Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Techpriest support

The inquisitors handbook weapons

Recommended Posts

Just got the inquisitors handbook (and disciples of THE dark gods. ) TIH is a goldmine of weapons and gear I plan to adopt to DH2.  I was thinking I can usually just use the weapons as is but I was wondering if I should give most weapons in TIH the variable setting rule from dh2 unless they are noted as already overcharged. 

Edited by Techpriest support

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the rules was copypasted word by word, but OW books offer a much larger list of weapons with additional rules for variant patterns, so it's much easier to judge what weapons should receive such benefits and what not.

Personally, I would add "variable setting" (in addition to standard list of laspistol, las carbine, lasgun, long las) to: Drusus Prime Pattern lasgun; Mars Pattern Mark III short lasgun and Mark IV command laspistol; Roth Pattern lightning lasgun; Stormfront lasgun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah I tend to think that in OW the response to a PC group encountering daemons is to start new comrade characters to replace the ones TGE players sacrificed covering their escape from the daemon.  Plus even if IG units do defeat a daemon and survive they are usually executed to keep them from telling people daemons exist. 

 

You fled THE daemon?! You are sentenced to death as cowards and deserters! 

You defeated a daemon?!  You are awarded medals for your heroism in THE emperor's name!  Now report for execution because we can't let people know daemons exist! 

:wacko:

In DH the players are actually expected to fight and defeat daemons on occasion.  They may ever be recognized for their efforts. <_<

 

Incidentally between felling 4,  proven 5 and the option to fire a single accurate shot I'm really tempted to make this a possible starting item for acolytes.  It's a pretty effective all around weapon and quite versatile.  Just the thing for an acolyte and if an Iggy can get one... 

 

 

Edited by Techpriest support

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Techpriest support said:

In DH the players are actually expected to fight and defeat daemons on occasion.  They may ever be recognized for their efforts.

And this is where the contradiction lies, IMHO, because players characters - acolytes - are not expected to do this. Confronting daemons face to face is a work for Grey Knights or Malleus Inquisitor with closest retinue of Throne Agents. Acolytes duty is to collect information, to find the target for their superiors and to make it as silently as possible - and If they are forced to meet the demon face to face - something went wrong or someone did his job bad. But it's hard to create a lasting campaign without any actions, it can become boring to the players, so characters are quipped not only with surveillance tools, but with the weapon too, and books include a lot of adversaries to kill. Whatever, DH isn't Deathwatch or even Only War, it's more about investigation than fight.

This is why I don't like both DH1 and DH2 corebook adventures - they leave players no choice but direct confrontation with very powerful enemy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jargal said:

And this is where the contradiction lies, IMHO, because players characters - acolytes - are not expected to do this. Confronting daemons face to face is a work for Grey Knights or Malleus Inquisitor with closest retinue of Throne Agents. Acolytes duty is to collect information, to find the target for their superiors and to make it as silently as possible - and If they are forced to meet the demon face to face - something went wrong or someone did his job bad. But it's hard to create a lasting campaign without any actions, it can become boring to the players, so characters are quipped not only with surveillance tools, but with the weapon too, and books include a lot of adversaries to kill. Whatever, DH isn't Deathwatch or even Only War, it's more about investigation than fight.

This is why I don't like both DH1 and DH2 corebook adventures - they leave players no choice but direct confrontation with very powerful enemy.

Actually I'm agreeing with you totally. I was amazed at the crippled daemonhost THE pc's we're supposed to fight in the first adventure.  Sure you can let the heretek do a lot of damage to it first but still... Whoah.  Then in a later adventure they're supposed to face a full daemon and his cultists... 

 

I think the Inquisition should supply the acolytes with a little better gear.  I mean at a minimum I think the Inquisition should issue most of them with basic flak armor, FAK, and some basic arms like choice of one common basic weapon,  las\auto\shotgun,  one las\autopistol and maybe a grenade.  I know each inquisitor is unique so I may decide 'my' inquisitor,  kinda based on Vincent price,  will issue them a bit more kit and met their influence bonus items go to other stuff like an auspex,  personal favored weapon,  other gear. I might also give them a few contacts from the Inquisition, like a low level agent who is actually a sanctioned psyker masquerading as a tarot reader,  a priest who can bless weapons,  etc. 

 

I notice that the dh2 stuff I find seems to lean towards daemonic cults. I just got forgotten gods.  Guess what THE main enemy is? 

