Coordinating these living campaigns sounds more difficult than coordinating Acolyte cells in-universe.

Just because the players aren't Inquisitors doesn't mean that they don't have autonomy. They get given a mission. It's up to them how they solve it.

It sounds like a terribly narrow approach, if you'd ask me. As a player, I'd feel as if the group is kept on a leash (quite possibly the intention of this step in the first place), when what I'd really want is the illusion of freedom as it exists in, say, Rogue Trader.

A matter of preferences, I suppose, but the Inquisitor in a game about the Inquisition not being a player character sounds like a lot of wasted potential and unfulfilled expectations.

The problem with having a player Inquisitor is that the Inquisitor is supposed to be in charge of the group of acolytes that the players are, whereas the GM is already running the game, and he can have the Inquisitor be an NPC. There's no problem with the PCs being promoted to Inquisitor later in the game, but at the start, it makes more sense for the people in charge of the PCs in-character to be the person in charge of the PCs out-of-character as well.

There is also the question of power level, I would find it hard to create a credible Inquisitor without a ton of experience to spend to represent decades or centuries of service, Inquisitors should be experts in several fields. By the time PC Inquisitors are a concern, you should be into the late game.

There's no problem with the PCs being promoted to Inquisitor later in the game, but at the start, it makes more sense for the people in charge of the PCs in-character to be the person in charge of the PCs out-of-character as well.

I don't see why -- it's pretty normal in pen&paper games for the characters to "manage" themselves, is it not?

There is also the question of power level, I would find it hard to create a credible Inquisitor without a ton of experience to spend to represent decades or centuries of service, Inquisitors should be experts in several fields. By the time PC Inquisitors are a concern, you should be into the late game.

Depends on how the Inquisitor rose to power and who they were before. If you check page 356 of the core rulebook, the game actually provides a lot of freedom here for the origins of potential Inquisitor -- even more than I would have expected.

Certainly the character shouldn't be a nobody, but I see no problem with the role being represented by a former acolyte of only a decade or two in experience, and who simply outlived his or her master, or even had a hand in their fall.

This would necessitate starting the party at a slightly higher level, but not what I'd consider "late game".

I freely admit that I am biased due to "growing up" with GW's descriptions of the Inquisition, and there, groups of Acolytes investigating on their own without being accompanied by an Inquisitor make about as much sense as the Space Marines in the Deathwatch RPG having no designated squad leader. But in both cases, FFG's system at least presents the option to bring in proper leadership.

In my opinion, it would make such a campaign more interesting (due to the players being more directly "invested"), though it certainly depends on the players and how they can work together, and with the responsibilities involved.

Just because the players aren't Inquisitors doesn't mean that they don't have autonomy. They get given a mission. It's up to them how they solve it.

It sounds like a terribly narrow approach, if you'd ask me. As a player, I'd feel as if the group is kept on a leash (quite possibly the intention of this step in the first place), when what I'd really want is the illusion of freedom as it exists in, say, Rogue Trader.

A matter of preferences, I suppose, but the Inquisitor in a game about the Inquisition not being a player character sounds like a lot of wasted potential and unfulfilled expectations.

My inquisitor tends to be on another planet. The party is then given a broad mandate. Solve the problem. Sometimes they get given the rosette, if it is expected that they will need to project a lot of power. The problem for me is that Inquisitors are very powerful beings. I don't look at them like early Eisenhorn Indiana Jones. An interrogator is in my mind is Indiana Jones. Inquisitors are politicians. You only see an inquisitor and his/her inner circle if things really go to hell. I mean speaking frankly, there is a huge power imbalance between having a few characters with 20-40 influence and one character with 75+. It's just not feasible unless you are running a deathwatch style game. Dark Heresy breaks down at the higher levels. The management becomes too insane and forces massive abstraction. If you are playing, as the rules support play, Dark heresy is for a small party at a low level. That's where the game RAW is functional. If you abstract it and make your own rules, then it isn't really Dark Heresy. It's whatever you made it.

I'm well known incidentally for not being a generous GM. My players live off the land. Most of what they get is taken from dead bodies. The first bolt pistol entered my party last week at the end of the 5th session. They took it off a fallen enemy. XP comes in at about 200-300 a session.

Maybe have each PC group as a different cell of acolytes, all working for the same NPC Inquisitor.

Maybe have each PC group as a different cell of acolytes, all working for the same NPC Inquisitor.

This is what would probably be the best way to handle it.

I think a campaign like this would have to be pretty centralized - like a group of say, 3-5 GMs coming together and designing the campaign together. Each GM would handle a cell of Acolytes, which would all be working towards the same goal. That goal would have a definite time limit to prevent one cell from taking 3 months and another handling their end in 3 days. Each mission would have to be connected enough to feel an impact, but have enough distance to the point that the groups aren't interfering with each other.

Needless to say, it would take an incredible amount of organization to pull off. Meaning, probably impossible to do right.

The problem for me is that Inquisitors are very powerful beings. I don't look at them like early Eisenhorn Indiana Jones.

Yeah -- like I said, it is a matter of interpretation. The way I see it, Inquisitors are an incredibly diverse folk. Their age, their experience, their modus operandi, and also their political pull varies immensely from one to another, depending on how they rose to power and what sort of contacts they have managed to acquire or retain in their personal network. This, then, would easily allow for a "junior Inquisitor" who has just inherited the rosette from their former master.

"It normally requires the consent of three Inquisitors or an Inquisitor Lord to pass on the full powers of an Inquisitor and grant an Inquisitorial Seal, though there have been occasions when this has not been necessary, or the immediate situation has dictated that the apprentice take on full Inquisitorial responsibilities immediately. This is likely if an Inquisitor is killed - their apprentice will inherit their Inquisitorial Seal and may fulfil the role of an Inquisitor subject to repeal by another Inquisitor."

-- d100 Inquisitor

I also don't quite agree about the power imbalance regarding the Influence levels, though I admit this depends entirely on how I would see Influence affecting Subtlety. If the GM sets up the threat correctly, the Inquisitor simply wouldn't use their high Influence very often for fear of tipping off spies and collaborators. Brandishing your Inquisitorial Seal and bullying your way through might get you what you want now, but perhaps it's not a smart idea on the long term.

In the final phase of the campaign, on the other hand, when the group is attempting to solicit support from other local forces, I'd deem it entirely appropriate to have a high Influence score help with acquiring reinforcements. And surely it will feel a lot more involved for the players if it is them who roll these Tests, rather than the GM just railroading it with their NPC Inquisitor.