Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Inquisitor Renfield

New Sourcebook

Recommended Posts

So with the detail and info in the Inquisitors handbook and the Radicals Handbook...

 

Can we expect a Hive Worlders handbook on Scum and to-be Guardsmen, Nobles and so on?  Perhaps a lengthy book on the lives of people on Hive Worlds and details on specific Gangers, Groups, Organizations and layouts of Upper, Middle and Under hive locations? 

 

What about a Adeptus Mechanicus book that give us details on Forge worlds and the people whi live and follow by the ways of the Machine God? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No - we need a Puritan Handbook to balance the scales!

The radicals get a handbook of their own and potentially stuff in both "Disciples of the Dark Gods" and "Creatures Anathema" which can be used for radical characters and NPCs - how about giving those who remain faithful to the Golden Throne a bit of love? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those who follow the Emperors light and walk with pure hearts and minds need nothing but their faith in Him, the blessed flame, and the purity of their hatred to cleanse the tainted filth from the galaxy! To ask for anything more is a sign of weakness and a sure sign of the first steps toward radicalism and heresy!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ItsUncertainWho said:

Those who follow the Emperors light and walk with pure hearts and minds need nothing but their faith in Him, the blessed flame, and the purity of their hatred to cleanse the tainted filth from the galaxy! To ask for anything more is a sign of weakness and a sure sign of the first steps toward radicalism and heresy!

A compelling argument.  I salute your sagacious grasp of the roots of heresy, sir.

Still, Ascension cannot come fast enough for my tastes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inquisitor Renfield said:

 What about a Adeptus Mechanicus book that give us details on Forge worlds and the people whi live and follow by the ways of the Machine God? 

You know, I would actually be really interested in the Adeptus Mechanicus sourcebook...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nerd King said:

 

No - we need a Puritan Handbook to balance the scales!

The radicals get a handbook of their own and potentially stuff in both "Disciples of the Dark Gods" and "Creatures Anathema" which can be used for radical characters and NPCs - how about giving those who remain faithful to the Golden Throne a bit of love? :)

 

 

The Inquisitors Handbook WAS the puritans handbook. I mean the book not only gave us the Adepta Sororitas careerpath, but also the Pure Faith talents and a lengthy description of religion and overall piousness.

In my opinion, the scales are balanced. On the puritan side we have Inquisitors Handbook and on the radical we have Radical's Handbook.

 

Personally I want to see a large book or series of smaller books that details the worlds of Calixis and it's many factions a little more. Perhaps one book for each sub sector? That would certainly be nice and managable for the writers to handle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically anything that expands on the technology available to Emperor-fearing Imperial authorities is a boon to Puritans, since Puritans tend to follow the baseline and only gain additional benefits a radical might not via factors such as fate points and factions which would not tolerate a radical master. Ascention, by detailing the resources available to Inquisitors, will likely expand greatly on the resources available to Puritans, hopefully including rules for ensuring the cooperation of other Imperial agencies and forming closer relationships to them, as the Radical's handboom did for more questionable contacts.

I still would enjoy a sourcebook dedicated to Puritan factions, simply because there are themes there which DH has yet to explore. Radicals often fear change so greatly, their fears turn them against loyal citizens as surely and subtlly as the warp corrupts a radical. A personal favourite example is an Amalathian who executed a Saint because he feared change (almost provoking war with the Ecclesiarchy in the process).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A gazeteer of the sector might be good, give us about 50 or so planets and some background on the sector.  They've showed us a map with about 100 planets, but only discussed maybe a dozen of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Varnias Tybalt said:

 

The Inquisitors Handbook WAS the puritans handbook. I mean the book not only gave us the Adepta Sororitas careerpath, but also the Pure Faith talents and a lengthy description of religion and overall piousness.

In my opinion, the scales are balanced. On the puritan side we have Inquisitors Handbook and on the radical we have Radical's Handbook.

 

 

I disagree entirely take what the puritans got from The Inquisitor's Handbook (Sororitas, Redemptionists, Faith powers and a few other bits) - the equivalent would be the Ritual, Sorcery and deamon weapon rules from DotDG, Dark Pacts and Psychic powers from the main rules, a good number of teh careers and origins from the Inquisitor's Handbook (i.e. Astral knives, Reclaimator, etc) Xenos items and the Verminspeaker in Creatures Anathema.  Added to that there's now a whole book about the Radical philisophies etc.

