Deathwatch and Inquisitors pushing their weight around

By fleshbearer, in Deathwatch Gamemasters

Posted at

AluminiumWolf said:

And what if some fanboy doesn't want to play their Space Marine as somebodies *****?

I don't think it is all that unlikely that people will want to play their SPACE MARINES, not Dark Heresy losers now, but SPACE MARINES as Masterless Men.

Cause seriously, we are talking about Space Marines here. This isn't a touching portrayal of one womans battle with cancer. This is a Space Marine, who is pretty much intended for juvenile power fantasies. As such, it seems churlish and rather wasteful to try to deny people the fun of playing a steriotypical kill crazed PC, especially when barely restrained psychotic fits so well with Space Marines.

I mean, if you look up Adolescent Power Fantasy in a dictionary there is a picture of a Space Marine.

Now, we can do everything we can to make the game meaningful and deep and ****, but lets not kid ourselves about the kind of experience people want out of playing a SPACE MARINE!

If that works for you, great! Enjoy it. Personally, I prefer to have a bit more to my game than "run around, shoot, repeat." If you take out any meaningful roleplay, you might as well be playing the tabletop game. Just change the rules so SMs are unstoppable killing machines and you're good to go.

So far, the Inquisition in my game has mostly consisted of Inquisitor Quist. She's been in a number of scenarios I've run, from the GM Kit adventure to a modified DH space hulk mission. Missions where she's actually come along (two of them) have taken the form of either the KT's Watch Captain telling the team to follow her lead to the team being asked to assist and protect her while having an entirely independent objective. If a confrontation was to take place between the KT and an Inquisitor, it would be something I'd plan where the two would be at cross purposes because of different intelligence. The obvious solution would be for the two sides to work together to find out what the real situation was. If things still turned hostile, it would definitely cost the team Renown or XP if they started it (especially if they killed the Inquisitor). I'd do that since there would be some way for the team to find another solution, be it a Lore skill or social rolls, and just saying "screw it, we shoot the Inquisitor" wouldn't cut it. If the Inquisitor, for whatever reason, was completely intractable and forced the team's hand it would be because that's what I planned for them, and thus no penalty would hit them.

I see Inquisitors as still human. They're tenacious, aggressive, and likely hard-hearted SOBs (no, not Sisters of Battle) with a ton of resources at hand. That said, they can still suffer from Humanity's flaws. I remember one of the Space Wolves books had an Inquisitor whose actions weren't the most sensible because there was a plague ravaging his home planet that he was trying to stop. Inquisitors can still make mistakes, still be fooled, but I definitely don't see them as bumbling idiots. Their career path is like Space Marine training - the weak and unqualified are weeded out before the end.

Posted at

Brand said:

If you take out any meaningful roleplay, you might as well be playing the tabletop game.

Hell, who is talking about taking out meaningful roleplay? Or do you think only bootlicking NPCs counts as roleplaying? No, playing a Space Marine I expect to be negotiating at least from a position of equals, and ideally a position of strength. If you want a game where the PC are constantly negotiating from a position of weakness I suggest Dark Heresy.

--

I just don't think we should lose sight of the core fantasy of being a Space Marine. Which is being a legendary badass, not somebodies *****.

When making The Force Unleashed, the guy in charge made everyone say at the start of every meeting:-

"What is the core gameplay?"

"Kicking someones ass with the Force!"

So, what is the core fantasy of being a Space Marine? How do we want a player to feel while playing the game? What do we want them to carry away from the game?

I submit that we totally want them to feel empowered by how awesome their Space Marine is, and not that they were totally that guys *****.

Posted at

If the players don't feel empowered by mowing down/routing hundreds of enemies in a few seconds, I don't know what it'll take. The KT should often be at a position of strength (they're the heroes arriving to save the day, after all) with the majority of the people they deal with - generals, beleaguered governors, etc. But there are people at their level or above in terms of power and resources - people like Inquisitors. It's times like these that roleplay should matter and not "I punch the problem in the face with my awesomeness until it goes away."

No matter how badass your Space Marine is, he IS someone's *****. It may be his Watch Captain, Watch Commander Mordigael, or whoever the team is assigned to help. There's a reason Quist is poisoned in "A Stony Sleep" - she's in charge, not the KT. Her poisoning allows the KT the freedom to do their own thing and shine. The key thing to remember is that having someone above you doesn't make you a weakling; it just means you're part of the Imperial machine. Look at the Space Wolves, possibly the most independent Chapter. Even their leaders admit they have to play politics because they can't achieve their goals by themselves.

Posted at

Double Post. I hate this forum software.

Posted at

I think what I am trying to say is that I think players will be happier with most interactions with NPCs taking the form of granting boons or dispensing charity, rather than being ordered about.

The PCs have something the NPCs cannot get anywhere else (largely their badassosity, but also potentially their wisdom or connection with the God Emperor), and the NPCs must ask nicely and offer something in return.

'Help us Obi-Wan Kenobi, you are our only hope!'

not

'Do this or face the consequences!'

And if every once in a while the PC want to withhold their services to demonstrate that they hold the power in the relationship, fine. This is about making the players feel empowered after all.

--

++++No matter how badass your Space Marine is, he IS someone's *****.++++

Well, I disagree. He may have technical superiors, but he is cooler than all of them.

They need the Space Marine, more than he needs them. They must beg him for his help, and be grateful that he gives it.

The Marine is the coolest person in the room.

