Killing an Inquisitor

By Lokan, in Deathwatch

Posted at

AluminiumWolf said:

2: I kinda think that that is what a lot of people who play Marines are going to want. I don't think many people are going to go in thinking 'Yeah! I totally want to have it rubbed in my face that my mighty Space Marine doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things! That will be so much fun!'.

But again, I think you're going too far the other way. Space Marines DO matter, they're just not superman in a universe without kryptonite. And a lot of us on the forums, as you can see, want to play more of the thinking man's marine in a game with balance rather than an 80s action movie.

Posted at

Charmander said:

And a lot of us on the forums, as you can see, want to play more of the thinking man's marine in a game with balance rather than an 80s action movie.

Yeah, but that is because you are self hating Marine fans who haven't yet managed to overcome your hangups that people will look down on you for having insecurities that you need to cover up by RPing as a 'roided up genetic freak who's main purpose to exist is to kill things and accept what you really want out of your Space Marines!

Embrace your inner Space Marine!

:-)

Posted at

DFK! said:

Kshatriya said:

Rawrsong said:

Again , I'm just saying that in the Big Picture of the Warhammer 40k Imperium, Space Marines are pretty much at the bottom of the heap . Here's a rough chart of the structure of the Imperium. See Space Marines all the way down at the bottom?

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Imperium#.T-xq13r4V8E

Imperium_organisation.gif

This literally cannot be correct. For one thing it completely omits Ordo Hereticus. For another The Inquisition is not subject to oversight by the High Lords of Terra. Third, the individual Space Marine Chapters really fall under the Adeptus Terra generally, not the Administratum.

Not only is it wrong for that reason, but the Mechanicus is definitely not under the Adeptus Terra, nor are the Custodes, nor is the Officia Assassinorum.

The high lords are fairly clearly, in my mind, modeled after the old English "Privy Council," with representatives from the various jurisdictions advising the king. Only in this case, the King is a Golden Throne, so they just run the show instead.

I'm pretty sure I've seen this in an early prototype of the command structure and not a formal "this is the breakdown" write up for the 40k universe, don't remember where

Posted at

Skeletor said:

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Imperium#.T-xq13r4V8E

I'm pretty sure I've seen this in an early prototype of the command structure and not a formal "this is the breakdown" write up for the 40k universe, don't remember where

That looks like the command structure charts from some of the old codexes, but things have changed some since those editions. If you look towards the back of dark heresy book (and you can find it on lexicanum and wikia) you can see what is a more confusing but more current structure and organization. The mushyness of the circular org chart shows that none of this is as cut and dry as some people would like.

Think of it like the US political structure. Sure, the President, head of the Executive, can deploy the armed forces, but without support from the Legislative they'll run out of money (and then ammo). Space Marines can do as they want in many cases, but if they go too far and alienate the organizations of the Empire that support them, they'll be in trouble.

And as has been described in some texts, the Inquisition doesn't get to do anything they want. High Lords are High Lords, and any Inquisitor doing anything against a High Lords wishes had better have some pretty potent political backing. Inquisitors don't even order the Astartes around without good reason, both want to keep each other in good graces the majority of the time.

Posted at

I knew i'd it seen it somewhere. in the preview for the new 40k book there's a shot of a new version of the that diagram:

Hope that like works, copy and paste it otherwise. Make of it what you will, sorts out a couple of the obvious issues.

Posted at

Face Eater said:

I knew i'd it seen it somewhere. in the preview for the new 40k book there's a shot of a new version of the that diagram:

Hope that like works, copy and paste it otherwise. Make of it what you will, sorts out a couple of the obvious issues.

Yeah, that chart still seems off from what the fluff would dictate.

Posted at

ItsUncertainWho said:

Face Eater said:

I knew i'd it seen it somewhere. in the preview for the new 40k book there's a shot of a new version of the that diagram:

Hope that like works, copy and paste it otherwise. Make of it what you will, sorts out a couple of the obvious issues.

Yeah, that chart still seems off from what the fluff would dictate.

In what way?

It's possible that the fluff in the new edition changes though, and they simplified it somewhat.

Posted at

Face Eater said:

In what way?

It's possible that the fluff in the new edition changes though, and they simplified it somewhat.

The Navis Nobilite is shown under the Imperial Fleet. I would think they should tied at least one level up.

The Adeptus Custodes, to my knowledge, only take orders from the Emperor. They should be tied to the Emperor with a dotted line, in addition to the Adeptus Terra, at the least.

The Adeptus Astartes are an Adeptus class that are shown to be under another Adeptus. They should probably be tied to the Adeptus Terra with that dotted line.

Posted at

Trying to get back on topic.


Killing someone that is supposed to be you ally is bad. In Deathwatch there is a command structure where the Watch Captain is top dog and he needs to work alongside the Inquisition.
This alliance is fragile at best, the whole mortal vs. inhuman space marine thing.

Killing an inquisitor without explicit order from the watch captain would seriously undermine the authority of the watch captain, who actually does outrank the characters.

So far I think we all can agree on this I guess.


In any case I think the watch captain would be angry to say the least and depending on the evidence the pc have will devise a punishment. If the pc's do not have any concrete evidence he will have little choice, as their commanding officer, to punish them severly. They killed a high ranking ally. If they do have evidence he can make a case for them.

The inquisition is not all powerful but neither are the space marines. The problem is one chapter cannot destroy the inquisition, the inquisition can declare a chapter excommunicatis traitores but are very unlikely to do so. The latter would be more of threat to keep the individual space marine in check.

Also do not forget that space marines live by a code of honour (at least most of them), they have sworn their lives to the Deathwatch for a period of time and therefor have to accept and obey their watch captain.


As for the GM who started this topic:

My advise:
If the pc's kill the inquisitor without proper evidence, do not let them get away with this but do not kill them off. Punish them and have them seek evidence/atonement. This makes for great roleplaying. Doing the right thing shouldn't be always the best course of action. But this is where the DW game gets interesting, moral choices. Make sure they know the consequences for their action can be dire. If they go through with it, they know they might end up being unsong or worse condemned heroes. No we are talking grim and dark.