 

I'm thinking of an adventure just to give THE PC's an excuse to gear up a little. I'll talk about it elsewhere. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Techpriest support said:

I know each inquisitor is unique so I may decide 'my' inquisitor,  kinda based on Vincent price,  will issue them a bit more kit and met their influence bonus items go to other stuff like an auspex,  personal favored weapon,  other gear. I might also give them a few contacts from the Inquisition, like a low level agent who is actually a sanctioned psyker masquerading as a tarot reader,  a priest who can bless weapons,  etc. 

Well, it all depends on what games your group prefer. If adventures with a lot of combat is something that your players like - it will be logical movement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again I agree pretty completely.  As a matter of personal preference I like to at least start the players off with a published adventure to get THE mood down.   But when the published intro adventure involves fighting a daemonhost that is terribly powerful and they almost are forced to rely on bad guys showing up and fighting THE monster for them I think it's kind of screwed up.  Now people here made suggestions that we're helpful,  like accurate weapons but how many are listed in the dh2 weapons book?  

Yes fire would help too,  especially if a priest blesses some promethium to give to the players. 

Still,  looking at that daemonhost and the heretek gang I can't help thinking some flak armor and basic weapons are called for as a 'welcome to THE holy inquisition' gift bag. 

 

BTW I just had an idea for a piece of gear.  People say what you think: a blessed seal that can be affixed to a clip of ammunition,  a melee Weapon,  or a bottle of promethium oil.  Affixing the seal to one of the above blesses it.  The clip counts as blessed ammunition,  a melee weapon counts as blessed for the duration of THE combat,  THE promethium oil counts as blessed flames.  At the end if THE clip,  the end of THE melee or when THE fire Burns out the seal is ended. When one is used a player must roll d100.  If he rolls his current corruption or lower the seal fails to work unless he spends a fate point. 

 

These might be available to some Inquisition agents if daemonic activity is suspected.  Does anyone think this is bad? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it isn't the thing that any acolyte can just take from the shelf in any desired amount, if it's something that must be provided by someone, and if I understand correctly, it works only once - I don't see any problems. In DH1 any cleric who succeeds in +0 CL (Imperial Creed) test and have 20 thrones worth of materials can make temporary blessing of weapon...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 thrones and an easy roll? ****... 

 I was thinking of inquisition contacts to help players out a little. So they may get a priest contact they go to, give the secret handshake, say the codeword, etc and he helps them as he can. Maybe he can make a number of these seals equal to his WP bonus a day? He might have a few on hand.

The priest may be blind, crippled, otherwise unable to fight directly but still a faithful servant who only knows he is serving the righteous.

Maybe the warband needs to make a subtlety roll to visit him without leading enemies to him and the associated consequences.

Likewise that old woman who gives imperial tarot readings for donations, maybe she's a low level sanctioned psyker who is no longer fit for active field duty. Approach her, give a certain subtle sign and she can try to do a low level psy reading for you. Just minor aids here and there. It adds to the idea that the inquisition is all around but the acolytes are actual combat agents, the rest are more like support staff. Very limited aid you need to be careful using, and there's always the risk they've been compromised .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Techpriest support said:

20 thrones and an easy roll? ****... 

"Blood of Martyrs" - a lot of overpowerness was introduced there, but temporary blessing isn't a game breaker, as I think.

1 hour ago, Techpriest support said:

It adds to the idea that the inquisition is all around but the acolytes are actual combat agents, the rest are more like support staff.

Personally, I prefer the directly reverse situation, but as I've said - it's all up to the group. Your support characters idea, especially considering subtlety problem, are really good in any case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Jargal said:

And this is where the contradiction lies, IMHO, because players characters - acolytes - are not expected to do this.

That really depends on the retinue. Character archetypes like Guardsmen or, Emperor beware, Battle Sisters are certainly supposed to deal with such threats as well; in some cases it's the only reason they got recruited in the first place, especially if one were to go by Games Workshop's published background on the Inquisition.

The good thing about Dark Heresy is that it can support both investigative or combat-focused playstyles or, better yet, a healthy mix, simply by picking the right kind of Inquisitor and a well-balanced party. Some might say the game generated a bit of a misconception when it also allowed "street level" characters as PCs, but even this can be supported, similar to how Shadowrun has rules for three tiers of gameplay. As you said, it's up to the group, and their preferred interpretation of the setting. :)

7 hours ago, Techpriest support said:

I mean at a minimum I think the Inquisition should issue most of them with basic flak armor, FAK, and some basic arms like choice of one common basic weapon,  las\auto\shotgun,  one las\autopistol and maybe a grenade. [...] I'm thinking of an adventure just to give THE PC's an excuse to gear up a little. I'll talk about it elsewhere. 

