heresy and Rogue Trader are missing is a viable character generation system that doesnt suffer from level creep. I think they finally stumbled onto the correct system but a bit too late, with advance package deals in Inquisitor's Handbook and then again in Tattered Fates with Campaign based Elite Advances.

IMHO every career should just have a skill and talent master chart that says how much the advance costs for each level of the skill (basic, Skilled, +10, +20) and the ones that are available at a later rank should be listed at a higher XP cost, perhaps +25 or +50 XP per rank over 1.

And then up the starting XP to like 1000, ditch ranks altogether and let PCs/NPS spend and build the chracter they like. Add in XP costs/bonuses for reduced Insanity/Corruption, Starting Insantity/Corruption and fate points, and add some negative traits for bonus XP.

Hell in Dark Heresy you could do all that in about 10 pages, clearing out the 50 pages of rank charts in the core rule book. You could even add ranks back into the game as a talent, so you could spend 250 XP at start and be a Captain or whatever other titles are available.

Dont get me wrong, imaging doing a camapign starting as a Rank 1 Scholar Progenium, Guardsman, Penal Legionaire, Tranch War Veteran, and moving on up thorugh the alternate careers ranks into Chaliced Commissar and then Sin Eater sounds like loads of fun.

So Im hoping Ascension compiles all this data and adds more even, cause it is interesting, it just needs to be better formatted.

After Ascension Dark Heresy is going to need its own version of WFRP 2E's Career Compendium with all the origins, careers, backgrounds, packages listed and available under one cover.

Peacekeeper_b said:

I think you're on to something there. Meanwhile, I am a player in a Cthulhu campaign and have time on my hands to plan the next stage of our DH campaign. Basically, I will see how all of this stuff develops and decide whether I should buy it or not.

Peacekeeper_b said:

The only thing is, classless/levelless seem (at least to me] to be pretty **** messy, and probably more open to exploitation of the rules. Thus creating more player book~keeping and more GM overseeing/idea slapping. Classes and levels gives people an idea of what "level of badass" they should be at any time, helps balance power difference within the party, and gives players an archetype base to build on.

As to "stumbling onto the correct system", I just tend to lump in all the bad stuff as BlackIndustry's work and praise FFG for the rest. Messy? Yes. Incorrect? Yes. But I get a burst of dark glee every time I even mentally harass GW.

On a somewhat related note, I like this system. It's the first I've ever come accross where xp actually means something. It's not "progress to X amount and then make a few choices". It's "xp is your money, spend it on talents/stats/abilities". And I guess I'll have to credit BlackIndustrys with that as well.

On a somewhat related note, I like this system. It's the first I've ever come accross where xp actually means something. It's not "progress to X amount and then make a few choices". It's "xp is your money, spend it on talents/stats/abilities". And I guess I'll have to credit BlackIndustrys with that as well.

It's certainly not a BI innovation. It's been done in many games for years. My first exposures to it - although almost certainly not the first places it appeared - was in the D6 system and in Earthdawn.

Cyberpunk? You gets your points, you spend 'em how you like. Very few of the multitude of character packs will ever get used by my group, in my opinion. Especially as they aren't 40k addicts so are pretty ignorant of the meaning of a lot of the fluff. For me this is useful- none of them have even heard of nurgle, so they don't know what to expect. On the other hand, the don't feel the need to be hemmed in to a career as a culexus temple assassin or something.

Baldrick said:

Am I the only one who finds the example Ascended Careers a bit strange?

I mean you can already build a perfectly viable Inquisitorial Stormtrooper with using only Guardsman career advances. I don't really see what "Storm Trooper" career would be about? Second thing is Vindicare Assassin as career... Okay, that would be pretty **** "ascended", yes, and probably (over)powerfull enough to be a main actor in campaign where the enemy of the week is Greater Demon/Planetary Governor level. However, unless they decide to rewrite the Officio Assassinorum canon I would find it pretty hard to play a character that literally has to have a written permission from the Terra to take each shot... Or have the High Lords started to issue the OA "carte blanche" execution orders?

Scary thought, isn't it?

Polaria said:

Scary, and confusing in my opinion. I agree, it seems like there is going to be some serious retcon going on.