We could do with more Puritan background, politics, faith powers, how monodominants manage without relying on astropaths, navigators (if they can) etc.

I just think a lot of people think that the idea of playing "the bad guys" (walking the thin line of corruption etc) is cooler than playing the puritan.  I think a well presented FFG sourcebook could change that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nerd King said:

We could do with more Puritan background, politics, faith powers, how monodominants manage without relying on astropaths, navigators (if they can) etc.

That assumes that all puritans are psyker-hating lunatics whose hobbies may include annihilating worlds based on the suspicion of taint.

Puritanism is orthodoxy; holding to the dictates of the Creed and the Law in their duties, and basically not crossing all those lines that Radicals cross. Just because someone's not an ultra-zealous Monodominant doesn't mean they're not a puritan. In that regard, puritanism is very much the 'default' position assumed by the game and the background.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

N0-1_H3r3 said:

Puritanism is orthodoxy; holding to the dictates of the Creed and the Law in their duties, and basically not crossing all those lines that Radicals cross. Just because someone's not an ultra-zealous Monodominant doesn't mean they're not a puritan. In that regard, puritanism is very much the 'default' position assumed by the game and the background.

I disagree - Orthodoxy is (by it's nature) the middle path - Puritanism is the fanatical opposition to Radicalism.  Think of it in political terms - Puritans are the right wing conservatives, Radicals the left wing socialists - orthodxy exists in the middle - not at either end.

Take a glance through the various Puritan philosophies, yes there are the monodominants but there's also Amaltheans, Thorians and who knows how many minor schools of thought.  Grief - the Thorians ALONE merited a soucebook in the Inquisitor skirmish game.  Add in the other philosophies, how they relate to the Adepta Sororitas, Faith Powers, minor philosophies, their relationship with orthodoxy - there's easily a sourcebook there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

N0-1_H3r3 said:

Nerd King said:

 

We could do with more Puritan background, politics, faith powers, how monodominants manage without relying on astropaths, navigators (if they can) etc.

 

That assumes that all puritans are psyker-hating lunatics whose hobbies may include annihilating worlds based on the suspicion of taint.

Puritanism is orthodoxy; holding to the dictates of the Creed and the Law in their duties, and basically not crossing all those lines that Radicals cross. Just because someone's not an ultra-zealous Monodominant doesn't mean they're not a puritan. In that regard, puritanism is very much the 'default' position assumed by the game and the background.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

Nerd King said:

 

We could do with more Puritan background, politics, faith powers, how monodominants manage without relying on astropaths, navigators (if they can) etc.

 

That assumes that all puritans are psyker-hating lunatics whose hobbies may include annihilating worlds based on the suspicion of taint.

Puritanism is orthodoxy; holding to the dictates of the Creed and the Law in their duties, and basically not crossing all those lines that Radicals cross. Just because someone's not an ultra-zealous Monodominant doesn't mean they're not a puritan. In that regard, puritanism is very much the 'default' position assumed by the game and the background.

Would agree with this, the core rulebook is very much set towards you being in the service of a middle of the road Inquisitor.  The Radical's Handbook was necessary as it provides options that diverge from this. 

My group and I have also pretty much had our fill of background packages and alternate career ranks.  It would take us a life time of playing to ever play all that is on offer and for those that play more than us I still feel there is now in place a plethora of character options to choose from.  My number one preference would be some sort of Guide to the Calixis Sector, broken down with thorough description of key planets and cities, with maps and NPCs.  However, given their desire to remain rather vague over specific details this may not happen. 

Not wanting to sound gloomy but I think we will see a slow down in Dark Heresy specific products after Ascension and Haarlock trilogy.  Rogue Trader is going to need some attention in 2010 (still only the core rulebook and GM screen out), certainly some sort of ship guide and bestiary, and then after that Death Watch should be on the horizon.   Not that this is a disaster, with Ascension I will pretty much have enough material to run Dark Heresy for years to come. 

Perhaps FFG will spoil us with their plans for Dark Heresy much like they did last year with Knowledge is Power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Replicant253 said:

 

Would agree with this, the core rulebook is very much set towards you being in the service of a middle of the road Inquisitor. 

Yes it does - but Puritanism isn't the middle path - it's the other extreme to Radicalism.