In my previous DH1 game, our group was granted access to an armory on the Inquisitorial fortress their master was based on. Before embarking on their assignment, characters were able to request loaned wargear, provided they were able to present a good reason they needed it. This gear was to be left unmodified and had to be returned in good condition. There even was a truncated mechanic that had the PCs gain sympathy with the squat in charge of the armory, allowing them to loan better stuff -- or lose it if they lost/mistreated gear or kept making outrageous demands.

The system existed alongside an opportunity for the player characters to collect personal weapons and armour, which they could modify to their heart's content. I still think this "two-way approach" was a good solution to a perceived lack of fundamental equipment at the start of the game.

Regarding the original topic, I would certainly recommend considering gear from other 40k RPG product lines, but at the same time caution against just adopting it 1:1 without careful checking and, if need be, tweaking. Regardless of the standard disclaimer, the different games are not 100% compatible, and the same weapon or enemy may have different stats in different books. Each of the RPGs exists in its own world, with its own special rules (comrades, squad modes, chaos gifts ...) written specifically for that fantasy. That is on top on the evolutionary changes between the various games and editions (firing mode modifiers, psychic powers, Horde rules, character generation). tl;dr: inspiration yay, straight copies nay.

Edited by Lynata

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Lynata said:

That really depends on the retinue

Yes, of course. But in FFG version the retinue that you talk about is more Ascension thing. At least this is how I've always perceive the picture depicted by DH1 books.

9 minutes ago, Lynata said:

Character archetypes like Guardsmen or, Emperor beware, Battle Sisters

Don't tell me that you suddenly become a fan of BoM Sororitas - I don't believe it :-) And IH Rank 1 Novice is far, far away from full Battle Sister.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jargal said:

Yes, of course. But in FFG version the retinue that you talk about is more Ascension thing. At least this is how I've always perceive the picture depicted by DH1 books.

True, but DH2 seems to try to follow more closely to how GW portrayed Inquisitorial procedures in its own d100 game (specifically as outlined in Gav Thorpe's Thorian Sourcebook), to the point that the party is even called a "warband".

It remains somewhat ambiguous as the party still does not require the Inquisitor to be a part of it, but personally I always found it a bit odd how DH1 tried to walk with both feet on opposite sides of the line there (see: ordinary agents wielding a rosette and the power it gives) instead of outright demanding a choice between either playing as directly employed retinue or deniable assets with zero official ties to any Imperial agency. It'd be both more internally consistent and closer to the source material.

1 hour ago, Jargal said:

Don't tell me that you suddenly become a fan of BoM Sororitas - I don't believe it :-) And IH Rank 1 Novice is far, far away from full Battle Sister.

Naaah. :D

But that Rank 1 Novice is going to turn into a full-fledged Battle Sister only a few levels later, and that's when she should be expected to kick demon ***, too. Or at least die trying. :P

And of course a party - especially if it includes an Inquisitor - may just opt to start at a higher level as well; part of the "different tiers of supported gameplay" bit mentioned earlier. A little like, in theory, starting RT and DW characters are supposed to be Rank 5 or 8 in DH1, respectively, as bad as that works in practice. If the games were more compatible or, better yet, feature a unified ruleset with the same mechanics for everyone, I think this would actually be a great representation of a power gap: just have certain archetypes only "unlock" i.e. become available at higher levels of gameplay, which can be reached by starting there right away, or via ordinary campaign progression, at which point the rest of the party has sufficient experience and wargear to keep up with the new high-power recruits.

Edited by Lynata

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Lynata said:

(see: ordinary agents wielding a rosette and the power it gives)

Ehm-m-m, but the only source of official authority in DH1 for acolytes is Legate Investigator alternate rank with their very limited carta of inquiry and a Sigil of the Question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jargal said:

but the only source of official authority in DH1 for acolytes is Legate Investigator alternate rank with their very limited carta of inquiry and a Sigil of the Question.

Not according to page 281 of the core rulebook, or more detailed page 214 of the Inquisitor's Handbook.