Posted at

AluminiumWolf said:

I think what I am trying to say is that I think players will be happier with most interactions with NPCs taking the form of granting boons or dispensing charity, rather than being ordered about.

The PCs have something the NPCs cannot get anywhere else (largely their badassosity, but also potentially their wisdom or connection with the God Emperor), and the NPCs must ask nicely and offer something in return.

'Help us Obi-Wan Kenobi, you are our only hope!'

not

'Do this or face the consequences!'

And if every once in a while the PC want to withhold their services to demonstrate that they hold the power in the relationship, fine. This is about making the players feel empowered after all.

And that's fine; the majority of NPC interactions will be like that. You won't see a Commissar trying to order around the group in any of my games. It doesn't mean there won't be missions with the Inquisition or directions from the team's Watch Captain, though. And the team is certainly allowed to say no to a possible mission objective (where they haven't been ordered by a superior), though they should be aware there's every possibility such decisions will come back to hurt them later, be it with gameplay repercussions or a loss of XP (no objective completed, no reward). I've had players miss objectives plenty. Sometimes they turn them down in favor of one that seems more important, sometimes they just flat miss the cues in front of them.

Posted at

Well, the majority is no good. If there are nine occasions where the Marines are negotiating from strength and one where they are obviously somebodies *****, it is being a ***** that they will remember.

Like I say, if there is an NPC who you genuinely can't stand the idea of the PCs being cooler than they are, keep them well away from the party.

Posted at

AluminiumWolf said:

Well, the majority is no good. If there are nine occasions where the Marines are negotiating from strength and one where they are obviously somebodies *****, it is being a ***** that they will remember.

Like I say, if there is an NPC who you genuinely can't stand the idea of the PCs being cooler than they are, keep them well away from the party.

It depends on how you work it (and how picky your party is). Let's keep Quist in "A Stony Sleep" as an example.

A. Quist sends a message to the party asking them to meet her in her audience chamber and relays the information about her missing friend. She asks the team to join her in the mission. The team runs it by their Captain, who tells them to accompany Quist and help her discover the truth of what's happening on Karlack.

B. Quist summons the group and tells them a bit about her problem. She orders them to join her. If they protest, their Captain orders them to go with her and follow her instructions.

Now, both of these methods result in the group helping Quist on her mission. They both result in her being in charge (it's her mission, after all). You'll likely get very different responses from your team based on which one you use. I went with A, and I didn't have any problem with how my team took to helping the Inquisitor. I don't think any sensible group should have a problem with it. Quist is at least on a par with the party, authority-wise, and that's why the module had her safely removed before the action really started.

Plus, if you've got a team clashing with someone like Mordigael, then they SHOULD remember that. Now, those sort of things should be very, very rare, but I've seen players take more insane actions. Unless you're the Emperor, you've got at least one boss (or someone you can't push around, at least); that's just the way of things.

Posted at

I guess I just like seeing NPCs beg, possibly because it happens so rarely.

--

I feel there should be many events ongoing at once, so if someone is being difficult the Marines can piss off and do something else - their skills are always in demand, so if you are not going to be polite and offer something in return you can go **** yourself.

'Sure, pal, we will move that right to the top of the queue' <dumps request in to circular filing cabinet>

Posted at

Then again I think we've kinda slipped away from the basic question, though this discussion is interesting as well.

The basic question was "Can a Space Marine shoot an Inquisitor and shrugg off the consequences?" Surely, the answer is "no". Even if you're a marine, and the cooles baddest mofo in the room, that doesn't allow you to behave like a crazy killer. And killing someone because "He was being loud" is not an excuse ;)

So, as much as Space Marines should be able to tell an Inquisitor to go f*** off, that doesn't mean they can do whatever they want. If a Watch Captain orders them to follow an Inq's orders, they better do it. The Captain is cooler than you, boy. Which makes the Inq cooler than you, because he's in charge of your buttochs.

And about the original situation, well, if the Inq just randomly found them and ordered them around, then they have two choices: if they agree, they can do the job (maybe tell the Inq to lower the volume if he wants attention), if they disagree, they can just point to their left shoulder pad and say "Hey man, Deathwatch here, we don't take sh*t". But they have absolutely no reason to become violent against an Inq. Space Marines are not only genetically superengineered killing machines. They are the paragons of mankind, the descendants from the Emperor. So they should behave accordingly, and not kill or hurt people because they can, but because they need to.

Posted at

N0-1_H3r3 said:

In which case, they have no place within the Deathwatch and should be returned to their Chapters as soon as possible - the Deathwatch is no place for petulant troublemakers.

I have no issue with a variety of different types of people... but there are a variety of preconceptions and fundamental premises that I operate by. Foremost in this instance being that Astartes who have impulse control problems or a problem with authority figures and don't get nominated to join the Deathwatch (and seldom advance within their own Chapters), and that only a relative minority of Ordo Xenos Inquisitors actually ever call upon/serve alongside the Deathwatch, and those are the ones most likely to treat the matter with the solemnity it deserves.

Their status? As what? The Deathwatch exists as an ally of the Ordo Xenos. Murdering Inquisitors because they're annoying is so far beyond what their vaunted status permits that it's farcical, and is the sort of behaviour that will result in severe reprimands from within the Deathwatch, simply to ensure that the organisation and its chain of command are not diminished or their relationship with their allies remains as strong as it must be. The nearest real-world equivalent would be if members of the SAS started gunning down highly-placed CIA agents (or vice-versa, if one of America's various special forces started killing MI6 agents)... it's not the kind of thing that goes away cleanly and quietly, no matter how much a swift, clean resolution may be desired.

