Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Its a pretty simple question, but different answers having been popping up.
Ill give you two examples
1. The Blood Angels and the Space Wolves have both fought against the sisters of battle, bu the imperium has done nothing
2. The knights of blood chapter (a blood angel succesor chapter) was declared renegade after they would get a bit carried away in a fight and kill a few guardsmen as well, however other ba succesors do kill their allies but havent been declared renegade (the Blood Drinkers have been known to drink their blood!)

So what do you think is the answer?

It's very subjective, and seemingly quite often a case of 'rather your ally, than your enemy'.

Well, I expect that's the simple answer anyway.

Perhaps some cases are better hidden than others.

As above, its subjective.

The BAs and Space Wolves are also First Founding legions. That gives them some privilege and political clout.

An Inquisitor would be a fool to declare one of the original founding legions traitors or corrupted. He'd have to have irrefutable proof, and even then he'd likely just get demolished by the other Inquisitors.

If his proof were irrefutable, he probably would not. Protecting the Imperium from another Horus Heresy is exactly what the Inquisition does. If the SW, for example, are absolutely proven to be renegade, they'd simply blow Fenris up. At that point, it's only a matter of time before the Space Wolves are extinct, because they've lost all possibility of recruiting new members.

 Grey Templar wrote:
As above, its subjective.

The BAs and Space Wolves are also First Founding legions. That gives them some privilege and political clout.

An Inquisitor would be a fool to declare one of the original founding legions traitors or corrupted. He'd have to have irrefutable proof, and even then he'd likely just get demolished by the other Inquisitors.

I see, but surely they would have some repremand for killing a bunch of sisters of battle - actually on ther other hand, they were probably doing the imperium a favour

Who are you going to believe?

The Space Wolves who have an illustrious 10,000 year history of loyalty or an organization that exists purely because of a loophole in a law passed to protect against the largest rebellion since the Heresy.

 FenWulf29 wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
As above, its subjective.

The BAs and Space Wolves are also First Founding legions. That gives them some privilege and political clout.

An Inquisitor would be a fool to declare one of the original founding legions traitors or corrupted. He'd have to have irrefutable proof, and even then he'd likely just get demolished by the other Inquisitors.

I see, but surely they would have some repremand for killing a bunch of sisters of battle - actually on ther other hand, they were probably doing the imperium a favour

The SW are known as non-givers of ****, they lopped of the head off some inquisitors and grey knights after they enslaved and killed the population of Armageddon after the first war of Armageddon. Like others have said it is all subjective. A First Founding legion/chapter has a lot more sway than most inquisitor's do and also have the power to back up their argument. If a very powerful inquisitor goes up against a newly founded chapter then the inquisitor will be the one calling the shots. It is all subjective.

When did the Blood Angels attack the Sisters of Battle?

One day, the Sisters of Battle will beat up an Avatar of Khaine, or an Avatar will beat up the Sisters of Battle, and all balance in the 40K universe will be restored.

Theyre tratiors depending on the age of the chapter, their parent chapter and the mood of the Inquisitor at the time

So many people in charge with a load of bureaucracy, it'd widely depend on what the individual reviewing the situation at the time thinks, tons of different Inquisitors and commissars; each with there own ideas of when someone has gone too far. It's a really messy system in the 41st millennium admittedly, so there's probably no standard criteria, it's often left up to the people in authority at the time.

 uk_crow wrote:

 FenWulf29 wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
As above, its subjective.

The BAs and Space Wolves are also First Founding legions. That gives them some privilege and political clout.

An Inquisitor would be a fool to declare one of the original founding legions traitors or corrupted. He'd have to have irrefutable proof, and even then he'd likely just get demolished by the other Inquisitors.

I see, but surely they would have some repremand for killing a bunch of sisters of battle - actually on ther other hand, they were probably doing the imperium a favour

The SW are known as non-givers of ****, they lopped of the head off some inquisitors and grey knights after they enslaved and killed the population of Armageddon after the first war of Armageddon.

Not really as far as I am aware

The Chapter Master of the Wolves was outraged by the treament of the defenders of Armageddon and his own impotence in the face of the Inquisiton - he did express this to them but could do nothing about it.

