Morangias said >>>

There's nothing realistic about a team of super elite, extremely trained "commandos" to not be more efficient when executing pre-trained group maneuvers. Not that realism is this important when talking about enormous combat mutants wielding impossible technology to battle impossible enemies, but still.

First, let's not conflate the use of the term "realism" in application to the 40k universe. Everyone knows that it is a fictional game universe, that the warp doesn't exist, there are no Greater Daemons of Tzeentch, or whatever. "Realism" is contextualised by the setting and individualised approaches to it as determined by preference, etc.

Also note that I took a pro-stance to the "Team Mode" mechanics earlier on in the thread. Ultimately I'm more interested in discussion on the relative merits, whether it is pointed or pointless mechanics, etc. No-one can say anything definitive, just speculate it and at the end of the day go, "Nope, I was wrong," or "Yep, I was right." Even then, you don't get some mystical form of fan points for doing so since it's inherently a personal observation (that others may share, but that's another point altogether).

On my own behalf, as above, when I look through Deathwatch ultimately what I'm going to be doing is searching for those things that enhance the game play and are worth my spending the time to convert them to another system. As it stands, Team Mode as describedadmittedly, with only one example of "combat space" as a form of group-share of abilities (sorta kinda)isn't really firing all my "Convert Now!" neurons. Indeed, I tend to remove all the "tactical wargame" elements of the system that I'm using in favour for something more fluid, so adding more of them into the fray is a bit... strange.

However, when we understand more about them I might be a convert and, erm... convert... them. Now? Not so much.

Morangias said >>>

Also, this mechanic doesn't seem to replace normal combat rules (and thus any tactics that they enable), it seems to be an additional layer on top of normal rules, representing the fact that thanks to their elite training Space Marines get more mileage out of their tactical approach than a random bunch of guys coming up with a cool idea

And do we need that? Marines are already going to be uber-cool and nigh on invulnerable to most things that the normal games throw at them barring meltaguns and the odd hellgun and thunderhammer so do they need another mechanic to buff them even more? If it gets even worseand this is a tongue-in-cheek commentit might be that when you open up Deathwatch all you get is a page that says, "Thank you for buying Deathwatch . You are now a member of the elite Space Marines of the Imperium of Mankind. You are some awesome and uber that you're going to win. Just roll 1d10. If the dice happens to randomly explode or turn into a Sperm Whale, you and your Battle Brothers win by sheer awesomeness. If you do find yourself with exploding dice or sea mammalia, roll another dice. Same rule applies."

Surely the Marine training would reflect in higher skillssorry, statisticsand what might in Ascension be called Master skills and Paragon Talents?

On the other hand, it might be fantastically cool and appropriate. We shall have to wait and see, though that doesn't stop people discussing it.

Kage

Kage2020 said:

I'm a little lost on this comment. What part of Deathwatch makes you think the party will be "nigh on invulnerable" exactly? These characters aren't going to be fighting the same things a "normal game" would by a long shot. So with that thinking, perhaps a few more abilities are really needed?

I assume that people expect the encounters in this game to be worthy of the Astartes themselves. In Dark Heresy you might never fight 30 cultists at the same time right? What about a group of Astartes? Perhaps 30 cultists is nothing to them, well except for the traitor marines with them, or the daemons, or even the possessed daemonhost with them.

This is a game of heroics, its the meat of "Space Marines". If, in your opinion, the characters are "too powerful" then you simply aren't doing your job as a GM of pushing their limits like you should IMHO.

I think that a lot of angst could be saved by changing the terminology somewhat and perhaps some of the mechanics.

A new resource is added to the game: cohesion.

Things like 'once per day per game time' are awefully gamist and can break the suspension of disbelief. If for example, feat of strength used as its cost Fatigue, say 1D5 fatigue, well there is a chance that a marine could do it more than once a day (or more than once between rest periods) but there is also a chance that they could collapse from the strain. This is internally consistent as the reason for the limitation is justified within the mechanics. There is no real abstraction invovled (except the necessary abstraction of using numbers to represent reality of course).

For me personally RPG (and wargames to a lesser extent) mechanics need to be self referencing to be 'realistic' within the game. ie, the D&D approach of 'once per encounter', 'once per day' etc are arbitrary limits placed on the rules that have no direct relationship to a character. If they relied on hit point expenditure, fatigue, or mana, then there would be a tangible REASON that something is most likely going to be 'once per encounter', it would be self referentially logical.

