Inquisitors need some love

[TheArtilleryman]

… not in the way you think :p

 

 

The lore behind inquisitors is so good, so varied and suggests to much potential. An inquisitor can literally have ANYTHING. Power armour, even terminator armour. Psyker/not psyker. Any kind of weaponry, from a simple bolt pistol to a harlequin’s kiss-style signet ring or a melta rifle or even Xenos equipment.

 

Yet in the game inquisitors are a bit lame. Sure we have the ability to select them in a no imperial list, make them a warlord and ride in any transport. That’s great. However, beyond this their profile is meh, their equipment is incredibly limited. I really think we need something better for these iconic characters. 
 

Suggestions:

 

1. Give inquisitors access to any man-portable weapon from any imperial codex.

2. Give them access to a wide range of xenos weaponry. Tau, Eldar, Votann etc. Not Tyranid stuff for obvious reasons, and I’d also argue not Chaos either.
3. Create some weapon options that are exclusive to inquisitors like digilasers or a poisoned stiletto or something.

4. Make psyker optional. Give them a range of psychic powers to choose from that you have to declare at the start of the game.
5. If you choose not to make them psychic, give them other special rules to select, a bit like a list of warlord traits from previous editions, or the chaplain litanies.

6. You probably need a couple of different datasheets e.g. inquisitor in carapace armour, inquisitor in power armour, inquisitor in terminator armour. Each with weapon options appropriate to their type.

 

I might add some more ideas to this post as and when I think of them but feel free to add your own ideas below.

Edited December 8, 2023 by TheArtilleryman
Deleted the “every single one is a psyker” bit

[AutumnEffect]

13 hours ago, TheArtilleryman said:

-and every single one is a psyker.

 

-4. Make psyker optional. Give them a range of psychic powers to choose from that you have to declare at the start of the game.

Small nitpick but being a psyker is optional on an unnamed Inquisitor. They grant a 5+ Feel No Pain against Mortal Wounds to their unit if you choose not to make them a psyker.

The problem is just their limited model range.
If/When GW gets around to making some new generic Inquisitor models then I think they will have some more options. Until then we're stuck with the crumbs if you want one without a name.

[casb1965]

Limited model range?

 

Go to your bits box and kitbash to your heart's desire.

[Gamiel]

12 minutes ago, AutumnEffect said:

Until then we're stuck with the crumbs if you want one without a name.

Or kitbashing, or just using AoS figures - they have a lot of figures that are good as they are or you just need a head swap or be given a gun at their waist to be 40k.

[AutumnEffect]

11 minutes ago, Gamiel said:

Or kitbashing, or just using AoS figures - they have a lot of figures that are good as they are or you just need a head swap or be given a gun at their waist to be 40k.

Yes, but we're not going to get rules for all of the things that TheArtilleryman was talking about until Games Workshop creates a model for them.

 

The point of the conversation was rules.

Games Workshop isn't making rules for things that don't have an official model to represent them.

 

If you want rules for an Inquisitor with a Tau Pulse Rifle then Games Workshop will have to make that model.

Edited December 7, 2023 by AutumnEffect

[Lord_Ikka]

As much as I love the Inquisition, it has always been a minor faction in the tabletop world of 40k. It's hard to make both lore-accurate but game-balanced characters like Inquisitors, as they literally have the right to destroy a planet but are still unmodified squishy humans (mostly...). So they stay in the form of strange buffing pieces that don't really add enough to an Imperial force- they aren't really more "killy" than what you get from something like a Sororitas character, while also generally being as less survivable. Their buffs/psychic powers are also not usually good enough to put them into your lists- especially since you are forced to only have them lead your basic Battleline/Troops squads rather than units that might better suit them more. 

 

The main problem is that GW doesn't know what to do with the Inquisition/Inquisitors/Agents of the Imperium and all the random weirdos that they've crammed in there, not the Inquisitors lack of weaponry/armor. If the Inquisition is on the battlefield, then give them some sort of significant role or a pair of roles. The two types of Inquisitors we generally see are the sneaky spy types or the "Hammer of the God-Emperor" battlefield type; use that. Make the Inquisitors able to select one of two different rule-sets- one  with the ability to give it's squad a Lone Operator equivalent, and one that increases it's squad's lethality with hit or wound rerolls. Make them able to lead any Imperial Infantry unit and that should be the bare minimum of what Inquisitors can do for a unit- something that is actually useful. 

