Hey guys, I'm having a pretty hardcore debate with my gaming group about what constitutes an Inquisitor under the Dark Heresy: Ascention rulebook. Some of my players are adamant to the point of quickly becoming angry on the topic, that in order for a PC to be considered an Inquisitor (or Interrogator, for that matter) in the capaign(s) they are palying in, that player must take the Inquisitor career, even though the Inquisitor's Influence mechanic is independant of the Inquisitor class.

My point of view is that Inquisitors are too diverse a group, with too many varing methods, ranging from a traditional covert investigation to monodominant suspicion-is-proof Witch Hunter, to be confined to a single career choice, and that forcing the party's Inquisitor to take a certain career is excessive even though that career is titled Inquisitor, and is at least somewhat more flexible and powerful than the other careers in the Ascention book, making it very desireable. So while I'm sure a lot of people would be happy to play an Inquisitor with the Inquisitor career (An Inquisitor Inquisitor, if you will), I see a problem in the making for players with a strong or more imaginative concept in mind.

Say, as a hypothetical example, the party leader in a Dark Heresy game heading on to Ascention was a characterful Feral Worlder Guardsman/Tyrantine Shadow Agent who wanted to become a very eccentric and shadowy Inquisitor with prodigious skill with blades and an uncompromising will, who delegated the investigative gruntwork to one of his allies as he had throughout the Acolyte phase of the game. He was set on taking the Death Cult Assassin (with GM permission) or Crusader career to augment his martial skill. In the same group, his "right hand" in the party started as an Imperial Psyker who used Divination powers to investigate crimes, and wants to reach the lofty heights of a Primaris Psyker, but as the party leaders headed for full Inquisitorial and Interrogator rank, respectively, the other members of the group want them to take the Inquisitor and Interrogator careers, and insist that they would not "really" be Inquisitors unless they took that career over their preferences. In this case the Inquisitor and Interrogator careers become a punishment rather than a rank at the front of their character names, and the point of argument threatens the ongoing campaign. I know full well this is a just a serious clash of opinions in my group, but I am curious to see what other people think about what makes an Inquisitor in Dark Heresy.

Do you think a PC must take the Inquisitor career to be the party's Inquisitor? Or should it be possible for an Inquisitor to have any combination of Dark Heresy and Ascention careers? For that matter, what career combinations do you think noteworthy Inquisitors in the lore and Dark Heresy rulebooks might have? For example, I could see Astrid Skane as an Arbitrator/Inquisitor for sure, but also as an Arbitrator/Judge just as easily.

As long as your Inquisitor is not a tech priest, the sky's the limit.

Additionally, I'd say that the other character classes don't HAVE to follow their fluff. For example, you could use the crusader class w/o being a member of a crusader house. Or you could use the vindicare assasin progress tree without having them be members of the actual assasin temple.

That being said, some combinations might be absurd. A Death Cult Inquisitor?

Bottom line, the Inquisitor should serve the Golden Throne and no-one else. If some other organization can claim his/her fealty, then they cannot be an Inquisitor.

Yeah, they're getting bogged down in mechanics and nametags, in my opinion at least. A Feral Guardsman/Death Cult Assassin is a deliberately extreme example that I came up with for the sake of argument, but as far as IC explinations for such a bizzare combo I'd imagine he'd use his authority to secure the finest melee combat training he could and pay lip service to the Death Cult, as most cults, such as the Moritat, continue to exist only because they are of use to the Inquisition. Or he could even have learned that level of swordplay from a mystic warrior clan like the ones featured in the Eisenhorn Trilogy, rather than a Death Cult.

A tamer example might be a Psychic Inquisitor who wants to go Psyker/Primaris Psyker to focus on their Psychic Techniques over peer talents and fellowship advances they will likely never qualify for. Or a Cleric who wanted to channel Witch Hunter Tyrus' full on Ecllesiarchal "suspicion is proof" style of Inquistion and just go Crusader or Heirophant. I'm not challenging the guidelines in the book so much as challenging the assertion that an Inquisitor must posses the Inquisitor career, rather than it being an optional "Vanilla" choice for an Inquisitor PC.