I am not sure either about Sisters / Blood Angels conflicts?

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Months_of_Shame#.UY66V8pc2MU

Grimnar and twenty Terminators teleported aboard the bridge of the flagship and massacred all they came across, with Grimnar slaying Kysnaros (A Lord-Inquisitor) himself.

He also killed a grand master of the Grey Knights

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Joros#.UY666cpc2MU

The nature of Space Marines means a lot of them fly under the radar of perceived Heresy because of their reverence in the Imperium. It's not that they might not be considered heretical or traitorous in some instances, but they can get away with more than what normal Imperial citizens get away with. I think the Inquisition relies heavily on the Codex Astartes to prevent any heresy on the part of the Space Marines. They might use the Codex Astartes as a kind of moderation tool so that they don't have to over-exert their power to investigate the Space Marines; many of which aren't exactly keen on being monitored like children. So far, this seems to have worked since the only relatively large Space Marine betrayal since the Horus Heresy was the Badab War; and even that wasn't nearly as big as the Horus Heresy.

Well it depends on the Chapter like the others said. But I think only the Ultramarines besides the Space Wolves might have pulled of what the SW did after the First War of Armageddon. The SW have already gone beyond the point of damnation (by deeds for which chapters are damned by the Imperium) for many chapters, who while still loyal are now being declared traitors. But the inquisition might be reluctant for killing of a first founding chapter, for the greater consequences it may cause. If it happened to them, why risk it and not kill them off kind of thinking, because now no chapter is safe. The high lords might block such attempts, reasoning one chapter on the edge of being viewed as traitors is better than whole chapters starting to cecede to avoid the same fate. As the Ultramarines might just pull half the Imperium with them if one overzealous inquisitor goes too far. Basically its because GW likes the SW (some might say too much) and wont kill them off, while having no problem killing off newly invented chapters for slight errors. Of course this might be said about the Blood Angels and Dark Angels too in a lesser extent, but they haven done what the SW did. Imo GW is so heavily invested in the SW by now that short of another fullscale heresy/civil war with them leading it, nothing will be considered too far gone. They should probably put a lid on some of the heavier stuff like what uk_crow posted. Imo because they have already reached a point where the things they get away with are starting to get a little ridiculous.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Who are you going to believe?

The Space Wolves who have an illustrious 10,000 year history of loyalty or an organization that exists purely because of a loophole in a law passed to protect against the largest rebellion since the Heresy.

You're selling the Sisters a little short there, don't you think? They're utterly devoted elite soldiers who are the official fighting force of the church, not just "that pesky loophole organisation". Space Wolves, on the other hand, are known for their open contempt for authorities. An Inquistior would probably believe the chuch over the Wolves.

But, as has been said, it's not a case of one side being believed over the other, it's a case of political pull. The Wolves got away with it because they're a First Founding Chapter.

 Troike wrote:

An Inquistior would probably believe the chuch over the Wolves.

I believe that thoroughly depends on the Inquisitor. For instance, a good portion of Radical Inquisitors probably don't give a flying gak about what the Ecclesiarchy says.

 Darth Bob wrote:


I believe that thoroughly depends on the Inquisitor. For instance, a good portion of Radical Inquisitors probably don't give a flying gak about what the Ecclesiarchy says.

Sure, but the Wolves have had clashes with the Inquisition, and are known to openly hold the organisation in disdain. So most Inquistors aren't going to be too keen on the Wolves anyway.

 Troike wrote:

 Darth Bob wrote:


I believe that thoroughly depends on the Inquisitor. For instance, a good portion of Radical Inquisitors probably don't give a flying gak about what the Ecclesiarchy says.

Sure, but the Wolves have had clashes with the Inquisition, and are known to openly hold the organisation in disdain. So most Inquistors aren't going to be too keen on the Wolves anyway.

Yes, but even Inquisitors know better than to throw away a chapter as powerful, important, and useful as the Wolves. The High Lords wouldn't take to kindly to the wolves getting destroyed, despite their rebellious nature they are very useful to the Imperium.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Troike wrote:

 Darth Bob wrote:


I believe that thoroughly depends on the Inquisitor. For instance, a good portion of Radical Inquisitors probably don't give a flying gak about what the Ecclesiarchy says.