 

Equipment for Inquisitors is, and should be, weird. They can use anything they want, from ancient plasma weaponry to Xenos and even Chaos-tainted weapons, but in-game get the really fun options of a bolt pistol, a combi-weapon, and a powersword (or force sword). So they really are armed with a half-decent chaff killer and IG officer pistol/sword- which is pretty terrible when an Inquisitor is supposed to be fighting against the toughest foes the Imperium has. At least the named Inquisitors get ok master-crafted melee weapons, but they are still lackluster. Some sort of killer weaponry is needed to make up for their lack of good stats, but with GW only making rules for models that they currently make, you won't see the large variety of weapons and armor possible- the current available "generic" Inquisitor is the old Witchhunter with powersword, hand flamer/inferno pistol, and carapace armor. Otherwise you have Eisenhorn, Greyfax, Draxus, or Coteaz (and Karamazov), who all have either power armor or carapace armor and are armed with bolt pistol, comdemnor boltgun, shuriken catapult, power sword, power fist, and daemon hammer. So that's what you get- no terminator armor, no weird weapons (aside from Draxus), no really unique stuff for the generic guys. 

[AutumnEffect]

I agree with what Lord_Ikka has to say, and I'll touch on their mentioning that it's difficult to game-balance a character like an Inquisitor.

A character that potentially can join any unit of any army in the largest macro-faction in the game is the ultimate can-of-worms for game balance because you have to consider every possible interaction it could have. It's most likely why the buffs they give at the moment are so tame.

[TheArtilleryman]

6 hours ago, AutumnEffect said:

Small nitpick but being a psyker is optional on an unnamed Inquisitor. They grant a 5+ Feel No Pain against Mortal Wounds to their unit if you choose not to make them a psyker.
 

My mistake, I read the datasheet as all inquisitors having both abilities. You are right, the psychic power/feel no pain are mutually exclusive options.

[TheArtilleryman]

5 hours ago, AutumnEffect said:

Yes, but we're not going to get rules for all of the things that TheArtilleryman was talking about until Games Workshop creates a model for them.

 

The point of the conversation was rules.

Games Workshop isn't making rules for things that don't have an official model to represent them.

 

If you want rules for an Inquisitor with a Tau Pulse Rifle then Games Workshop will have to make that model.

I am totally OK with there not being models for every option. In many editions there have been army list options that had no models. For example? Tau Crisis suits don’t come with ion blasters, so people buy 3D printed versions.

 

Mantic don’t make models for every unit they write rules for and actively encourage use of alternative models. Now I understand why GW mainly doesn’t want to do this i.e. money, but Inquisitors would be a perfect exception. Make it a hobby opportunity for people and give them the scope to create a truly unique character.

Edited December 7, 2023 by TheArtilleryman

[TheArtilleryman]

@Lord_Ikka said it well. The options available to inquisitors make them a meh option in any list, instead of a fun option that would add character. There is no real reason to include one other than for your own lore or whatever, because there are other options in each army that would be better in-game. 

[Emperor Ming]

Its a travesty how the inq are treated now

 

Today its just a cobbled together crap of nice models with terrible rules and overcosted crap

 

 

Edited December 7, 2023 by Emperor Ming

[casb1965]

Not complete crap, an expensive but fun unit of Eisenhorn plus a full Inquisitorial agents works nicely as an objective holder.

 

17 models, 36 wounds, 5++ save, +1 to wound rolls and if Eisenhorn hits a 2-5 d6 roll it's -1 to be hit.

Plenty of shooting  including S9 weapons and 45 S3 attacks (assuming full squad) and 13 S6 in melee.

 

Yes you could add more guard or a tank instead but would it be as much fun.

[EverythingIsGreat]

7 hours ago, Lord_Ikka said:

As much as I love the Inquisition, it has always been a minor faction in the tabletop world of 40k. It's hard to make both lore-accurate but game-balanced characters like Inquisitors,

 

Indeed. I am not a gamer, although I have been following the lore as it codeveloped with the various editions and supplements. I seem to remember Inquisitor models/retinues in the very early editions, with their own distinct scenarios, which iirc had little in common with battle scenarios involving SM/IG squads.

 

As the Inquisition is supposed to be outside the normal Imperial Hierarchy, and one of its functions is policing the Imperial institutions (including sanctioning/excommunicating entire SM Chapters and singlehandedly ordering Exterminatus) I would think they would have abilities and rules very different from the policed factions. I may have misunderstood the OP, but it seems to me that TheArtilleryman is asking for line-of-battle-type rules? In the lore I'm aware of, Inquisition retinues (outside of their StormTroopers perhaps) rarely participate in military-style operations even when deployed in a warzone. Their missions seem to be specialized, away from a battle front. If I am mistaken please enlighten me.