In the previous example, feat of strength could be an alternative use for a fate point. As fate points are a finite resource, then like the pure of heart talents that sisters/clerics can use, it shows that the character's own 'fate' is behind their heroic feats rather than an abstract limitation to 'balance' the ability.

They've gone for a very different kind of RPG, more like a combat simulator I think. I've often thought that space marines (and other elites like eldar aspects) act as force multipliers within their squads. ie, 1 marine is worth 10 guardsmen. 2 marines are worth 25 guardsmen, 3 marines are worth 40 guardsmen and so on. The more 'squad cohesion' there is, the more their training can be amplified. Basically, elite forces in the 41st millennium trained for decades become greater than the sum of their parts.

Cohesion seems to be a method of measuring this. Although it also sounds like a form of morale meter as well, which I would have thought could be represented by the current disposition rules with regards to Command tests etc. I don't mind the cohesion concept; the squad ability given as an example is fairly logical in its application. However it does seem strange that a unit becomes less cohesive the more it acts as a unit - ie the more the unit acts together using squad abilities the less cohessiveness it actually has...

So my opinion is that I like the concept, but not necessarily all of the execution. Some of it could have been covered by preexisting rules imo, whilst others seem a little too abstractly gamist for my tastes.

I truly believe that you can have great mechanics without sacrificing verssimilitude and relying on abstraction to balance the system.

Hellebore

I actually like the idea of having some form of squad specific powers, the way I see it is as a kind of group investment just like Rogue Trader's ship mechanic. Giving players a chance and opportunity to invest into a common thing. Just calling it Solo Mode or Team Mode is kinda weird...I'd say call it Solitary Tactics or Squad Tactics or something in the likes.

kenshin138 said >>>

I'm a little lost on this comment. What part of Deathwatch makes you think the party will be "nigh on invulnerable" exactly? These characters aren't going to be fighting the same things a "normal game" would by a long shot. So with that thinking, perhaps a few more abilities are really needed?

Needed only so far that we get into power creep. Based upon what we've seen, and what might be reasonable to inferI laugh at myself for using that phrase, but you have to use something!of the base representation, these are characters that have power armour, and a functional stacked set of power armour that happens to be invulnerable to armour piercing weapons. They have upgraded weaponry based upon their size (news to many, but there we go). They have sheer manner of cool abilities based upon their inherent being, as produced by the zygotes (something that we didn't really see in our previous insight into Space Marines). They're seemingly going to get a whole lot of awesome to be used on narrative whim, and then they're going to get a resource pool of coolness to buff them in certain "transcendent abilities" that manifest themselves by dint of them working together because they get uber abilities that out-uber their already-uber abilities because they're in the Deathwatch.

And that's just what we've seen (with a healthy dose of inference).

It seems to buff Space Marines up beyond where they're already buffed to no end for the sake of "uber coolness." Can you imagine the amount of buffing that is going to go on for Grey Knights? Or, god forbid, Adeptus Custodes ?

That's why I ask if it is necessary .

kenshin138 said >>>

What about a group of Astartes? Perhaps 30 cultists is nothing to them, well except for the traitor marines with them, or the daemons, or even the possessed daemonhost with them.

Don't forget that they can shoot fireballs out of their &$^$. Another useful ability for the Marine in power armour.

Seriously, though it might be a kick-ass cool ability in the context of the game...? Is it necessary , or does it merely subscribe to power creep?

kenshin138 said >>>

If, in your opinion, the characters are "too powerful" then you simply aren't doing your job as a GM of pushing their limits like you should IMHO.

That's a dual edged sword there, kenshin138. Pushing them by which definition? The one that has Space Marines as to "da bestest," or ones that might see them as bionetically augmented, highly trained individuals with the most advanced technology that they are allowed to get their hands on? The idea that Marines are superhuman, so you take the best possible example from humanity and then uber it for "heroic reasons?"

Who is doing what job?

Hellebore said>>>

I think that a lot of angst could be saved by changing the terminology somewhat and perhaps some of the mechanics.

Good point.

A new resource is added to the game: cohesion.

Hellebore said >>>

In the previous example, feat of strength could be an alternative use for a fate point. As fate points are a finite resource, then like the pure of heart talents that sisters/clerics can use, it shows that the character's own 'fate' is behind their heroic feats rather than an abstract limitation to 'balance' the ability.