Sure, but the Wolves have had clashes with the Inquisition, and are known to openly hold the organisation in disdain. So most Inquistors aren't going to be too keen on the Wolves anyway.

Yes, but even Inquisitors know better than to throw away a chapter as powerful, important, and useful as the Wolves. The High Lords wouldn't take to kindly to the wolves getting destroyed, despite their rebellious nature they are very useful to the Imperium.

I'm agreeing with you. That's exactly why they can do the things they've done without reprecussion. I was only disagreeing with your post where you said that belief was a factor in the Sapce Wolves's favour.

Presumably, by the time the great bureaucracy had filed paperwork back to Terra, the Blood Angels and the Sisters of Battle had reached a truce, and some lonely bureaucrat in a musty office decided that the document must've been wrong, because the Blood Angels and the Sisters of Battle were coexisting peacefully at the time he read it.

Or maybe the conflict was so old and the bureaucracy so slow, that by the time the bureaucrat had been born the fight was long over, and he was so confused that he just threw it in his 'sort later' stack.

I haven't been able to find a reference to any incidents between the Blood Angels and the SoB. There are incidents with the Angels Vermillion and the Flesh Tearers, but not the Blood Angels themselves.

Well depending on when the space wolves killed said sisters they may well have been sent by a radical leader that no one liked anyways. Other reasons may be because they are not actually traitors and the higher ups in the Imperium know full well that any organization the size of the Imperium will have some of its parts grinding up against each other. It's not like the Space wolves of the Blood Angels are about to turn on the Emperor. Heck the Dark Angels did go part traitor and by hiding it well they have gotten away from it so far. They also actively ditch allies to go off chasing the fallen and all that has happened is some people got angry.

 Psienesis wrote:
Protecting the Imperium from another Horus Heresy is exactly what the Inquisition does.

I use this same theory in debate about the Garro storyline. They founded the Inquisition because they faced everything the Inquisition oversees now.

=][= No one is innocent. There are only varying degrees of guilt. =][=

 FenWulf29 wrote:
Its a pretty simple question, but different answers having been popping up.
Ill give you two examples
1. The Blood Angels and the Space Wolves have both fought against the sisters of battle, bu the imperium has done nothing
2. The knights of blood chapter (a blood angel succesor chapter) was declared renegade after they would get a bit carried away in a fight and kill a few guardsmen as well, however other ba succesors do kill their allies but havent been declared renegade (the Blood Drinkers have been known to drink their blood!)

So what do you think is the answer?

Being a traitor is less about your actual actions and more a frame of mind, or your political clout. Some Chapters have more sway and can get away with more dirty deeds than most others; newer Chapters don't have as much leeway.

 uk_crow wrote:
http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Months_of_Shame#.UY66V8pc2MU

Grimnar and twenty Terminators teleported aboard the bridge of the flagship and massacred all they came across, with Grimnar slaying Kysnaros (A Lord-Inquisitor) himself.

He also killed a grand master of the Grey Knights

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Joros#.UY666cpc2MU

thanks - I had not read that novel

wow thats a big retcon...............

 Mr Morden wrote:

 uk_crow wrote:
http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Months_of_Shame#.UY66V8pc2MU

Grimnar and twenty Terminators teleported aboard the bridge of the flagship and massacred all they came across, with Grimnar slaying Kysnaros (A Lord-Inquisitor) himself.

He also killed a grand master of the Grey Knights

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Joros#.UY666cpc2MU

thanks - I had not read that novel

wow thats a big retcon...............

Is it a retcon, or an elaboration upon what we didn't know?

 Mr Morden wrote:

 uk_crow wrote:
http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Months_of_Shame#.UY66V8pc2MU

Grimnar and twenty Terminators teleported aboard the bridge of the flagship and massacred all they came across, with Grimnar slaying Kysnaros (A Lord-Inquisitor) himself.

He also killed a grand master of the Grey Knights

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Joros#.UY666cpc2MU

thanks - I had not read that novel

wow thats a big retcon...............

No problem, for such a huge incident involving such powerful organisations it is not very well known surprisingly.