As an organisation, the Deathwatch exists in support of the Ordo Xenos, and the relationship goes both ways. An Inquisitor who misuses a valuable resource like a Kill-Team will not be well-regarded by his peers, and may even suffer for his presumption... but similarly, the Deathwatch can't effectively act in a situation where the local representatives of the Inquisition don't trust them because of past bloodshed. The Ordo Xenos needs the unique blend of precision and might that the Deathwatch provides, and the Deathwatch needs the connections and intelligence networks the Inquisition cultivates to give direction and purpose to their power. If one element on either side messes things up, it goes wrong for both sides.. and as a result, it is in the best interests of Inquisition and Deathwatch alike to make every effort to cooperate effectively.

I completely agree. Even if the Inquisition is to be rebuffed, it is not the job of the mere battle-brother to do so, no more than it is valid for a P1C to execute a nosey journalist because he thought it was the right thing to do.

'Marines' most certainly are not freelancers. You could consider the CHAPTER to be freelancers, and senior figures its spokesman and representatives, but there's a vast difference between a Chapter Master or Watch Commander and a kill-team assault marine. Marines exist within an organisational structure, and basic training should weed out the wildcards who F*** things up because they didn't think about what they were doing. AW favours a setting where marines are elite. Me to. And elite troops are disciplined; not brainless hooligans.

Maybe a Watch Commander can tell an Inquisitor to stuff it (and I imagine the Commander does turn down his share of requests in a more diplomatic manner). Maybe they would order them killed or do so themselves. But they would do so with the full knowledge of the political ramifications of their actions. For a battle brother to gun an Inquisitor down because he didn't like the cut of his jib is just dumb. Forget the ramifications from the Inquisition: What the Watch Commander would do to him should be far worse. In his shoes I'd be sending the brother and the guys who stood by and let him kill an inquisitor for giggles on a suicide mission pronto, so when the ramifications arrived, I'd be able to say "Sorry, he was KIA last week along with the rest of his team who witnessed it. Guess we'll never know what happened. Let's just bury it, eh?"
In the WC's boots, even if I believed the Marine to have been 100% correct, I'd RTU him immediately, and then point any Inquisitors at his Chapter, and let them sort out the inevitable *&^%storm. That's the BEST case scenario.

As others have highlighted: DW marines are specially selected for the role. A deep-running hatred of authority figures doesn't really mesh with that. If somebody doesn't want to play as somebody's *****, then they should probably not be playing in a military themed game where you are ALWAYS somebody's *****. It's a joke to call them masterless, seeing as they are hypno-conditioned members of a formal organisational structure. There are a million other games where one can 'cut loose' as a PC, but seriously... in a military game, as part of a fascist Imperium, where some guy hands you orders and you go and do what missions you are told? Not really. If players want to cut loose and play crazed psychos who do what they want, then this is not the game for it really... Black Crusade will be a much better bet.

The clue is that the PCs are wearing a uniform. That makes them someone's *****.

Now I'm not saying that every mission should feature the PCs being followed around and told what to do. It should be very much the exception that they are micro-managed, or even really managed in any degree other than being told to do a mission and not blow the planet up. But sometimes there will be occasions where the GM sets up a plot-line that involves the players being managed in a more hands-on manner; maybe in fact in order to reinforce that they are NOT a bunch of loose cannons and do sometimes have to do as told, and maybe for other reasons... but I think that we can agree that no GM who has ever got laid and has a life is going to constantly send the party on missions along with a hand-puppet NPC who bosses them around. If the player's reaction to that rare occurrence is to whine 'I'm nobody's *****' and start popping bolt shells into an Inquisitors face, then that's just crappy gaming, and -frankly- they need to get a life.

As to lazy inquisitors... An Inquisitor is what... one in a billion...more, even, for there certainly seems to be far less than one per planet. It's a superbly powerful role in one of the most political, vicious organisations around. You don't get there by being lazy, and you don't get to sit on your laurels if you do. People capable of taking such positions are driven people. Real-world comparisons would be perhaps the ten most powerful individuals on our planet. Such people don't retire and hand over the reins, because the concept of their career being 'over' and there being no more billions to make or mountains to climb simply isn't there for that kind of person. I just don't see it as appropriate to have Inquisitors as anything less than driven and competent, barring perhaps for aspects of mental fatigue slipping in from years of long service and seeing lots of horrible gribblies. Slightly unhinged: Yes. Lazy and useless: No.

Posted at

Stormast said:

if they disagree, they can just point to their left shoulder pad and say "Hey man, Deathwatch here, we don't take sh*t". But they have absolutely no reason to become violent against an Inq. Space Marines are not only genetically superengineered killing machines. They are the paragons of mankind, the descendants from the Emperor. So they should behave accordingly, and not kill or hurt people because they can, but because they need to.

Or the more sensible option of "Hey, we're on a job already. Top priority. Would love to help, but FIGMO. Tell you what: Here's the name of my Watch Captain. Go and ask him. Yeah...he's 50 light years away, but I'm sure he'll get right back to you, Sir."

Posted at

AluminiumWolf said:

SPACE MARINES as Masterless Men.