Replicant253 said:

My group and I have also pretty much had our fill of background packages and alternate career ranks.  It would take us a life time of playing to ever play all that is on offer and for those that play more than us I still feel there is now in place a plethora of character options to choose from. 

That's fair comment - but I'm more concerned with the mechanics of the philosophies, their political activities and their power in the sector - career paths are just frosting.

Replicant253 said:

Perhaps FFG will spoil us with their plans for Dark Heresy much like they did last year with Knowledge is Power.

Wholeheartedly agree on that score!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Um, you know how there are no Inquisitors described as middle-of-the-road in any of the sourcebooks? That's because there are no midle-of-the-road inquisitors. The closest thing is an Amalathian, who wants to accept the present status quo (Psykers, mutants, and latent corruption and all), and they certainly aren't middle of the road.

A radical is willing to use heretical tools or accepts some limited heretical ideas. Beyond this they vary widely in what tools they are willing to use or what ideas they accept. A puritan, the default position for any Inquisitor, is neither willing to tolerate heresy long enough to make use of it, nor accepts any heretical ideas. Once again, there is a great deal of variation within this.

The thing about Radicals is that any given Radical faction can make use of a great deal of the tools of Puritans. Force Weapons, for example, are fine for most Puritans, and an ideal tool for a Puritan of the Ordo Malleus who wants to be able to face off against Daemons. That's why every member of the militant wing of that Ordo (the Grey Knights Space Marines) uses one. However, there's still nothing stopping a Radical from using a Force Weapon.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nerd King said:

I disagree - Orthodoxy is (by it's nature) the middle path - Puritanism is the fanatical opposition to Radicalism.  Think of it in political terms - Puritans are the right wing conservatives, Radicals the left wing socialists - orthodxy exists in the middle - not at either end.

 

I disagree with your disagreement, and bring evidence for my assertion.

Fundamentally, IMO, the distinction between Radicalism and Puritanism is the individual's regard for and interaction with the established (orthodox, traditional, conventional or whatever other synonym of the term you wish to use) structures and strictures of the Imperium of Man, as embodied by the mechanisms of the Adeptus Terra, the dictates of the Lex Imperialis, and the accepted variations of the Imperial Creed.

As described in the Inquisitor rulebook - where the concept of Inquisitorial factions, and the six most prevalent of those factions (Monodominant, Thorian, Amalathian, Istvaanian, Xanthite and Recongregator), were first introduced - Puritans are those who "uphold the letter of the Lore and the dictates of the Emperor to the letter, as enforced upon the populace and servants of the Emperor at large where possible. It is they who uphold the widespread beliefs that permeate the organisations of the Imperium, and can be said to adhere to the traditional values as preached by the Ministorum and enshrined at the heart of Imperial Law."

Radicals are those who, by comparison, use their position as Inquisitors to do what they feel is necessary to preserve the Imperium, using methods which might be considered heretical to the greater populace of the Imperium.

There's no middle ground, no distinct 'moderate' philosophies. One either cleaves to the dictates and strictures of the Imperium, or one does not; that's where the difference between Radicalism and Puritanism lies.

The tools of the Puritan are any and all of the tools the Imperium has to offer. The tools of the Radical are all those tools, and potentially anything else as well...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nerd King said:

I disagree entirely take what the puritans got from The Inquisitor's Handbook (Sororitas, Redemptionists, Faith powers and a few other bits) - the equivalent would be the Ritual, Sorcery and deamon weapon rules from DotDG, Dark Pacts and Psychic powers from the main rules, a good number of teh careers and origins from the Inquisitor's Handbook (i.e. Astral knives, Reclaimator, etc) Xenos items and the Verminspeaker in Creatures Anathema.  Added to that there's now a whole book about the Radical philisophies etc.

We could do with more Puritan background, politics, faith powers, how monodominants manage without relying on astropaths, navigators (if they can) etc.

I just think a lot of people think that the idea of playing "the bad guys" (walking the thin line of corruption etc) is cooler than playing the puritan.  I think a well presented FFG sourcebook could change that.