I reckon I'd fall into the Inquisitor must be an Inquisitor camp.

The way I see things, a career is not what the character dose, it is who they are. It takes a very, very special individual to eventually make it to the status of Inquisitor and that kind of individual is defined by the Inquisitor career. In order to be an Inquisitor, being an Inquisitor must be the most important thing to that character as well as being the most important descriptor of that character -they must be an Inquisitor first before any and all other things.

In looking the career over, it seems fairly diverse in and of its self (doubly so if you go the Interrogator -> Inquisitor rout) as well as having diversity injected into any character taking the career in the form of their former careers. All in all, I think just about any concept would fit it. If a player came to me with a vision for an Inquisitor that they felt wouldn't be served by the career, I'd have to fist ask them what about the Inquisitor career prevents them from realizing their vision? Once I had the answer, chances are, I'd whip up some elite packages for the character and an in-game means (if needed) for the character to get them as, chances are, what the career lacks in their vision would be much smaller then what it offers an Inquisitor on the whole. So, what about the career would prevent you from realizing the vision of an Inquisitor from a feral world and assassin background who's a very hands on killy kind of guy, or your Judge example from being fulfilled by the Inquisitor career, or an insainly powerful psyker Inquisitor?

Either way, that's just my view on it, and all careers for that matter

All fair points and reasonably made, but if by the same token the GM is willing to offer elite packages to accomodate a specific concept, isn't it even easier to let said player use their preferred career, which has been playtested and okayed, and add the word "Inquisitor" to their name tagline instead of their career tagline? After all the only thing one Inquisitor is garunteed to have in common with the next is that they have near infinite authority, a mechanic handled independatnly of the Inquisitor class.

But then again for me an Inquisitor isn't defined by any default skillset or modus operandi , simply by the fact they hold a Rosette and the mandate to eliminate the enemeies of man in any way they see fit. Maybe I'm going agaisnt the grain in the perception. That's how I rationale people like Tyrus still being Inquisitors, anyway...

Out of curiousity, how are you NOT managing to make an extreme butt-kicking potential Psyker out of the Inquisitor ascended career if that is the direction the character is going in? You still have access to all your previous ranks, so a dedicated killing machine can easily buy up the skills and traits to get "free" versions of the ascended packages. After that they are largely a pile of social packages that tie in to the "big picture" puzzle piece that a character of that social rank can tap into.

An Inquisitor is an INQUISITOR, but by no means is that class restrictive to differeing play-styles. Heck, if you are really desperate for some extra crunch you could start them out on another ascended career, then Elite Advance into Interrogator, then again into Inquisitor. The guy who can order the death of a planet has to make some room for the murder-specialists and the social-monkeys to shine as well or the game is not nearly as much fun for the "support characters".

I'd say it'd be easier to take the Inquisitor career with elite advances as opposed to making another career an Inquisitor since, by and large, I can not imagine any vision requiring more then 3 elite advances while still offering up skills and talents that reflect the life of an Inquisitor. It just seems to fit better. However, I'm still not fully convinced that a reasonable character concept for an Inquisitor could be made that couldn't be served by the Inquisitor career path at all. All concepts mentioned so far can be built with the Inquisitor career.

Either way, I'd agree that an Inquisitor is not defined by any set of skills or modus operandi. However, it takes a certain kind of individual to make it to Inquisitor in the first place (one with a hell of a lot of will power for starters which is represented by the Inquisitors special abilities) and serving as an Inquisitor will tend to make it easier for the character to learn certain skills or preform certain tasks more often then others thus the skills and talents available to them. Being an Inquisitor doesn't require any specific skills or modes of operation, but surviving as one tends to certain kinds of individuals and those individuals tend to pick up on certain things a lot easier then others ;-)

I have to go with Graver here, careers are more than just name tags; not every acolyte grows up to be an Inquisitor. You're professions are defining of what you have done with your life and how you plan to progress based upon that - if the Inquisitor profession does not appeal to your pc, then he is not Inquisitor material it is straight forward as that. (and not everyone should be)