The problem is that you are breaking all the basic assumptions the world of 40 000 is based on. Space Marines are not Masterless Men. They are very much under authority and very much in control. If you want to play "I listen to no-one" in the World of 40 000, there are games for that:

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_temas.asp?efid=123&efcid=3

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_temas.asp?efid=231&efcid=3

AluminiumWolf said:

Cause seriously, we are talking about Space Marines here. This isn't a touching portrayal of one womans battle with cancer. This is a Space Marine, who is pretty much intended for juvenile power fantasies. As such, it seems churlish and rather wasteful to try to deny people the fun of playing a steriotypical kill crazed PC, especially when barely restrained psychotic fits so well with Space Marines. I mean, when is there going to be a better opportunity to cut lose and have some fun?

If you look up Adolescent Power Fantasy in a dictionary there is a picture of a Space Marine.

Now, we can do everything we can to make the game meaningful and deep and ****, but lets not kid ourselves about the kind of experience people want out of playing a SPACE MARINE! (as a hint, I suspect being someones ***** is not it).

Interesting rant: "touching portrayal of one womans battle with cancer"... "kill crazed"... "barely restrained psychotic fits"... "someones *****"... Especially the term "someones *****" comes up quite a lot in your writing. Where everyone else in this thread is talking about the limits of cooperation, chain of command, authority and limits of status and power you seem to see this whole thing in very much black-and-white terms:

Either you can do whatever you **** wish with no consequences whatsover or you are "someones *****".

I'm not even going to write out what I am thinking right now.

Posted at

I don't think it is genuinely news to people that a lot of Marine fans are going to want to play a Space Marine who isn't anyones *****.

Again, this isn't the heartwarming story of the lives and loves of three couples in small town Alaska. This is Space Marine roleplaying. A certain amount of boyish glee is not only to be expected, it should be tolerated and even encouraged!

It therefore behoves us to consider ways to avoid their characters looking like anyones *****.

--

Marines range from Noble Ultramarines through Stoic Imperial Fists through Norse Berserker Space Wolves to proper hardcore psychos like Flesh Tearers and Carcharodons/Space Sharks. Kill crazy mentalist is not outside the box for Space Marines. Like, at all. Marines are the most violent men in a universe of violent men. As always, these are not calm professionals. These are men whose hate is so pure it gives them combat bonuses. Men who are dangerous to be around.

Just like PCs...

--

I would suggest that we examine the Maverick Cop/Police Captain dynamic for how to handle a superior/subordinate relationship where the junior position is the coolest person.

(McBain is almost big enough to be a Space Marine)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXSpPvb9lhk

It means he gets results you stupid chief!

The chief is just there to provide a demonstration that the cool guy doesn't play by the rules - but he gets results!

Posted at

N0-1_H3r3 said:

ak-73 said:

Yeah but I'm not going run them as all-knowing. Nor am I going to run them as competent through-out. Nor do I have to assume that psychic probing will reveal a candidate who doesn't have any intention to live the good life once having attained rank. Unless you suggest looking into the future at which point it turns into "It's psychic powers, I ain't got to explain s**t."

Quite frankly, lazy, feckless Inquisitors doesn't fit my view of the setting. At all. There are plenty of people like that in the Imperium, but those who somehow end up in the service of the inquisition tend to end up dead as a consequence of being generally lacklustre human beings.

I don't want to have a too fixed view of the setting. And actually it will be hard to keep tabs on an Inquisitor, where he is what he is doing and whether he's being lazy or not.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

ak-73 said:

Doesn't have much bearing on the scenario I made up: an actual severe conflict of interests where neither side is willing to back down. You are free to fill in the blanks yourself.

At which point, you'll protest that my "filling in the blanks" has missed the point entirely... I've been in internet discussions before, I know how they work.

Well, if your filling the blanks misses other people's point regularly, it wouldn't be surprising if you knew the response before-hand.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

Thing is, I'm reminded of the short story Exhumed, by Steve Parker - a Deathwatch short story, written to the same background we're discussing here (because the author was sent copies of it) - where the Kill-Team are given the order by an Inquisitor to execute the personnel of an Adeptus Mechanicus dig site at the end of their mission... the Kill-Team's leader doesn't want to, but the Kill-Team complies anyway (mainly because one of the other Marines forces the matter). The Inquisitor isn't directly present at all - they don't even know his real name - but it sums up for me the interactions between an Inquisitor and a Kill-Team.

We have been debating this short story before. Not the scenario I had suggested. Two points: we had been discussing rather as a conflict on morality iirc. Secondly, I would not generalize from one short story to general behaviour.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

ak-73 said:

They are pretty much the same thing when both end up being obstacles to a mission that needs to be accomplished.

Not really an answer.

You think? Not really an explanation why not.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

"Needs to be accomplished"? Really?

You heard me right.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

I don't see the Kill-Team having any actual say in the matter, beyond bullying and generally acting like swaggering idiots. In my opinion, the matter is simple: the Kill-Team honours their oath, does as the Inquisitor demands, and then if they've got a problem with it, they bring it up with their Watch Captain, who actually has the authority and experience to deal with the matter.

If the alternative is Space Marines having a tantrum (albeit a tantrum that ends in bloodshed), then I'd rather see restraint.

Still not the scenario I suggested though. I was talking about a conflict of interests such as a chance encounter inquisitor having demands that interferes with their mission.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

ak-73 said:

Which might place the Inquisitor's life in immediate peril if the KT doesn't want their existance made living hell, especially if it would threaten to interfere with their current mission. Which is what they might have their mind more on than their existance beyond the current mission which they may not survive.