Certainly not unreasonable, and while I might be setting myself up for an astute counter-argument (dang it, don't you just live discussion) I find myself agreeing.

Hellebore said >>>

Cohesion seems to be a method of measuring this. Although it also sounds like a form of morale meter as well, which I would have thought could be represented by the current disposition rules with regards to Command tests etc.

Indeed. Sounds like Corruption with the vestiges of the karma system that was left of from some of the original design?

Hellebore said >>>

I truly believe that you can have great mechanics without sacrificing verssimilitude and relying on abstraction to balance the system.

Again, I find myself agreeing with this.

Brence said >>>

I actually like the idea of having some form of squad specific powers, the way I see it is as a kind of group investment just like Rogue Trader's ship mechanic. Giving players a chance and opportunity to invest into a common thing. Just calling it Solo Mode or Team Mode is kinda weird...I'd say call it Solitary Tactics or Squad Tactics or something in the likes.

Hence why my question is whether it is necessary or whether it obfuscates a quality of power creep that is common to the 40k universe? What are its broader implications to the 40k universe, or do "we" not "care" because it's the next 40k universe?

Questioning whether something is necessary doesn't mean that you're saying something is bad . Remember for me it doesn't matter either way. I'll look at the Team Buff modes and see whether there is something in there that, for me, needs to be converted. If nothing, I don't convert and I don't get the Buff Mode. If it's a whole lot of awesome for the individual characters with oodles of narrative potentials rather than just combat/tactical wargame buffing? I'm all for that.

Kage

I feel like I could boil down half of the above agruments to "Do RPGs need rules?" Technicaly, no. I've both run and been a player in compleatly ruleless RPGs. Those are essentialy stories with mulitple authors.

The G in the RPG is what seperates it from just being a group of people making up a story, and I for one enjoy some Rolling with my Roleing. And that's were mechanics are helpful. And personaly, I'm glad that FFG is putting the time and effort into making Deathwatch a game specifily designed to play as a squad of marines, rather then just porting over Dark Heresy with different starting equipment.

In many ways, I think videogames have been one of the bigest chalanges to RPGs, not because they try to make RPGs more like video games, but because everyone insists on comparing the two on some assumption that an RPG should be nothing like a video game. Odd given that many RPG-Video games were created by just programing in pen-and-paper rule sets.

Quicksilver said >>>

I feel like I could boil down half of the above arguments to "Do RPGs need rules?"

I'm not sure that it's the same thing, since the question of necessity also comes along implicitly with the question of whether they improve the roleplaying experience or not. Again, though, this comes down to the whole "ROLEPLAYING game" or "roleplaying GAME" as Luddite on another forum puts it. As it stands, Team Mode sounds like the latter.

Of course, if rpG is what you want, then great. I could see why the gamist elements of Cohesion and "Team Awesome Powers" would appeal and that's great. One might imagine that they would help with the immersion into the game, just like, say, the additional dedicated crunch of Space Hulk likely does there.

Quicksilver said >>>

And personally, I'm glad that FFG is putting the time and effort into making Deathwatch a game specifically designed to play as a squad of Marines, rather than just porting over Dark Heresy with different starting equipment.

Errr... It's the same system, just with even more crunch.

Quicksilver said >>>

...but because everyone insists on comparing the two on some assumption that an RPG should be nothing like a video game.

I presume that's not a reference to me, since I have stated numerously that drawing some inspiration from them can increase the flavour of a Marine-specific game. With that said, my bias is for the "ROLEPLAYING game," or RPg. In that instance, "Team Awesome Powers" just seem unnecessary to the "fun" of the RP and, in some instances, create an additional barrier to the RP experience insofar as it changes the focus of the game.

Kage

I think that Cohesion is more to represent how long the very distinct training and personalities of each SM can stand to go against their own Chapters “proper” way of fighting. How long can a Space Wolf stand to fight with the restraint and control of an Ultramarine? How long can a Blood Angel keep the red thirst in check when he is trying to match the ferocity of a Space Wolf?

The thing to remember is that Deathwatch is an elite organization composed of hand picked veteran space marines. So from the get go, the characters should be, to borrow from Kage, out-ubering the line marines from their chapters. Their Deathwatch training should make them more uber than a standard marine from their chapter.