Similarly, I would never allow someone to take the Vindicare package if he was not a temple assassin. Being an assassin and being a Vindicare are not simply extensions of one another - the later requires a good deal of specialized training you can only get through the temple; if you are unwilling to dedicate yourself to that you do not deserve the benefits that come along with it ... just like in real life you don't gain the training and benefits of being army special forces if you don't join the military. (you might have other training that makes you similarly as dangerous, but it won't be the same) Where else is the assassin going to learn Vindicare specific abilities? It isn't as though this is something you can just pick up on the street, and you're not going to find some ex-Vindicare running a school and giving away temple secrets. (and if he were foolish enough to try he'd get schooled by the temple himself very quickly)

The issue I have with it being just a tag is the book deals with other classes becoming an inquisitor. Now I do agree that any class should be able to do it within reason.

It's up to your group as always but...

I'm firmly in the Inquisitor-must-be-Inquisitor camp. A career (IMO)does define who you are and where your focus lies. Therefore, a Primaris Psyker spends all their time honing their skills, the Judge does the same. An Inquisitor must also hone their skills and they're completely different from any of the other careers. Being an Inquisitor is more than running around beating people up, it takes politics, schmoozing, power-broking and gathering information/assets/connections. That's their focus. They spend their time doing that which keeps them from honing their other skills.

However, I firmly agree that warping the other Ascended Careers should be encouraged. There is no reason that someone would have to have the specific title that is accompanied by a particular career. Maybe my Stormtrooper is really a top-notch Wildspace Mercenary who has fought a hundred engagements in the service of a Rogue Trader, maybe my Hierophant is really a politician on an Imperial World. As noted above, I do think the sky is the limit there.

ZillaPrime said:

Okay, Psykers are an aside to the topic of discussion at best, but here we go.

Never said I would have trouble making a workable Psyker with the Inquisitor career if I so chose, we're talking hypotheticals. Psykers are easy fodder for the negative argument because Imperial Psyker/Inquisitors are far superior to Imperial Psyker/Primaris Psykers for the first five ranks of Ascention and barely lag behind after that point, the Inquisitor is paying grossly inflated prices for his powers, yes, but the options are there to purchase at their leisure, and it's not like the Inquisitor isn't spoiled for choice, having access to out-of discipline powers at 750xp a pop, something that Primaris Psykers can't get.

But the Psyker case works quite well for the affirmative argument too, as the big point of argument agaisnt some career combinations seems to be that iron will most Inquisitors are known for, because it can't be the Inquisitor's ability to exercise authority, as that's covered by the Influence rules which stand apart from the careers. Well Psykers will typically have a lot more willpower than any other career, and moving into Primarius Psyker means they get a comparable number of Unnatural Willpower traits to boot and get Soul of Stone a whole three ranks before Inquisitors. So there's no lack of steely, uncompromising will there.

ZillaPrime said:

What? An Adept/Sage INQUISITOR wouldn't be inclined to step back and let his team do their thing? Or an INQUISITOR Crusader with a team of ranged support and intellectuals shouldn't lead from the front? The individual INQUISITOR is not defined by the Rosette and we're not we're not talking about glory-hogging, we're talking about players with strong and/or imaginative character concepts carrying over from a Dark Heresy campaign to Ascention, and then being told that their INQUISITOR PC must take the vanilla INQUISITOR class over their preference or retire the character, which is absurd.

Jack of Tears said:

Gotta disagree, the whole point and appeal of an Inquisitor for many is that no two are alike, The whole point of having Acolytes is to bring skills to the Inquisitor that he does not himself possess. Therefore your past history is irrelevant beyond the fact that you did something to catch the attention of the Holy Ordos. Besides, you're saying that despite there being no criteria for becoming an Inquisitor besides "Impress an Inquisitor" and "Be confirmed by your master and two colleagues of at least comparable Inquisitorial rank" a character who compotently led a team of acolytes for eight ranks worth of harrowing investigations and perilous adventure, survivng to rank nine and Ascention, is elected by the entire group as their continuing leader in Ascention, then only has a choice of either take Inquisitor as his career or suffer? A character's ability to lead a party and carry out an Inquisitor's duties is deliberately disconnected from the mechanics of the game. There's no logical reason to force a player to take a career they neither want nor need to portray their Inquisitor, this assertion is even covered in the core rules.