Dark Heresy was the product that had introduced the concept of the rosette as a badge of authority by proxy in the first place -- and I certainly agree with Black Industries' original team that players should not be required to invest XP into a mechanical class like the Legate Investigator just to gain access to a purely narrative device. Authority is bestowed by (or at least assumed in) the mantle of whatever organisation the character serves as part of their background and activities, not a talent tree-like "unlock".

What I still consider weird is this neither-here-nor-there where the game offered Inquisitorial authority to the players, yet refrained from the - imho - logical choice of making one of them an Inquisitor, similar to how there is a Rogue Trader in Rogue Trader, or a squad Sergeant for Only War. The only other game that felt just as weird in terms of hierarchy was Deathwatch, where a squad of wildly different Space Marines is assumed to just get along on their mission without having a commander assigned (even when, ironically, you can attain officer ranks as a class..), as if the Adeptus Astartes was a democracy.

As such, one of the improvements DH2 made is, I think, the ability to play an Inquisitor right away, and build a "proper" Inquisitorial cadre like they are featured in the novels and the tabletop. In short, how people know the Inquisition from everywhere but Dark Heresy, until now. Or, well, Ascension, but I'm still not sure we should talk about what happened in Ascension (j/k, it was not all bad! :P

Edited by Lynata

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Jargal said:

"Blood of Martyrs" - a lot of overpowerness was introduced there, but temporary blessing isn't a game breaker, as I think.

Personally, I prefer the directly reverse situation, but as I've said - it's all up to the group. Your support characters idea, especially considering subtlety problem, are really good in any case.

Yeah, blessed weapons/ammo only affect daemonic enemies.  Xenos or ordinary heretics, it's useless.  Of course the people writing the dh2 adventures seem to think every encounter has to end with a daemonic enemy. :angry: The adventure in the rulesbook, the one in the gm kit, the one in the adventure I just ordered. I kinda wrote smelt rat hunt just to leave out daemons....:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Lynata said:

Not according to page 281 of the core rulebook, or more detailed page 214 of the Inquisitor's Handbook.

Dark Heresy was the product that had introduced the concept of the rosette as a badge of authority by proxy in the first place -- and I certainly agree with Black Industries' original team that players should not be required to invest XP into a mechanical class like the Legate Investigator just to gain access to a purely narrative device. Authority is bestowed by (or at least assumed in) the mantle of whatever organisation the character serves as part of their background and activities, not a talent tree-like "unlock".

Uh, I was unclear, it looks. I know about rosette and I'm ok with it. But rosette isn't the authority of PCs, it's the authority of their Inquisitor that he may bestow upon characters - or  may not. Legate Investigator gives (without XP cost, btw, it's free trait of the rank) the character his own power, but even then - it can be only given by Inquisitor/GM, not chosen by player.

8 hours ago, Lynata said:

What I still consider weird is this neither-here-nor-there where the game offered Inquisitorial authority to the players, yet refrained from the - imho - logical choice of making one of them an Inquisitor

I suppose that someone thought it would be "unfair" to make one player undoubted boss of the party, the same with Deathwatch. Stupid idea, but false correctness is widespread these days...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Jargal said:

Uh, I was unclear, it looks. I know about rosette and I'm ok with it. But rosette isn't the authority of PCs, it's the authority of their Inquisitor that he may bestow upon characters - or  may not. Legate Investigator gives (without XP cost, btw, it's free trait of the rank) the character his own power, but even then - it can be only given by Inquisitor/GM, not chosen by player.

Ah, I see. But even then, an Inquisitor's authority is itself only provided "by proxy" of the Emperor. Technically, all authority is granted and rests with the tolerance of someone else...

Of course, the interesting thing about the Inquisition in particular is that this organisation, which has few resources by itself, relies so much on other people just falling in line at the drop of its name. :D The fascinating bit then of course being that you have some Inquisitors that have more influence than others, simply due to reputation and powerful contacts, even though officially they should be equal.

15 hours ago, Jargal said:

I suppose that someone thought it would be "unfair" to make one player undoubted boss of the party, the same with Deathwatch.

Yeah, it's a bit weird, especially as you still have the book mention the option of one of the Acolytes being made the "Prime", which means they are pretty much an Inquisitor in anything but name.

15 hours ago, Jargal said:

Stupid idea, but false correctness is widespread these days...

