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.

I have a question; I'm writing a book that I hope to get published by BL, and I was wondering if making an Inquisitor the villain would hurt my chances. I understand that I really can't write that way, but I also want to remain fluffy and true to 40k's spirit. My villain is a power-hungry bully who is either a Lord-general or an Ordo-hereticus inquisitor. One of my protagonists, an imperial guard Colonel, gets on the villains bad side, which is worked into the conflict of the war.

Would making the villain an Inquisitor be a bad idea?

It has happened before, Inquisitors are not incorruptible.

Well then, I'm sure I can pull it off. I was just worried that GW wouldn't go for it.

A good example is inquisitor heldane from the gaunts ghosts novel.

Don't forget, bad and good are subjective. The Inquisitor could well be loyal to the Imperium, but the Colonel disagrees with their methods/ideals.

You do see this in Eisenhorn too, and that's maybe the prime Inquisitor trilogy. Methods differ, tempers flare and suddenly one inquisitor accuses another of heresy. There could be a good reason but it could as well be because one has had a bad feeling about the other, or is just jealous of his successes. Once an excuse presents itself, well, why not bring forth charges?

Not even Inquisitors are above suspicion, and they too are just human. One could very easily use his position for his own benefit - there's only so many Inquisitors after all, few people below Imperial Governor, Admiral, General, Chapter Master or Rogue Trader probably even know where to send a complaint!

Spetulhu wrote:
You do see this in Eisenhorn too, and that's maybe the prime Inquisitor trilogy. Methods differ, tempers flare and suddenly one inquisitor accuses another of heresy. There could be a good reason but it could as well be because one has had a bad feeling about the other, or is just jealous of his successes. Once an excuse presents itself, well, why not bring forth charges?

Not even Inquisitors are above suspicion, and they too are just human. One could very easily use his position for his own benefit - there's only so many Inquisitors after all, few people below Imperial Governor, Admiral, General, Chapter Master or Rogue Trader probably even know where to send a complaint!

Or have the ability to make that complaint mean anything.

Just cause you say something, doesn't mean the inquisition cares.
Unless it's clear heresy, other inquisitors are likely loathe to back a complaint, as it could draw attentions to their own indiscretions.

Yes, but not because it breaks the lore.

It's a bad idea because it's boring and cliche.

I don't know - You know about TV Tropes? It's a website that catalogs cliches, and they have just about everything one might think of. So I'm not too concerned with avoiding cliches EVERYWHERE, just in my plot twists. The villain's not a plot twist, you pretty much know he's trouble from the start.

Anyways, If it is really bad (I have not read 40k stuff extensively, so I don't know if it is a terrible cliche) I'll probably cut it out like you suggested.

It's not about avoiding cliches, so much that if you want to have a villain be hidden and mysterious, making them an Inquisitor is probably a bad idea. People will just assume they're the villain, so it's not really a secret. If you can find a new and interesting way to do it, MAYBE, but the way it was described it'll jsut be kind of boring and samey.

An Inquisitor could be a villain. Depends on what kind of villain you want him to be.

do you want him to be a true evil villain or a good guy who's a bit of a dick. Maybe the unwilling pawn of some greater power or maybe he could be bad but his alignment is unclear like Severus Snape from Harry Potter.

Inquisitors have unlimited potential plot wise. Also it depends one the point of view. If a Space Marine does something wrong and is sanctioned by an inquisitor who's the bad guy? The Space Marine hero of the imperium or the cold hearted, secretive inquisitor?

This might help
http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Radical

The Inquisition has been used as generic villains for as long as they've been around. The space Wolves straight up murders one (pretty sure it was in their own coedex) when he tries to summarily execute the people of a village. What's sad is that the Inquisition is such an intresting concept but they often get demoted to being simply a generic villain or hero with personality quirks, and few authors accept that in the 40k universe they are often in the right. Imagine realising that not kicking in a starving families door and murdering their child would lead to a cult using this particular house as a festing ground that will corrupt degenerate the lives of thousands. No one will appreciate you for it and people will come after you for revenge and hatred. You're carrying the weight of the sector on your shoulder and at any time you may become what you seek to destroy, or more likely, end up dead in a ditch somewhere.

Quite often a Inquisitor needs to perform immensily immoral acts and all those that can't take the preassure will soon end up dead or broken.

Remember that there isn't really "good and evil" in 40k in the way there is in most typical fantasy novels. More specifically, there isn't really "Good" in a grand sense, just on the local, mundane level. The Imperium that the heroes of all the bolter-porn and IG novels are defending is a xenophobic, totalitarian theocracy, so much so that it makes ISIS look reasonable by comparison.

So the question arises, what makes this guy the villain? Is it because he has it out for the IG Colonel? Guess what? The IG Colonel is powerless in comparison to an Inquisitor, who has the remit to do basically anything he wants in pursuit of his mandate to protect the Imperium.

As was said of the Inquisition by Gabriel Angelos, "To hate the Inquisition is heretical. To fear them, redundant."

 Psienesis wrote:
Remember that there isn't really "good and evil" in 40k in the way there is in most typical fantasy novels. More specifically, there isn't really "Good" in a grand sense, just on the local, mundane level. The Imperium that the heroes of all the bolter-porn and IG novels are defending is a xenophobic, totalitarian theocracy, so much so that it makes ISIS look reasonable by comparison.

So the question arises, what makes this guy the villain? Is it because he has it out for the IG Colonel? Guess what? The IG Colonel is powerless in comparison to an Inquisitor, who has the remit to do basically anything he wants in pursuit of his mandate to protect the Imperium.

As was said of the Inquisition by Gabriel Angelos, "To hate the Inquisition is heretical. To fear them, redundant."

Basically what I said earlier, good and bad are fairly subjective in 40k. Good means killing aliens, bad is not killing aliens.