Jack of Tears said:

That's an extreme example, a player wanting to play a Vindicare Assassin probably has no Inquisitorial aspirations, just like most Tech Priests wouldn't either. Training with the Officio Assassinorum or the Adeptus Mechanicus precludes that individual from ever becoming an Inquisitor. It's against the cannon, and if you're disregaring the 40K setting's laws then who the hell cares what your players careers are? Besides, there's no "School for Inquisitors" in the cannon, they have have no unified training programs, you get told you're great, get handed your Rosette and if you want more training, you have the entire Imperium to draw upon for possible training paths.

As for the dedication to the job, that's a PC quality, not at all represented mechanically, the PC decides when to give up on an investigation, not by any mechanic that favors one career over another. And as for military training, an Inquisitor can, in fact, get any training he or she wants with very few exceptions, including "army special forces" training without enlisting in the Imperial Guard, or for that matter advanced training from the Adeptus Astra Telepathica, the Adeptus Ministorum, Adeptus Sororitas, Adeptus Administratum, Adeptus Arbites, the Imperial Navy, the PDF, and any other organisation or individual who recognizes the authority of the Rosette.

My reading of it is that the "Inquisitor" career is that it's an attempt to represent the background using the mechanics of the DH system. The Ascension career is very clearly structured around combining combat abilities with the influence talents that an Inquisitor is likely to need to develop to function with any degree of skill in the highly politicised environment of the upper echelons of the Imperium...So while I think you're right, Azraiel, an Inquisitor need not necessarily currently hold the Inquisitor career in order to hold an Inquisitorial rosette, I would certainly say it's by far the preferred option.

I can't see many circumstances where - for example - a Death Cult assassin (even an ascended one) would build up sufficient Inquisitorial goodwill and faith in their investigative (as opposed to combat) skills to prompt another Inquisitor to raise the assassin to Inquisitorial rank.

My feeling is that Inquisitors know the skills required to make someone an Inquisitor, and wouldn't want to degrade the authority of their own rank by raising someone to the rosette who wasn't ready for it. So yes, theoretically if a simple conscript Guardsman is suddenly handed an Inquisitorial rosette, he becomes an Inquisitor...but in a very real sense he isn't a TRUE Inquisitor, because he lacks the skill set, ruthlessness and force of will necessary to operate with any degree of effectiveness in that role.

Do I become a member of the NYPD just because (for reasons too convoluted to explain) someone hands me a badge? Perhaps technically...or perhaps not...but I don't know US police procedures, I've never fired a gun in my life, I'm a wretched coward and I hate doughnuts.

I would say that the Interrogator-Inquisitor career path is designed to facilitate a canon-compatible representation of the skills necessary to become an Inquisitor, and it does this effectively. So I would certainly prefer to draw up both PC and NPC Inquisitors based upon that structure, rather than any other.

Just my two cents!

Azraiel said:

I was addressing two separate issues in my post - the first being the question about the Inquisitor, the second being a comment someone made about allowing characters to take professions such as - and mentioned in that post - the Vindicare Assassin profession without actually being a temple assassin. My point there was, no, you cannot become a Vindicare without going through the temple training.

Azraiel said:

There is nothing wrong with reskining the careers to count as something else. If the Inquisitor career does not represent how you want to play your Inquisitor and the Sage career does then there is nothing stopping you playing an Inquisitor using the sage career.

Inquisitor is a status, anyone can attain that status but the rank structure is simply a list of the most likely advances for someone who is an Inquisitor, not what defines the Inquisitor himself.

If someone has a Rosette they are an Inquisitor, it doesn't matter what he choses to learn after that point he will still be an Inquisitor. An Interrogator can be taught skills in line with another career as well depending on the preferences of the Inquisitor training him.

Kaihlik

Kaihlik said:

Yes, but the inquisitor/interrogator career path represents someone who invests time and effort (years if the book is to be followed) cultivating trust and accolades within the Inquisition.

While it's the GM's game to do with as he pleases, there is a specific in character reason why there is an official "inquisitor" role, and everyone else is throne agents.

While the psyker was getting his Primaris ranking, the Inquisitor was flushing out heretics.