A Space Marines life is full of enemies. It is their Watch Commander's duty to protect them from repercussions of doing the Emperor's work.

Just as it's their Watch Commander's duty to protect the ongoing mission of the Deathwatch from the mistakes of his subordinates.

It's the how-maniest post now and you're still not addressing the scenario I was raising.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

ak-73 said:

I thought we were talking about a chance encounter in the field though.

I don't know about you, but I don't tend to put Inquisitors on random encounter tables.

"Chance encounter in the field" is, IMO, ludicrous, particularly if the situation is one likely to end in bloodshed.

Does that mean in your 40K universe can never encounter an Inquisitor who is working on his own case? Okay...

N0-1_H3r3 said:

ak-73 said:

Chance encoutner.

Chance encounter is more likely with that Inquisitor's acolytes/throne agents. Who are far more likely to stand aside and let the Astartes do what they want.

Simulationist thinking applied to a cinematic game.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

ak-73 said:

A world in which most people are noble or reasonable, nice. Not the kind of world I play 40K in though. It's the fringe cases that make for better cinema.

Noble, reasonable and nice? Hardly. Ruthless, efficient and cunning.

Frankly, I'd rather not deal with a version of 40k where the Inquisition consists primarily of the petty tyrants, feckless cowards and witless megalomaniacs, or where an elite organisation of Astartes chosen from many Chapters is populated with the unstable, the psychotic and the trigger-happy.

And I prefer a less predictable mixture of both. Especially since I think that giving people a position of nearly unlimited power doesn't breed efficiency, irrespective of the path needed to attain it. But then again that argument is too much from the realism angle too.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

ak-73 said:

As for the Astartes, there is entire chapters who only grudgingly uphold the ancient vow of sending their own to the Deathwatch. Again, my view of what is going on is more grim-dark. Some Marines, particular Space Wolves, might not be too enthusiastic about having to leave their pack behind.

Clearly you and I have different ideas as to what grimdark means. Yours, to my mind, seems to be far more of a farce, rife with far too many people who would be utterly pointless in hugely important roles. I don't feel that "grimdark" has to equal "everyone is a screwed up and wretched example of humanity who wouldn't look out of place in a Tim Burton movie".

I have no idea of grimdark whatsoever but I acknowledge the "pulp" nature of the 40K setting. Perhaps it comes from having grown up with the substantial amount of cheese that existed both in 40K as well as WFRP. I don't consider it farcical either, I consider it human and completely thematic with the feudal side of the Imperium: I don't think of Inquisitors as highly professional people through-out at all but some of them rather being comparable to mediaeval popes.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

As for upholding the vow... it's not a tithe. A Chapter isn't required to send X number of Marines every century... it's a choice. If a Chapter has a problem with sending Astartes to the Deathwatch, they don't send anyone.

Well, some Chapter Masters might not want to send one of their own but will feel bound by the Oath of one of their predecessors.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

ak-73 said:

Deathwatch doesn't equal Reasonable Marines chapter.

If anything, yes it does - the Deathwatch get called upon to do things that would cause nothing but disgust in those not of the Deathwatch. It requires a degree of "plays well with others" and "can put personal feelings aside in the name of fighting a common enemy".

How boring Deathwatch RPG would be if every PC would play well with (all) others.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

Space Marines who struggle with those simple matters of personal discipline.. they're the ones who get sent on decades-long penitent crusades into the most dangerous corners of the galaxy. They're not the kind of Space Marine who gets sent to the Deathwatch.

Which is good enough for a GM to prevent inner-party bloodshed, not to shut down less violent conflict. You will find that a lot of DW groups play their PCs less "reasonable" than you suggest, simply it makes for more interesting interaction. Which is why I say that dramaturgic concerns override your approach towards realism.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

I'm not inclined to put a square peg in a round hole for the sake of more easily stereotyped NPCs. I'm not inclined to run Inquisitor Weiss and the Seven Battle-Brothers (Grumpy, Happy, Sleepy, Bashful, Sneezy, Dopey, and their Apothecary, Doc).

Sounds rather you run Inquisitor Balanced and the Seven Battle-Brothers Reasonable-01, Reasonable-02, Reasonable-03, Reasonable-04, Reasonable-05, Reasonable-06, Reasonable-07. You will find that my play-style is the style people generally play DW and it actually can be put to good depth, if you don't reduce your character to one or two traits but that goes for every rpg.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

ak-73 said:

From ancient terra the Emperor commands his proud sons.

From revered bloodstock these warriors are made his proud sons.

His proud sons who have a history of heresy and betrayal... is it any wonder the Inquisition doesn't trust them?

That does not go so much though for the successors of those legions who remained loyalist. And if I might add: if you are an Inquisitor and say such a thing to an ill-tempered Blood Angel marine who is daily re-experiencing the death of his own Primarch as he was surrendering his life for the sake of the Emperor himself, you're putting yourself in danger.

Not to mention that the Inquisition has its own heretics among their own. A fair share.

Anyway, the Astartes blood predates the Imperium and it predates the founding of the Inquisition. You can be sure that a number of Astartes won't accept the Inquisition as the higher authority and a number of Inquisitors will only see their own authority and not accept any pride the Astartes might hold.

Because different people have different viewpoints and attitudes. That's variety for ya.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

ak-73 said:

And if you had kept the scenario I suggested in mind, you would have realized that killing that Inquisitor might not be seen as a misdeed by their superiors but rather a necessary act to accomplish their mission.