No, the stuff in Disciples of the Dark Gods wasn't intended for radical Inquisitors, it was intended as rules for the REAL bad guys of the setting (heretics, rogue psykers, daemonworshippers etc.) So you can't claim that DotDG was primarily aimed at radical Inquisitors, because that wa the job of the Radical's Handbook. Both books (radical's a well as Inquisitors) have the name "handbook" in them, this clearly hints that they are supposed to be sort of eachother's opposites, even if both of them do contain some information that does play a little on the other side (certain things in IH do skirt the edges of radicalism like the astral knives or Reclaimators, but there are things in Radical's handbook that aren't radical at all to use either, like many of the entries in Shadow gear etc.)

Purita background, politics and faith powers have already been covered by Inquisitors Handbook and Disciples of the Dark Gods as well as the core rulebook. I don't see the immediate need for more...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talking about the Puritan-Book Argument:
What good is it to write a book for a group that is renowned for simply burning them?!  ... oh...winter is coming in.... I see...

 

Talking "New Sourcebook":
I would really like to see a sourcebook that is at least covering psykers. Thereby, I do not mean "new psyker powers" (even now as I am still in need for more MINOR Powers) but more background and fluff. Like what is happening after the sanctioning, what the other schools the Scholastica Psykana is made up are like (see the side notes in the "Templar Calixis" in the IH), who and according to which method are they assigned outside of the military, the Inquisition and the Astropath cores.

Complete "World Sourcebooks" would be nice as well. Like 3 to 8 worlds covered in on book. I really really really would like to have more details about what is like on Dusk or Sinophia (yeah... have to buy "Cities of the Damnedn. Narf).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gregorius21778 said:

Complete "World Sourcebooks" would be nice as well. Like 3 to 8 worlds covered in on book. I really really really would like to have more details about what is like on Dusk or Sinophia (yeah... have to buy "Cities of the Damnedn. Narf).

This kind of sounds like the idea I presented. One big ass book for every subsector in Calixis (which of course covers most or all worlds located in the subsector in question).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

N0-1_H3r3 said:

I disagree with your disagreement, and bring evidence for my assertion.

Fundamentally, IMO, the distinction between Radicalism and Puritanism is the individual's regard for and interaction with the established (orthodox, traditional, conventional or whatever other synonym of the term you wish to use) structures and strictures of the Imperium of Man, as embodied by the mechanisms of the Adeptus Terra, the dictates of the Lex Imperialis, and the accepted variations of the Imperial Creed.

As described in the Inquisitor rulebook - where the concept of Inquisitorial factions, and the six most prevalent of those factions (Monodominant, Thorian, Amalathian, Istvaanian, Xanthite and Recongregator), were first introduced - Puritans are those who "uphold the letter of the Lore and the dictates of the Emperor to the letter, as enforced upon the populace and servants of the Emperor at large where possible. It is they who uphold the widespread beliefs that permeate the organisations of the Imperium, and can be said to adhere to the traditional values as preached by the Ministorum and enshrined at the heart of Imperial Law."

I appreciate the support of your case and defer the point.  Well argued sirrah.

However I still see the merit of a Puritan book - look at the amount of material in the Thorian Sourcebook for Inquisitor - multiply that by three (for the main puritan factions, add in minor factions and Calixian specific details and you'd have a good, solid and very useful resource IMHO.

And in response to the point that DotDG wasn't *intended* as a Radical resource - I know it wasn't but it included details on sorcery, deamon weapons etc that could be used by radically inclined players. Which I still argue is more than the Puritan factions have got.

I do see your points and I'm enjoying the discussion but I'd personally like to see more on the politics, background and key NPCs of the remaining philosophical factions before moving on to new ground.  It seems like we only have half a picture at the minute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nerd King said:

However I still see the merit of a Puritan book - look at the amount of material in the Thorian Sourcebook for Inquisitor - multiply that by three (for the main puritan factions, add in minor factions and Calixian specific details and you'd have a good, solid and very useful resource IMHO.

A good chunk of the material in the Thorian Sourcebook is the history and structure of the Inquisition in general, though; the actual material on the Thorian faction is good, but there's not a great deal of it (the sourcebook as a whole is only 33 pages long, including the cover). Even working to cover the other Puritan factions (existing and new alike), there'd be less material than is present in the Radical's Handbook, primarily because the tools and methods of Puritanism have been covered to various degrees in other books, and few of those tools and methods are unique to Puritans.

It would, in essence, be a much smaller book.