While the Crusader was undergoing her training, the Inquisitor was learning influence webs from his mentor.

While the scum was consolidating his criminal empire, the Inquisitor was learning the labyrinth political connections in Conclave.

While the Vindicare was learning his trade, the Inquisitor was having his soul tested against corruption.

The book even flat out says that the Techpriest can never become an Inquisitor, simply because he can't serve two masters, and he already serves the mechanicus.

If anyone can "pick up a rosette", then there is literally no reason to have the Inquisitor/interrogator character class. The rosette represents your willingness to sacrifice for the good of the imperium. The Inquisition refuses to let you serve two masters. If you want the rosette, and don't want to settle for a throne agent, you'll have to leave your old job behind and dedicate yourself to the Inquisition.

Remember, career paths represent training that you receive from your background. It's not just an arbitrary division of rules to make characters function differently. To me, letting someone take any other ascended career *and* get all the benefits of being an inquisitor is having your cake and eating it too. Inquisitors have to make hard decisions. Someone not totally dedicated to being an inquisitor will be found wanting, and will not receive the rosette.

H.B.M.C. said:

Well, no, not at all. Inquisitor is a rank, just like Chapter Master or Lord Militant Castellian or High Lord of Terra, there's no "Chapter Master" or "Captain" or even "Sergeant" career in Deathwatch. It's a rank, and the powers and privialges of that rank are represented by the Influence system, which is not tied to any career in any way.

Just as the rules say an Ascention group does not need an Inquisitor or Interrogator to use the Influence rules or play the game, it does not say at any point that the Inquisitor has no choice but to take the Inquisitor career. The rules are clear as day, I'm only interested in opinions here, no need to be hostile.

Azraiel said:

Actually, it's not. Inquisitor is a role within above and beyond the Imperium of Man. It stands alone from any structure. Chapter Masters, Lords Commander Militant (and all variations thereof), High Lords of Terra (or rather, the positions that are deemed to be High Lords of Terra) are all at the top of their organisation. Inquisitors aren't; they're the top, middle and bottom of the 'official' structure of the Inquisition (every Acolyte, every Throne Agent, every informant and Inquisitorial Stormtrooper... they're all just servants of the Inquisition, rather than strictly being part of it).

An Inquisitor is not merely a man with a shiny I-shaped badge that lets him commandeer or kill anything from people to planets. It's the culmination of many years or decades of training and instruction from his former master (whether they're aware of being trained or not), and elevation into an organisation that bears theoretically unlimited personal authority.

Azraiel said:

Actually, go read page 6. The rules as written, according to the designer note, assume that someone will take Interrogator or Inquisitor.

Your interpretation is, according to the rules as written, the opinion, not the rule:

Thus, this book is written with the understanding that one of the player characters will take on the role of an Interrogator or an Inquisitor. Therefore, if the group does not possess an Interrorgator or Inquisitor amongst them, the GM may need to make some appropriate adjustments. The GM should keep in mind that a sufficiently authoritative Throne Agent such as a Judge or Magos can also effectively fill the required role.

So while you can fudge it, you're still fudging it. The Designer notes don't say "just give a rosette to the party leader and be done with it." Also note that it references the Throne Agent as a Judge or Magos, not as an Inquisitor. *That* is as clear as day. There is a distinct difference between "Throne Agent" and "Inquisitor" within the rules. An Inquisitor is an Inquisitor. Everyone else is a Throne Agent.

I'd say that's pretty definitive. There's nothing stopping you from running a game without someone in the Inquisitor career path, but nobody in your party actually *is* an Inquisitor. You're just working with the Inquisition at that point as a Throne Agent.

Again, it's the GM's game. But simply handing a rosette to someone in your party breaks with the setting and canon. If you want to be "the exception to the rule", go ahead, but realize the thematic changes you're making, and don't insinuate that you're Right, and everyone else who disagrees with you is Wrong.

Azraiel said:

So you're saying that according to the rules as written, my PC's Scum character can actually be a Sergeant in the Imperial Guard, since it's all just fluff anyway.

No.

PS: We're not talking about Deathwatch, we're talking about Dark Heresy. Two different games.