Doesn't make it any better for them.

The right choice, the easy choice, the necessary choice... none of them should ever come without consequences, especially in 40k. That's where I get my grimdark - heroism tainted by compromise, the right choices tarred with terrible consequences and necessary sacrifices... not surly, petulant Astartes and lazy, incompetent Inquisitors.

I got fed up with it in WFRP - the sheer number of incompetent and/or corrupt authority figures in WFRP1 basically made me sick of the whole concept.

Easy enough to change. However incompetence and corruption are both "realistic" concepts in feudal societies. They tend to breed both, I think.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

ak-73 said:

Now if only everyone would act all the time reasonably... it would make for an efficient Imperium and for a bland storyline.

Reasonably? Clearly, you're reading something into what I'm writing that isn't my intent.

Organisations like the Deathwatch and the Inquisition exist because the Imperium is inefficient. They exist to bypass the inefficiencies, so that the Imperium can acutally defend itself.

Posted at

Brand said:

If the players don't feel empowered by mowing down/routing hundreds of enemies in a few seconds, I don't know what it'll take. The KT should often be at a position of strength (they're the heroes arriving to save the day, after all) with the majority of the people they deal with - generals, beleaguered governors, etc. But there are people at their level or above in terms of power and resources - people like Inquisitors. It's times like these that roleplay should matter and not "I punch the problem in the face with my awesomeness until it goes away."

No matter how badass your Space Marine is, he IS someone's *****. It may be his Watch Captain, Watch Commander Mordigael, or whoever the team is assigned to help. There's a reason Quist is poisoned in "A Stony Sleep" - she's in charge, not the KT. Her poisoning allows the KT the freedom to do their own thing and shine. The key thing to remember is that having someone above you doesn't make you a weakling; it just means you're part of the Imperial machine. Look at the Space Wolves, possibly the most independent Chapter. Even their leaders admit they have to play politics because they can't achieve their goals by themselves.

While what you say is true I'd like to add a small correction: Quist asks the KT for aid. She asks them to be their escort, their protection.

Alex

Posted at

Siranui said:

but I think that we can agree that no GM who has ever got laid and has a life is going to constantly send the party on missions along with a hand-puppet NPC who bosses them around. If the player's reaction to that rare occurrence is to whine 'I'm nobody's *****' and start popping bolt shells into an Inquisitors face, then that's just crappy gaming, and -frankly- they need to get a life.

Two points:

1. That has never been the suggested scenario. The suggested scenario a severe conflict of interest, such as an Inquisitor who has been never given formal authority over them by their WC encountered in the field, pursuing his own case, meeting them and starting to give them orders because he insists on him having the formal authority to do so by nature of his vocation.

This debate started out with me stating that Deathwatch marines don't s**t from an Inquisitor and in the above scenario I don't assume the KT would be too impressed if the Inquisitor's orders conflicted with their current mission. As for shooting the Inquisitor, if he had insisted on his formal authority based on him weilding an inquisitorial rosette and was willing to enforce his perceived authority, it very well might come to that point.

In that case in my game world a review would take place after the mission and the KT would probably be cleared. "I knew Inquisitor X, he always was a d*ckhead."

Siranui said:

As to lazy inquisitors... An Inquisitor is what... one in a billion...more, even, for there certainly seems to be far less than one per planet. It's a superbly powerful role in one of the most political, vicious organisations around. You don't get there by being lazy, and you don't get to sit on your laurels if you do. People capable of taking such positions are driven people. Real-world comparisons would be perhaps the ten most powerful individuals on our planet. Such people don't retire and hand over the reins, because the concept of their career being 'over' and there being no more billions to make or mountains to climb simply isn't there for that kind of person. I just don't see it as appropriate to have Inquisitors as anything less than driven and competent, barring perhaps for aspects of mental fatigue slipping in from years of long service and seeing lots of horrible gribblies. Slightly unhinged: Yes. Lazy and useless: No.

Well, the middle ages and feudal times are full of people who have been working hard to carve out their own personal kingdom (if necessary by invading other countries and taking what you want) and they didn't get their by being lazy. But they did get there to be able to afford being lazy. And some of them got lazy. Some of them had to pay for that and others didn't.

And what you saying above is fairly unrealistic too. It's like saying that Bill Gates would never retire from being CEO of Microsoft and hand over the reins because that is his vocation. Sure you can find 10 people who commit to one thing for their entire life, however why they should be representative of Inquisitors and not formerly passionate and dedicated individuals who have had enough and want to do something else isn't clear. Unless you presume a mythical weeding out process that seperates those who never tire from those who tire out after x years/decades.

Alex

Posted at

AluminiumWolf said:

Marines are the most violent men in a universe of violent men.

Err, I have some Khornate cultists here who'd like to have a word with you...

And @ak-73, I was under the impression that in order to become an Inquisitor one had to have served as an acolyte under another Inquisitor. Wouldn't the things an Inquisitor has seen and done during this apprenticeship (acolyteship?) give the Inquisitor a good perspective on the state of the Imperium, and the consequences for lack of vigilance?

Presumably at the very least on the road to becoming an Inquisitor they would have had a taste of the infinite horrors of the warp.

Don't get me wrong, a lax Inquisitor would make for a great storyline, but they'd definitely be in the minority.

Posted at

Lex1nat0r said:

Don't get me wrong, a lax Inquisitor would make for a great storyline, but they'd definitely be in the minority.