Kage2020:
It seems to buff Space Marines up beyond where they're already buffed to no end for the sake of "uber coolness." Can you imagine the amount of buffing that is going to go on for Grey Knights? Or, god forbid, Adeptus Custodes?

That's the point of Deathwatch. They are the top tier marines of all the Astartes chapters. As for Grey Knights, they are a Chapter that should be stupid powerful. A Grey Knight should be able to take down a greater daemon by himself. It'll be a slobber-knocker, but he should be able to do it. As for Custodes, IMO, they should just never be stated. They should just remain a 14' tall win button. As in they win, you don't.

Think of it this way: A Deathwatch marine is like Batman. A Grey Knight is Superman. They are on par with each other in how awesome they are, but they are by no means equal.

ItsUncertainWho said:

A single Grey Knight should definitely not be able to take a greater daemon by himself...

Atheosis said:

yet a primaris psyker from Ascension can one power a greater demon of Tzeentch? ......according to fluff for grey knights A Ordo Mallues Inq and a team of 5 to 6 grey knight termies held off a demon incursion on a planet....A PLANET....

so yes kage is does come down to a Power ideal...how much is too much??

What are fans going to want from playing such a more powerful role in the 40k verse? And by giving them that power is it tipping the scales way to much?

Something else that people need to understand is that Deathwatch is a special kill team usually sent in to uncover xenos activity or attempt to put a stop to xenos plots of invasion...should the deathwatch fail that is when the full might of the SMs are usually called in from their chapters.

RedSkull said:

Ascension is retarded. Please leave that joke of a game system out of this. And what Grey Knights fluff are you referring to exactly? As far as I'm aware Grey Knights usually have to deploy in mass to take on a full daemonic incursion, and often fail. They're badass, but not quite as badass as you're saying they are.

The fluff I refrence comes from the codex Demon hunters for the table top...If i can recall right there is a short story or something that talks about a small group being Epic.

And not to spark an argument but I believe that some people will be mixing the ideas of ascension into this game

ItsUncertainWho said >>>

I think that Cohesion is more to represent how long the very distinct training and personalities of each SM can stand to go against their own Chapters “proper” way of fighting. How long can a Space Wolf stand to fight with the restraint and control of an Ultramarine? How long can a Blood Angel keep the red thirst in check when he is trying to match the ferocity of a Space Wolf?

Darned good counter-argument. My answer to that would be "WP test" against specific disadvantages/traits, which wouldn't necessarily require the additional crunch. At the same time, darned good argument.

ItsUncertainWho said >>>

That's the point of Deathwatch. They are the top tier marines of all the Astartes chapters. As for Grey Knights, they are a Chapter that should be stupid powerful. A Grey Knight should be able to take down a greater daemon by himself. It'll be a slobber-knocker, but he should be able to do it. As for Custodes, IMO, they should just never be stated. They should just remain a 14' tall win button. As in they win, you don't.

I think it quite clearly comes down to a difference in interpretations of what a Marine is, which has always been the issue of Marines. Some people see them as bionetically enhanced humans in powered armour, while others view them as demigods. Such was ever going to be an issue with an Space Marine RPG and probably one part of the reason that it was always going to be contentious.

So, Deathwatch RPG is 40k Supers? Or at least it should be in your opinion?

Atheosis said >>>

A single Grey Knight should definitely not be able to take a greater daemon by himself...

I would tend to agree with that, but then again I don't view them as demigod superheroes.

RedSkull said >>>

...according to fluff for grey knights A Ordo Mallues Inq and a team of 5 to 6 grey knight termies held off a demon incursion on a planet....A PLANET....

One has always kind of hoped that even the publishers knew that the material is a bit on the cack side (English definition of "cack" there, not the Matt Damon Boston accent one), but it keeps on selling so they're not going to be looking a gift-horse in the mouth. If this is truly how awesome the Marines of the Deathwatch are meant to be then... Well, 40k has definitely come along way since its humble origins.

Kage

RedSkull said:

I'm well aware of that. That, combined with the abysmal DDs, is why I have little hope for DW.

RedSkull said:

I can't seem to find any such story.

Atheosis
Read the Grey Knight omnibus. It kinda sucks but it will back my argument. All Grey Knights do is train to hunt and kill Daemons. They are warded in mind, body, and armor. Armed with Psycannons, Nemesis force weapons, psychic powers, and all the normal space marine goodies.