Whilst actual correctness seems to be fading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well i've always thought the inquisition was high on omnipotent. I mean, a freaking inquisitor can declare exterminatus on a planet. I also thought they had access to high level resources, as evidenced by inquisitors wearing power armor, toting plasma pistols, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/12/2017 at 1:09 AM, Lynata said:

What I still consider weird is this neither-here-nor-there where the game offered Inquisitorial authority to the players, yet refrained from the - imho - logical choice of making one of them an Inquisitor, similar to how there is a Rogue Trader in Rogue Trader, or a squad Sergeant for Only War. The only other game that felt just as weird in terms of hierarchy was Deathwatch, where a squad of wildly different Space Marines is assumed to just get along on their mission without having a commander assigned (even when, ironically, you can attain officer ranks as a class..), as if the Adeptus Astartes was a democracy.

Inquisitor is not similar to a Sergeant... or even General. That's the problem.

OW doesn't get into details much, but it mentions that the ranks are a bit blurry, because they are tied to local traditions. Then again, a squad of IG, even detached, can be just as well run by an "acting Corporal" - after a little while the commanders will take time to review the performance and either give him a real rank or demote and replace. For most units it's probably no big deal, especially if there's a Commissar to oversee.

With Deathwatch not clearing it up is a bit of derp, yes, but it kind of assumes that someone is in charge, and occasionally assigns perks like "second in command by default".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/13/2017 at 0:28 AM, Techpriest support said:

Well i've always thought the inquisition was high on omnipotent. I mean, a freaking inquisitor can declare exterminatus on a planet. I also thought they had access to high level resources, as evidenced by inquisitors wearing power armor, toting plasma pistols, etc.

This may be a matter of background exposition. Inquisitors have ultimate authority ... on paper. In practice, the Inquisition has no established chain of access to Imperial authorities and the war machinery, so if they need something, individual Inquisitors have to go somewhere and requisition it. Since resources are finite and Inquisitors all have their own ideas on which priorities to pursue or how to tackle a given problem, not to mention secret agendas, this creates significant potential for internal strife. You end up with Inquisitors blocking or even arresting/killing other Inquisitors, which ends up serving as a sort of "soft" barrier to abuse of power.

The more outrageous a demand an Inquisitor makes, the more likely it is they will attract the attention of rival (or simply overzealous) Inquisitors who have it out for them or their allies. Blow up a planet? Better make sure to have a good reason, otherwise you may be indicted for high treason. Requisitioned a Titan Legion and a naval battlegroup? Better make sure to have a good reason, again, otherwise you may get called out as a saboteur as those military resources are needed elsewhere, too. Trying to requisition a bunch of Space Marines or Battle Sisters? Well, turns out the Marines/Sisters are already honor-bound to or friendly with another Inquisitor, who's not too happy about someone else interfering with their resources or allies' activities.

It's a great, secret game of internal politics and rivalry, overlapping jurisdictions and even extrajudicial assassinations. Ever had a Dark Heresy game where it turned out that two parties of acolytes were operating against one another, firmly believing the others to be heretics to be killed, only because their respective Inquisitors had a disagreement?

1 hour ago, TBeholder said:

Inquisitor is not similar to a Sergeant... or even General. That's the problem.

OW doesn't get into details much, but it mentions that the ranks are a bit blurry, because they are tied to local traditions. Then again, a squad of IG, even detached, can be just as well run by an "acting Corporal" - after a little while the commanders will take time to review the performance and either give him a real rank or demote and replace. For most units it's probably no big deal, especially if there's a Commissar to oversee.

With Deathwatch not clearing it up is a bit of derp, yes, but it kind of assumes that someone is in charge, and occasionally assigns perks like "second in command by default".

Well, they are similar in that they are a person of authority around whom the party can gather. I have had some experience with "leaderless" games where the characters decide democratically on how to proceed, but in my experience this always comes with a big risk to result in a significant waste of time debating pros and cons, or nobody being willing to make a call when the group is stuck between two options out of (understandable) fear they'd piss someone off. The best games are those where you have one character be the accepted and, for narrative/story purposes permanent, leader, but who is still willing to listen to suggestions and have an ear for the other characters' input and concerns. The Motoko Kusanagi of RPGs, if you will.

And in terms of background, to me it would simply fulfill a certain expectation that a game about the Inquisition has an Inquisitor, or a game about the Imperial Guard or the Space Marines has a Sergeant, Captain, or whatever higher rank puts them in command.

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...