[TheArtilleryman]

4 hours ago, EverythingIsGreat said:

 

I may have misunderstood the OP, but it seems to me that TheArtilleryman is asking for line-of-battle-type rules? In the lore I'm aware of, Inquisition retinues (outside of their StormTroopers perhaps) rarely participate in military-style operations even when deployed in a warzone. Their missions seem to be specialized, away from a battle front. If I am mistaken please enlighten me.

Not sure exactly what you mean by “line-of-battle,” but I’d just like to see a much wider range of customisation options, for weapons and for special rules, so we can create inquisitors as bespoke as the lore suggests.

[Lord_Ikka]

10 hours ago, EverythingIsGreat said:

As the Inquisition is supposed to be outside the normal Imperial Hierarchy, and one of its functions is policing the Imperial institutions (including sanctioning/excommunicating entire SM Chapters and singlehandedly ordering Exterminatus) I would think they would have abilities and rules very different from the policed factions. I may have misunderstood the OP, but it seems to me that TheArtilleryman is asking for line-of-battle-type rules? In the lore I'm aware of, Inquisition retinues (outside of their StormTroopers perhaps) rarely participate in military-style operations even when deployed in a warzone. Their missions seem to be specialized, away from a battle front. If I am mistaken please enlighten me.

It really depends on the Inquisitor- most of the time we see Inquisitors like Eisenhorn or Kryptmann, those that are either active investigators or investigator-researcher hybrid types. We haven't really seen the full-on battlefield Inquisitors that have been described in the fluff; the type that will gather up Imperial battlegroups and lead minor crusades against various enemies of the Imperium. There are plenty of Inquisitors who operate in battlefield conditions, even if they rarely are seen on the field (see Inquisitor Lilith Abfequarn in Gaunt's Ghosts: Ghostmaker). We just don't see the full-blown fighter Inquisitors that often, even though they are mentioned as being a thing, especially those of the Ordo Malleus who accompany/lead Grey Knights into battle. 

 

Those battlefield Inquisitors can really be represented by any of the higher-up of Imperial factions leaders in-game if you want- instead of a SoB canoness with the Blade of St Ellynor, you have an Ordo Hereticus Inquisitor armoured in blessed power armor with an ancient Terranic powerblade that has been consecrated on Holy Terra itself. There are possibilities, but unfortunately right now you have to use counts-as style gameplay rather than having an actual worthwhile Inquisitor. 

[EverythingIsGreat]

@TheArtilleryman, thanks for the clarification.

 

Lord_Ikka, I had somehow forgotten the campaign part of the Inquisition's remit. I remember the examples you gave (Lilith is an interesting character that appears elsewhere as well), and then I remembered even more, including examples where Inquisitors were getting down and dirty very close to battle front lines and not in an HQ-type capacity either. I was erroneously thinking of rules and abilities as they apply to say, a tactical squad, but even an HQ contingent would not be a perfect fit imo.

 

Aren't Inquisitors always leading their Chambers Militant? I thought DeathWatch, SoB and GK (and others, such as Assassinorum members) are seconded to Inquisitors. I don't know if Inquisitors "accompany" them, although they seem to defer to them in battle situations.

[TheArtilleryman]

17 hours ago, EverythingIsGreat said:

@TheArtilleryman, thanks for the clarification.

 

Lord_Ikka, I had somehow forgotten the campaign part of the Inquisition's remit. I remember the examples you gave (Lilith is an interesting character that appears elsewhere as well), and then I remembered even more, including examples where Inquisitors were getting down and dirty very close to battle front lines and not in an HQ-type capacity either. I was erroneously thinking of rules and abilities as they apply to say, a tactical squad, but even an HQ contingent would not be a perfect fit imo.

 

Aren't Inquisitors always leading their Chambers Militant? I thought DeathWatch, SoB and GK (and others, such as Assassinorum members) are seconded to Inquisitors. I don't know if Inquisitors "accompany" them, although they seem to defer to them in battle situations.

Not always. Some are lone wolves, like some have a small retinue like Amberley Vail in the Commissar Cain books or Nyxos in the Grey Knights novels. In one book, Vail shows up in power armour in the middle of a fight, getting seriously stuck in. Some commandeer others to fight for them, like Thaddeus in the Soul Drinkers with the Battle Sisters. The point is they can be anyone and anything. At the moment though, the options in-game are very limited.