Kage2020
I never said Deathwatch was 40K supers, you apparently missed the analogy. I also don't ascribe to the demigod theory but I do see them as significantly more capable than any human ever could be without massive augmentation. I equated space marines to Batman in my analogy. Batman is the peak of human perfection physically and mentally but is a non-powered hero who is still an equal to Superman, up to a point. Grey Knights are space marines, but then they get psyker powers also. They are equal, but they are better, significantly better.

Actually, demigod would be an accurate term to describe a space marine. Since a demigod is a human who is basically a level of magnitude greater than normal, it's actually quite an apt description. I don't believe they are unstoppable, but for lack of a better descriptor they are demigods. I seem to have reversed my own ideas a bit. Space Marines are basically superheros when compared to a normal man. So I guess I do expect Deathwatch to be a bit over the top when compared to DH or RT.

demigod
1 : a mythological being with more power than a mortal but less than a god
2 : a person so outstanding as to seem to approach the divine <the demigods of jazz>

A grey knight grand master might be able to take on a greater daemon, but a normal one won't. It took 100 Grey Knight terminators to defeat Angron and his Bloodthirsters and only ~8 I think survived the encounter.

Grey Knights are great, but they are still space marines. A single trooper won't be able to defeat a greater daemon one on one.

Hellebore

ItsUncertainWho said:

I know all about the Grey Knights. I actually read those books a long time ago, and I remember nothing in them that would support your statement. A solitary Grey Knight could not kill a Greater Daemon. As Hellebore says, maybe a Grand Master could pull it off, though I would heavily emphasize the 'maybe' there. Seriously what you're saying is just plain wrong.

ItsUncertainWho said >>>

I never said Deathwatch was 40K supers, you apparently missed the analogy.

Well, it would certainly one way of looking at it. One might also look back on some of the previous posts and look at the flavour of the arguments and see it as an interpretation of the argument within the context of other points. One might also suggest that if you're going to use an analogy, make sure that it is concise and appropriate since people will read associated and parallel information off of it.

Or, at least, it's something to think about.

ItsUncertainWho said >>>

I also don't ascribe to the demigod theory but I do see them as significantly more capable than any human ever could be without massive augmentation.

So, physically superior, enhanced technology, and good training. Fair enough. My point was merely that just because they have this doesn't mean that they are demi-gods. That you don't view them as such either is just another point.

ItsUncertainWho said >>>

I equated space marines to Batman in my analogy. Batman is the peak of human perfection physically and mentally but is a non-powered hero who is still an equal to Superman, up to a point.

This is where the analogy fails on a number of different levels since, of course, its hard to demand that people see the same relationships as another.

ItsUncertainWho said >>>

Actually, demigod would be an accurate term to describe a space marine.

On a mythological standpoint, perhaps. One could equally say "post human" without the divine references, which would perhaps be a more accurate term.

ItsUncertainWho said>>>

demigod

1 : a mythological being with more power than a mortal but less than a god
2 : a person so outstanding as to seem to approach the divine <the demigods of jazz>

Good definitions to show how it is either in inaccurate terms, or relies upon referencing mythology.

Kage

Kage2020

You seem to be forgetting the basis for 40K is that God, the God Emperor of Mankind (Bob), created the Space Marines. By that very fundamental, undeniable truth of 40K, space marines are man made better, divine, by Bob. They are less than gods themselves but so much more than man as to be approaching the divine.

Primarchs would be equatable to gods, as they were created wholly by Bob and were considered his sons and equals. They were never human, by any stretch of the imagination. Men were made greater by taking a part of a god, their Primarchs gene seed, and combining it with their own. Thus a demigod space marine is born.

I think people seem to be taking an odd view of the term demigod.

I also find it interesting that you think the Batman/Superman analogy failed. I thought it was quite accurate and easily understandable.

ItsUncertainWho said:

Except that the Emperor expressly forbid people from viewing him as a god, and the majority still Space Marines continue that tradition...

Atheosis said:

The Emperor hasn't made any complaints about it in the last 10,000 years.

ItsUncertainWho said >>>

You seem to be forgetting the basis for 40K is that God, the God Emperor of Mankind (Bob), created the Space Marines. By that very fundamental, undeniable truth of 40K, space marines are man made better, divine, by Bob. They are less than gods themselves but so much more than man as to be approaching the divine.