Oh, absolutely. I consider the fringe cases interesting.

Alex

Posted at

AluminiumWolf said:

I don't think it is genuinely news to people that a lot of Marine fans are going to want to play a Space Marine who isn't anyones *****.

Again, this isn't the heartwarming story of the lives and loves of three couples in small town Alaska. This is Space Marine roleplaying. A certain amount of boyish glee is not only to be expected, it should be tolerated and even encouraged!

It therefore behoves us to consider ways to avoid their characters looking like anyones *****.

I'm sorry but I don't feel obliged to indulge every specific power-fantasy of every specific player in my group. There are guys and gals who do that for a modest payment, I'm sure. But thats not my job as a GM. My job is to run a game that is interesting, fun and pleasing to play and run. Which also means that my job is to keep the world, settting and rules consistent. One consistent part of 40K world is that however 'cool' Space Marines are they are not always the top dogs in chain of command and when push comes to shove they are not necessarily the guys with biggest guns. Many times they are, but not all the time. If the mission calls for powerfull Inquisitor who has the balls and guns to tell a Space Marine twice then he or she WILL do that. If that happens to insult the delicate sensibilities of someone who feels emasculated and impotent when his superman alter-ego is suddenly "someones *****"... Well, I'm not his psychotherapist, but he sure should get one.

AluminiumWolf said:

Marines range from Noble Ultramarines through Stoic Imperial Fists through Norse Berserker Space Wolves to proper hardcore psychos like Flesh Tearers and Carcharodons/Space Sharks. Kill crazy mentalist is not outside the box for Space Marines. Like, at all. Marines are the most violent men in a universe of violent men. As always, these are not calm professionals. These are men whose hate is so pure it gives them combat bonuses. Men who are dangerous to be around.

Just like PCs...

This I agree almost fully. Space Marine are individuals and there are quite a lot of different types there. Some are downright psychotic. If someone likes to play a psycho in my games, that fine. But it doesn't mean the 'logic of force' is suddenly put on hold for his part. However psychotic he may be if someone has the inclination and ability to kick his ass it WILL happen. It doesn't matter if its 'enemy', 'peer' or 'boss'. Many times NPCs that KNOW you are psychotic will avoid you and make sure they don't make you angry... but if NPC doesn't know it or is just as messed up in the head as the psychotic character is, then again I'm not indulging to your speicific power-fantasy and snivel against the NPCs nature. If at this point the player kils the NPC, then he has to face the music. Which may be anything from 'no consequencies at all' to 'roll a new character' depending on the logic of force and consistence of the setting.

Posted at

Is the Deathwatch the Chamber Militant of the Ordos Xenos or not? If yes, then they should do what they're fraken told to do. Of course, any leader (insert Inquisitor) that treats their troops like **** will reap what they sow.

Posted at

They kinda are ;)

The thing is, when they're on the field, they're already on a mission, so an Ordo Hereticus Inquisitor who would encounter a Kill-Team and tell them "Yo, 'sup *******, got a hive to cleanse, get off your lazy arses an' go kill tha haratics!" is not doing it right ;)

But what's at stakes is the answer of the Marines. To me - and some other guys -, Marines wouldn't need to answer violently. The guy is an Inquisitor, you may be a SPESS MEHREEN, but that doesn't grant you the right to do whatever you want "because you aren't anyone's *****". The classical, normal answer for a Marine in that situation would be "Yeah, well, you know, as much as I'd like to, and I sure like kicking heretic asses, I've already got a job to do, and it does matter a lot so, see, two things here: you handle it yourself, or you wait for us to come back". And then you've got a myriad of possibilities because Space Marines are not cloned robotic-like soldiers, ranging from the crazy mofo who kills the Inquisitor "because I don't take sh*t from anyone" to the nice guy who says "Well OK those Tau cultists may wait, let's first get some heretic blood on our shoulder plates !"

All of these are legit, but what I'm advocating is that there always should be consequences, even if your Marine is the coolest piece of crap on the planet. If you kill the Inquisitor "because he was pushing too much", you surely should be scolded (and lose renown maybe, because you know, inquisitorial requisition? Given to an Inquisitor killer?) / get one or two Inquisitors on your back. If you forget about the mission to go kill the heretics and that causes the mission to fail, then surely your Watch Captain shouldn't be too happy..."What? I don't give a f*ck if the planet was going to fall to the heretics, THAT WASN'T OUR JOB YOU TWIT! 3000 PUSH-UPS, HERE AND NOW. YOUR LIFE'S GONNA BE HELL, YOU'LL REGRET EVER BEING BORN, YOU ù^$ù$%¨*%¨*" (and so on, and so forth). If you calmly send the Inquisitor back home telling him you've got better things to do, then maybe the planet will fall to the heretics, which will not be cool, but hey, your duty had been accomplished...Or maybe you'll take the blame?

That's what role playing is about. Being ultra super cool and powerful, and your actions actually having consequences. That's what I personally find cool and interesting to play. If your players like to kill things, tell all the others to f*** off because they're not cool and not care for nothing, that's another style, you could as well play that way, too.

Posted at

ak-73 said:

Easy enough to change. However incompetence and corruption are both "realistic" concepts in feudal societies. They tend to breed both, I think.

Which is fine, until you get to organisations like Astartes Chapters, the Deathwatch, the Officio Assassinorum and the Inquisition where members are chosen by merit - you don't get to be a Space Marine or an Inquisitor because your great-uncle knows someone who can give you a job, you attain that status because you're exceptional at the skills required of you for that role and nothing less than exceptional is sufficient.