 

As for detail on Inquisitorial politics... there's an ongoing series of Faction sourcebooks being produced by a group of Inquisitor players alongside the fan magazine "Dark Magenta", with Istvaanian and Recongregator done so far, and Amalathian currently being written. While not official, they're well written and don't particularly contradict any existing sources.

Nerd King said:

And in response to the point that DotDG wasn't *intended* as a Radical resource - I know it wasn't but it included details on sorcery, deamon weapons etc that could be used by radically inclined players. Which I still argue is more than the Puritan factions have got.

The rules for Sorcery, Daemon Weapons, etc, were copied across to The Radical's Handbook, though; presented first in Disciples as a GM resource, then again as a player resource in The Radical's Handbook. It's not really as much material as it seems, when considered in that light.

And, as previously noted, the tools of Puritans are, like the Puritans themselves, far more conventional in nature. Bolters and flamers and grenades and armour and blessed swords and so forth... Radicals get all manner of strange new toys because they're much more willing to use all manner of strange methods in their duties.

Personally, my inclination for a new sourcebook would be more towards an exploration of the Adeptus Mechanicus; delving into one of the massive organisations of the Imperium and showing how they work. Rather than being a strictly "Tech-Priest's Handbook" affair, it'd cover the Mechanicus as a whole, depicting Skitarii maniples and the other inhabitants of Mechanicus-ruled locations, as well as the way the Mechanicus influences people not necessarily devoted to the Omnissiah. It'd also be a nice place to throw in a whole pile of bizarre archaeotech and other obscure technology, and dabble a little further in the matter of Technoheresy...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nerd King said:

And in response to the point that DotDG wasn't *intended* as a Radical resource - I know it wasn't but it included details on sorcery, deamon weapons etc that could be used by radically inclined players. Which I still argue is more than the Puritan factions have got.

Yes it COULD be used by radically inclined players, but there's nothing in the book claiming that the intention was to provide radically inclined players with rules for radical methods. For all intents and purposes the inclusion of daemon weapons, sorcery and these new psychic powers were probably there to provide the GM with tips and rules for making the "bad guys"... "Badder" than they were before.

Also do note that many of the talents and traits described and sometimes needed to employ these radical methods (like sorcery for instance) doesn't include any rules at all for how a player character would have to go about acquiring the relevant talent needed (i.e there's no xp cost for how to get the Sorcerer talent, the talent is just described with no tangible way of achieving it in any careerpath).

So could DotDG be used to provide radically inclined players with radical powers and weapons? Of course (just like any sourcebook describing rules for xenos weaponry could be used to provide PC's with "radical" xenos weapons). Was it the explicit intention of the writers to do that? No not really. The title of the book in question does give away a lot of who the rules and new gear was intended for (i.e the enemies of the PC's, not the PC's themselves)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see a trio of books

Xenos, Malleus, Hereticus

Each detailing the ins and outs of the three primary divisions of the Inquisition, how they work, what exactly falls under the perview of each group, the technologies they use, the people they employ etc.  How they interact with other agecies and other Inquisitorial groups.  How the factions of the Inquisition (Thorians, Xanthites etc) operate within the brnches.  Important personal (Inquisitors and Throne-Agents and enemies).  throw in some alternate career paths related to the divisions (Xeno-hunter specialists, Anti-psyker training etc)

Each books could also include a short adventure based on each of the three threats.

I think that the current books (Radicals, Anathema, DotDG) somewhat cover these topics but only in brief and most often as anatagonists and enemies rather than as possible sources of internal conflict, allies and influence on a group of Acolytes.

I would also like to see books covering the different types of worlds (Use the same groups as in the IH, Hive & Forge, Feral & Fuedal etc), I personally have a more that fair amount of knowledge in regards to how the Imperium appears and what sorts of worlds and people generally populate it but sourcebooks on such topics could really be of benefit to others who haven't followed the genre or read as many books as I have.  Make each book about one of the iconic worlds of its type in the Calixis sector and I think you could easily get a book worth its weight.

- Raith

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll put my hand up for "the big book of the Calixis Sector" Worlds and setting are so much more useful than new careers and guns, with RH, I don't think we really need too many more. 

I'd also love an Ad-Mech one, I'm a sucker for awesome bionics. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Raith said:

I would like to see a trio of books

Xenos, Malleus, Hereticus

 

I'll second that motion, give us the various workings of the three major factions, maybe cover the smaller ordos as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...