Now that you have pointed out the error of my ways, I shall endeavour to reform...

... Not.

Let's just face it, I could say that the celery in my salad is "God" and, therefore, that my salad is divine. It doesn't make it "fact," though, it just makes it a part of a mythological system--a system of belief . Forgive my whimsy, but that particular argument reminds me of this:

Monty Python and the Holy Grail had this to say on the topic >>>

ARTHUR: The Lady of the Lake,
[angels sing]
her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur
from the bosom of the water signifying by Divine Providence that I,
Arthur, was to carry Excalibur.
[singing stops]
That is why I am your king!

DENNIS: Listen strange women lying in ponds distributing swords
is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power
derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical
aquatic ceremony.

ARTHUR: Be quiet!

DENNIS: Well you can't expect to wield supreme executive power
just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!

ARTHUR: Shut up!

DENNIS: I mean, if I went around sayin' I was an empereror just
because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me they'd
put me away!

Thus, arguing that just because someone that is claimed (by others) to be a "god," whatever that might mean, definitively makes the Space Marines "demi-gods" is... is... I'm sorry, about the only thing that springs to mind is "laughable."

That the people of the Imperium might them in that way is slightly more believable, but for vanilla 40k then the chances are that this very specific information is going to be beyond their sphere of knowledge. Thus, the "Angels of Death," the harbingers of the Emperor's Wrath that ride the Emperor's steed, the Thunderhawk, into their acts of retribution against the unrighteous.

ItsUncertainWho said >>>

Primarchs would be equatable to gods, as they were created wholly by Bob and were considered his sons and equals.

Beyond the repeated conflation of mythology and religious beliefs for fact, while they might have been considered his sons, not even they considered themselves to be his equal.

ItsUncertainWho said >>>

I think people seem to be taking an odd view of the term demigod.

I like to think of it as a literal one. YMATV.

ItsUncertainWho said >>>

I also find it interesting that you think the Batman/Superman analogy failed. I thought it was quite accurate and easily understandable.

Interest away. I would just avoid mention to superheroes. It feeds too much into the mythology and the common conflationarguableof Marines that leads to the "power creep" that is a part of the history of interpretation of Space Marines. (And which might be at the heart of the Team Mode.)

Kage

Figure I'll chime in again as best possible with my NDA:

I actually was a game master in one of the play test groups. I can't speak on a lot of specifics, but the Solo Mode/Squad Mode abilities along with Cohesion is something that we focused on from the start of the play test to help ensure it was a fun mechanic. Having actually played some games, I can say that they are not abilities that you will probably use in every encounter, but they are there for imaginative players and can definitely make or break an encounter if used right. For those that are concerned, they in no way replace combat, rather they give your group simply more options.

Kage2020 said:

Maybe, but whether or not the Emperor is a god within the context of the setting is subject to more than just the opinion of the masses; afterall, many things are determined to be 'gods' within the 40k universe, from the C'Tan, to some interpretations of the Old Ones, to warp-borne incarnate pseudo-intellects formed from coalescing emotions. Determining whether or not those things are gods is more than simply a matter of opinion on the parts of their believers.

Indeed, given the nature of the Warp, belief in its own right may be sufficient to lend credence to claims of divinity. The ruinous powers come as much from belief as they do from stray emotion - indeed, it might be suggested that the focussed emotion of knowing belief is more potent than unfocussed thought (a berserker rage devoted specifically to Khorne grants the Lord of Skulls far more power than one not specifically devoted to Khorne) - so are they gods because they are worshipped, or are they worshipped because they are gods?

By the same token, over the last ten thousand years, untold numbers of human beings have lived lives devoted to serving and worshipping the Emperor of Mankind, praying to him for protection, strength, guidance and all manner of other things, because they have been raised to think of him as a god. The Orks know that humanity worships the Emperor, understanding him to be the war-god of mankind, and belief that Titans are made in the Emperor's image just as Gargants are made in the image of the Orks' own violent deities. By merit of that belief in the Emperor's divinity, is the Emperor made divine?

If so, then the Astartes, through their genetic links to the Emperor (each bearing a fragment of the genetic legacies of their Primarch, who in turn were wrought from the genetics of the Emperor) are literal demigods...

This does, to an extent, depend on whether or not you accept the 40k universe as being essentially fantasy with superficial sci-fi trappings...