99.99999% of the Imperium can be as frakked up and insane as they want... but I believe that the Inquisition and the Adeptus Astartes can neither afford nor justify recruiting a collection of whimsical nutjobs, trigger-happy psychopaths, lazy incompetents or any other corner case stereotype you happen to find "interesting".

I actually posed the scenario you suggested to my group. All of them, without exception, chose to compromise - they employed their initiative to find an alternative solution to either side of the argument. Now, I agree that this isn't the situation you're trying to ram down everyone's throat, but I regard the "neither side is willing to back down, ever, for any reason" concept as being about as corner case idiotic as discussions about rules that deliberately construct a broken hypothetical situation that won't actually occur in practice just to complain about those rules.

I say this because I don't see the situation you're positing as ever actually happening except as a means of proving a point. By the way you describe it, there is exactly one outcome - the Astartes murder the Inquisitor and then carry on as if nothing had happened. The situation is loaded because that's the outcome you want to come from the situation, and it leaves no room for any other interpretations of the situation (because neither side is willing to back down), and at that point, the question stops being "what happens when a Kill-Team and an Inquisitor have a difference of opinion?" and starts being "who would win between a Kill-Team and a lone Inquisitor who randomly appeared and started giving orders for no discernable reason?"

Posted at

++++I'm sorry but I don't feel obliged to indulge every specific power-fantasy of every specific player in my group.++++

Well, in a Space Marine game you should.

This is not a tasteful tale of the riverbank animals coming togeather to build Mr. Beaver a new dam. This is Space Marine roleplaying.

Macho bull should flow so thickly you need a shower after the game!

In a game about Space Marines focusing on how awesome Space Marines are, we can easily say that many Inquisitors are political appointees chosen more for having the correct stance on issues important to the republican party such as gay marriage or abortion (er, I mean the monodominant faction and unstinting prosecution of the Imperiums enemies) than their other qualities and that any Inq who gets themselves offed by a Marine obviously got what was coming to them for not being careful enough. Inquisitors can be cool in their own **** game.

Look, it is my experience that many GMs have trouble remembering that the PCs are the coolest people. While playing, you get the distinct impression that the GM thinks his NPCs are more interesting than the PCs. Hello! Your NPCs haven't rearranged their schedule to turn up to your poxy game!

Your player have put up with being the NPCs ******* in roleplaying games from Dark Heresy to Vampire. Why not let them have the spotlight now that they have gotten their hands on a mightly Space Marine?

Here we see a Space Marine dealing with an Inquisition representitve:-

Posted at

ak-73 said:

Brand said:

If the players don't feel empowered by mowing down/routing hundreds of enemies in a few seconds, I don't know what it'll take. The KT should often be at a position of strength (they're the heroes arriving to save the day, after all) with the majority of the people they deal with - generals, beleaguered governors, etc. But there are people at their level or above in terms of power and resources - people like Inquisitors. It's times like these that roleplay should matter and not "I punch the problem in the face with my awesomeness until it goes away."

No matter how badass your Space Marine is, he IS someone's *****. It may be his Watch Captain, Watch Commander Mordigael, or whoever the team is assigned to help. There's a reason Quist is poisoned in "A Stony Sleep" - she's in charge, not the KT. Her poisoning allows the KT the freedom to do their own thing and shine. The key thing to remember is that having someone above you doesn't make you a weakling; it just means you're part of the Imperial machine. Look at the Space Wolves, possibly the most independent Chapter. Even their leaders admit they have to play politics because they can't achieve their goals by themselves.

While what you say is true I'd like to add a small correction: Quist asks the KT for aid. She asks them to be their escort, their protection.

Alex

ak-73 said:

Brand said:

If the players don't feel empowered by mowing down/routing hundreds of enemies in a few seconds, I don't know what it'll take. The KT should often be at a position of strength (they're the heroes arriving to save the day, after all) with the majority of the people they deal with - generals, beleaguered governors, etc. But there are people at their level or above in terms of power and resources - people like Inquisitors. It's times like these that roleplay should matter and not "I punch the problem in the face with my awesomeness until it goes away."

No matter how badass your Space Marine is, he IS someone's *****. It may be his Watch Captain, Watch Commander Mordigael, or whoever the team is assigned to help. There's a reason Quist is poisoned in "A Stony Sleep" - she's in charge, not the KT. Her poisoning allows the KT the freedom to do their own thing and shine. The key thing to remember is that having someone above you doesn't make you a weakling; it just means you're part of the Imperial machine. Look at the Space Wolves, possibly the most independent Chapter. Even their leaders admit they have to play politics because they can't achieve their goals by themselves.

While what you say is true I'd like to add a small correction: Quist asks the KT for aid. She asks them to be their escort, their protection.

Alex

She does, but a lot of things make it clear that this is first and foremost her mission, primarily the top of pg 55. For the KT, it's called an escort mission while it's personal for Quist. She is the Mission Authority (she's giving out the goodies). And it's her own personal ship that takes the team to Karlack. Even the box "The Fate of Inquisitor Quist" on pg 57 clearly says, "Her profile is provided and she could continue to lead this Mission..."

For the record, a meeting with someone like Quist is the perfect opportunity for roleplay, especially if the character has a history with the team and the basic interaction from the module can be expanded. She's someone easily on a power-level as the team, so she isn't a cowering underling who just does whatever the SMs say.