Edited December 9, 2023 by TheArtilleryman
Autocorrect error

[Lord_Ikka]

7 hours ago, TheArtilleryman said:

Not always. Some are lone wolves, like some have a small retinue like Amberley Vail in the Commissar Cain books or any cos in the Grey Knights novels. In one book, Vail shows up in power armour in the middle of a fight, getting seriously stuck in. Some commandeer others to fight for them, like Thaddeus in the Soul Drinkers with the Battle Sisters. The point is they can be anyone and anything. At the moment though, the options in-game are very limited.

Very true. The Inquisition has lots of different types of Inquisitors- old Inquisitor Commodus Voke (mentor of Heldane) flat-out stated that he didn't approve of Eisenhorn's style of Inquisitor, skulking in the shadows rather than using their God-Emperor given authority to command power/submission/troops. That's from another Puritan-leaning Inquisitor, not even touching on the differences between the Puritans and Radicals, emphasizing the sheer breadth of variety in both methods/styles and weaponry/wargear. 

[EverythingIsGreat]

8 hours ago, TheArtilleryman said:

The point is they can be anyone and anything. At the moment though, the options in-game are very limited.

 

Not easy to reconcile the two, I imagine. Perhaps GW does not want to commit the resources to fully flesh them out, as it were.

 

45 minutes ago, Lord_Ikka said:

Inquisitor Commodus Voke (mentor of Heldane) flat-out stated that he didn't approve of Eisenhorn's style of Inquisitor

 

Eisenhorn, at least in Xenos describes himself as an Amalathian, and it seems Voke was more of the Monodominant persuasion. But I get the point. The in-game complexity of translating  just the major ideological positions (Puritan/Radical) into rules and abilities, assuming there is a decision to match the lore with the game.

[casb1965]

On 12/7/2023 at 1:30 PM, TheArtilleryman said:

@Lord_Ikka said it well. The options available to inquisitors make them a meh option in any list, instead of a fun option that would add character. There is no real reason to include one other than for your own lore or whatever, because there are other options in each army that would be better in-game. 

 

Inquisitors aren't ever going to be competitve so that is the ONLY reason you'd include an Inquisitor and not everyone plays Tournament 40k some play for fun with friends, also for some it's more about the modelling than the game. 

 

If you want options for other weapons then model them with an Eldar Shuriken Pistol or a Necron Gauss Flayer and just use the Combi-Weapon rules for it you don't lose much stat wise than if you used the other codex rules.

[The Praetorian of Inwit]

Not everything needs to be on the tabletop. 

 

A BL book, a videogame, sure. On the tabletop Inquistors are just something else 40k simply doesn't need. Like the Custodes, Sisters of Silence and IK. 

[EverythingIsGreat]

On 12/20/2023 at 4:16 AM, The Praetorian of Inwit said:

Not everything needs to be on the tabletop. 

 

A BL book, a videogame, sure. On the tabletop Inquistors are just something else 40k simply doesn't need. Like the Custodes, Sisters of Silence and IK. 

 

This is a moot point. The Inquisition existed on the tabletop since the very beginning (Rogue Trader), and not only as part of the background. Some of the first Citadel 40K minis were those of an "Inquisitorial Warband". The 1st edition book also had a rudimentary Imperium org chart making it clear that the Inquisition was outside the Imperial Hierarchy, "reporting" directly to the Emperor. That much hasn't changed lore-wise, I think.

 

I limited my response to the Inquisition (and avoided wading in detail into supporting lore) to keep on-topic.

[ThePenitentOne]

If the Inquisition gets love, it will be in the form of an Agents Dex or a collection of White Dwarf articles.

 

What we need most are some detachments. An Agents dex could give us a Rogue Trader/ Navy Detachment, and Arbites Detachment.... and still leave room for a detachment for each Ordo. If you had 4 Ordo specific Enhancements, 6 Ordo specific strats and the potential to distinguish Inquisitors of different Ordos. Also, this time around, Inquisition needs bespoke Crusade Content- Rogue Traders had it in 9th, but Inquisition never got it.

 

Ashes of Faith was a great glimpse of what Inquisition can be when given adequate narrative support. I'm not rushing to generate content for 10th because it's unclear whether 10th will work out in the long run, but Ashes of Faith could be adapted to 40k Crusade. White Dwarf also needs to stop printing reems and reems of additional content for Marines and start filling the gaps in material for under-represented forces. 

 

At the 2/3 edition mark, I might make it myself if it doesn't look like GW is going to it.